Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business GUI Mozilla Software The Internet Linux Entertainment Games

Desktop Linux Summit Highlights 416

mo writes "The Desktop Linux Summit has just concluded in San Diego. There were a number of exhibitors, including Novell, AMD, and Mozilla. I've put together a summary of some of the more interesting announcements and booths at the conference. Highlights include a Linux-only 3D game, DRM-free music services, and a new Asterisk GUI."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Desktop Linux Summit Highlights

Comments Filter:
  • by KrisCowboy ( 776288 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:32PM (#11664221) Journal
    Beyond doubt, we need better and more 3D games to attract a normal Joe towards using GNU/Linux. Even I reboot to winblows for the games. First step would be to port the existing games to Linux, but this cannot be done by the community. We need help from the gaming companies and I am are more than willing to pay for some nice games like Counter Stike, Half Life and NFS Underground.
  • by As Seen On TV ( 857673 ) <asseen@gmail.com> on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:35PM (#11664238)
    Normal Joes do not play computer games. They use computers to do things like work and communicate with friends and family. When the time comes to have fun, normal Joes turn off their computers and play tennis or go camping or walk the dog.

    If you want to attract people who play computer games to use your operating system, that's great. But do not assume that these people are normal Joes. Do not assume that they make up anything other than the tiniest niche market.
  • by Nefarious Wheel ( 628136 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:37PM (#11664251) Journal
    The big firms will embrace Linux on the desktop when they can see network deployability and end-user configuration lockdown in an easy-to-buy solution. It's a pretty major acceptance criterion. Anybody focusing on that?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:46PM (#11664315)
    Trouble is, while those who know and love Linux would kill for games like Counter-Strike, a lot of people used to the latest and greatest (?) would look at games like that as passé. I had a discussion with someone over this a little while ago, who was fairly obsessed with WinXP and all its amazing features, and I told him Linux was every bit as polished and easy to use, and on top of that more secure, etc. etc. He didn't care, because you can't play HL2 on Linux.

    Not one to give up easily :) I showed him a handful of Linux games, and ports of other popular Windows games (e.g. Unreal Tournament, Descent III, etc.) -- but he's played them all to death.

    Linux needs some new games that can compete directly with the current offerings on the Windows market, or the people we're trying to attract won't care because it's old news to them. Also, they need to be marketed well (good luck!) or else they won't recognize them, and the unfortunate fact of the matter is that people far too often equate unknown names that haven't been played up and down with flashy marketing with crap quality.
  • by OneArmedMan ( 606657 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:48PM (#11664319)
    From some sources the PC gaming industry is rated at being over $35 Billion in value, i'd say thats a fairly large *niche* to be aiming for.
  • by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @10:59PM (#11664373)
    If you want to attract people who play computer games to use your operating system, that's great. But do not assume that these people are normal Joes. Do not assume that they make up anything other than the tiniest niche market.


    True, games are a niche market, although an important one. The best ways for the likes of Suse, RedHat, Mandrake &Co. to get regular users to use Linux is firstly by developing it's desktop capability to the point that one can convince corporations to use it on workstations. That basically means (this will horrify pruists) idiot proof Linux distros that offer all the same software and functionality as the normal Windows workstation plus the same kind of easy intuitive integration into Windows networks as you have got with OS.X. Secondly it would be important to ensure it has a sigificant representation in the student workstation pools of educational institutions from primary school upward. Which is why Microsoft donates computers and software to schools all over the place, they get to look like philanthropists while securing their market share. The 'normal user' will use at home what he/she learned to use at school or uses regularly at work.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 13, 2005 @11:03PM (#11664394)
    Normal Joes do not play computer games. They use computers to do things like work and communicate with friends and family.

    I'm sure this will be marked at flamebate.

    Normal joes want to jack off to downloadable free porn with a facial at the end. If I hear "I want you to cum on my face" one more time I sware i'm going to explode!^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h be most annoyed.

  • by johnlittledotorg ( 858326 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @11:11PM (#11664441) Homepage
    AC's comments are pretty accurate. However, the Linux gaming market has improved significantly in the past couple of years with offerings from companies like TransGaming and more native Linux titles popping up. Granted it isn't perfect but A LOT more gamers could make the switch than people realize.

    I haven't tried services like TransGaming's Cedega but I am finding that games like Enemy Territory and UT2004 are running significantly better on my formerly Win2k hardware. Is it Linux or the Nvidia Linux drivers or both? I dunno but it's just another reason that I'm glad I switched back to Linux.

    I'm posting a few details on my experiences with games and the switch in general at http://www.johnlittle.org/ [johnlittle.org] in an effort to sway friends and family and lure them into the open source light.

    And that concludes my first /. post after too many years of lurking.
  • Re:Not ready (Score:3, Insightful)

    by djplurvert ( 737910 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @11:28PM (#11664524)
    The only person I see talking down is you. You seem to think that ALL linux users fit your STEROTYPE of what a linux user is.

    FWIW. I use linux on the desktop and I PREFER the distributions that are the easiest to use, e.g. fedora/ubuntu. That said, I still prefer to use command line toos for many activities because it is simply a more efficient way to accomplish some tasks.

    While you are busy trying to defend your predjudice, linux developers have been working to make linux easier and easier for the end user to install and maintain. No, it's not perfect, but it's a far cry from what it was five years ago.

    Most people I encounter who use linux fall in between the extremes that you mention. They aren't super geeks who eschew the gui for a command line because it's l33t but they typically aren't afraid of typing a command or two if it is a more efficient way of doing something.

    Has it occured to you that what you percieve as archaic and complex is, in fact, neither?

    (typed on federa core 3...installed from GUI)

  • by fishlet ( 93611 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @11:29PM (#11664529)
    I see lots of posts saying "games" are the magic ticket to Linux getting popular. Stop dreaming... it's not gonna happen for a long time. Linux on the desktop is not even remotely near even 10% market share... no sane company is going to put lots of resources into developing games for Linux. Yes there were some flukes where a couple popular games got made but they were hardly profitable. Most of what Linux has for games are done by hobbyist... which is fine for the nostalgic type who like 80's style gaming but will never fail to succeed an impressing most of the gaming public. END OF RANT.

    On to what I originally wanted to say... Linux on the desktop could sure use alot of polish in the following ways. Consider:

    1) A common control panel. There are a ton of different config tools which vary by distribution. Even on a single distro you can't configure everything from one place- it's often a mix of various config tools and hand editing of config files.

    2) Tell the freakin developers to make GOOD intallation binaries and keep them UP TO DATE. Have a common to all distro's install tool that is very easy to use (perhaps a RPM front end). I am a programmer and yes I do know how to compile stuff but when I'm not programming... I'm also a user and feel I should not have to compile anything myself.

    3) KDE vs Gnome wars: put an end to it. I know everyone will disagree with me saying 'choice is good'. I agree... but there needs to be a standard. Without a standard alot of manpowers being distributed where it could much be better focused. Perhaps this is the downfall of Linux in general... everyones got freedom so all they choose to work on something different.

    I could go on but I'll leave it at that for now.

  • by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Sunday February 13, 2005 @11:43PM (#11664627)
    God the same old crap time and time again.

    I for one am tired of these old outdated complaints. Nobody has to compile anything unless they want to. With the exception of gentoo no linux distrubitution requires compiling anything.

    A common control panel? Wake me up when windows has one. The control panel works for some things, for other things you need to right click on my computer and manage, still others you have to manually load a snap in, and finally you have to muck with the registry for others. With linux everything is in /etc. If the GUI can't take care of it then you can go in and do it yourself. It may not be perfect but it's better then windows.

    As for KDE and GNOME I'll say go to F yourself. I hope to hell everybody disagrees with you because I sure as hell do. Linux is about freedom more then anything else. Who are you to shove a desktop down my throat?
  • by sloanster ( 213766 ) <<ringfan> <at> <mainphrame.com>> on Monday February 14, 2005 @12:20AM (#11664832) Journal
    I see lots of posts saying "games" are the magic ticket to Linux getting popular. Stop dreaming... it's not gonna happen for a long time. Linux on the desktop is not even remotely near even 10% market share... no sane company is going to put lots of resources into developing games for Linux. Yes there were some flukes where a couple popular games got made but they were hardly profitable. Most of what Linux has for games are done by hobbyist... which is fine for the nostalgic type who like 80's style gaming but will never fail to succeed an impressing most of the gaming public. END OF RANT.

    Since your credibility was shot to hell with your rant, there is not really much point in reading your later statements, but I did anyway and saw some tired old ideas that have been trotted out before. Other than the point about "good installation binaries, up to date" (? that problem was solved years ago by all vendors I'm familiar with) the ideas aren't likely to happen, but that doesn't matter since none of those things you mentioned is holding linux back.

  • by Deusy ( 455433 ) <charlie&vexi,org> on Monday February 14, 2005 @12:27AM (#11664865) Homepage
    If you call mplayer (a media player with the most comprehensive format support you'll find anywhere) half-baked then you are sadly deluded.

    Admittedly gmplayer isn't the most brilliant interface, but as a gecko plugin it works flawlessly and not only runs happily in-browser but also offers fullscreen playback for stuff you view in-browser. That is a damn useful feature that (IIRC) you won't find in realplayer or MS media player browser plugins.

    With regards to your sarcastic take on KDE and Gnome, they are totally different DEs with different approaches, architecture, and language choice. Do you honestly think we'd make faster progress if we pigeon-holed people into one or the other? Half of the development impetus comes from the passion of the developers. Remove the choice for them to work on what they feel is [potentially] the best platform and you remove much of the emotion involved and hence the desire and motivation.

    This is not the corporate world when focusing on one thing is best because that's how you make money. The freedom and choice that you deride is not only what makes Free Software so attractive but what provides the reason that most people develop for it; I don't think many people would volunteer their services to Microsoft.

    There is more than logistics at work here. You, and others who scorn at Free Software diversity, would do well to appreciate that.
  • by KrackHouse ( 628313 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @01:35AM (#11665214) Homepage
    I totally agree. I think open source 3D gaming is entering a new era with the release of OGRE 1.0. Game development in the past consisted of trying to learn OpenGL then trying to learn how to code physics which can take a couple of years for professional looking results. Now you can just download Open Dynamics Engine, OGRE3D and SDL and bang out a decent looking 3D game in a few months. The emphasis is shifting to content creators.

    2005/6 will see the first real competition for the EAs of the world. I'm going out on a limb and predicting that Open Source 3D games will be the killer app for PCs. If you can buy a game at CompUSA loaded with a ton of high quality PC games or buy a PS3 for $350 with no games people may begin to think twice, especially with the emergence of HDTVs and the home theater PC.
  • by Osty ( 16825 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @01:43AM (#11665239)

    I'm confident it's going to be a success is due to our use of 3rd party libraries to aid in development but how long it takes depends on how much help we recieve.

    I hate to break it to you, but games don't succeed because of 3rd party library use. In the case of a driving simulator, success is two-fold:

    1. The gameplay is good. This depends on your physics engine, and the type of driving game you're building. If the driving mechanics aren't there, or don't "feel right", you're screwed. ("feel" depends on the type of racer -- an arcade title will have a completely different feel than a hardcore sim, and your audience will be able to tell the difference)
    2. Licensing. A few games have succeeded without licenses, but those typically have another draw. For example, the Burnout series was successful enough to have two sequels, without car licenses, but that's because the game is not a driver but a crasher. It doesn't matter that you can't crash a Ferrari, because what you're crashing doesn't matter. It's how you do it. Also, while you're a small little startup, it doesn't matter that you're using car licenses without authorization, because it's likely you're not going to go anywhere. If you do succeed, you'll need to re-evaluate that decision. If you don't have the bucks (or a major publisher backing you) to buy all of the licenses, you're going to have to go back to the drawing board and design your own set of cars. If you don't think that far enough ahead, you're likely to get Foxed [palgn.com.au].

    If you or anybody you know are C++ gurus and have a love for driving and/or Open Source Software please consider lending a hand.

    Relatively speaking, developing the engine is easy. As you said yourself, the use of third-party libraries lets you concentrate on the important parts. What you really should be looking for are artists that are willing to work pro-bono (good luck finding anyone good!), or finding a way to pay an artist to work for you. From your screenshots, it's obvious that you need major help with models and textures. While you might think it simple to model a car (lots of reference material), you'd be surprised at how difficult it can be. And if you miss a detail here or there, expect to have raving fanboys breathing down your neck about why you put the trim piece from a 2003 Caragon on a 1999 version, or why you have a BBS wheel that's only made in 18" sizes on a car that can only handle 15" wheels.

    All of that said, good luck to you. You're entering a market with very stiff competition, and if you can pull it off then more power to you.

  • by kuzb ( 724081 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @02:25AM (#11665353)
    You shouldn't. What you have does everything you need, and if you don't experience the common problems associated with windows, you may never need to. It amazes me that some people assume you *must* be having problems because you're using windows.

    The zealots won't get this, because they're too blinded by the foam coming out of their mouths. Realisticly though, that's their problem, not yours.
  • by kuzb ( 724081 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @02:29AM (#11665373)
    Yeah, because we would like to install yet another ad-ware, spy-ware, bloat-ware infested piece of garbage.

    I removed realplayer several years ago, and it will never, and i mean *never* go back in. I make it a point to remove it on any system I come in to contact with too.

    I'm probably coming across as rather trollish, but I've had so many bad experiences with realplayer that I'm quite jaded towards it.
  • by elhedran ( 768858 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @02:41AM (#11665424)
    If making GNU/Linux Popular means taking away what I like about GNU/Linux, then to hell with popular.

    Linux isn't a company. Linux isn't a religion. Linux is a public space where a bunch of people have come and started helping out each other. It doesn't need to change to succeed, It just is.

    If you said for a panda to really succeed it should be made like a grizzly bear, would the panda have succeeded? or would we now just be without pandas.
  • by Osty ( 16825 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @04:35AM (#11665787)

    Since you can't use the "Well, Direct3D is better than OpenGL" argument, they've started using the "Oh, well Direct3D is more high-level than OpenGL."

    It's not a matter of OpenGL vs. Direct3D. Both are very good in their own way. Direct3D has come a long way, and is a hugely different animal than what it was in versions 1 through 3 (btw, Direct3D as a name is dead, and it's just referred to now as DirectX). The more important part is everything else. DirectX is a framework that provides 3D, 2D (though DirectDraw is dead, and only available for backwards compatibility), audio, input management, networking, and a whole lot more. OpenGL is a 3D (and 2D, if you like) framework and nothing more. That's why Loki developed SDL way back when. As good as SDL is now, it still has a long way to go to be on par with DirectX. Even id uses DirectX for input and sound (though they use other libraries for sound management as well).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 14, 2005 @05:29AM (#11665929)
    Admittedly gmplayer isn't the most brilliant interface

    Understatement of the year!

    When you consider that the interface is the part people see and use, you realize that it's kind of silly to make claims about the quality of a program, and then qualify it by excluding the interface.

    Look at Mac application reviews. Note you never see a comment like "decent program, but the UI needs work". To Mac users, the UI *is* the program. I think Linux apps are going to be kind of lousy until people realize this, and stop talking of "interfaces" separate from "programs".

    I'd rather have a program like Totem (which I can figure out) that only plays 80% of the videos I try, than mplayer -- which may play 100% of the videos I've ever wanted to watch, but which is a pain in the ass to get working.

    If they were going for "most comprehensive format support", then yay, they succeeded. They don't seem to have been going for "good app", sadly. So it's more of an intellectual curiosity for the hacker in me, than a useful tool.
  • by jotaeleemeese ( 303437 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @06:47AM (#11666138) Homepage Journal
    In Windows you are subjected to the whims of whatever company or individual that handles to put a piece of software in your computer, from known manufacturers to spammers, crackers and fraudsters.

    With windows you are waiting that uncles Bill snaps his fingers to be out of support, need to upgrade or having to agree to draconian EULAs when installing things like media viewers.

    With Linux you are free of those inconveniences and you know that the software you use has a better chance to be improved in the benefit of the users that use it, not in the benefit of the company that produces it.
  • by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @08:55AM (#11666495)
    These days you can use the GTK-Qt theme to unify the looks regardless of what visual style you like. It has been refined for a long time and works pretty well. The remaining differences are mostly trivial and are of the level of inconsistency found in Carbon/Cocoa apps or between Explorer/IE/Office on Windows. So I don't think it's a big problem.
  • by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @09:54AM (#11666831) Homepage Journal
    At least I think it is. After all XP really is a pretty good desktop all other things aside. The problems are a) cost b) security c) adminsistrative overhead. Linux addresses two out of three. Administrative overhead is still pretty high, at least if you're the guy doing it because no one else will be able to. In either case Linux also suffers from a few distinct disadvantages: a) installation complexity b) inability to run Windows apps without introducing another layer of complexity in Wine, etc. c) It really doesn't run well in a desktop environment in hardware that is significantly cheaper or underpowered compared to Windows. XP requires quite a bit of juice to run well whereas W2K runs rather nice on my P2-400 with 288MB RAM. Similarly ANY good Linux desktop really does need 256MB RAM and at least that much processor. Installation disk requirements for Linux are somewhat higher but disk is practically free.

    So instead of playing to Windows strengths why not play to Linux strengths? Make a desktop that can run Windows apps when it needs to but runs the machine in a highly configured, locked down, no spyware, no virus no end user ability to change anything configuration? And run it on cheap hardware? In fact a Linux terminal server starts to look like a nice alternative for a home LAN.

    Other than that I'd ask for better support and much much cleaner functional installs of devices that are no longer exotic, like Wireless NICs, scanners, multifunction printer/scanner/fax machines, drawing tablets and USB devices of all kinds. Instead of building the 19th most popular UI for Linux why dont' we build better integrated support for LAN bootable 802.11G NICs?
  • Linspire (Score:3, Insightful)

    by phorm ( 591458 ) on Monday February 14, 2005 @12:06PM (#11668197) Journal
    I don't know about everyone else, but personally I found that the last screenshot gave me shivers.

    Username: root
    Hostname: linspire

    I don't really think that touting "looks and works like windows" is a good thing, because eventually that just dumbs down to "gets 0WN3D like Windows" as well.

    I run as a local user, which works just fine for me (and guess what, my touchpad scroll also works on X.org). For things that need root access (such as installing new software through apt), specific apps are allowed via sudo.

"Everyone's head is a cheap movie show." -- Jeff G. Bone

Working...