No Tux No Bux

[juho]

Why a you making a MAC version of the game and not a Linux version? Was the Linux port not profitable in the end. I know that Linux gamers make up about 1 % percent of total gamers but there aren't that many MAC gamers either if you look at the Steam hardware surveys. MAC is only 3 to 4 %. So why waste time on that?

We can do Mac port inhouse, but we can't do Linux inhouse. There's a huge difference.

[Dr.Disaster]

I know that Linux gamers make up about 1 % percent of total gamers but there aren't that many MAC gamers either if you look at the Steam hardware surveys. MAC is only 3 to 4 %. So why waste time on that?

Because when they don't there will never be a Linux port.

OSX marketshare is larger then Linux so it's natural to port to OSX first. Once the Mac port is done chances for a generic Linux port are quite good because OSX is in fact a proprietary Linux.

[badhabit]

I know that Linux gamers make up about 1 % percent of total gamers but there aren't that many MAC gamers either if you look at the Steam hardware surveys. MAC is only 3 to 4 %. So why waste time on that?

Once the Mac port is done chances for a generic Linux port are quite good because OSX is in fact a proprietary Linux.

While this is often "claimed" (as OSX has some unix roots) I humblely disagree to this simplification: OSX and the linux ecosystem have as much similarities as Android and Debian, nearly no overlap for desktop realm. OSX, while unixoid, forms a independent desktop platform on its own with own, native libs, tools, technologies etc. which mostly incompatible with the linux ecosystem. (PS: strictly spoken, OSX is not a linux overall as it uses BSD parts and not the linux kernel)

But, if someone is willing to limit himself to only cross-platform frameworks and tools to develop an application (SDL2, OpenGL, openAL etc), and not the common, well supported and native APIs and tools, compatiblity between all OSs' is easier to achieve... but normally development works not like that. Developer program the application for one platform and try later to "match" it with minimum effort to other platforms... which is the hardest for linux for several reasons.

If the linux community would be not that dogmatic and would accept WINE/Cross-Over as reasonable ports we would see faster and more ports for linux. And the bickering against DX (without providing a similar stable and universal alternative) as being non-native becomes less and less reasonable as the support for it becomes more and more native to the linux ecosystem, he, stop this FUD against WINE, it addresses just an API!

[FlashSoul]

@afettouhi : Another thing is that even if it's only 3-4% more, it's still at least twice as many copies sold so the minimum revenue to make it profitable is easier to achieve.

@badhabit : I remember the big backlash when John Carmack said the same thing about Wine and native builds. I think many linux users prefer ideology over more programs.

[badhabit]

I think many linux users prefer ideology over more programs.

For me is here the question: which ideology?

• Open-source? These currently released more-native linux ports are mostly still closed-source, so no.
• Pushing the linux platform? there is no linux platform, only a fragmented ecosystem with hundreds of possibilities... not really reasonable, as native builds are broken instantly among the all distros or break over time (no LOKI installer is working anymore).
• Everything MS is evil? as DX is made from MS it must be evil and should be forbidden to be used... while this is a position, it is not really a objective and reasonable one... infact, we should be happy to have DX9 as some kind of universal and stable PC API/ABI standard where everyone else failed to establish one. Especially the linux ecosystem, which NEEDS exactly something like Win32+DX API/ABI for unifiying the ecosystem, whcih provides nothing comparable here (maybe steam in future, but they struggle still.).

[Azel]

Why a you making a MAC version of the game and not a Linux version? Was the Linux port not profitable in the end. I know that Linux gamers make up about 1 % percent of total gamers but there aren't that many MAC gamers either if you look at the Steam hardware surveys. MAC is only 3 to 4 %. So why waste time on that?

Because Math.

While this is often "claimed" (as OSX has some unix roots) I humblely disagree

Some people humbly disagree that the Earth is round. Their simplistic reasoning is similar to yours


Hey so World of WarCraft has no Linux Client (it was dropped early on), but can be played on the OS using Wine. I doubt Blizzard regrets the decision as the game only gets stronger and better each year it seems. So wtf are all the winers wining about with Grimrock? Unless I'm missing something here?

[badhabit]

While this is often "claimed" (as OSX has some unix roots) I humblely disagree

Some people humbly disagree that the Earth is round. Their simplistic reasoning is similar to yours

The simplistic reasoning is on your side if you conclude from: "OSX platform == somewhat unix'ish" and "linux ecosystem == somewhat unix'ish" that "OSX platform" == "linux ecosystem".

[Azel]

You are inventing points so that you can try to counterpoint. That's kinda cute

There are standards shared between the two OS's, enough so that porting software becomes significantly easier. You can nitpick and quote hump all you like, you'll still end up being the guy with a rep for typing up "bad info."

[badhabit]

You are inventing points so that you can try to counterpoint. That's kinda cute

There are standards shared between the two OS's, enough so that porting software becomes significantly easier. You can nitpick and quote hump all you like, you'll still end up being the guy with a rep for typing up "bad info."

ahhh standards, funny fact: OSX is fully POSIX-compliant, linux is not.

OSX follows indeed standards, the linux distros not: they were even unable to agree on even a standard among the distros, the LSB.

File Hierarchy Structure: incompatible, OSX uses extension useful for the desktop while linux sticks still to the archaic and incomprehensible stuff

OSX has the Carbon API ... Linux has not.

OSX uses for application deployment decoupled selfcontaining application bundles, linux uses tightly system integrated repository packages.

OSX is a unified thoroughly designed platform & OS, linux is a wild ecosystem (not a OS nor a platform) without focus.

Where do you see standards between both, please I'm seriously interested?

[Azel]

Well it's too bad that your brain stopped at only one Wikipedia page, but I wouldn't expect much from someone so dedicated to endorsing bad information.

LSB is a superset of POSIX, it's literally based on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base

You should be ashamed that one Wikipedia linked completely obliterates the argument you made with another Wikipedia link. Then again, I sense that you are way too lacking in brain power to understand what just took place.

There is a full white-paper on the effort to resolve the differences between LSB/POSIX to further conform to a common set of standards: https://personal.opengroup.org/~ajosey/tr28-07-2003.txt

And as far as standards are concerned, this exchange perfectly illustrates how you set the standard for terrible information and willful ignorance. I look forward to your next attempt to win an argument via Hyperlinks to content you clearly do not understand.