EVE Search - @ DEVS: When can we expect a native linux client?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

@ DEVS: When can we expect a native linux client?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Marysse Lynn	Posted - 2007.07.26 18:52:00 - [61] Originally by: Mastin Dragonfly You'll get it right after it runs flawlessly on windows. so... never, yeah? Originally by: Xordan Stackless Python is open source software... so they don't really have a problem with it do they? Well, just a few really, nothing TOO major...
Norwood Franskly	Posted - 2007.07.27 05:24:00 - [62] Originally by: Andrue Originally by: Norwood Franskly Your arguement about package dependencies seems fairly weak to me, just put the onus on the user to maintain he's packages. why the censored should the user have to do any such thing? Maybe I've misunderstood your posting but ISTM that it's an example of exactly why Linux has never made it into the mainstream. Users want to use their computer not ** around with it. I don't have to 'manage my packages' when I'm using Windows. I can just install and play the game. That's what I like and that's what 95% of the computer users in the world want to do. Until/unless the majority of Linux supporters realise this they will never, ever get their precious OS out of the niche that it currently occupies. I'm not arguing anywhere that Linux should be mainstream, I have no idea what gave you that impression. Linux is not for everybody, thats the first thing I tell people who ask me to set up Linux for them. Linux takes time and effort to learn, its for people who know about computers and care enough to have the control to ** around with their computer. If you want things to "just work" (TM) stick with Windows, just don't ask me to fix your computer when things go wrong. Asking a Linux user to install package X is a basic, basic operation if you don't know how to install a package and you can't be bothered to learn then Linux is not the operating system for you. I also find fault with you saying you don't need to 'manage packages' in windows. Did you install Direct X, Did you install\upgrade Video drivers how bout all those windows updates and service packs you installed. Do you use Acrobat reader did it pop up with an update message, how bout realplayer or quicktime, what about Java? What your doing when this happens is analogous to package management in the Linux world. In my opinion Package management is 'the thing' that sets Linux miles ahead of Windows. It provides a single easy way to install, remove or update software, drivers and applications and manage dependencies. Imagine if you could patch all the apps running on your windows system with 1 command, well you can with Linux. Desktop Linux users may be a niche but it's a damn important one, we are technically proficient geeks (and I say that with a great deal of affection), exactly the sort of people who are prepared to shell out a monthly fee to play something like Eve.
Gyrn Fzirth Minmatar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.07.27 08:36:00 - [63] Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 27/07/2007 08:43:31 Originally by: Norwood Franskly Originally by: Andrue Originally by: Norwood Franskly Your arguement about package dependencies seems fairly weak to me, just put the onus on the user to maintain he's packages. why the censored should the user have to do any such thing? Maybe I've misunderstood your posting but ISTM that it's an example of exactly why Linux has never made it into the mainstream. Users want to use their computer not ** around with it. I don't have to 'manage my packages' when I'm using Windows. I can just install and play the game. That's what I like and that's what 95% of the computer users in the world want to do. Until/unless the majority of Linux supporters realise this they will never, ever get their precious OS out of the niche that it currently occupies. I'm not arguing anywhere that Linux should be mainstream, I have no idea what gave you that impression. Linux is not for everybody, thats the first thing I tell people who ask me to set up Linux for them. Linux takes time and effort to learn, its for people who know about computers and care enough to have the control to around with their computer. If you want things to "just work" (TM) stick with Windows, just don't ask me to fix your computer when things go wrong. Asking a Linux user to install package X is a basic, basic operation if you don't know how to install a package and you can't be bothered to learn then Linux is not the operating system for you. I also find fault with you saying you don't need to 'manage packages' in windows. Did you install Direct X, Did you install\upgrade Video drivers how bout all those windows updates and service packs you installed. Do you use Acrobat reader did it pop up with an update message, how bout realplayer or quicktime, what about Java? bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. Originally by:** Norwood Franskly What your doing when this happens is analogous to package management in the Linux world. analogous only insofar that linux updates the relevant package, yet can't deal with version x.y.z vs x.y.n package for each and every little service or application Originally by: Norwood Franskly In my opinion Package management is 'the thing' that sets Linux miles ahead of Windows. It provides a single easy way to install, remove or update software, drivers and applications and manage dependencies. Imagine if you could patch all the apps running on your windows system with 1 command, well you can with Linux. except that you have to patch EVERYTHING each time you want to patch ANYTHING with linux. In windows if I want an updated application I only need to install the update for that application. Originally by: Norwood Franskly Desktop Linux users may be a niche but it's a damn important one, we are technically proficient geeks (and I say that with a great deal of affection), exactly the sort of people who are prepared to shell out a monthly fee to play something like Eve. bull**** you guys are a fractional percentage minority that happens to know how to click the "submit" button on forums. Have a nice day while you search for a job requiring RHCE or some other enterprise linux cert. ========== CELES KB: http://www.celeskills.com
Norwood Franskly	Posted - 2007.07.27 09:28:00 - [64] Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 27/07/2007 08:43:31 bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. Your deliberatly over -exagerating, Java doesn't affect your window managers or kernel, modern package managers handle all the dependencies automatically and it's completely transperant to the user so what you've mentioned is a non issue. What basic tasks require you to recompile your kernel? I've recompiled my Kernel twice in all the time i've been using Linux and both times were because I was trying to do something non standard and very much non basic (playing around with XEN virtualisation). Somethings are easier to do in Windows and some are better in Linux. They are based on a different philosophies. Quote: except that you have to patch EVERYTHING each time you want to patch ANYTHING with linux. In windows if I want an updated application I only need to install the update for that application Also untrue you only have to update things that have dependencies and again it's handled automatically.I'm curious to know why from a security point of view you'd ever want a half patched system anyway? Quote: bull** you guys are a fractional percentage minority that happens to know how to click the "submit" button on forums. Have a nice day while you search for a job requiring RHCE or some bull** other enterprise linux cert. I already have a nice job thank you very much, perhaps you haven't heard of Unix it's very popular and runs on a lot of large corporate mainframes\servers.
Gyrn Fzirth Minmatar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.07.27 09:36:00 - [65] Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 27/07/2007 09:37:46 Originally by: Norwood Franskly Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 27/07/2007 08:43:31 bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. Your deliberatly over -exagerating, Java doesn't affect your window managers or kernel, modern package managers handle all the dependencies automatically and it's completely transperant to the user so what you've mentioned is a non issue. What basic tasks require you to recompile your kernel? I've recompiled my Kernel twice in all the time i've been using Linux and both times were because I was trying to do something non standard and very much non basic (playing around with XEN virtualisation). Somethings are easier to do in Windows and some are better in Linux. They are based on a different philosophies. I agree 100% with you on this point Originally by: Norwood Franskly Quote: except that you have to patch EVERYTHING each time you want to patch ANYTHING with linux. In windows if I want an updated application I only need to install the update for that application Also untrue you only have to update things that have dependencies and again it's handled automatically.I'm curious to know why from a security point of view you'd ever want a half patched system anyway? Quote: bull** you guys are a fractional percentage minority that happens to know how to click the "submit" button on forums. Have a nice day while you search for a job requiring RHCE or some bull** other enterprise linux cert. I already have a nice job thank you very much, perhaps you haven't heard of Unix it's very popular and runs on a lot of large corporate mainframes\servers. unix != linux. I help manage roughly 30 vmware ESX boxes which of course run rh linux. they are the exception as required by vmware as all of our unix stuff runs real unix - solaris or bsd, not that hacked together wannabe crap. ========== CELES KB: http://www.celeskills.com
Lysit Kaune Minmatar Phoenix Division The Imperial Order	Posted - 2007.07.27 09:41:00 - [66] Edited by: Lysit Kaune on 27/07/2007 09:42:43 Originally by: Norwood Franskly I already have a nice job thank you very much, perhaps you haven't heard of Unix it's very popular and runs on a lot of large corporate mainframes\servers. ...and not worth a damn for gaming, whats sort of the point really, and yes, windows is much simpler for the user. When was the last time you had to download the source to the NT/XP/M$/Whatever kernel so you could just install some drivers (Which didn't perform well). Sure, *nix certainly seems to peform better when setup perfectly (Quite like my DSL Box), but if your using relatively up to date hardware (In the desktop environment) you can forget it, if theres drivers they may not work (Thats practically everyone with a 8500+ from ATI), and if there are its 50/50 if joe average can install them.
Norwood Franskly	Posted - 2007.07.27 09:51:00 - [67] I don't admin and I'm not going to argue the merits of Solaris and BSD compared to Linux, Last time I used Solaris was at Uni (Version 7??? on UltraSparc I think) suffice to say I don't have very fond memories of it... I'm not sure what my position would be technically called I'm emplyeed as an Engineer and I work in process simulation and modelling. Most of it is fairly computationally intensive Fluid dynamics / Chemical equilibrium calculations, these run on large IBM mainframe\work stations (RS 6000 and Zseries) running a combination of AIX and Linux. Anyway this is getting very off topic and isn't contributing to the thread so Im going to stop posting.
Gord Ackfordham Fenscore Enterprises United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2007.07.27 10:50:00 - [68] Originally by: Norwood Franskly I don't admin and I'm not going to argue the merits of Solaris and BSD compared to Linux, Last time I used Solaris was at Uni (Version 7??? on UltraSparc I think) suffice to say I don't have very fond memories of it... I'm not sure what my position would be technically called I'm emplyeed as an Engineer and I work in process simulation and modelling. Most of it is fairly computationally intensive Fluid dynamics / Chemical equilibrium calculations, these run on large IBM mainframe\work stations (RS 6000 and Zseries) running a combination of AIX and Linux. Anyway this is getting very off topic and isn't contributing to the thread so Im going to stop posting. solaris is crap and always has been crap... use a real *nix os. --- cheers, gordo
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega	Posted - 2007.07.27 10:55:00 - [69] does linux still exist? you cant play games on it.... whats the point? sure its fast and stable and sexy and nerdycool... but who cares.... BOOOORING.... nothing to see here people, move along. ----------------------------------------------- "Yes... I sleep with my myrmidon. It's nothing to be ashamed of!"
Gord Ackfordham Fenscore Enterprises United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2007.07.27 10:56:00 - [70] Originally by: Cornucopian does linux still exist? you cant play games on it.... whats the point? nice troll. --- cheers, gordo
Scorpyn Caldari Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.07.27 11:00:00 - [71] Edited by: Scorpyn on 27/07/2007 11:01:01 Originally by: Gord Ackfordham solaris is crap and always has been crap... use a real nix os. That "use a real nix os" comment is actually being used for all flavours of unix... 2007-07-19 20:26
Loyal Servant Caldari Farmer Killers United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2007.07.27 12:51:00 - [72] Originally by: Scorpyn Edited by: Scorpyn on 27/07/2007 11:01:01 Originally by: Gord Ackfordham solaris is crap and always has been crap... use a real nix os. That "use a real nix os" comment is actually being used for all flavours of unix... Which, includes slowaris :)

CCP Explorer	Posted - 2007.07.27 19:44:00 - [73] Edited by: CCP Explorer on 27/07/2007 19:46:25 I've read all the links in the responses you've posted and based on the material already out there from our marketing department I can evidently be less vague than in my first post. First of all, we have no plans to release a native client for Linux or Mac OS X, but that specific question is the topic of this thread. All the articles that use the word native are wrong. The articles that don't use that word are right. We are actively working with TransGaming Technologies on providing EVE clients for the Cider and Cedega platforms in a forthcoming release, hence my (vague) comment earlier that we are committed to enhance our support for API wrappers. I'm not committing to a specific release date, let it suffice to say that I don't intend this project to linger around any longer at this point than is necessary for QA purposes. We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson Software Director EVE Online, CCP Games

An Anarchyyt Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.07.27 19:50:00 - [74] Originally by: CCP Explorer We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. Good.
Alty Altalot	Posted - 2007.07.27 20:12:00 - [75] Originally by: CCP Explorer We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. Maybe people can stop WINEing about this now.
Sevarus James Minmatar Meridian Dynamics FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.27 20:27:00 - [76] Originally by: CCP Explorer We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. As an Ubuntu Linux user that I thank you for that. Its interesting how in "general" when we linux users start a thread, how quickly the flames and arguments rage. Now back to the tech and COAD forums I go. Ubuntu 3d Beryl-Linux Desktop+EVE
Kadesh Priestess	Posted - 2007.07.27 22:49:00 - [77] Simple question. Will you compile eve against cedegalibs, or we'll have to subscribe to it and you'll just improve game compatibility?
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.27 23:11:00 - [78] Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. When I install a program in Windows, I run the installer for that program. It then prompts me that I need [whatever] version of Direct X, so I go and run a separate installer for that. It might prompt me that I need to update my .NET Runtime Environment, so I run a third installer for that. If its a graphics-intensive program, it may require a video driver update; I go to the website and download the fourth installer for that. In Linux, to install the same program I simply click "install". If any of that other stuff needs doing, the dependency tree will sort itself out without my interference. Linux doesn't "force" the user to upgrade things that "are completely unrelated to the fricking application". The "dependency tree" means just what it says- the things the program is dependent on. Windows has EXACTLY the same dependencies, only it forces you to run around doing them all yourself. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that Linux updates everything to install a new application- as a Linux user, I've never observed anything of the sort. I fail to see how an automated package manager is a bad thing... --------
Fedaykin Naib 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.07.27 23:35:00 - [79] Oh SNAP! You got gyrn all riled up! Better watch out, your about to get pwned! "Long Live the Fighters!"
Gyrn Fzirth Minmatar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.07.28 00:20:00 - [80] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. When I install a program in Windows, I run the installer for that program. It then prompts me that I need [whatever] version of Direct X, so I go and run a separate installer for that. It might prompt me that I need to update my .NET Runtime Environment, so I run a third installer for that. If its a graphics-intensive program, it may require a video driver update; I go to the website and download the fourth installer for that. In Linux, to install the same program I simply click "install". If any of that other stuff needs doing, the dependency tree will sort itself out without my interference. Linux doesn't "force" the user to upgrade things that "are completely unrelated to the fricking application". The "dependency tree" means just what it says- the things the program is dependent on. Windows has EXACTLY the same dependencies, only it forces you to run around doing them all yourself. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that Linux updates everything to install a new application- as a Linux user, I've never observed anything of the sort. I fail to see how an automated package manager is a bad thing... Obviously the sarcasm ("..requires a fricking act of congress ...) and disclaimers ("..in the user view of things...") got by you there. Package managment in linux is spectacular, I agree. The key difference is that, in order to install an application in Windows I only need to... install the application. DirectX 9 has been out for literally 5 years. .net 2.0 has been out for 2 years. These may be required for an application, but if you don't already have them please return your p3 and move into the modern age. Of course you occasionally need to update components of ANY system. Graphic drivers of a certain version aren't required - kinda silly to state they are. As long as you have a relatively recent version your application will call out to it just fine, and any calls that aren't supported just won't be used :/ When I installed Eve it didn't ask for ATI driver version x.y.z or anything like that. When I installed Quake 4 same thing. let me give you a real life ferinstance where linux' automated package management sucks: running ubuntu dapper drake (haven't run feisty yet) I wanted to run beryl. I grabbed beryl, which also grabbed a stack of other updates that Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application which unfortunately didn't work well with some other aspects of the system. I had to explicitly degrade beryl and some other components just to get it to work. Guess what happened next time the autopatch cycle came around. Yep, I had to uncheck all of the updates that broke beryl in the first place, even though they were listed as "required" for the damn application. So, the point being linux requires these updates EVERY TIME I install an application or autopatch. This in theory is a good thing - thumbs up! - but in practice can introduce NEW bugs that the user wasn't looking for because it wasn't a change they explicitly initiated. ========== CELES KB: http://www.celeskills.com
Hexman The Ankou The Reckoning.	Posted - 2007.07.28 00:50:00 - [81] Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth As far as you monkies talking about MS backends being crap, grow up and pull yer head out. Most of the biggest and most well known companies use a mix for a reason. Some things lend themselves to MS backends more than unix and vice versa. Yeah, and the EVE cluster ain't one of em...every monkey knows MS backends are made for a lot of stuff, scalability NOT being one of em.
Gord Ackfordham Fenscore Enterprises United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2007.07.28 00:54:00 - [82] Originally by: CCP Explorer Edited by: CCP Explorer on 27/07/2007 19:46:25 I've read all the links in the responses you've posted and based on the material already out there from our marketing department I can evidently be less vague than in my first post. First of all, we have no plans to release a native client for Linux or Mac OS X, but that specific question is the topic of this thread. All the articles that use the word native are wrong. The articles that don't use that word are right. We are actively working with TransGaming Technologies on providing EVE clients for the Cider and Cedega platforms in a forthcoming release, hence my (vague) comment earlier that we are committed to enhance our support for API wrappers. I'm not committing to a specific release date, let it suffice to say that I don't intend this project to linger around any longer at this point than is necessary for QA purposes. We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. what are the chances of you guys helping out the wine team? not all of us have the liberty to pay for the monthly usage of cedega. --- cheers, gordo
Gyrn Fzirth Minmatar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.07.28 01:10:00 - [83] Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 28/07/2007 01:12:40 Originally by: Hexman Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth As far as you monkies talking about MS backends being crap, grow up and pull yer head out. Most of the biggest and most well known companies use a mix for a reason. Some things lend themselves to MS backends more than unix and vice versa. Yeah, and the EVE cluster ain't one of em...every monkey knows MS backends are made for a lot of stuff, scalability NOT being one of em. And yet every monkey's employer uses Exchange for their global mail, calendaring, etc etc. Somehow the brilliant monkey bosses figured out how to run it on something OTHER than windows :/ ========== CELES KB: http://www.celeskills.com
Hexman The Ankou The Reckoning.	Posted - 2007.07.28 02:04:00 - [84] Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 28/07/2007 01:12:40 Originally by: Hexman Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth As far as you monkies talking about MS backends being crap, grow up and pull yer head out. Most of the biggest and most well known companies use a mix for a reason. Some things lend themselves to MS backends more than unix and vice versa. Yeah, and the EVE cluster ain't one of em...every monkey knows MS backends are made for a lot of stuff, scalability NOT being one of em. And yet every monkey's employer uses Exchange for their global mail, calendaring, etc etc. Somehow the brilliant monkey bosses figured out how to run it on something OTHER than windows :/ I might be inclined to say "touche"...but alas, EVE is not a calendaring/mail service...and MS SQL sucks at manageability and preformance, most people know that. And it sucks even more at scaling. And it does so EVEN more at massive scaling. Strike three for what EVE architecture needs...
Gyrn Fzirth Minmatar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.07.28 02:51:00 - [85] Originally by: Hexman Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth Edited by: Gyrn Fzirth on 28/07/2007 01:12:40 Originally by: Hexman Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth As far as you monkies talking about MS backends being crap, grow up and pull yer head out. Most of the biggest and most well known companies use a mix for a reason. Some things lend themselves to MS backends more than unix and vice versa. Yeah, and the EVE cluster ain't one of em...every monkey knows MS backends are made for a lot of stuff, scalability NOT being one of em. And yet every monkey's employer uses Exchange for their global mail, calendaring, etc etc. Somehow the brilliant monkey bosses figured out how to run it on something OTHER than windows :/ I might be inclined to say "touche"...but alas, EVE is not a calendaring/mail service...and MS SQL sucks at manageability and preformance, most people know that. And it sucks even more at scaling. And it does so EVEN more at massive scaling. Strike three for what EVE architecture needs... you didn't say which app, you just generalized everything as an "ms backend" in typical fanboi fashion. While I agree that MS SQL isn't the best database app out there for large scale stuff - most of our customers tend to use oracle on solaris for critical enterprise databases - it is far more than sufficient for most purposes requiring a scalable database from tiny to large. You'll never hear me say 'everything ms is great.' You'll also never hear me say 'everything linux sucks' or 'everything mac is dumbed down for stupid people' because none of those overly broad generalizations are true. To go back to one of my original statements: Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth Some things lend themselves to MS backends more than unix and vice versa. Beware anyone that uses ridiculously broad overgeneralizations. ========== CELES KB: http://www.celeskills.com
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2007.07.28 03:09:00 - [86] Originally by: Gord Ackfordham Originally by: CCP Explorer Edited by: CCP Explorer on 27/07/2007 19:46:25 I've read all the links in the responses you've posted and based on the material already out there from our marketing department I can evidently be less vague than in my first post. First of all, we have no plans to release a native client for Linux or Mac OS X, but that specific question is the topic of this thread. All the articles that use the word native are wrong. The articles that don't use that word are right. We are actively working with TransGaming Technologies on providing EVE clients for the Cider and Cedega platforms in a forthcoming release, hence my (vague) comment earlier that we are committed to enhance our support for API wrappers. I'm not committing to a specific release date, let it suffice to say that I don't intend this project to linger around any longer at this point than is necessary for QA purposes. We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. what are the chances of you guys helping out the wine team? not all of us have the liberty to pay for the monthly usage of cedega. I should add that not all of us have the liberty to be patient enough to use an obviously inferior product. Cedega sucks, no contest. Wine > Cedega ____________________ Pimped out Raven to run level 4 missions quickly: 210 Mil ISK. Realizing your 120 Mil ISK Drake gets the job done faster: Priceless.
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2007.07.28 08:24:00 - [87] Originally by: CCP Explorer We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. That are good news! Hopefully the plans will soon result in actions
Scorpyn Caldari Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.07.28 08:30:00 - [88] Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: CCP Explorer We are planning to officially support Tiger, Leopard, Ubuntu and openSUSE. That are good news! Hopefully the plans will soon result in actions Actually they already have, they've been asking for info (logs iirc) on linux specific issues recently. 2007-07-19 20:26
Kadesh Priestess	Posted - 2007.07.28 09:15:00 - [89] Well, i'd also prefer wine over cedega (and i will, if eve will be just adapted) cuz eve has 3-10 fps more here... But it's rather clear why ccp decided to work with them - it's much more easy to ask guys from transgaming to do sth than to do sth themselves in wine or wait when wine dev team will make suitable changes.
Human Cattle Amarr Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.07.28 09:49:00 - [90] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Gyrn Fzirth bolded the relevant part of this asinine argument. I upgraded java, yet didn't have to upgrade my drivers to x.y.z, upgrade my window manager to n, upgrade all other dependent parts of the pacakge within the os to k, y, l, o, l because its not NECESSARY to do so. I upgrade java without a concern about which sp of the os I'm on. Linux requires users to upgrade packages that (in the user view of things) are utterly unrelated and totally separate from the fricking application or service they are trying to upgrade. Package management in windows is SIMPLE because you only need to manage the packages for the relevant application or service. Linux on the other hand requires a fricking act of congress and recompilation of the kernel to accomplish basic things. When I install a program in Windows, I run the installer for that program. It then prompts me that I need [whatever] version of Direct X, so I go and run a separate installer for that. It might prompt me that I need to update my .NET Runtime Environment, so I run a third installer for that. If its a graphics-intensive program, it may require a video driver update; I go to the website and download the fourth installer for that. In Linux, to install the same program I simply click "install". If any of that other stuff needs doing, the dependency tree will sort itself out without my interference. sigh, typical worst case windows (and actually non-sensical) Vs best case linux (what distro are you thinking of? one's i've used this year have horrific package management and incredibly slow updating). this kind of BS should be outlawed, people might actually start believing it. fact is installing/upgrading linux is much, much more involved than upgrading in windows. Even in the latest versions of mandrake and opensuse, installing and upgrading is a damn pain and takes ages for the tree to resolve. And that's when I don't have to go into command line and do it myself. -------------- unhappy cogs :(((

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.