I see. That’s not what “security by obscurity” means in my world, but the expression certainly sounds like it could. It’s not like I own the meaning of words, so it’s interesting to hear what it means to others. Could also have been meant figuratively, I suppose.
In what way does “security by obscurity” apply here?
“Install Linux”, is usually a hurdle for most people. We should be willing to help with that part.
Maybe this was an intentional leak. Now the Nintendo lawyers can claim they’ve used stolen proprietary code?
I suppose. If you are doing things against TOS and you suspect just might happen, by all means.
The license is with regards to “GOG Service”, not “GOG Contents”. You need the former to get access to the latter, sure. But what isn’t clear about this?
You still own the contents (though, as mentioned, individual titles may have additional blablabla). If you don’t think this distinction makes sense when it comes to GoG vs Steam, then maybe you’re just discussing something entirely different?
That’s for the gog service itself.
What do you mean? Native Linux isn’t that relevant these days. Most games run well through Proton, and some even better than on Windows. Judging by the protondb entry, you wouldn’t notice on Linux that this was a windows game: https://www.protondb.com/app/2142790
Make it have to follow the same regulations as other currencies and banks. If it looks like currency, and functions like currency, maybe it should be considered currency.
Alacritty is fine. If you’re not combining it with tmux and zsh/fish, id pluck those fruits first.
I’ve used DOS, 3.11 to all the way to 11. Switched to Linux as main driver around 2009. Used MacOS at work for over a year now. I occasionally boot into windows for rare game that uses some anti cheat that doesn’t play well with wine.
I’m old enough that I just want things to work. I don’t care for any fanboyism. These are my opinions:
Windows is a mess. It has different UI from different decades, depending on what and where. NT kernel is ancient. The registry is a horror show. The only edge it has, is third party software, like propriatery drivers. that’s it. And that’s isn’t a merit of windows, but rather market share.
MacOS is inconsistent at every turn. It’s frustrating to use, and riddled with UX bugs, and seemingly deliberate lack of functionality. The core tooling, like the file manager, is absolute garbage. The only good thing it has going it, is that the Unix core is solid. In that year, I’ve experienced a soft brick once, that almost was a hard brick, and the reason was having set the display refresh rate from 120 to 60 Hz. Something I changed BTW, because certain animation transitions in MacOS took twice as long on 120 Hz… Yeah, top notch QA there Apple.
Linux. It has its own flaws. For sure. But as for “just works”, it happens so often, that it’s exactly why Windows and MacOS feels so frustrating. I’d have my grandmother use Linux.
And, I’m not just saying this. When I upgraded components on windows, I spent 2 hours debugging problems. One of the problems was also that it reverted a GPU driver, where every single version information was unmistakably older. It also made it not work.
I’ve also experienced that the WiFi network adapter also doesn’t work until I download some proprietary software over ethernet cable.
On Linux? I didn’t need to do a single thing in either case. It for sure didn’t use to be this way. In 2009 I was hunting WiFi drivers for fedora over ethernet. But in the last, say 5 years, on Arch, it’s been amazing. Did I mention that I use arch?
Ps: The last 4 times I’ve had problems on Linux have been:
There are so many good games being made these days. I don’t understand why people still reward bad practices.
But then again, you did comment on what the article was about. Which would make it relevant to know what the article was about.
Isn’t it called “rogue-like” because that last part of metaprogress was not in rogue? Maybe I’m confusing it with roguelite.
I’m not. You implied that my point was that it was easy to write OpenOffice, or the equivalent. From the context, it should have been obvious that this wasn’t my point, and I’m not interested in entertaining such straw man arguments, and my responses tend to be rude. Apologies.
I don’t feel like paraphrasing myself either, but in the spirit of good intentions: I made the comparison that document productivity software is orders of magnitude simpler than something like Blender. If you disagree on this, that’s fine. Inferring that this means productivity software is easy, that’s all on you.
If you read what I wrote, in context. I’m sure you can get a better idea of what I meant, than what you’re implying here.
should also see what they can do to make Microsoft improve/fix their ODF implementation since it is an ISO standard. There has to be something to get that ball rolling.
The answer to this should be the same as when some standard S is implemented in software X, Y, Z. If Z doesn’t follow the standard, blacklist it until it does. That’s the whole point of having a format standard, that it shouldn’t matter what software you use.
If people, companies, institutions and governments have this stance and attitude, MS will need to compete on actual user experience, and not degrading the UX of the competition.
They’d get their shit together mighty fast. I’d expect them to lose too. Software to edit documents isn’t complicated. If we can have things like blender, which I’d say is about 3-4 orders of magnitude a greater endeavour, for which use case has the inverse potential user base, it’s pretty obvious that the only reason that MS Office is a thing (i.e. in raking in billions in license fees… 49 billion USD in 2022), is shady business practices.
It still pisses me off that in my country, when they had a group of experts make the evaluation of which document standard to follow, all experts agreed on ODF. But, because of shady MS money being thrown around, they ignored the recommendation, and went with DOCX.
The solution that solves ODF compatibility issues is to not allow applications that do not adhere to the standard. In other words, to explicitly disallow the use of Microsoft products. It’s not by accident that MS Office products are slightly fucking up documents, it’s by design.
Since many companies use MS Office, when they do a pilot to see if they can use ODF, it ends up “causing problems”. If anyone tries to use it in a mostly Office based workspace, it’ll also “causes problems”.
MS only has very good reason to always be just subtly off, and everything to lose if they aren’t.
I had mixed feelings about the whole Ondsel thing. And, please correct me if I’m wrong.
Most of the significant features in 1.0, that supposedly came from Ondsel, are things that I’ve been using for perhaps 3 years now, with a fairly well known branch of FreeCAD called Linkstage3 by a user that goes by RealThunder.
I don’t know how much he was involved in Ondsel, or the merging of those features into FreeCAD, but it sure looked like a whole lot of great work wasn’t credited to mind boggling amount of work by one person.
I still use the Linkstage3 branch, because it has a lot more features still, than what was present in the 1.0 pre-release i tried some months ago. Maybe things have changed since then.