Gaming on Linux, what are my options?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in
news:11j0gfoc300phaf@corp.supernews.com:

> On 20-9-2005 13:57, Nick Vargish wrote:
>> Kevin <no@SPAM.here> writes:
>>
>>
>>>>PC gaming is still not for the faint-of-heart, and probably never
>>>>really will be.
>>
>>
>>>Nor is Linux.
>>
>>
>> Well, that was kind of my point, since the OP described himself as
>> "lazy", it seemed like a console or two would be the best thing for
>> him.
>>
>> Nick
>>
> The "me being lazy" part was figurative. What I meant is that I
> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
> necessary.
Not much you can do about it. Those OSes are too different and many
applications exist only on one of them 🙁

The best you can do (IMHO) is to make dual boot, but make shared filesystem
(probably FAT32) and put your email, newsgroups, web etc there. This way
you can do these activities from either boot which will allow you to avoid
unnecessary reboots. But, of course, if you want to switch between gaming
and development, tough luck. If you have 2 computers you can do many things
on Linux box via running terminal on Windows. But if you want to run
something graphics intensive from Linux box, it's becoming suboptimal...

Alex.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"ROBERT POLLARD" <RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:uvBXe.868$MD4.771@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> No, but seriously, unless you have a real reason to use Linux (and
> gaming isn't one of them), don't do it!
<snip>
>
> 'Do I actually NEED linux? What will I actually USE it for?'
That's actually a very good question to ask. Surprising enough many Windows
shortcoming can be overcome without switching OS. One of the main ones is
lack of tools and utilities. Installing cygwin will fix large part of this
one. You will get good shell, decent make system, text batch processing,
few scripting languages and a lot of other stuff. This will take care of
most of repetitive work one has to do on Windows. Many traditionally UNIX
packages have Windows ports as well (the drawback is that you'll have to
hunt them down and install on your own, but if you're used to Windows there
is nothing new in that).

For someone new to Linux, I'd suggest to start this way; it will allow you
to learn a lot about Linux and its tools without totally diving into it.
Later, when you decide to switch to real Linux you'll have much easier
time.

So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average user
there's no good reason. The most of Linux strong points is related to doing
something serious, not to the entertainment which is probably the main
computer use for the average user. Linux will give you a bit better
stability, but rebooting Windows once a week is not really that big hassle.
Security-wise advantage is probably not that important for most people. So
even if they get trojan or virus, it's not that big deal.

For more creative people, there're more incentives: version control system
would benefit most, always nice to keep history of your work and much
easier to collaborate. For those in interested in programming Lunux offers
a lot of nice tools. Everybody with technical interests is likely to find
some interesting offering on Linux - because his interests are likely to
coincide with interests of some of developers Finally, it's nicer to be
a driver than a passenger (even if one doesn't know where he is going)

Alex.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Chris de Bruin <news@cdb.demon.nl-nospam> wrote in news:11iqm8i3c993id0
@corp.supernews.com:

> I am preparing to migrate from Windows to Linux. Off course I still need
> to be able to do the things with Linux that I now do with Windows. Main
> issue today: gaming, what are my options?
>

Some of my favorite games have linux options. Such as Dominions 2

But generally I prefer linux as a server option rather than a desktop
option

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>
>Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>little icons too. ;P
>
>> What I meant is that I
>> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
>> necessary.
>
>It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
I thought there was one already.
<snip>

/BAH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127316988.795729.148310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>> In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> >> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>> >
>> >Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>> >little icons too. ;P
>> >
>> >> What I meant is that I
>> >> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> >> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't be
>> >> necessary.
>> >
>> >It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>> >particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
>> I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
>> I thought there was one already.
>
>They don't work for every game, only a few.

An emulator makes the Windows program think it's running
on the real hardware. I don't think you understood
what I meant.

/BAH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:39:32 GMT, alexti wrote:

> So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average user
> there's no good reason.

There are some reasons that fall in the "ideology" category. Windows is not
free, not as in "beer" and not as in "speech". New versions always cost
money, and frequently, you *must* get those if you want to keep using new
software. I realise that most people either use the OEM version they got
with a new computer or use a pirated copy, but still. With DRM, "Trusted
Computing" and other such nonsense on the Windows horizon, there are also
some solid reasons to switch to Linux, FreeBSD or OSX for those users who
feel strongly about privacy and "freedom".

On a practical level, you cannot really choose a GUI of your preference
under Windows. You have to use what Microsoft gives you.

M.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Michael Vondung <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote in
news:3t4s3ugwk5uk$.1638jvwfka6w4$.dlg@40tude.net:

> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:39:32 GMT, alexti wrote:
>
>> So why one would want to switch to Linux? I suspect that for average
>> user there's no good reason.
>
> There are some reasons that fall in the "ideology" category. Windows is
> not free, not as in "beer" and not as in "speech". New versions always
> cost money, and frequently, you *must* get those if you want to keep
> using new software. I realise that most people either use the OEM
> version they got with a new computer or use a pirated copy, but still.
> With DRM, "Trusted Computing" and other such nonsense on the Windows
> horizon, there are also some solid reasons to switch to Linux, FreeBSD
> or OSX for those users who feel strongly about privacy and "freedom".
>
> On a practical level, you cannot really choose a GUI of your preference
> under Windows. You have to use what Microsoft gives you.

You're right about that. But I am not sure if "average user" is aware of
those issues. Anyway, who is that "average user"? Everybody probably thinks
he is the greatest computer expert after Bill Gates

Alex.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
>"competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
>run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
>trojans on a regular basis

I wonder why? I've always run Windows XP and IE without an anti-virus
program (except for the anti-virus scan that's required before logging
onto corpnet from outside, and a few anti-spyware runs out of
curiosity). The same on my family PC. Have NEVER ONCE had a virus or
trojan or spyware. And I do browse to "fun" websites (filez, mp3z,
....). All this makes me think that a competently-managed Windows
machine is possible, and I've got one, and you don't.

--
Lucian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <1127325536.446520.53520@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>jmfbah...@aol.com wrote:
>> In article <1127316988.795729.148310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>> "knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>> >> In article <1127237223.530606.153020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> "Knight37" <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >Chris de Bruin wrote:
>> >> >> The "me being lazy" part was figurative.
>> >> >
>> >> >Sure it was, you lazy git. I bet you're too lazy to clicky clicky the
>> >> >little icons too. ;P
>> >> >
>> >> >> What I meant is that I
>> >> >> personally think it's too much trouble to have to boot from one OS to
>> >> >> another every time I want to use a specific application. It shouldn't
be
>> >> >> necessary.
>> >> >
>> >> >It SHOULDN'T be, but it IS. The compatibility to run Windows software,
>> >> >particularly games, under Linux just isn't there yet
>> >> I thought there was. Run a windows emulator as a job under Unix.
>> >> I thought there was one already.
>> >
>> >They don't work for every game, only a few.
>>
>> An emulator makes the Windows program think it's running
>> on the real hardware. I don't think you understood
>> what I meant.
>
>I do understand what you meant.

Oh, OK. I had to check. Sorry.

> .. Can you give a specific emulator that
>you're talking about?

No, I can't remember the cybercrud.

> ...Because every one I've read about for linux
>doesn't work for every game out there. If you know of one otherwise I'm
>sure the original poster would be interested in hearing about it.

If I see the magic incantation, I'll post it here...in c.s.i.p.g.r.
Note that I, also, am repeated gossip that I've read.

> .. Even
>VMWare, which is reputedly the best of the virtual-machine programs
>(and priced accordingly, it's pretty expensive) won't work for every
>windows game.

From what you've written, I'm getting the impression that
you've read about failures. If so, then you can't give
a detail about one; or can you? I'd like to know.
Just at a guestimate, I'd say that the problem lay in
the memory mismanagement of Windows but that's just
an educated guess.

It is certain that people I've seen talk about this
have not tested every game written for Windows.



/BAH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

After reading some stuff on the register (IT news site that is generally
anti MS) over the last day or two, it turns out that firefox in it's present
state has some major security issues and IE seems to have been sorted
out.....

I have to say I agree with magnate, I have had XP since it has come out and
the only security software I use is a firewall. Never had any virus's or
trojans. Some of my friends machines that I had to sort out were in a poor
way because they either didn't have a running fire wall or they hadn't used
MS update. Stability on my XP system seems extremely solid. In fact I think
XP is so good Microsoft might have trouble getting people to upgrade....

On the linux side I have had numerous crashes, mostly from the desktop (KDE)
I might add. I think the problem with linux is that you have a very good
command line OS which has stacked on top of it a bunch of API's and layers
that don't seem to entirely fit togoether properly and produce a desktop
system that is greater than the sum of its parts. I can do things on the
linux command line, that will not be seen in the desktop, because the two
aren't working effectivelly together. XP is much better at command
line/desktop integration, not quite as good as OS/2 with its object based
desktop, but still pretty good never the less.

Ironically, the main problem with linux for me is not the OS, but the lack
of good quality productivity software for it. All the distros I tried come
bundled with 1000's of applications, most of which are way below par in the
functionality department, and hey, if you don't want to pay for software on
XP dowload the Eclipse Java IDE for free and a whole host of other free gold
nuggets that can be found around the internet.

Linux'ers have most Xp'ers figured wrong. We are fairly neutral people that
just want to 'use' our computers. Some of us would love to have a different
vendor for their OS, but don't feel that Linux supplies the necesary
software. Who knows, now that the Macs are going intel, I wonder if apple
would ever be tempted to sell their OS to the desktop PC market and give
microsoft a fright.....

RobP


"Lucian Wischik" <lu.nn@wischik.com> wrote in message
news:qhq5j1tll60m0910hm4hg4knkprq9bhb5l@4ax.com...
> "magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
>>"competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
>>run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
>>trojans on a regular basis
>
> I wonder why? I've always run Windows XP and IE without an anti-virus
> program (except for the anti-virus scan that's required before logging
> onto corpnet from outside, and a few anti-spyware runs out of
> curiosity). The same on my family PC. Have NEVER ONCE had a virus or
> trojan or spyware. And I do browse to "fun" websites (filez, mp3z,
> ...). All this makes me think that a competently-managed Windows
> machine is possible, and I've got one, and you don't.
>
> --
> Lucian
>

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:33:24 GMT, "ROBERT POLLARD"
<RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>After reading some stuff on the register (IT news site that is generally
>anti MS) over the last day or two, it turns out that firefox in it's present
>state has some major security issues

There is already a patch for the issue.

> and IE seems to have been sorted
>out.....

ROFL.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:1127399985.175720.161060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> Giftzwerg wrote:
>> In short, a properly-updated, competently-managed XP system isn't
>> vulnerable *at all* - and it's easier for a naive user to update and
>> manage an XP box. How can you claim a better record for Linux?
>
> The first part is total, complete and utter bollocks - unless by
> "competently-managed" you mean "with Explorer replaced by Firefox". I
> run a fully updated XP system and still find and remove viruses and
> trojans on a regular basis (though less often since switching to
> Firefox). These are *not* caught by the M$ "malicious software removal
> tool".
>
> Even the second point is arguable - Debian-based distros such as Ubuntu
> are now extremely easy to update and manage, and many other package
> management systems are nearly as good.
"nearly as good"? I'd say that Debian's one is by far better than Windows
update system. Why? Because on Windows only OS and office (and occasionally
some other MS products) are getting updated. All other applications the
user has to update on his own. Some of applications may have their own
auto-update feature, but sooner or later one of them screws up something in
registry or in system32 with *usual* consequences (unless one backs up
windows before every update of every application - which is wise, but
frustratingly time consuming). On Debian pretty much everything gets
updated when necessary (including things like library dependency
resolution).

Alex.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"ROBERT POLLARD" <RobertAPollard@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:UNCYe.9963$MD4.8080@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Ironically, the main problem with linux for me is not the OS, but the
> lack of good quality productivity software for it. All the distros I
> tried come bundled with 1000's of applications, most of which are way
> below par in the functionality department, and hey, if you don't want
> to pay for software on XP dowload the Eclipse Java IDE for free and a
> whole host of other free gold nuggets that can be found around the
> internet.
Have you actually tried to run Eclipse on XP? It's so sluggish.
Unfortunately, that's not uncommon. One of the reasons is that cost of the
process on XP is very high in comparison to UNIX. As a result you have to
compromise between speed and stability. For example, if you need to run
some external plugin on UNIX you'd fork and run that plugin in forked
process (with decreased privileges for a good measure), so that if it has
bugs it won't thrash your program and won't do much damage. On XP you have
to either start another process (which is slow and non-trivial to bring it
to the right state) or run plugin within your process, which means that
problems in plugin are likely to bring problems in your app as well.

Alex.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:37:48 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I run XP. I rarely get viruses. I don't count attachments that I never
>open. I have problems with Firefox too. Most 3rd-party browsers will
>do anything Firefox will. I use Avant which is based on IE. It seems
>to me that you just like anything that is alternative.

Maybe one or two will do what Firefox does by default, name one that
has the hundreds of extensions that Firefox has.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <v5d7j19fe7nmf9rv4bqcbcu02nqau4t391@4ax.com>,
spamtrap@localhost. says...
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:37:48 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I run XP. I rarely get viruses. I don't count attachments that I never
> >open. I have problems with Firefox too. Most 3rd-party browsers will
> >do anything Firefox will. I use Avant which is based on IE. It seems
> >to me that you just like anything that is alternative.
>
> Maybe one or two will do what Firefox does by default, name one that
> has the hundreds of extensions that Firefox has.

unless I'm going something wrong, Firefox has a problem saving pics (no,
not just porn). Instead of saving what's downloaded and displaying, it
downloads it again. It's also butt ugly. Though maybe you can find a
decent skin.

The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
I'm too lazy to look.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>I'm too lazy to look.

If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
make Firefox the clear leader IMO.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <o7h7j19dfve1oie2ksi7hgakbp5nd04hju@4ax.com>,
spamtrap@localhost. says...
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
> >search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
> >java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
> >I'm too lazy to look.
>
> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

How about this...Ever do web pages? If it works, it will work in IE.
Might not in other browsers. This includes Firefox. The only time a
page won't work for IE is when someone included a script so it won't.
If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:

> If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.

I think you have that backwards, Epi.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:36:13 -0700, wolfing wrote:

> Try running today's Linux in a Pentium I
> with 64MB RAM and a 2GB Hard drive.

Actually you can - as long as you don't use a big resource-intensive GUI
like KDE3 or Gnome. Linux with a very simple GUI like Icewm or Blackbox
(or no GUI) will work on an older computer.


> If you want to play games in your computer, there is no option. Win XP
> is the only choice.

Win 2000 still works, since it uses the same video and sound card drivers
as XP. I don't know of any games that are XP only (yet).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <87y85oat97.fsf@localhost.localdomain>,
nav+posts@bandersnatch.org says...
> Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > If you ever do web pages, browsers other than IE can be a pain.
>
> I think you have that backwards, Epi.
>
> Nick

How so....Everything works on IE. Not on other browsers. You have to
install Java separately now, of course.

Oh! I forgot. The big bad bear makes IE.

Epi

----
When you use insults as a crutch, it's much like
using cussing in the same manner. It's not a great
sign of intelligence.
----
Some people can think for themselves. Others read
books and "parrot" them.
----
When he was growing up, his mother never allowed him
to admit he was wrong. If he did, he got a horrible
whipping.
----
http://www.curlesneck.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com> writes:

> How so....Everything works on IE. Not on other browsers.

Try writing a web site using CSS2 before you make such claims.

> You have to install Java separately now, of course.

Java's an entirely seperate issue.

> Oh! I forgot. The big bad bear makes IE.

BFD. I could care less who makes it, what bothers me is that it
isn't compliant with published standards.

Nick

--
#include<stdio.h> /* sigmask (sig.c) 20041028 PUBLIC DOMAIN */
int main(c,v)char *v;{return !c?putchar(* /* cc -o sig sig.c */
v-1)&&main(0,v+1):main(0,"Ojdl!Wbshjti!=ojdlAwbshjti/psh?\v\1");}

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:
>If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
>comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
>several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
>make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

.... or download The Proxomitron, and get cross-browser ad-blocking. (I
also configured it to enlarge fonts on certain too-small websites.)

--
Lucian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 10:06:37 +0100, Andrew wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:01:37 GMT, Epi Watkins <epicat1212@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>>I'm too lazy to look.
>
> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.

Adblock is a great tool, but it's not the first ad blocking software.

Now if only it would integrate a cookie blocker into it as well!

 

[CK]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

>>>The browser I use does all I would want it to. As long as you can
>>>search with google with it, I'm fairly satisfied. You can also turn
>>>java and activex off and on real easy with it. Other things too, but
>>>I'm too lazy to look.
>>
>> If that is all you use it for then you aren't really qualified to make
>> comparisons of different browsers. There are hundreds of extensions,
>> several of which are invaluable for me - Adblock in particular, that
>> make Firefox the clear leader IMO.
>
> Adblock is a great tool, but it's not the first ad blocking software.
>
> Now if only it would integrate a cookie blocker into it as well!

What are you talking about? Firefox already has the option to
block/allow cookies, or to only accept cookies from the site you're on,
or to exclude cookies on a per-site basis, and even to clear the cookies
when you exit Firefox. And, unusually, it's all in the options screen,
so you don't even have to look at about:config.

HTH.

CK

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 01:35:45 GMT the fame writer, CK wrote not much to
be useful on, "Re: Firefox extensions",

>What are you talking about?

He spam this all over!

Please don't feed the Trolls.
--
DISCLAIMER
If you find a posting or message from myself
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please
ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting,
complain to me and I will demonstrate.