QuoteNeed a desktop PC crammed into a laptop powered by Linux?

No. I prefer my desktop PC to be shaped like itself. :)

What I need is lightweight 10" netbook.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapulcloud gaming in general has some issues like:
being an perfect DRM (if the game is cloud exclusive)
killing video game preservation (if the game is exclusive to the cloud and the game/service is discontinued)

those are serious issues, but on the flip side, we can find the perfect anti cheat system, without putting backdoors in the players machines.

That is a particular case of a greater problem: server-side dependency.
What if a game is a native Linux one (like "War Thunder"), but is solely multiplayer with server-based infrastructure? If the servers get offline, that's it.
Or if a game uses Valves' servers for match-making. If those go puff, that's it (number two).
In order to circumvent this problem, we need to own games in full, including network infrastructure.
Streaming gaming is just one small step to the logical conclusion: games as a service. Some say we are already there.
I loathe DRM, so I personally will not use Steam (till it drops its DRM client and server-shackles, which probably will never happen)., but it is a general consensus, that the ability to play has a priority.
So, gaming first, ideological preferences second. If you need Proton™ to play a game, so be it. If you need Stadia™, so be it. If you need GeForce Now, so be it. If you need PlayStation 5, so be it.
But if one insists on ideological part of things, then I do not understand this faint-heartedness, bashing one thing (GeForce Now), but totally tolerating the other (Steam). It is either/or in my opinion.
At least, GeForce Now™ is better than Stadia™: it relies on ones' owned games on other stores and provides just streaming service, not "games as a service".

Quoting: Rooster…a developer wrongly evaluating me as Windows user…

Oh, come on! They are not wrong. In a financial way of thinking, at least. They are making Windows™ games and you are purchasing their Windows™ games. And everyone is happy. They will not lose you as a customer if they target only Windows™ in their future products. In this light, technical details are of no importance. Let Valve figure them out.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapuli dont know if the developers were going to drop support for linux anyway or proton was the issue.

Agreed, guessing "What Have been if…" is a mug's game.

Quoting: elmapulyes, but we were comparing proton to gfn, not proton to oem windows...

Correct. And that is a downside.
On the plus side, though, GFN provides support for some games that are not (and will likely never be) available trough Proton™, like Fortnite® and all "anticheat" games.
So, overall GFN is net-positive for Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mylkawhy are they doing this? just make it available in browser for everyone and dump the client

Small steps, small steps.
It was stated in the article that getting everything to work in a browser is the plan. nVivida probably wants to localize and eliminate problems in a more controlled environment before broadening the support.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapulactually steam will count the sale as an linux sale, if you play it on proton

Means nothing. British people have a proverb starting with "If it flies like a duck…" :)
All most developers care about is whether a user purchases their product or not. And in Proton's case, a user purchases their Windows product, so it is for all intents and purposes (s)he is a Windows user. How (s)he will play the game afterwards is of no importance. Yes, some developers are willing to "support" Proton™. While others are more than happy to mock "Linux gamers" on Twitter or in interviews. As I've said, it all comes down to the person responsible. What would happen it Proton™ did not exist? Maybe that kind developer that "supports" it would make a native version instead? Who knows?

Quoting: elmapulwrong, you DO pay another licence.
it may be cheaper because nvidia buy in a lot with a bunch of licences, but you're still paying.
nvidia cant make unlimited copies of an software and distribute it just because you're streaming it from an vm running in their servers, instead of using it yourself.

Hm… This has some weight. Now, this is a valid point. Sort of "Windows tax" included into GFN subscription fee.
Yes, in this case, unless you opt for free trial, you support Windows to a small degree. But again, this also goes for pre-installed Windows on notebooks. I'd say, a minor evil for a Greater Good.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlReally not interested in spending time…

If you are inclined on just being rude and accuse others of "demagoguery" instead of presenting arguments, then so be it.

It is OK, I also hate many things after all, preaching included.

Our conversation is over.

Quoting: PatolaWho said the developers have access to this data?

And who said they don't? Let's not speculate on thing we do not have information about, OK?

Quoting: PatolaThe important part: do you think they would have to incur the costs of supporting ChromeOS at any time, instead of Windows?

No, I do not. As I do not think they will be willing to incur costs by supporting Linux after seeing a bunch of "Linux Gamers" playing on Proton™.
To be clear here, I am just playing a "Devil's Advocate" role here, nothing more. In my own opinion (of which you are very well aware) I am equally against GFN and Proton™, as both ways a gamer is wasting money on Windows products instead of supporting Linux (NTNB is my motto).
But I find bashing of GFN by people endorsing Proton™ to be unjustified (and unethical).

Quoting: PatolaIn the case of proton, as small as it is, developers who see advantage in letting users use it often do make modifications and patches of their games to better ensure compatibility, like with Hello Games' No Man's Sky.

And other developers see that "Linux Players" are more than happy to play Windows versions, as the "Supraland" developer. It all comes down to the person responsible. For your every positive example I can bring a negative one. Let's not get into particularities. Proton's overall influence has not been evaluated yet and we can not claim it to be beneficial or detrimental. Besides, that is besides the dispute. We are about the "ethics" of using GFN, not about what developers might think.

Quoting: PatolaDude, seriously, stop your anti-proton crusade…

Don't you see the irony? I did not bash Proton™ this time around! I defended GFN.
If you are so pro-Proton because (as Liam would say) it enables Linux market to be more viable as it brings more games to ecosystem, then you shall accept GFN, as it also does just that!

Quoting: Patola…it is not fruitful and makes you look like a histrionic person.

Seriously, what's up with you guys? Can not maintain a conversation without resorting to calling names? You are absolutely need to get personal, aren't you? Shall we continue discussing our personalities instead of the news? (No!)

Quoting: PatolaAnd by no means using a compatibility layer for Windows on Linux for some software, without paying a dime to Microsoft…

Moot point. Using GFN also does not require to spent a dime on a Microsoft product.

Quoting: Patola…would be worse than running that software within an actual Windows environment with a license paid to Microsoft.

Again, nVidia pays the license, not player. Stop telling "un-truths" in order to strengthen your position in a dispute.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlI'd say those who don't want to give any edge to Linux gaming hostile MS, don't dual boot…

Dualbooting has nothing to do with this case. A user is not required to do so in any way (while using GFN).

Quoting: ShmerlComparison with Wine is invalid in this context. We are talking about actual Windows.

No, we are not. GFN does not require to use either "actual" or "virtual" Windows. And what nVidia is using is nVidia's problem, not user's.
By using GFN one does not makes another sale for Windows (contrary to WINE, where some may argue it is de-facto a Windows copy). On the opposite, by using GFN you are sending a "clear signal" (as Proton™ adepts would put it) to game developers that you are not a Windows gamer (but a ChromeOS user, a Linux variant, mind you, in this case).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlKeep in mind also that Geforce Now is using Windows on the server.

Does it matter?

I mean, you are playing "The Witcher 3", a game using Microsoft® API (DirectX™) via Proton™.

As much as I despise Proton, it's proponents' main argument "As Long As It Works" has some merit. Why a user should be bothered by this minor detail, if (s)he does not have to deal with Windows™ in any way her-/himself?

Both methods (GFN and Proton) involve purchasing a game, which developers could not care less about Linux. But I say, if anything, using GeForce Now is even purer than using Proton™: you don't have to deal with Microsoft yourself at all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: morbiusDefinitely sounds like Ryzen low power bug. As I said, if you have first or second generation Ryzen, find in EFI interface "Power supply idle control" and set it to "Typical Current Idle". AMD never admitted to this CPU errata, so Linux developers didn't fix it. Instead AMD reached to mobo manufacturers and they silently added this setting to the EFI interfaces. In Windows it was stealthily solved by tweaking the power management.

Where have you been when my PC was plagued by this on "Ryzen 3 1200"??? It was definitely worth knowing back then.
Luckily, the "R5 3600" does not suffer from this bug.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It is "X4: Foundations" for me again. Now with LibreOffice Calc spreadsheet and "XTools" game resource extraction utility at hand (I wonder, does it count as using WINE for gaming?) to make my own strategy on how to pwn the Galaxy as fast as possible.

I'm reading faction fleet quotas as of right now. Not that impressed by the maximum allowed (and even more so per-sector) Argon battle fleet strength, no wonder The Holy Order basically squashes them like a bugs (they are). :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments