Jim Leonard wrote: >Pedro Quaresma wrote: > > > > > You never had to configure anything in Windows? Reduce a bit your sound > > card acceleration? Tweak around with your gfx card settings? > > >What the heck is "reducing sound card accleration?" > > Hmmm. I remember a slide bar somewhere about the sound card... maybe it was > some completely different thing. >I have never, ever had to do that. What the heck is wrong with your >system? ;-) Don't ask! :) It happened one time that I had to switch my beloved AWE64 ISA for an unknown PCI sound card and it was working with the AWE's windows drivers... the problems I had before I found that it was a SB PCI64 >I say that with a wink because, sometimes, the user does >nothing wrong and it still flakes out. But you can say this for any >post-1990 OS/hardware combo anyway. Sure. On some less than on others, though. > >I only tweak GFX if I'm trying to overclock and get better performance > >:) > > How many times have you had to uninstall your regular drivers, because the > newer nVidia's were faster, and then uninstalled your nVidia's because the > older nVidias were even faster, and then uninstalled those and installed > GLSetup because the old nVidias were incompatible with game X that you love > so much... well, been there, done that. >Well, maybe you should've stuck with the original drivers. There's a >reason they only officially release drivers twice a year. You aren't >blaming this on the user or the OS, are you? Well, I don't know whose "fault" it is, but I don't know if this has anything to do with official drivers or not. I mean, both the chipset drivers (in my case nVidia's) and the gfx card (Asus) should be compatible with the same software, right? > >It is not "way" faster. I don't consider 3-5fps "way" faster. > > 3-5? We had managed to get more than that. >Then you have a broken setup or you're doing something wrong. In games >where the rendering pipeline is 85% of the total gameslice *and* are >hardware-assisted *and* the hardware assist is the same library (OpenGL) >*and* the API for both platforms is provided by the same company >(nVidia), there is no way Linux is going to be "way" faster. Hmmm, I'l try to find one of the guys that actually ran the test and I'll let you know. > > in Windows. Better yet, Quake 2 for Windows on a Windows emulator in > Linux > > is faster than Quake 2 in Windows! Interesting, isn't it? > > >In software rendering, yes. But people don't play Q2 in software. > > Nevertheless, it was interesting to compare. >So is running Windows in an emulator that itself is running in Windows, >but I don't see the usefulness of it. The fact that some windows applications work faster when windows itself is being emulated is useful. I've never seen linux being emulated on a winbox, and I doubt good results could be achieved. > >Okay, are we done arguing about which OS is better than the other for > >gaming? It's a pointless argument. Consoles whip all computer > >platforms anyway since they never crash and never have compatibility > >issues. > > Consoles never crash? What's this that I hear everywhere about the XBox on > exposition on the different Toys'r'us around USA reading randomly from the > "CD drive", failing to output any sound, stopping abruptly with error > messages, etc? >At no point did I promote the X-Box as a good console. Come up with >*ANY* other report of a console crashing (NOT x-box). No, you never promoted xbox, but you said "consoles whip all computer platforms anyway since they never crash" (hey, it's right there 11 lines above! ;) ), and there Microsoft comes along and proves you wrong! ;) > > won't crash. In the worst possible event, X will crash but not the OS, so > > >And that's acceptable? > > Well, I prefer the X to crash (and even so it happens with less frequency > than Windows crashes) than a complete OS crash. Just "startx" and you're > back on. >But you still lose data. Your argument is really "well, it's faster to >restart X then it is to reboot a hung winbox". One is not better than >the other. It's completely different. X is just a GUI. An application. I work lots of times without the GUI, I just love multitasking 80x25 screens. In windows, the GUI is part of the OS. > >I'm just saying you should choose your battles wisely. If you were > >arguing for Linux as a server OS, I'd roll out the red carpet and step > >aside. But gaming isn't one of those platforms you should debate on. > > I still don't understand why not, but nevermind. I have this stable OS that > has the same potentiality as this other unstable OS. In the very least it's > as good to run games as the other. >Hey, I can lament for years why the Dreamcast didn't succeed but that >doesn't change the current state of things :-) I'm not trying to change the current state of things, I'm purely in the "lamenting" phase ;) Hey, I wish my soccer club had more fans, but I'm not going to do anything about that either (except to lament it, too ;) ) Pedro R. Quaresma [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] "So long, and thanks for all the fish" http://www.salvador-caetano.pt http://www.globalshop.pt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
