AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > AnimeSuki & Technology > Tech Support

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-03-06, 11:31   Link #21
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Oh, trust me, they have "found out" about OpenGL.
Also, if one would want to focus on making a quality-made game, he/she would make Linux as one of the platforms to be able to play on, but not many companies want to be proud of their own game on how good it is, but how much money it brings.

On the other side, if I understood you right, I agree with you at some points, but I totally did not understand you at others, so I'll rather not comment, hehe.
Anyhow, I'm really happy to see that you are a supporter of Linux, keep it up!
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-06, 11:37   Link #22
spikexp
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec
Age: 22
Well, I support Linux, I love it.
All the server at my job are Linux based (centos most of the time), my home server is running Linux (debian stable) and my home computer is (normally, don't have place to dual boot it with windows 7 on my 60gb SSD) running Debian wheezy.
When I get my new harddrive, I will try to create a virtual machine for gaming
http://www.overclock.net/t/1205216/g...irtual-machine
spikexp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-07, 13:24   Link #23
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
A virtual machine for gaming you say?
Sounds interesting, make sure to share the progress/result! :D
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 12:31   Link #24
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Virtual machines aren't that great for gaming. I'm not running Linux, but OS X, where graphics potential is one of the metrics that the VM companies compete on. My experience has been that very old or low-demand games run acceptably well, but when it comes to more modern games there are some major issues. I tried running Mirror's Edge and The Witcher, neither of which are new or particularly demanding games. My underlying hardware is a 2.2 GHz i7 (quad-core, self-overclocks to 3.3 or 3.6 GHz if only a few cores are being utilized), 16 GB of RAM, and an AMD Radeon 6750M with 512 MB of on-board memory. The Witcher ran under Windows XP, but was incredibly laggy even with the lowest graphical settings. Mirror's Edge had graphical problems under Windows XP and had to be run under Windows 7, where the game performed semi-decently but was unstable. These were all run under Parallels 7, which was the best performer graphics-wise at the time (Parallels 8 has since been released and should further improve performance).

The problem is that virtual machines do not have access to the underlying hardware, and everything is emulated. According to someone at VMWare, there is no way to "share" the graphics card directly with the virtual machine. I'm sure the graphics card still gets utilized, but how much goes through the graphics card compared to the processor depends on how good the virtual machine drivers are, and probably on how the game itself is coded.

Virtualbox and VMWare's enterprise solutions don't emphasize graphics performance; I'd be surprised if they perform better than Parallels. As far as I know, your best bet is to ditch virtualizing the OS and go for a solution like WINE.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 12:45   Link #25
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
I just want to keep something clear here.
Linux was never meant to be a gaming-focused Software, but something secure, fast and free.
Trust me, Linux is much faster than Windows or Mac in many things, from Updating your system, starting up the computer, searching through Net, and so on.

However, with having Intel Quad Core i7, 8 GiB RAM and having a connection speed of 100 Mbit/s (Direct optic), I can tell that all the 3D games I play while using my OpenGL mode run smoothly. The only thing that I do not have is a top-class gaming graphic card, because those cost as much as the computer itself does and they are not worth that much. Plus, I'm not a huge gamer myself.

Keeping things short, if your only computer activity is gaming, then Linux is probably not for you.
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 13:06   Link #26
spikexp
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec
Age: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
The problem is that virtual machines do not have access to the underlying hardware, and everything is emulated.
And that is where you are wrong, I choose my hardware specialy for that :
AMD FX-8320
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3

Nothing high-end, but it support IOMMU.
IOMMU can be used for pci-passthrough.
So, using IOMMU with xen on linux can give the guest machine direct access to the PCI-E bus. The guest OS then have direct access to the video card, with it's own driver.

What is left are the CPU and RAM management which VM do really well.

Do, you can boot a Windows 7 under linux and game on it
spikexp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 16:04   Link #27
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by spikexp View Post
And that is where you are wrong, I choose my hardware specialy for that :
AMD FX-8320
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3

Nothing high-end, but it support IOMMU.
IOMMU can be used for pci-passthrough.
So, using IOMMU with xen on linux can give the guest machine direct access to the PCI-E bus. The guest OS then have direct access to the video card, with it's own driver.

What is left are the CPU and RAM management which VM do really well.

Do, you can boot a Windows 7 under linux and game on it
I'm not as familiar with Xen as with "conventional" virtual machines. My understanding of Xen was that it's the base system, and everything else runs on top of it. Compare that with VMWare or Virtualbox, where you have your base operating system and then the virtual machine is stacked on top of it. Is that right? If so, what I initially wrote probably wouldn't apply to Xen.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 16:04   Link #28
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Quote:
Originally Posted by spikexp View Post
Do, you can boot a Windows 7 under linux and game on it :D
Although written a little wrong, that part hits exactly on the point. :D
If you are already using an operating system other than Linux, Installing Linux is never something bad, since you can use them both then and switch between them whenever you want.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
I'm not as familiar with Xen as with "conventional" virtual machines. My understanding of Xen was that it's the base system, and everything else runs on top of it. Compare that with VMWare or Virtualbox, where you have your base operating system and then the virtual machine is stacked on top of it. Is that right? If so, what I initially wrote probably wouldn't apply to Xen.
Well, as much as I know about Xen, it is a hypervisor, providing services that allow multiple computer operating systems to run on the same computer Hardware concurrently.

Operating systems: Linux, BSD, OpenSolaris as management host; many OSs including Microsoft Windows as guests.

Newest version, 4.2, was released on 8th of September 2012. That is as far as I have read right now, hehe.

Copying the distributions and Linux upstream:
"As of 2009, most Linux distributions had included Xen packages to interact with the Xen hypervisor and start additional domains, but because Xen was not accepted into the mainline Linux kernel and installation required several kernel patches, some distros such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and Ubuntu 8.10 dropped out-of-the-box support for dom0 in subsequent releases. With the inclusion of the most significant parts of Xen in the Linux 2.6.37 mainline kernel in early 2011, several distributions are again considering dom0 support. Version 3.0 of the Linux kernel supports dom0 and domU in the mainline kernel."

Now, as far as it goes for Virtualization, Xen includes two types:
Paravirtualization - modified guests and Hardware-assisted virtualization, allowing for unmodified guests.

What are we focusing on in this case?

Last edited by Haiprbim; 2013-03-08 at 16:15.
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 16:10   Link #29
Flower
Purrrfectly cuddly! ^^
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Yamoto, Akiba, Log Horizon Guild Hall, Kitchen
Anyone else in hear familiar with/used Zentyal?

If so I would be interested to hear their impressions and feedback about their experiences with it.
__________________
Flower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-08, 16:17   Link #30
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower View Post
Anyone else in hear familiar with/used Zentyal?

If so I would be interested to hear their impressions and feedback about their experiences with it. :)
The eBox Platform!
I don't think I came in contact with it yet, but I have heard and read about it a lot. I would also really like someone to share experiences with it. :D
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 05:03   Link #31
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mucking about
Age: 64
Zentyal is a packaged server built on top of Ubuntu as I recall. As I build servers from scratch on CentOS I haven't tried it. But it's not designed as an OS for ordinary workstations. For that you're better off choosing Ubuntu or Fedora. If you're just starting out with Linux, I'd suggest Ubuntu or the Linux Mint derivative which have a more "easy-going" attitude toward proprietary items like video and audio codecs. Ubuntu also has a lot of community-developed documentation at https://help.ubuntu.com/ and a very active independent support forum at http://ubuntuforums.com/.

I prefer KDE as a desktop environment so I run the Kubuntu "flavor" of Ubuntu which comes standard with that desktop. Some of the default programs will be unfamiliar, so I typically add Firefox, Thunderbird, GIMP, and smplayer to the stock release.

For someone new to Ubuntu, I strongly recommend installing the 12.04 LTS version which has "long-term support." Ubuntu is on a six-month release cycle, with specific versions designated as LTS. For those who like living on the edge, wait until next month when 13.04 will be released, or give the beta a try.

On older hardware a more "lightweight" desktop can be a better choice. Lubuntu and Xubuntu are the options here.
__________________
SeijiSensei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 10:14   Link #32
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Yeah, the most people that use Linux use Ubuntu just because of that - it is very user friendly and easy to orientate.
However, looking overall, Fedora was proven better than Ubuntu.

I don't know how it goes with Zentyal, but I would take SeijiSensei's word for it.
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 10:34   Link #33
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mucking about
Age: 64
"Proven" is a rather strong term for something as malleable as a Linux distribution. All Linux distros have pretty much the same codebase. I've used both Fedora and Ubuntu and found the latter easier to manage. For instance, I find apt much better and certainly a lot faster than yum for updating packages. Also Ubuntu now offers you the option of installing the proprietary bits in "restricted extras" during the installation of the system. I presume Fedora per se still only includes FOSS software so you have to add specific third-party repositories to access things like mp3 codecs and libdvdcss2, yes?

A lot of old-time GNOME users dislike Ubuntu's new Unity desktop environment. As a KDE user, I still have the same interface (KDE4) that I have had since October, 2010.

As I said, I use CentOS pretty much exclusively for servers and would always choose a RedHat-flavored distribution for that purpose. But for ordinary people and particularly for newcomers to Linux, I'd go with Ubuntu.

For those of you considering your options, most every Linux distribution can be run in a "live-CD" mode. After burning the CD/DVD or installing it on a USB thumb drive, you can choose to boot the system off the distribution medium and run it while making no changes to your computer. It will run a lot slower than it would if natively installed on the main drive, but you'll get a chance to see what it looks like.
__________________
SeijiSensei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 11:58   Link #34
Dhomochevsky
temporary safeguard
 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Germany
Age: 33
Ubuntu is absolutely not userfriendly! It is frustrating, hard to get into and obstructive.

It trys to present itself as easy to use by hiding all the complicated options from the user.

But the options are all still there in the background, having their full effects, messing with you.
And at some point you will want to get to one of those options. Options that you might have to navigate a couple of menues to find in other distributions.
Not so much in Ubuntu: they can only be found by invoking some obscure magic, or just aren't accessible over UI at all.

If there were ways to fully control the OS, using a smartly organized, easy to use UI, that would be an easy to use OS. But that's not Ubuntu. Ubuntu just puts you in chains, so you can't move freely enough to hurt yourself.
Dhomochevsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-21, 14:34   Link #35
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Yes, it was more or less "proven" (judged by professionals) and written why in a book I read in the library. I'll check it again and give you the title of it.

Edit: I'll go to the library tomorrow and take a photo of the main page and the page containing that info in the book. I am not certain at the moment, but it was a book that purely focused on Linux. I think it was written by "Monitor", but it may have been someone else. Anyhow, more info about it tomorrow. :)

As for Ubuntu being user-friendly, I meant that many that come from a different platform to Linux like to use it because it's Desktop is easier to understand than Fedora's for example.

Last edited by Haiprbim; 2013-05-02 at 10:20.
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-22, 00:59   Link #36
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mucking about
Age: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky View Post
Ubuntu is absolutely not userfriendly! It is frustrating, hard to get into and obstructive.
Is this a comment about Ubuntu compared to other distributions, or a comment about Linux distributions in general? Have you had better success with Fedora, SuSE, Mandriva, etc.? Have you tried other Ubuntu "flavors" like Kubuntu, Lubuntu, or Xubuntu? Maybe one of them is more to your liking.

I'm not going to get into a "distro war" here because it is very unproductive. If you don't like Ubuntu, there are plenty of other options.
__________________
SeijiSensei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-22, 01:21   Link #37
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeijiSensei View Post
Is this a comment about Ubuntu compared to other distributions, or a comment about Linux distributions in general? Have you had better success with Fedora, SuSE, Mandriva, etc.? Have you tried other Ubuntu "flavors" like Kubuntu, Lubuntu, or Xubuntu? Maybe one of them is more to your liking.

I'm not going to get into a "distro war" here because it is very unproductive. If you don't like Ubuntu, there are plenty of other options.
I think Dhomochevsky was focusing on Linux distributions in general, but since I pointed out Ubuntu being user-friendly (I meant if we compare it with others, such as Fedora), I think that was the reason why he/she named it and focused on it then later in the post.

On the other hand, I do not see this as a "war", but a discussion on what AnimeSuki visitors think about Linux. We may have gotten too subjective though, hehe. Nevertheless, I'm liking the posts you guys and gals post. :)
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-22, 01:53   Link #38
Dhomochevsky
temporary safeguard
 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Germany
Age: 33
I'd prefer to compare Ubuntu (and it's two main desktop managers gnome and kde) with other debian based distributions.
They all hasve more or less the same resources and possibilities to throw around, which makes it a more objective thng to compare what they achieve with their chosen solution.

In this respect, the path Ubuntu chose to go, hiding anything remotely complicated from the user, without making anything more easy, is horrible.
That's akin to when Windows decided in Vista to hide all the usefull settings behind stylished pages with huge icons that are useless for almost anything.

Well least there you could eventually reach to the more detailed pages used before, so it was just an annoyance.

In Ubuntu, you often can not, because they just are not there..
I can't count the number of times I had to install special 'settings tools', just so I could modify basic stuff without a texteditor. Things that in other distributions (even those using the same Gnome or KDE) is just a few clicks through an 'advanced' menu.

And worse, it seems with every iteration, more options are lost. They try to streamline it all into a 10 button OS...
KDE is arguably less of an offender here, but KDE has other issues. Mostly being overly enthusiastic with new, shiny features, which then promptly brake things.

I do not see why you think this is a 'war'. This is just me expressing my frustration with the chosen route of what was once my #1 OS.

And the serious question, why Ubuntu still has the reputation of it being easy? I never had another Debian distribution that made things so complicated like modern Ubuntu.
Dhomochevsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-22, 02:30   Link #39
Haiprbim
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Visual Dream Panire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky View Post
And the serious question, why Ubuntu still has the reputation of it being easy? I never had another Debian distribution that made things so complicated like modern Ubuntu.
As I don't use Ubuntu, I cannot answer that question.
However, I do know that most of the users that switched from a different platform to Linux prefer the use of Ubuntu. I don't know why, maybe because it is quite a famous distribution, but I've also heard that it is because it is easier to get used to it than to Fedora for example.
Haiprbim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-31, 11:09   Link #40
King Lycan
User Title eaten by ravenous bunnies
*IT Support
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Zeon
Age: 23
I believe Ubuntu was made for the first time Linux user it was my first and it was very easy. I couldn't imagine if Gentoo was my first try I would have been so lost.
__________________
King Lycan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
linux

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:11.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.