And...let the flaming begin! Lol.
Phoronix: Yes, There Are Portal 2 Linux References
I'm only mentioning this so readers will hopefully stop emailing me regarding the references that have been discovered within Valve's Mac OS X launcher to their new Portal 2 game regarding Linux support...
And...let the flaming begin! Lol.
According to this logic, my grandmother will soon also have a linux client.
Why do people buy such news? Has the linux ecosystem become so commercialised it would invent sensations in order to sell more?
It's the same like when skype announced open sourcing their frontend and giving over development to the community. Then you suddenly read on thisweekinlinux that 'a new API option' has appeared. People lie to their teeth to shove in another prominent mention of nothing.
In the words, the level of journalism in the community is reaching normal human values. We're not better than the rest of the world, after all...
I've never paid anything for Linux. Never even been asked to. What do you mean by "commercialised?"Why do people buy such news? Has the linux ecosystem become so commercialised it would invent sensations in order to sell more?
You should take that up with thisweekinlinux. I get the feeling that Michael is reporting fairly and making any speculation on his part clear. It seems like you're looking for something to complain about.It's the same like when skype announced open sourcing their frontend and giving over development to the community. Then you suddenly read on thisweekinlinux that 'a new API option' has appeared. People lie to their teeth to shove in another prominent mention of nothing.
At the very least we're on par with our share of fanboy-ism and trolls, right?In the words, the level of journalism in the community is reaching normal human values. We're not better than the rest of the world, after all...
uname? Why does it sound like a very unreliable way to detect the platform? Usually you'd use ifdefs for things like this. Or the version statement, if you're using D.
I'm going to take these a little out of order for flow's sake.
[/QUOTE]It's an example for the absurdity of this news item. I could come up with equally good signs my grandmother is about to receive a linux port.[/QUOTE]
No, I don't think you can. Michael's claim is that he has inside info on this in addition to the corroborating evidence brought to light thus far. I wanted to open up your grandmother's bash script to check your claims for a Linux reference, but I couldn't find her or her half-finished client on the server. Could you send me her source code or at least the relevant portions backing this claim? Michael has done all of this for Steam on Linux.
You might want to start saving hyperbole until you really need it.
Let me try to make my issue clear. What you appear to have done is lay blame for another article on another site that you disagreed with at Michael's feet. From what I gather, the article you're referencing is completely irrelevant to this one.I was giving an example of another news site that is getting gradually commercial and inane. The corresponding example here is this article.
As I've said before, if Phoronix articles bother you so much; if it is so utterly intolerable here; just up and leave. Posting a bitch about the general state of Linux articles on other sites really doesn't add to the discussion.
What, specifically, about THIS article are you trying to make a point about? That you don't like it? Fine. Your prerogative. Do you think it is factually incorrect? Again, fine. Prove it. Let's have some evidence. Are you wanting to make a political statement? Personally I'm uninterested, but you're allowed to do that too.
In summary, I found your complaints largely irrelevant and poorly thought out for the reasons I've detailed above. You are, of course, free to disagree with me, but I'm going to hold you to a higher standard of evidence than you've demonstrated thus far.
If I've missed anything, please let me know.
The cake is a lie (and it looks disgusting!).
Well, I see a bit of a paradox here:
1. Michael claims that both public and private information contribute to his "confirmation" that Steam and Source are coming to Linux.
2. If there were public information available that confirmed it, then everyone would have already heard about it, and the issue would be settled and done with.
3. If there were private information that was divulged to Michael (from Valve or the guys working on Postal III), then this "private" information would undoubtedly be something that he isn't allowed to disclose. Isn't then disclosing it, by saying that there will be a Linux port, thus violating what he agreed upon? I guess, maybe not: maybe they told him "the secret information is, 'our Linux client will be 64-bit only' but you can say anything else derived from this to the general public" -- if they did that, then he would be within his rights to say "Steam/Source are coming to Linux!" -- trivially derivable from the statement they gave him -- as long as he doesn't mention the 64-bit-only part.
But I'm under the impression that proprietary corporations (especially Valve) are nowhere near that lenient with information they disclose in private; and further, I have my doubts that they would even disclose anything to Michael (or any journalist: nothing personal to Michael). The role of journalists is to make stuff public, so saying something privately to someone whose job is to report to the public is really foolish. The foolishness thereof relates directly to how salacious a crumb of information is fed to the journalist. And this is quite a sensational crumb, if indeed it has its roots in official information from Valve.