Btrfs & Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

[V!NCENT]

Three windows replacements (as in removal) on desktops this year. Linux is already on desktops (not just "ready for") for 4-5 years.
I don't understand this "when will linux be on desktop" thing, it is already.

Yeah but it's not the year of the "Linux breaks out of cult status and starts dominating marketshare"-desktop.

Actualy all that inux is missing is some killer apps here and there. I mean if Fedora has SystemD automatically loading hid-wiimote (Linux 3.1 and up) and BlueZ plus the Wiimote profile plugin (some non-standard pairing issues) then you basically have a Wii. OpenGL 2.1 support in Mesa, good enough Gallium drivers for cheap AMD cards. Why aren't there some nice JOGL games? You don't even need to package the damn software for a distro as it's just standard Java packageing.

--

Anyway... all I'm saying is that Stean=m is either going to die, or it's going to become like OnLive and Gaikai and by then it's platform independant anyway and it doesn't matter anymore.

[smitty3268]

the bottleneck in a PC is the hard-drive not the cpu and not the ram i do have already 4gb of ram in my pc and i can upgrade it to 16gb ram for maybe 40€ its cheap very cheap

the slowest part of my pc is my hard-driver a mechanic one with only 75mb/s

so please we really need fractal trees!

Hah, can you imagine the uproar on these forums if Linux started requiring 4GB ram and quad-core CPUs as minimum specs? If the kernel reserved 1GB memory for nothing but the filesystem? People would be going insane yelling about how much better Win7 could do with lesser specs.

[V!NCENT]

Hah, can you imagine the uproar on these forums if Linux started requiring 4GB ram and quad-core CPUs as minimum specs? If the kernel reserved 1GB memory for nothing but the filesystem? People would be going insane yelling about how much better Win7 could do with lesser specs.

I would applaud the hell out of it. RAM nothing but disc cache, so why don't we... you know... fill it?

Do you know how idiotic the following sounds?:
"OMG Imagine if Linux would toaly fill up the entire L3 cache of the latest i7?!!?!?! OMFG"

So how retarted is it that Linux/Windows/whatever does not fill up the RAM?

[GreatEmerald]

They just don't believe that an O.S. officially ranked at something like 1% of market share could ever bring them a single additionnal penny of operating result.

5%. Very motivated 5%, if Humble Bundles are anything to go by.

Three windows replacements (as in removal) on desktops this year. Linux is already on desktops (not just "ready for") for 4-5 years.
I don't understand this "when will linux be on desktop" thing, it is already.

Woah, exactly the same thing here. Honestly, it's a rather good time for Linux on desktops - mainstream users are now realising that using their 10 year old Windows XPs is a pretty poor idea, and since they have to transition to something else, they might as well try out Linux before buying the latest Windows. To be fair, the learning curve between WinXP and Linux is not that much bigger than between WinXP and Win7.

[Qaridarium]

Hah, can you imagine the uproar on these forums if Linux started requiring 4GB ram and quad-core CPUs as minimum specs? If the kernel reserved 1GB memory for nothing but the filesystem? People would be going insane yelling about how much better Win7 could do with lesser specs.

LOL windows7 already use 1gb ram for nothing. also you are free do use an old-scool file system like ext4 if you have low ram in your system.*

this does not mean a highend feature should not be a part of linux. because we already do have LOW-RAM file-systems! a linux installer can check the RAM in the SYSTEM and if there is less than 2gb ram or 4gb ram then the system can pick ext4 or BTRFS

[Qaridarium]

I would applaud the hell out of it. RAM nothing but disc cache, so why don't we... you know... fill it?

Do you know how idiotic the following sounds?:
"OMG Imagine if Linux would toaly fill up the entire L3 cache of the latest i7?!!?!?! OMFG"

So how retarted is it that Linux/Windows/whatever does not fill up the RAM?

the stupidity in in an other point WE ALREADY HAVE LOW-RAM FILESYSTEMS!

also windows7 already use 1gb ram for NOTHING!

FTRFS is a highend filesystem means highendhardware! lowend can use ext4!

[Luke_Wolf]

I would applaud the hell out of it. RAM nothing but disc cache, so why don't we... you know... fill it?

Do you know how idiotic the following sounds?:
"OMG Imagine if Linux would toaly fill up the entire L3 cache of the latest i7?!!?!?! OMFG"

So how retarted is it that Linux/Windows/whatever does not fill up the RAM?

Actually Linux does already cache the filesystem into the RAM... as does Windows...

See here http://www.linuxatemyram.com/

[V!NCENT]

Actually Linux does already cache the filesystem into the RAM... as does Windows...

See here http://www.linuxatemyram.com/

Yeah I know and Linux has been doing this for ages. However, I have 8GB of RAM (and this computer is now about 5 damn years old) and still with preload, full blown KDE, loads of apps, documents, photo's, movies, VM images... it only uses about 2-2,5GB

Now I understand that completely caching more than one movie is a problem, but with semantics this RAM caching could be a lot smarter. For example caching the latest downloaded movie at times I frequently watch movies for example. Or maybe the last three opened documents...

[susikala]

Wasn't this article, like, supposed to be published next Sunday? Get your timing straight, phoronix...

[kraftman]

They just don't believe that an O.S. officially ranked at something like 1% of market share could ever bring them a single additionnal penny of operating result.
They just do see additionnal developping costs, additionnal testing, some code redesigning as they probably have designed the entire game to run for DirectX.

Then why there's steam on os x while os x doesn't support directx? It must be about politics, nothing more. Bring steam to Linux and it will eat os x for breakfast. Argument like it's hard to support Linux, because there's too much distributions is a bull. Nobody forces them to support entire Linux and it's enough to focus on Ubuntu (even on LTS, so 5 years without problems). Another argument regarding problems with graphic drivers is another bull. Proprietary drivers are better on Linux than os x for playing games and you're not even limited to OpenGL 3.2. Politics, that's all.