Linux Gaming

15758 readers

326 users here now

Gaming on the GNU/Linux operating system.

Recommended news sources:

Related chat:

Related Communities:

Please be nice to other members. Anyone not being nice will be banned. Keep it fun, respectful and just be awesome to each other.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

795

Latest Verge article about their review of Asus ROG Ally X (and this is why gamers are preferring Steam Deck) (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

134 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://www.theverge.com/24204770/asus-rog-ally-x-review-handheld-gaming-pc

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I had to set up a Mac for our sole marketing employee yesterday. I didn't want to go back to my windows computer. I was only asked for an icloud the entire time. Windows has become a shabby ad platform with an OS attached to it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

What is this heresy that you utter in this holy community? /s

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Linux distros are waay worse!
They keep on advertising things like Desktop Environments and Window Managers and Display Managers and Printer Drivers!
And they don't even go about it subtly, like, one at a time. A single ad contains a list of around 10 or so Graphical Environments and even after you select one, it keeps on showing you the other ads, because you, apparently, can install as many of those things at the same time as your have HDD space for. And then they keep advertising GRUB and systemd-boot! (Though I must give them credit for giving me the option of "No boot")

And even after you have finished installing, it is not enough, because you have to see an ad of 2 Network Card drivers, both being different versions of the same, because why not ?!

And turns out, everything that they give you in the package is actually third party! Meaning, stuff that has access to the lowest depths of your hardware, to stuff that you use to enter your bank details are all made by different people. So many people you have to put your trust into.

And if that's not enough, the people who compile it and send it to you might be totally different people from those who made the code!! What kind of heresy is this?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And turns out, everything that they give you in the package is actually third party! Meaning, stuff that has access to the lowest depths of your hardware, to stuff that you use to enter your bank details are all made by different people. So many people you have to put your trust into.

And if that's not enough, the people who compile it and send it to you might be totally different people from those who made the code!! What kind of heresy is this?

You joke but I've met people that actually think like this

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The reason for that being that all the points I have put are fully valid.

The rest depends upon the persons inference.

Having a separate coder and a packager means there is a good chance that another person (the packager) is looking at the code.
- And this other person is also most probably a separate entity, so if the coder is malicious, someone will know.
Then comes the point of the distro community being more open and fragmented, as compared to a corporation, that can keeps their members' mouths shut using contracts and all

For the same thing, the pro corpo guys will say that they have a single entity to go to for any problems. And since they have a contract (which maybe a b2b client-provider contract), their interests match.
- As opposed to some random chap on the internet, developing some Open Source thing as a hobby, purely for their own fun/ego/satisfaction.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Your points about enterprise support are fair but I was more talking about people that believe that FOSS is inherently less secure than something closed source controlled by a single large company (i.e. security by obscurity which doesn't actually work)

Honestly I do agree in some ways support is better for enterprise products but at the same time companies could still use some sort of source-available license to promote transparency/security auditing while having the same control as a closed source product. It's not FOSS but would definitely be better than having everything closed off