4 ms·

It's a bit scary to be honest. Linux is fairly easy to use because it piggy backs on the popularity and relative standardization of PCs thanks to Windows. If Wi

by lopis 3y ago

It's a bit scary to be honest. Linux is fairly easy to use because it piggy backs on the popularity and relative standardization of PCs thanks to Windows. If Windows were to go fully cloud-based and computers would become simple terminals, the availability of cheap Linux machines could suffer. Not a likely scenario, probably more a microsoft wet dream.

dtx1 3y ago
As long as the speed of light in fiberglass is what it is, Gamers will be enough of a Market to prevent that.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  On the other hand, cloud gaming has been more of a market than cloud PCs for consumers. Because you need a basic PC to connect to it which is enough for most usecases anyway. But not for gaming so there it makes more sense.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago
    Cloud gaming will always be hampered by the simple reality of really of poor internet connections being very common.
    - hammyhavoc 3y ago
      20m people use Xbox cloud gaming. NVIDIA GeForce Now has 25m users. I'd say those are some stats worthy of appreciation.
      - dtx1 3y ago
        Worthy of appreciation maybe but no one is gonna reasonably play things like CSGO on a cloud server. The difference due to latency is instantly noticeable and very obvious.
        hammyhavoc 3y ago
        I addressed this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36057449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36057449 It's also bold to assume that everybody plays twitchy FPS. CSGO runs on Linux, the Steam Deck uses Linux in the OOBE, I'm sure that if push comes to shove and MS stops offering native Windows, people who want to play CSGO will just use Linux in the same way that people use emulators and FPGAs and CRT PVMs (hello) to play what they want and have the best experience. However, what's probably more likely is that latency-dependent games becomes less and less popular if cloud gaming takes over, because more people are probably going to be playing a game that's included in their cheap monthly subscription rather than spending $XY. Making a twitchy niche latency-dependent game makes less sense than reaching as many people as possible where they're playing. I can't imagine a world where Microsoft kills native Windows though, it just doesn't make sense. How environmentally friendly it is or is not is also a consideration with streaming a desktop.
        dtx1 3y ago
        > It's also bold to assume that everybody plays twitchy FPS. Never said "everybody" but enough do. https://steamcharts.com/app/730 https://steamcharts.com/app/730 Current active players 1,458,036 for CSGO alone
        hammyhavoc 3y ago
        But this doesn't negate the fact that cloud gaming works for a lot of genres and a lot of people. That market will likely only grow, and in that scenario, will likely become what most publishers try to cater for as that's where the worthwhile money is. Look at how many competitive FPS have tried to take on CSGO and have failed since its launch. CSGO is very much the gold-standard of its genre. Despite modern PC gaming largely being a better experience (minus bad ports, buggy launches), consoles still sell in huge numbers. If cloud gaming grows, I expect it to replace consoles for a lot of people. Even now, rather than download a game to my living room Xbox, I'll just stream the game via the cloud to it. However, if I'm sat up close with a game at my desk, of course I'll install it on my PC. But at x feet away from my TV in the living room, whatever is lacking visually or in terms of latency, I'm not gonna care about when my input device isn't exactly all that performant. I dare say that about sums it up for a lot of people using the cloud to game. This is without even bringing up the number of Nintendo Switch games that are streaming-only as the console can't handle it natively. Doesn't seem to bother Switch owners much.
asjfka 3y ago
Linux is part of the problem. Linux never has been an OS for personal computer and it's security model is backward and even nefarious for this purpose. Linux, like all Unix and Unix-like is an OS for a big central computer connected to many dumb terminals. What happens here is Windows taking lessons from Linux and Unix. If you want to save the idea of a personal computer you want an OS that empowers users instead of protecting the computer from them.

by lopis 3y ago

dtx1 3y ago

As long as the speed of light in fiberglass is what it is, Gamers will be enough of a Market to prevent that.

wkat4242 3y ago
On the other hand, cloud gaming has been more of a market than cloud PCs for consumers. Because you need a basic PC to connect to it which is enough for most usecases anyway. But not for gaming so there it makes more sense.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago
  Cloud gaming will always be hampered by the simple reality of really of poor internet connections being very common.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    20m people use Xbox cloud gaming. NVIDIA GeForce Now has 25m users. I'd say those are some stats worthy of appreciation.
    - dtx1 3y ago
      Worthy of appreciation maybe but no one is gonna reasonably play things like CSGO on a cloud server. The difference due to latency is instantly noticeable and very obvious.
      - hammyhavoc 3y ago
        I addressed this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36057449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36057449 It's also bold to assume that everybody plays twitchy FPS. CSGO runs on Linux, the Steam Deck uses Linux in the OOBE, I'm sure that if push comes to shove and MS stops offering native Windows, people who want to play CSGO will just use Linux in the same way that people use emulators and FPGAs and CRT PVMs (hello) to play what they want and have the best experience. However, what's probably more likely is that latency-dependent games becomes less and less popular if cloud gaming takes over, because more people are probably going to be playing a game that's included in their cheap monthly subscription rather than spending $XY. Making a twitchy niche latency-dependent game makes less sense than reaching as many people as possible where they're playing. I can't imagine a world where Microsoft kills native Windows though, it just doesn't make sense. How environmentally friendly it is or is not is also a consideration with streaming a desktop.
        dtx1 3y ago
        > It's also bold to assume that everybody plays twitchy FPS. Never said "everybody" but enough do. https://steamcharts.com/app/730 https://steamcharts.com/app/730 Current active players 1,458,036 for CSGO alone
        hammyhavoc 3y ago
        But this doesn't negate the fact that cloud gaming works for a lot of genres and a lot of people. That market will likely only grow, and in that scenario, will likely become what most publishers try to cater for as that's where the worthwhile money is. Look at how many competitive FPS have tried to take on CSGO and have failed since its launch. CSGO is very much the gold-standard of its genre. Despite modern PC gaming largely being a better experience (minus bad ports, buggy launches), consoles still sell in huge numbers. If cloud gaming grows, I expect it to replace consoles for a lot of people. Even now, rather than download a game to my living room Xbox, I'll just stream the game via the cloud to it. However, if I'm sat up close with a game at my desk, of course I'll install it on my PC. But at x feet away from my TV in the living room, whatever is lacking visually or in terms of latency, I'm not gonna care about when my input device isn't exactly all that performant. I dare say that about sums it up for a lot of people using the cloud to game. This is without even bringing up the number of Nintendo Switch games that are streaming-only as the console can't handle it natively. Doesn't seem to bother Switch owners much.

asjfka 3y ago

Linux is part of the problem. Linux never has been an OS for personal computer and it's security model is backward and even nefarious for this purpose. Linux, like all Unix and Unix-like is an OS for a big central computer connected to many dumb terminals. What happens here is Windows taking lessons from Linux and Unix. If you want to save the idea of a personal computer you want an OS that empowers users instead of protecting the computer from them.