I hear and feel a lot of linux users were saddened by the recent new of Lokigames finally ceasing all game development. They were, in my opinion a driving force for bringing linux to the mainstream, as they caught the attention of a lot of average linux users.

"You can actually get quake3 for linux??"

you could hear them saying.

"wow, maybe its time i gave linux a go".

But then i think about it realistically, and i think about the other side of the equation. That is the linux user, not the would-be linux user. Now if the average linux user here is anything to go by, its no wonder loki went broke, as most linux users seem too damn cheap to buy and software, whether its for a good cause or not.

"You mean you actually have to PAY money for SuSE??".

i laugh everytime i hear this said or seen it typed.

Yes, you actually have to pay for SuSE. I know its a rip off. i mean you have to pay 70 dollars for an OS with all the functionality of MS advance server which costs 3000US.

<sarcasm>
If i were a hardcore programmer, i would dedicate all my time and effort to linux. I would dedicate so much time that i could not get a another job, and thus not be able to put food of my family's table, for fear that if i were to actually expect MONEY for the hundreds of man hours id invested in making this software, that nobody would buy it and my company would go broke."
</sarcasm>

Im sick to death of spoilt brats expecting something for nothing in this world, and whinging when 1/100th of the linux software available costs money. I personally bought 5 loki games, and they are worth every cent.

You cheap linux users want linux to do well, to become mainstream and be accepted, to trounce MS??? Then why dont you put your money where your mouth is, because in a capitalist world you have to play by capitalist rules. and nice guys finish last. you CANT give all software away for free, no economy can sustain itself like that in the real world.

BRAVO *clap* *clap* *clap*

Hail to all the cheap linux users shooting the hand thats feeding them.

i'll have to agree in a way... as i am not a big gamer though, the games i do have, i have bought...

though i feel that linux was meant to be free, but i do support the idea of buying and supporting other software and occasionally any linux distro as i have bought them before the one's i use to support them.

there are other means in supporting free software, like even donating or contributing to some extent.

but you don't have to totally pay for suse, you can download it, just can't get the iso's which is much easier for most people.. oh well. i stopped using them at 6.4, it just wasn't my distro of choice ever.. so unsure if i would ever buy it, since i don't use it.

might have been a bit harsher than i meant but i do agree with the general argument.

I somewhat agree with your statement SICKBOY, but most of the games they came out with either I did not want, or already paid for a copy to run on Windows.

Now you could argue that I should have bought a Linux copy to get off Windows, but that is not true. Most of the games I have are legacy, DOS games that I would have to keep Windows for anyway.

If I could have bought all my original games I own for Linux, I would have whipped out my purse and did it. But you cant expect everyone to do the same.

It is sad to see Loki shutdown, and I do feel it will hurt Linux taking the desktop. But there aer alternatives that are getting better. Look at Wine or Transgaming.

Anyway, that is my story and Im sticking to it.

Well, a tad harsh yeah. Don't know where this came out of. I'd have bought a game if they made one I played. I goofed around with the demo cd that came with mandrake 7, but as i'm not a huge gamer, I guess it don't really matter. In the end, i don't think anyone has a problem buying Linux software if they want it bad enough.

This does raise a very good question regarding Linux funding though.

There's a saying that there's no such thing as a free lunch (except when the girlfriend pays ). And Linux being labled a free OS is a bit of misleading statement cus everyone assumes it doesn't cost anything.

I think that unless Linux development is given a financial model to work within it 'may' never get beyond a certain level.

However saying that, if ppl keep buying M$ OS's each time they are released, then maybe there is hope for boxed distros. The average user wont mind paying for an upgrade, just to have the latest kernel, software etc... for a price. Just as long as it is useable and 'easy'.