Half-Life 2 - A Linux User's Lament 792
jvm writes "If you're a gamer with a pulse, you've probably heard about the impending release of Valve's Half-Life 2. As a gamer and a Linux user, I always get a little stirred up about the whole Half-Life situation, where we have a dedicated server but no client. So here's my reflection on the sad situation, past and present. How will the rest of the Linux gaming community react to the release of Half-Life 2? Boot into Windows? Wait for WINE or WineX support? Get the Xbox version? With so many Half-Life servers running on Linux, will the same be true for Half-Life 2?"
why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh dear (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoever said the the Linux gaming scene was full of shit?
Aiming for the Market (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
Voodoo3 (Score:0, Insightful)
The 5P1D3R...
fp?
Here we go... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes its technically capable. Especially with modern nVidia drivers the way they are. But that's not the point.
The point is that you have to expend money, resources and time to make a Linux client. Why are you going to do that when 95% of your user base can/will use the Windows version anyway?
Besides community goodwill, there is no good reason for a developer to port a game to Linux and until there is a damn good reason for developers to port games to Linux, UT2K3 will remain the exception rather than the rule.
Skip it, and do something better with your time? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
Money talks, bullshit walks. With Microsoft you get both.
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again, this article does talk about the state of Linux gaming. Which is slim right now. But then again, look at the user base.
It is a tough argument to make. On one hand you have the masses that will buy your games no problem. On the other hand you have this small, but VERY thankful group who will not forget the fact that you put out a game for them (or that you didn't).
But I still have to go back to the fact that if you really really want to play latest games, have a Windows partition so that you can boot to just for that. Compatibility will never be an issue.
RonB
directX (Score:4, Insightful)
DX9 beats the living pixels out of OpenGL, and that's just a simple fact.
I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but come on guys.
Windows has Linux beat hands down for gaming.
On another note, while freeBSD runs fine on my 500mhz via mini-itx board, I know I'm not the only person out there buying a whole new system for HL2 and Doom3 in the next few months. and guess what's going on the primary partition? It'll only get booted up to play games, web/e-mail can be done on anything.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
ID and Activition are both releasing competitors to Half-Life 2 (Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004) that will run on linux, and I would strongly recomend either of them over HL2 soley based on principal. If you just buy the damn game like they want you to, and never demand alternative OS support, they're never going to care.
It's too bad, really, because hl2 looks like a spectacular game.
Re:Not sure I can sympathize (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop bitching and buy a new box. Or buy new internals and use your old case. Or buy an old Athlon 1.XGHZ for $300 on eBay. Or wait 6 months until it comes out on the consoles and spend $150 on one of those.
No to flame, but shut up.
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:5, Insightful)
He says exactly what you said: no one will get rich, or even make a profit, selling Linux games (just check out Loki!). His angle is that since Linux gamers have really helped out on the dedicated server side with Half Life 1, maybe its time to expect Valve to return the favor a little. Most of the lastest-n-greatest games/engines have native Linux versions, so it is technically possible if you keep portability in mind (and isn't that just plain good programing?). Of all the big game producers, Valve is one of the few that do great FPS that don't have Linux ports.
I want to play HL2, and I will buy HL2, but I'm not going to buy it until a) WineX is reported to run it with no problems or b) there is a native Linux port. I will not use Windows for it. But that's just me. No skin off Valve's back if they don't get my money since I'm not their target market.
How will I react to the release of Half-Life 2? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh darn... wait, you mean something like this [libsdl.org]? Well, if you don't like that, how about this one [clanlib.org]? Oh, I see... you forgot to do any research before you made you groundless claim.
"Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass.
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it doesn't. Just because you can run a server, which people connect to and run maps from, doesn't mean your server is actually "rendering" anything. It's loading data for your clients to read/write to, and its controlling the flow of that data. Linux does this much better than Windows, which is why the Linux server exists in the first place. No one would bother cooking up a dedicated server for it otherwise.
But Half-Life 2 is DX9 from the ground up. This means it uses extensions, functions, and rendering calls that are so deeply ingrained into windows, that you can NOT run the game any other way. This is where WineX and whatnot come into play, taking those same function calls and telling Linux how to use them.
Firstly, this type of translation is going to make any port of the game run slower, until the code is much faster than it will be in the first few WineX releases supporting it. Yes, I know how fast UT2003 can run in Linux. But have you seen the tech demos for HL2? It will be quite some time before we see that level of speed and clarity on a Linux system.
And, this sounds really pathetic, but their licensing agreements with Installshield may hold them back as well. From what I recall, this is the same thing that held up NWN from being released on Linux. The Windows registry can be a shit-filled bog, and the Installshield makes the game-makers lives that much easier. It sounds pitiful, but little stuff like that can hold up development.
And finally, Valve has busted their ass on Steam, and even though it stumbled out of the gate with their recent full-on release (who didn't see that coming), they put so much time and effort on a solid DRM release platform that to try and convert that to Linux, who by nature is a registry-less system, would be too much time and trouble for a company to put themselves through, let alone farm out the work at considerable cost.
In this dreamworld that the article-writer lives in, he forgets that game companies are under intense pressure to deliver perfect product all of the time. It is easier to leave it up to the community than to put serious time and resources into making the same thing available on both OSes.
And don't forget about DRM. We geeks chuckle at it, but the fact remains that as the years go on, and MS has its way (which it always does, eventually), between the Windows versions of iTunes and delivery mechanisms such as Steam, you'd be surprised at how this will begin to hold Linux back, in my opinion. DRM is awful, I agree, but everyone loves iTunes and what is it but a wolf in sheeps clothing (nice interface and high moral standing but really just DRM)?
Food for thought.
Re: Linux uses don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)
> When linux comes out with a directx equivelent then they might write for it ( this is ONE set of API's ) . Not opengl doesn't count, that is only graphics.
> You need sound,graphics,networking,AND graphics card writers writing to those drivers. That is what makes windows such a good gaming platform. Linux needs to consolidate and throw away the 4 graphics libraries and the 3 different sound package and the 60 windowing library packages and get down to one standard that EVERYONE uses.
Sounds like a recipe for SDL [libsdl.org].
will never happen (Score:3, Insightful)
"DirectX 9.0 has been crucial in helping us create a worthy sequel to Half-Life, one that gives Windows gamers everything they've been waiting for, a truly unequaled experience," said Gabe Newell, cofounder of Valve. "We are thrilled that our relationship with Microsoft has produced a title that all of us can be proud of."
Re:MS does good (Score:5, Insightful)
BECAUSE THEY ARE PRAGMATIC, NOT RELIGIOUS! (Score:2, Insightful)
Not everyone hates Microsoft, and not every one cares enough to cut off their nose to spite their face. These HL2 guys know which side of the bread is buttered, and they SHOULD cater to the Windows crowd. They outnumber Linux clients by, what... 45 times? There are more PS2 and X-box users than Linux end-users.
And the fact is, you will play it on a Windows box. HL2 will kick so much ass that if you don't have a box, you will be forced to copy it (I'm quite sure most slashdotters don't even have a legal copy of Windows anyways) and use Windows to play it.
Kudos to the UT developers and id for having the spare time to throw a bone to all the linux geeks, but this is an exception, not the rule.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What about us Netware users? (Score:4, Insightful)
You run Linux. I run Linux. For the added beauty of this operating system, we have to make compromises. Right now, that is software (specifically game) support.
The answer is simply to continue to run Linux and continue to show others how wonderful this OS is.
We need numbers before companies will port all of their games to Linux. I can't blame them in the least, if I was the CEO of a gaming company, I wouldn't waste my time and effort porting something to Linux.
Unfortunately, the answer is not "MAKE THEM PORT GAMES SO MORE USERS WILL COME!!!??!?!"
The answer is, get more users. Once Linux has a significant share of the desktop community, the games will follow suit.
Re:I have a lament too (Score:3, Insightful)
So, I'll admit it: I'm going to play Half-Life 2, on WindowsXP, the day it is released. And, I bet, the next day, and the next day, and the next day, . . .
Re:I have a lament too (Score:2, Insightful)
Please, everyone, think about what you're giving up by booting windows. Purity, integrity and your future, nothing less. Yes, even if you copied that windows CD and Gate$ gets no money from your HL2 experience. What you're doing is sending a message to game authors that it's OK to ignore Linux forever.
To cynical types this may look a bit over the top. But it's a way of life.
Why there's no client (Score:3, Insightful)
1: The dedicated server is simpler and easier to port because most of the source remains unchanged and you don't have to fuss with OS-specific API's and graphics libraries beyond the very rudimentary GUI
2: Linux is sucessful in the realm of servers, but is not yet a mainstream primary desktop operating system. Sure, maybe there are 10% as many linux desktop installs as windows, but the vast majority of those linux users also have a windows partition or another computer running windows, therefore it's not worth porting the client to take advantage of an extra 1% of market space.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, how short the geek memory. Remember Loki [lokigames.com]? A company that tried to bring mainstream games to the Linux platform?
The problem is, while geeks talk the talk, they don't walk the walk with their wallets. There simply isn't a market for games on Linux. A few people might buy a Linux copy, sure, but the majority will buy the Windows version when it's released, then demand the Linux version for free when it's finished porting.
Games companies are in business to make money. They're not charities, and even if they were, even charities need money to operate. Valve is simply making what it believes to be the best decision based on its reading of the market.
Re:directX...never forget (Score:3, Insightful)
Basicly, look how much the users have spent on 3d cards only to have MS cherry-pick the very best games for their own "system". Remember when you use directx you're just a beta-tester for the next MS toy!
You will have to continue using Windows... (Score:2, Insightful)
Valve can hardly be blamed for trying to defray enormous development costs by concentrating on the platform the vast majority of gamers will use.
Linux on the destkop has made tremendous strides, particularly in the last two years, but it's still a long way from being able to draw mainstream gaming developers from spending a significant portion of development time to have their games run on it.
Do I like this? Of course not. But all we can do as a community right now is continue to support those developers that do release official Linux clients with our wallets. We can also continue to help our friends and family make the leap to our OS of choice. Linux will get there. It's just going to take some time. But blaming developers for not releasing Linux clients will get us nowhere. They will jump on board on their own when a substantial user base is there who purchase games for Linux. If you have any doubts about that theory, just look at IT industry giants like IBM, Sun, and Dell and their about-faces in the course of the last decade concerning Linux support.
One last point, as far as I'm concerned, Mac users have had much more to caterwaul about than Linux users. The treatment they've received from game developers pales in comparison.
Looking for a Linux/Windows tech monkey in the Los Angeles area? Please see my resume [hotjobs.com].
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Parent poster complains about the number of differing libraries to develop under and wants ONE set of API's.
You respond by giving him *two* libraries to use.
Way to miss the point there, fella
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:1, Insightful)
its biggest seller not handled by MacMillan had moved only 5,000 copies, == Not Enough To Make Money
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
But that is how a minority becomes a majority. If no one takes a stand, then the issue will not be visible to others.
If we followed your mindset, we'd still think the world was flat.
dual-boot (Score:4, Insightful)
What?! HL2 won't run on my toaster with netbsd?! (Score:4, Insightful)
So here's a typical slashdot response. I mean, just because it runs on Windows and not linux, you have a bajillion people calling shenanigans on Valve. I didn't hear nearly as many complaints when Nintendo released Legend of Zelda for the Gamecube only. And the same can be said for any third-party-developer game released for a single platform, so don't say that's a bad analogy.
And of course, for those people who say that it's the same hardware, so it should be easy, well, just look at how long it took to get WINE working. It's not easy. It's essentially developing for a different platform even if the hardware is the same.
So before you get all self-righteous about this, just stop and think for a second. If you're about to whine because Valve won't support your platform of choice, just remember that you made a choice. No one's forcing you to use linux. No one but you. And quit saying that Valve is in bed with Microsoft. It sure seems that they've been pretty linux friendly, compared to say... ohh. I don't know. Blizzard. And pretty much everyone else out there. Sure there are some exceptions, but in the end, they're about making money, and yes, you hate that, but many of you live in America, and enjoy doing so, what with the whole democracy and capitalism thing going on, imperfect though our implementation may be. Like the subject says, this is like whining about it not running on your toaster with netbsd. So. Yeah. Stop it.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, there would be 3 parts in the costs:
1. General development of the Game
2. Implementation for windows
3. Implementation for Linux
Now costs for #1 would be devided over all sales.
Costs for #2 would be devided over all sales for Windows.
Costs for #3 would be devided over all sales for Linux (being... whell... a few thousand?)
A realistic price for the game on windows would be 50 or 60 euro's (forgive me, I am in euroland). A realistic price for linux would be 250 - 350 euro's.
Now, it's very nice of those folks at ID et al that are pretty much helping out Linux-users by taking Linux R&D costs and include them in the windows-variant. But would you, Linux ubergeek, *want* those darn windowsusers to pay for your product?
Dumb question. I know.
SiggyRadiation.
Linux Game Market smaller than advocates believe (Score:3, Insightful)
Just to clarify and elaborate on your point, the 95% are Linux folk not Windows folk. Most Linux gamers dual boot or run Wine, they are already customers. A Linux port would not generate new money, it would merely replace a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a loss from Valve's perspective, more work, no new money.
The Linux Game Market is not anyone who would buy and run a Linux game. It is only those who would never buy the Win32 version, those who would do without and not dual boot or run Wine.
Re:Linux uses don't get it. (Score:1, Insightful)
See Linux users love to point to both these projects yet that only proves how little these specific Linux users know about Direct X.
Look at both projects and tell me where they speak of things like "fog table emulation" how about getting down to the metal of graphic and sound hardware and emulation of features not present in that hardware so you can provide an equal platform for gaming? That basically disqualifies "mid level" approaches like ClanLib. There is also nowhere near the graphic/audio driver certification that ensures things work. Hell don't get me started on the tower of bable that the competing/complimentary Linux sound systems are in. ALSA supports one sound card. ARTS (KDE) can handle that but this app (specifically Team Speak for example) has issues if I don't use OSS instead. These problems that Linux has RIGHT NOW are obilderated by having Direct X like setups. Sure you can write yet another sound lib but many would rather put those energies on the rest of the game unless they have to. Before you get in a big hissy fit about this specific example go look at the message boards for the Quake engine games. Ask yourself if the majority of those (problems on the board) happen on Windows then get back to me.
At the end of the day though it is an issue of
a) good coding practices and placing a high value on portability under different x86 OS's. (Sorry 64 bit users for now but even this will change see Unreal Ed next edition for a baby step in the right direct although its only Windows apparently.)
b) getting goodwill from a great community that also has good server potential while supporting a fledgling OS that will likely get better in the future.
c) a platform
"Linux 7.2", huh? Thanks for proving my point that you don't know wtf you're talking about. "Interesting" my ass."
It is sad but with the Red Hat dominance of Linux distros in terms of shear volume of installs AND support well many people developers included do think this way. Most developers and publishers want to support a distro NOT a kernel and a whole wack of other variables. This of course assumes they will support it at all. Yet another reason why PC games in general are behind console titles in sales.
---
As an aside I wonder what will happen if Red Hat loses market share on the home installation front due to their newly introduced lifecycle policy. Some seem to think that others will provide support to eratta but I wonder if regular Linux gamers will buy into that or just jump ship to Mandrake or more likely Gentoo. Here is another thought, will people be content to stand still long enough with their Linux install to be a viable target install?
Re:What about us Netware users? (Score:2, Insightful)
And herein lies the chicken and the egg problem. Most people won't run Linux as their primary OS unless it does everything they want, including games. I run Linux, ya, but I have another machine with Windows XP on it that I fire up for gaming, and other windows stuff I can't do in Linux.
Most people can't afford two high quality machines, and dual booting is a pain in the ass, oh shit, that file's on my Linux partition, I gotta reboot to get to it. Crap, I need to send an email to my Aunt, gotta reboot to Windows. I did dual boot for years, the result was that I never booted to Linux because Windows could do most that Linux could do, and more, without constantly rebooting.
Sure there's WineX, etc for transgaming blah blah blah, but that's never gonna play HL2 as soon as it hits the shelves. So the games, or at least some games are going to have to be there to get people to switch. And you're going to get people like me to put up with Linux and it's lack of games just because it's something I believe in. The more people switch, the more games there will be, etc. It's gonna be a long and grueling process.
As for showing people how great Linux is, one glance at a nasty config file they have to edit to get X working, recompiling the kernel for sound, etc, and they go screaming the other way.
Wha, wha wha (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Aiming for the Market (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Implementation for windows
3. Implementation for Linux
If the product is targeted cross-platform then (2) and (3) are only very thin layers on top of (1). In such case a good programmer would implement (1) by using cross-platform APIs like OpenGL, OpenAL, and SDL. Therefore, in a cross-platform environment (1) isn't more expensive than it would be in a single-platform environment. The next good thing about such implementation of (1) is that a port to even more platforme, like MAC or PS2, is also very cheap.
In the special case of HalfLife2, where the game engine seems to be implemened by using DirectX, a client port is more or less a complete rewrite of the whole engine. Therefore, I don't expect to see ports of the game to any other platforms then MS Windows and X-Box.
Anyway, there are other games for linux, like BUG-HUNTING 2.6 or so - check it out, it's fun!
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I have a lament too (Score:4, Insightful)
What does buying a game that runs on Windows have to do with sacraficing principles? It's a computer. "Not liking Microsoft" is not a significant principle in the grand scheme of things.
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to break it to you but with a very small number of exceptions, every game released in the last 10 years locks you down to a propriatory platform. I can't see this trend changing for the next couple of years at least.
This would be more news-worthy if there was going to be a Linux version - rather than there not being one.
Re:Remember tuxgames.com? (Score:3, Insightful)
This may be hard for you to understand, but outside of the "geeks" no-one cares about Linux except as a way to make money.
And get this: even Red Hat doesn't. They're a corporation just like Valve.
Here we go again. (Score:5, Insightful)
Go back and look over this story [slashdot.org]. There, one before, we had a story on Slashdot about a software vendor not supporting Linux. At that time, I made a very reasonable suggestion - write to the company involved and ask for a Linux port. I also asked folks who had done so to comment in my Journal, so as to have a public record of the number of letters so written so that when the company involved said "We've never had any requests for this" we could trivially disprove the claim.
And what came of it? Nothing. cat
Why did Valve release a Linux server for Halflife? Because the community innundated them with requests for it.
So you want a HalfLife2 for Linux? Innundate Valve with requests! Stop bitching on Slashdot, and write them a physical, paper and toner letter requesting a HalfLife2 client for Linux.
Now, as for the whole "Just suck it up and run Windows" crowd, and the whole "Fuck Windows - Linux or Nothing" crowd: Each of us must make a decision what is more important - running the OS we choose, or playing a game. And you know what? That decision is going to be different for different people - imagine that!
If you are willing to put up with Windows to be able to run Halflife 2, then by all means do so, have fun, and SHUT THE FUCK UP!
If you will 'live free or die', and refuse to run Windows in order to run Halflife 2, then great! Welcome to the fold, accept the consequences of your decision, and SHUT THE FUCK UP (on Slashdot, that is)! Bitching on Slashdot won't change things, writing a letter to Valve just might!
Or if you don't want to write Valve, then help out on the Wine DirectX layer (and yes, I actually DO have contributions in the Wine source tree.)
But whatever your choices are, accept that they come with consequences, and STOP BITCHING ABOUT THEM WHERE IT WILL DO NO GOOD!
Re:DirectX is the proprietary problem (as usual) (Score:4, Insightful)
And surely you realize that such an abstraction will either require significant architectural concessions from all platforms, or will inevitably lead to slower performance on all platforms. Its called optimization, and it is almost always the enemy of generalization.
petition ......... (Score:3, Insightful)
Instead of signing a petition, wait till a company
comes out with a linux game, and BUY it, buy 2 or 3 for your friends. Thats how we will get good games on linux.
petition with your wallet...
Re:HL2 has an Interesting price model (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, uh, right. I recall the Half-life website going over 2 years without a single update. I downloaded Steam 2.0 and not a single feature has been added to any of the games in months and months.
The Counter-Strike crew did most of their work before joining the ranks of Valve. The Half-life engine was riddled with hacks and cheats, which took months to get patched.
My take on the Sierra/Valve thing is they had the right game at the right time. A good 32 player supporting engine that ran on your average machine of the day. TFC, even though it's graphics were bad compared to others, had great potential for people to actually work in teams. All this stuff was extrodinary at the time.
Yes, Tribes2 looked nicer and was a more advanced game, but you need a serious machine to run it. What fun is multi-player when it's requirements are so demanding that only a very few people will be able to play?
I guess what I am saying, in so many words, is.. Don't get too excited about a game that hasn't come out yet. The whole industry is geared around hype surrounding sequels. We, as the customers, fall for it every time. We get excited, hoping to re-live the excitement of what once was new. This hasn't been happening lately, as most studios are investing millions into making a game look pretty and have all the latest beats, but forget to make it fun.
I'm just negative..
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself.
XBox (Score:2, Insightful)
SLATE
Comparisons to Mac Game Market wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
The Mac Game Market is not a useful comparison, the Mac and Linux situations are different. Counting users is a mistake. The Mac situation wildly differs from Linux in that Mac users can not dual boot or effectively emulate. On the Mac they not only have to emulate the APIs but the CPU instructions as well. For modern games it a native version or nothing. On the other hand Linux users can use the Win32 version of the game. Most Linux gamers dual boot or use Wine so they are already customers. Targeting Linux does not generate any new money from them, it merely replaces a Win32 sale with a Linux sale. That's a money losing situation for the developer. The Linux Game Market only consists of those Linux Gamers who would never buy the Win32 version, those who would do without rather than dual boot or use Wine.
Re:I have a lament too (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because someone is charging you for a word processor that could theoretically be given away does not entitle you to a free word processor. In life, nobody is entitled to anything, period. People could theoretically build cars for free, but it doesn't happen. Just because it seems like a cheap investment doesn't mean that typing on a computer all day to make your living should be done for free.
Slashdot wouldn't exist if there weren't programmers getting paid for what they're doing. They get paid when the company they work for makes money off of a product. That means somebody is selling something. Ideology is poor currency at the grocery store.
Re:will never happen (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, having said that, Valve has a tight relationship with MS. It's not likely that there will be a port because of that reason, but not for the reason you state.
Re:I have a lament too (Score:3, Insightful)
That is true, on top of the fact that it is a tremendous support nightmare. There about a hundred other things that can go wrong trying to get a game to work under linux than can go wrong under windows. Of all the things I have installed on either I would say the average success rate of putting a cd into my machine and installing something on Winodws is much higher than it is with Linux. With windows you don't need to worry about dependencies (except for maybe direct x which the game will install itself.
There is something inherently wrong with having to work hard to play a game. I have no problem doing it to set up a server or write a script, but when it comes to games I just want to plug and play.
It is not a bad thing, it makes Linux a more productive OS for me to operate under.
Re:I have a lament too (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:why not support the companies that support us? (Score:2, Insightful)
Graphics only sell games until word gets out that a it's crap; so only the initial release will really generate any revenue.
Good game play keeps people coming back.
I have to ask again, this is insightful? (Score:3, Insightful)
The PCI latencies can be off (That's a VERY common thing in Windows)- it can throw the OS or the app completely off, causing stuttering in sound or skipped frames with the video. Doesn't seem to happen on Linux based setups on the same hardware, but under XP, it does bizarre things with your applications.
Suffice it to say, basing the current state of affairs off of what they were a year or two ago is making an error in that you're operating off of old info.