On Sun, 2004-02-22 at 23:08, Carlos Hendson wrote: > On Sat, 2004-02-21 at 04:38, John Klingler wrote: > > And I think part of the reason they don't is because there are so many > > different linux distributions/configurations that simply their increased > > end-user tech support costs would really start to bite into their profits. > > John makes a very good point. If games were made to run natively under > Linux, how long would these games be functional before kernel/module/API > changes to the OS break the game? 1 - 2 years? > > For example, with little effort I could make "Day of the Tentacle" for > MSDOS and run under Windows XP. > > This is a game that was developed round the early-mid 90's. Granted, I > can attempt to use Wine(X) to get this game working under Linux. > > My point is, if "Day of the Tentacle" was developed for the Linux > platform from the mid 90's, what are the chances of that game still > natively functioning under todays Linux platform? > > It's not unheard of for backward compatibility to be dropped in the name > of advancing the functionality of Linux at times. > > That's my 2 cents worth. > > Carlos I've read that older libraries can still be installed to give backward compatibility. So that should not be too much of a problem. Wolf
