LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   LQ Suggestions & Feedback (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/lq-suggestions-and-feedback-7/)
-   -   Use of the "What programs/games would you like to see ported" threads (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/lq-suggestions-and-feedback-7/use-of-the-what-programs-games-would-you-like-to-see-ported-threads-868893/)

Nylex 03-16-2011 06:25 AM

Use of the "What programs/games would you like to see ported" threads
 
We have two sticky threads (here and here) asking users which software and games they'd like to see ported to Linux. These threads are quite long now and as such, it seems difficult to keep track of the posts in them. I'm just wondering if these threads really serve a useful purpose. They just seem to be long lists. In both of them, Jeremy states that if there's enough interest in certain software/games, he'll contact the vendors. Does this happen?

Cr0wb4r 03-16-2011 01:18 PM

I to have often wondered this my self. It would be nice to know if this really does help.

jeremy 03-17-2011 10:52 AM

Nylex,

When we started the threads in 2003, the application landscape for Linux looked quite a bit different than it does now. It's possible the threads have outlived their usefulness. That being said, they still seem to garner a lot of participation...so it's possible they haven't. I'm interested in hearing what other members think. Also, if someone is willing to go through the threads (of even say the last 2-3 years worth of posts) and tally up the requests, I would be willing to contact vendors on LQ's behalf and see if we can make some kind of difference.

--jeremy

Nylex 03-19-2011 02:16 AM

Thanks, Jeremy. I can understand that software for Linux has changed dramatically since 2003. While the threads do get a lot of participation, I think they're only really useful if some action is going to be taken on the responses. I'd offer to go through them and make a tally, but I simply don't have the time. Even just going a few years back would be a big task for anyone, I think. Still, I agree, it would be good to see what other members think about this.

archtoad6 03-20-2011 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy (Post 4293992)
Also, if someone is willing to go through the threads (of even say the last 2-3 years worth of posts)

Currently, there 4412 posts in the thread in Software & 1314 in the thread in Games. Even reading the Games thread, all 1314, would be a monumental task. Can something automated yield good enough info.?

Note: If LQ Search, in its present form, is part of the process, then a cut-off date of anything but a year will be difficult.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy (Post 4293992)
and tally up the requests, I would be willing to contact vendors on LQ's behalf and see if we can make some kind of difference.

What do you mean by "tally"? -- What kind of details do you want to send the vendors? For instance, using the thread in Games & World of Warcraft for a test, I got the following results using LQ Advanced Search:
  • 50 posts for "World of Warcraft"
  • 75 posts for "World of Warcraft" OR "wow"
    One these was due to the word "Wow, ..."
    One was an objection to porting WoW, & one was a comment on that objection.
  • *2 posts for "World of Warcraft" OR "wow" in the last year
  • 73 posts for "World of Warcraft" OR "wow" older than one year
  • 47 posts for blizzard (blizzard is the vendor of WoW.)
  • 33 posts for blizzard NOT "WORLD OF WARCRAFT"
Is this kind of info. detailed & accurate enough? If so, then anybody can pick a favorite game, search the thread, & post the results. The results could go here or on an LQ Wiki page, where they could be kept in alphabetical order.


* - I really wish LQ/vBulletin allowed  

Nylex 03-26-2011 07:31 AM

Does anyone else have opinions on this?

corp769 03-26-2011 07:37 AM

If anything, can't you create a new thread, put a sticky on it for all threads, and have an anonymous voting system for even visitors to vote? That way, we can pick the most popular applications and games being talked about and create a rough list, and go off of the comments to add more applications and programs. Just a thought.

jlinkels 03-26-2011 07:58 AM

Opinions on the usefulness of the threads? Or how to proceed with the input of the threads?

I have the feeling that there a few die-hard requests in the application thread. Like Photoshop, Quickbooks and Dreamweaver. While some of them are simply a different application to process the same standard (bitmaps, html), others (Quickbooks) are needed to process proprietary data which cannot be done anyway else. There is a difference between the two groups. I can edit bitmaps or Word documents once I learned to start Gimp instead of Photoshop, and I have little mercy with people who don't want to put in the effort to get used to a different application. With Quickbooks and alike, not having the application seriously affects co-operation with colleagues.

For these kind of applications Jeremy's proposal is fine, and maybe, finally it would help a bit. In LQ however we would need some kind of entry and presentation system so it become more easily visible what application fall in either category, how much need there is, how much support on each etc without having to read thru the 2354 posts.

As I see it, the thread current useful purpose is mainly to answer which are alternatives in Linux for certain applications. Not only for users too lazy too Google, but also to indicate which Linux equivalents are widely used and really useful. As Jeremy points out, the application landscape did change the past years, no one can complain about choice in applications available in Linux to perform any task.

Except for those few applications which seriously hinder co-operation in organizations the issue on drivers and special application programs also remains. One buys a piece of hardware, ranging from a PDA thru a scanner ot spectrum analyzer, and the included CD invariably runs on "Windows XP, Vista or 7 with 512 MB of RAM". The Linux community has put an insane amount into reverse engineering, rewriting and re-inventing the obvious because of lack of support and lack of information. Effort which could have been used for better. goals. That sucks.

jlinkels

irneb 07-17-2012 08:23 AM

Sorry to resurrect this old thread :tisk:, but IMO it is still relevant :D.

Rather than trying to go through the now 4805 & 1372 posts and attempt trying to structure them, I'd suggest a different route:

Use a Wiki page with a voting addon (something like the Polling Extension on MediaWiki). As sample this page can be used as a starting point. It's reasonably well structured, but not fully comprehensive (e.g. no CAD).

There'd need to be some changes though:
  1. Forum members should be given rights to at least vote on the WikiPage (So they need not have to re-register yet another username just so they can feedback on the wiki).
  2. There should be a way of discussing each item on the wiki page - perhaps as a forum thread.
  3. There should be a way for users to suggest additions to such page. Perhaps also a forum thread.
Point 1 is a definite must. 2 & 3 are quick-fix solutions which might make future additions a bit problematic, but for now I can't see an easier approach.

The point is: in the past year there was already 400 extra posts to the software thread. Most are probably duplicates of older posts. That does not take account of how many users read through some of the posts and found an answer already - e.g. the software thread has in excess of 600,000 reads (not a good estimate, but does show there's a large set of users interested in this). So relevancy is still there, and thus a new start with a more structured approach may populate quite quickly in any case, even if all the old posts are not used directly.

If you do go about something like this, then those 2 threads need to be closed with an ending post linking to the relevant Wiki page - so users searching would redirect them to the correct new spot.

Nylex 07-22-2012 03:22 AM

Sounds like a good idea to me, irneb!

irneb 07-23-2012 02:49 AM

I think so! If someone could allow such extension to the wiki, it would not be too difficult to get some proper page setup. I'd even be willing to help (if no more than a few hours a week).

Nylex 07-29-2012 02:00 AM

I guess you'll have to wait for Jeremy to post here.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:07 PM.