TECHRIGHTS gave many links about the rather major news from Valve. That was limited to daily links, but we should really say a word about it.

"There is nothing to lose from having those games extended to support GNU/Linux; the only downside might be that they can steal attention away from FOSS games."So Vista 8 is not working out so well, eh? This is also a major blow for DirectX, as some publications help emphasise. More games are now coming to GNU/Linux, a platform which gamers can download for free to enjoy good performance and improved security on. It can be seen as a recruitment tool for FOSS, but Richard Stallman begs to differ, with reservations. My own position is that it is strategically counter-productive to publicly berate Valve for being proprietary, especially at this time. There is nothing to lose from having those games extended to support GNU/Linux; the only downside might be that they can steal attention away from FOSS games. Anyway, major titles that come along nicely will help demonstrate to gamers that GNU/Linux is the better platform. For game developers it helps show that GNU/Linux support is doable, that it results in good performance, and that OpenGL has merit.

"For game developers it helps show that GNU/Linux support is doable, that it results in good performance, and that OpenGL has merit."Stallman's words received a lot of coverage (see daily links) including some from the BBC. Windows has been getting terrible coverage and the FSF managed to get its point across to the masses. Speaking of the FSF, it says that "ZaReason supports the FSF statement against Restricted Boot" (ZaReason sells GNU/Linux gear). So the FSF is not so "radical" after all, eh? And its platform is not just philosophically better but also technically better as benchmarks show. One culprit is bad design and gimmicks that Microsoft uses as unnecessary selling points. As one blogger put it, "I have a low opinion of Microsoft, but even I never saw Microsoft under Ballmer making such a basic blunder as not checking out the trademark for Metro, the most distinctive name attached to Windows 8. Just how dumb is Ballmer?

"Seriously. This is business 101. Oh, Microsoft is claiming now that the “Metro de-emphasis is not related to any litigation,” but they're refusing to answer on questions about the Windows 8 Metro name conflicting with the German company name Metro AG. Metro AG isn't talking either. Interesting, huh?

"To us, it's still Vista. It just has a thick layer of "Metro" paint and more restrictions such as UEFI.""In addition, Microsoft, after years of pushing the Metro brand, is now claiming that Metro was always just a code name. Really? That's news to me; Mary Jo Foley, ZDNet's ace Microsoft reporter; and anyone else who's paid any attention whatsoever to Windows 8."

Microsoft's technically weak products have enjoyed good marketing, including bribes for reviews, heavily marketed brands such as "Vista" (a technical failure but an advertising success), and anti-competitive tricks, the latest of which is UEFI. One of our contributors found out that BIOS alterations go further than that and according to him, "Microsoft demands more of OEMs than ever for Windows 8. As usual, "piracy" is the excuse." To quote the report he cites, "requiring OEMs to write a unique activation key into the BIOS of each machine, and ship them with the operating pre-installed. OEMs also going to have to get all keys directly from Microsoft, no ifs ands or buts."

This offers nothing whatsoever to the user. In fact, it is an antifeature that can only ever harm the user. Metra is equally bad; it limits the user. Metro, like "Surface", is not a new name; this is a reused program name (reused from around the same time of the original surface). Perhaps as part of cost-cutting Microsoft is trying to reuse brands. No wonder it dumped "Vista" in favour of the older name, "Windows". To us, it's still Vista. It just has a thick layer of "Metro" paint and more restrictions such as UEFI. ⬆