10 best first person shooter games for Android
First person shooters are a perennial favorite among gamers, including those who play on their Android devices. But it can be tough to separate the wheat from the chaff, given just how many first person games are out there for Android.
Thankfully, a writer at Gotta Be Mobile has a helpful list of the 10 best first person shooter games for Android.
Cory Gunther reports for Gotta Be Mobile:
There are thousands of games on the Google Play Store for Android smartphones and tablets. This makes it hard to find quality games, or ones worth spending money on. For those who love headshots or FPS titles, here are 10 or so of the best shooter games on Android in 2016.
Gaming on our Android smartphones and tablets is becoming increasingly more popular thanks to a huge selection of quality games, big HD displays, and powerful 8-core processors. First person shooter games are extremely popular and typically offer some of the best graphics too. Not all of them are worth downloading, and we’ve gathered a list of our favorites.
How to set up the i3WM window manager
Desktop environments like Unity can be quite useful for many people, but sometimes a window manager like i3WM can be a better option. The DevPy blog has a helpful guide that will show you how to set up i3WM on your Linux system.
Robert Washbourne reports for DevPy:
i3WM is not a traditional desktop environment, such as Unity or Gnome. Instead, it is only a window manager, and it's only purpose is to control the layout of your screen. i3 is not recommended for beginners to Linux, as all the configuration you do is in text files, with almost no gui.
You have two major choices for configuration in i3. You can have the files in a dot folder (such as /home/user/.i3/) or in the .config folder (/home/user/.config/i3/). It does not really matter which you use, but in this guide I will be referring to the .config approach.
Do you prefer Pacman or Apt?
Package managers, like just about anything else in technology, have their fans who swear by them. A recent thread on the Linux subreddit featured a discussion by users of Pacman and Apt, and the redditors there discussed the pros and cons of each.
Talkyistheman started the thread off with this:
Pacman or apt?
Which one do you prefer? I personally like pacman, but I'm interested in what other people prefer, and why they prefer it.
His fellow Linux redditors chimed in with their thoughts:
TingPing: “My complaints with Pacman are Arch policies (not packaging debug info, avoiding versioned dependencies, etc). The worst part about apt is the tooling to build deb files, it is absolutely the most painful and over-engineered packaging I've ever encountered.
Either way the package manager is only part of the question where many distro specific policies and infrastructure are equally important in what you use.”
Pheonix991: “Yum, history feature is amazing.”
JzDarr: “Apt, because I'm on Debian.”
Mmstick: “Certainly pacman. Simple, fast, reliable: pick three.”
Cbmuser: “How are the multi-arch features or the strong signing algorithms coming along in pacman? pacman may be faster than apt, but it has considerably less features.”
Ethelward: “Pacman has multi-arch repos and GPG-signing for packages, with configurable levels of tolerance depending on the repo.”
TingPing: “I don't believe Pacman has any knowledge of multi-arch though, Arch convention is just to name them lib32-* and throw them in their own repo.”
Dually: “I think the biggest advantage with apt is how easy it is to get apt-cacher-ng running on your home server. With Arch the best comparison is to point pacman at a squid server, but I don't think this is as easy.”
Did you miss a roundup? Check the Eye On Open home page to get caught up with the latest news about open source and Linux.
This article is published as part of the IDG Contributor Network. Want to Join?