Slashdot Mirror
Wine Works Towards 1.0
Sukru Tikves writes "Today on Wine Weekly News' future issue I read from that '
The Wine team is preparing to begin on the road towards the long-awaited Wine 1.0 release, but there's still some way to go, and many usability issues to clean up before even a public beta release is possible. While the wizards churn out the machine-readable source code, the Wine Weekly News plan to help by providing human-readable language mere users can read.
'
"
If you really feel the need to poke fun of someone, at least make sure it's the right person.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I, too, would prefer native applications over emulated ones - but emulated ones are definitely better than nothing.
Wine (the emulator) is definitely a good thing - at this time, a lot of stuff is still written for Windows only, and it's good to have some way to use them without having to rewrite them (phone directories, anyone?).
Winelib gives programmers the possibility to move their existing code to real OSes quickly without having to learn a new API RIGHT AWAY, and something like
[Windoze calls for interface] + [Unix specific parts for extra features and/or better integration]
is definitely better than an emulated application...
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
Using a gif is just inexcusable here. The jpeg format compressed it much better, and have we forgotten about the UNISYS GIF patent issue so quickly?
<rant>
Ever heard of PNG? Just perfect for typical Web images (JPEG is still better for compressing the kinds of images you take from a digital camera). No patents, excellent quality, faster load, better compression, true alpha-channel support, etc. etc. etc...
</rant>
Many people underestimate badly the need to run Windows apps. We're not only talking about office software here. We're talking about thousands of small utilities or custom made programs that are written for Windows to do some small task. At our company there's already several of them.
What Wine lets us do is to run those small programs and concentrate on writing the newest ones for Linux. But we won't port the old ones because it would take a lot of time which we don't have.
So before you put Wine down, remember that changing OS at work places is a huge task. Changing all those small programs on top of that is just a gigantic task and won't happen unless there's a big reason. And the difference between Linux and NT is not big enough.
Now that wine-1.0 is nearing, will we finally get Lotus Notes' Detach working in wine? This has been an open issue for months now, and alas, wine-20000526 is no better :-(
Say no to software patents.
No 1.0 release without testing and quality assurance! A set of applications that Wine "must" run should be defined,
and regression tests should be done regularly.
Kudos to the wine team for getting this far. [Seeing Office fire up under wine never fails to amaze]
IMHO, the first target for QA testing should be popular e-mail clients, like Eudora, Agent and (ugh.. Outlook.)
E-mail is still the most frequently used app in business, and many users are forced to work with a particular client,
thus dooming them to a life of Windows [or, in more open-minded shops, Macs.]
Giving these users one less reason to dual boot into Windows would go a long way to driving adoption
of Linux in a corporate environment.
Of course, getting Office to run reliably would put the nail in the coffin. But is this realistic? The day it happens,
you can expect a "service pack" release from Redmond. Sigh.
docwolf
I'm really sick of Hearing the open Source RMS wannabes bitching about Wine. Wine w/ its DirectX support has been doing wonders for Linux Gaming.
3 days ago I was able to get Starsige Tribes to work under linux. I have also run unreal, commandos, Carmageddon and Starcraft under linux flawlessly.
My Complaint comes in when people bitch about open source drivers Such as NVidias but dont seem to give a damn about open source Games, Atleast untill the Topic of Wine comes up. Then they bitch about Win32 and DirectX being a bad set or APIs. I'M SICK OF THE DOUBLE STANDARD. One moment its ok to have a closed game and then the next it isnt unless its linux native.
Anyone that knows jack about wine knows the biggest part isnt the emulator its WINELIB the free OPEN SOURCE win32 api for *NIX. The goal is to have a compleat working free win32 clone so any devolper could recomple the application and it WOULD BE LINUX NATIVE. You got that you RMS FREAKS, Its a API, not the goal of a EMULATOR.
Think of it like this I could port GTK to the USER and GDI componets of windows then if i compiled GNOME on windows it would be WINDOWS NATIVE.
Ok I've had my rant and relased some anger, time to watch the KARMA drop.
Isolation
not just a handle its a way of life
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
As many people have noted, the Windows API is a moving target. Microsoft love to change it, and add to it. WINE has already managed to keep up with Microsoft pretty well, and once WINE has managed at least 99% of the Windows API, most of the work is done.
Even when Microsoft go and add or change the API again, compared to what WINE has already achieved it shouldn't be too much work to add the new functions into WINE. After all, Microsoft can't change the API too much, without breaking compatibility.
Syllable : It's an Operating System
Add to the list of Wine products "Project Odin" which takes it one step futher and allows you to convert the Win32 binary into an OS/2 Binary alongside emulating the program or providing the winelib interface to the OS/2 presentation manager
Had IBM done the marketing Win32's as we know it today would be a subset of OS/2.. But IBM lost its balls and lost the os market to Microsoft.
But it is interesting how this is an achievement, soon 64 big computing will be out and another 7 years later we will be emulating the win64's :)
send flames > /dev/null
Only 'flamers' flame!
in order here...
Lotus' position with porting Smartsuite to OS/2 was their problem, not IBM's.
Win32-OS/2 is not an IBM project. It is a project of the OS/2 Community and is now Odin. They (Odin developers) ran Lotus Notes R5 Windows version on OS/2 at CeBIT this year.
IBM did not fail in developing Win32 support for OS/2. At a cost of $1000 per copy (Microsoft's price to IBM), it was a no-brainer decision not to implement. The programmers, feeling a challenge, set out to crack the code. It has been running on OS/2 for years in house. It will not be allowed outside due to legal issues.
'til dawn...
Silver Surfer
I don't know if I'd have the willpower to stay on a project for seven years..I'd just reach a point where I'd figure it'd just be easier to dual boot...
BTW I think ygotta hand it to the Wine developers. They're catching Microsoft up. You can now get Office 97 to run, though it wobbles a lot. They've managed to close in on the moving target which is the Windows API. IBM (OS/2), Sun (WABI) and others have tried and failed. Within the forseeable future it will be possible to execute the average Win95 program under X on x86 Unix. That's really a remarkable achievement, more so as it's free.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
The latest installs are no-brainers, and Wine means that Linux will have more applications than Windows (all the Windows apps + all the pre-existing Linux apps).
.rpmorig files, causing me to have to go in and reinstitute many of the changes that I had made to get fix silly problems in their initialization routines specific to my system. By no means was it difficult, but had I been a novice, I might have been screwed.
I beg to differ. Recently, I performed both an upgrade of my Redhat 6.1 installation (to 6.2) and my Windows 98 installation (to Windows 2000). While I would consider myself to be well-skilled in the operation and installation of both, the Windows 2000 installation was by far easier. Windows 2000 easily recognized my current settings, my current programs, and my current hardware and moved everything over the new system. About the only trouble spot during the entire installation was when it detected and changed refresh rates on my monitor, causing the monitor to go blank until I turned it off and on. Redhat, on the other hand, didn't save the majority of my files, opting instead to save them as
Wine itself isn't done yet, and the timetable hasn't been established yet for when it will be. They're just now preparing to begin to get ready to be done. That's a really vague idea of where they are. That's like saying, "Hey, we're gonna get to 1.0 sometime, so let's see what we have to do to be ready for it." It's not as if we're talking about a stable beta here that just needs to be tweaked. Wine still needs some major work to be at the level where it will threaten Microsoft.
Linux advocates have a tendency to over-embellish their influence, position, and future. Even if Wine came out tomorrow, it would not be the final nail in Microsoft's coffin. The antitrust suit hasn't even been settled yet, much less made its way through the appeals process (remember AT&T? IBM?). Add to that the fact that businesses are not just going to dump their current corporate infrastructure to run something just like it on another operating system. Why not? Because it takes time to take an NT-based system administrator and convert him to a Unix-based system admin. Or, it takes time to hire. And many companies don't make those sorts of technical decisions beyond the realm of the sysadmin anyway, so is that sysadmin going to replace himself? I think not.
Wine's a good thing, and it means good things for Linux, but I don't think it's threatening Microsoft in any way.
When all the dust settles, operating systems that run Win32 apps will be a commodity anybody can build
I'd take it farther than that. Win32 will be the next Java: a pseudo-ubiquitous application environment sitting on top of the native operating system, with its specifications controlled by a single company.
"We got tired of waiting for the Wine project to implement the Windows 5.5 APIs so we did it ourselves, but support on BeOS is kind of dodgy..." It would be really ironic if IBM became the leading supplier of Windows-compliant open-source operating systems.
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
We're getting there, though. Give it a year or two.
MSK
Now for my obligatory BeOS spiel. Wine is not only helping LInux and other Unicies, but alternative OSs in general. In particular, Wine has already been compiled on BeOS, and things are moving at a fair clip to get the thing working. Wine is really a godsend to some of these alternative alternative OSs because it will allow them (when it's done) to have a body of functional software that allows users to complete some important tasks. Unlike Linux, these OSs are missing a few critical apps, and what better way is there to quickly fill this gap than get good emulation (I know it's not emulation per se, but for lack of a better word) going so Windows apps can be used. If you have any coding talent, support the BeWine project at bewine.loungenet.org. It seems that it is pretty low profile and not enough people know about it.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
DirectX would have a hard time being ported into Linux. Like NT, Linux has a significant admistration layer, and it wouldn't meld to well with the rest of the OS. Unlike OpenGL, which has a higher level interface to the OS, DirectX has to be down there in the core. Unless the Linux gods officially bless a DirectX port and integrate it deep into the kernel, it will be hard to get a good, fast DirectX port going without forking the kenrel.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Just check out http://www.winehq.com/Apps and search for the programs you're interested in. You have to be aware that the revievers are not necessarily talking about the same WINE snapshot, so look for the most recent reviews.
Cthulhu fhtagn!
For anyone who hasn't seen programs running under Wine, I have some screenshots here: http://pla-netx.com/linebackn/guis/wine.html
To pull this back on topic: how platform-independent is WINE? I'm guessing that it's x86-only (since it's running Windows x86 binaries) but does it work (well) on *BSD, Solaris x86, Be, SCO, etc?
I belive how it works is that it hacks ELF symbols into looking like PE symbols (PE is the format Windows executables use, and they're pretty close - I've heard ELF described as "PE without the cruft") in shared libraries. Of course there's other stuff to emulate having a C: drive, etc, but the main thing in the shared libraries implementing the Windows API and something that will make a Windows executable link with a ELF library. So if it's x86 and ELF, it's probably good to go.
Since I was a bit curious myself, I looked at the Wine FAQ:
UNIXes currently being tested for Wine compatibility include Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris x86. NetBSD, OpenBSD, Unixware, and SCO OpenServer 5 worked at one time, but Wine now requires kernel-level threads which are not currently available (or understood by the Wine team) in those platforms...
There are side efforts underway to port Wine to the Alpha, OS/2, and BeOS platforms.
Even funkier question (to which I don't expect an answer): can it be compiled on an Alpha-based UNIX system and run Windows NT for Alpha binaries?
That would be pretty interesting (though of course I have to ask just what apps are there for NT on Alpha?!?!?). It would probably be easier to run everything (Wine and the Windows apps) in an x86 emulator, though you'd need a fast machine (which, happily enough, an Alpha is very good at being).
But does it run MS office?
MS Office is still one of the biggest crutches of windows users, especially when most people dont use much more than WordPad/Write + spell checker.
(i just know some bastard is going to moderate me down for no particular reason, but a response would be really appreciated.)
This is terrible! Wine must never be allowed to reach 1.0 status. The success of the revolution is hinged on a windows emulator that really works for applets and some other things, but can't get any real work done. This attracts software developers and users with its promise, but then when they figure out that it doesn't work perfectly yet, they move on to *real* Linux apps. This keeps Linux healthy. If Wine does truly succeed, developers and users will still come to Linux, but they'll never migrate from the Windows model. Microsoft (or just the "Soft," if it's broken up) then will change the API, and Wine will be broken again. Everyone will move back to Windows.
Come on people. We don't want another OS/2 on our hands.
Remember, just playing the devil's advocate. Go Wine.
I am not a lawyer.
Having just hosed my primary desktop PC, I've now got the time to play around with the various OSs I've got lying around. I've got a bit of an oddball system and usually have to resort to some tweaking to get everything humming.
To cut a long story short, Solaris 7 (x86) was, freakily enough, the best at getting everything properly configured. This was up against Windows 2000, Windows 98, FreeBSD 4, Debian 2.2. RedHat 6.2 and BeOS 5. I found it a little off that the poor stepchild of Solaris SPARC was better able to handle my system than a number of OSs whose bread-and-butter is x86.
To pull this back on topic: how platform-independent is WINE? I'm guessing that it's x86-only (since it's running Windows x86 binaries) but does it work (well) on *BSD, Solaris x86, Be, SCO, etc?
Even funkier question (to which I don't expect an answer): can it be compiled on an Alpha-based UNIX system and run Windows NT for Alpha binaries?
--srj/mmv
Some posters seem to have the idea that WINE (together with Samba)
make it much more logical to use Linux as the backbone of a mixed
UNIX/Windows shop, with Linux displacing windows. One could equally
argue that NT & Win2k's support for POSIX means that the displacement
could work exactly the other way.
If anyone has any experience, I would be interested to know just how
good MS's POSIX support is. How difficult would it to build a Linux
distro on top of NT? (Debian NT?)
It could, but PCMCIA support is quite a bit easier. Also, the kernel still has to have some sembelance of what PCMCIA is (in this case a bus) in order to load the module. Sure DirectX could be loaded as a module, but it would still need a great deal of access to hardware without going through the kernel, and would still have to be an integral part of the kernel. It might be loaded from a module, but the kernel would still have to include new code to allow the module to take over the system. (What do you think DX is for? Total control baby ;)
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
"At".
We poke fun "at" a person.
We make fun "of" a person.
I'm assuming that English is not your first language, and Heaven knows it's one of the hardest to learn because of things like this.
If, however, English _is_ your first language, then you should feel, very, very ashamed. This is kids stuff.
"AT" because anything which is to be poked has to be poked "at" something. I poke "at" you. You poke "at" me. We poke "at"...pokable things.
"Of" because "making" is the act of fabrication; we are making this person "into" fun.
I make fun "of" you, because I'm making you into an object "of" fun for others. See?
If this seems like pedantic crap to some of you: too bad. Nobody ever mistyped 'of' for 'to', so it's not a 'typo' ("an error caused by hitting adjacent keys on a typewriter"); it's a linguistic misunderstanding. As such it belongs to the author of the previous message, and I'm correcting him/her, so bog off and mind yer own, OK?
"We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code." Dave Clark, IETF
Hemos, Malda, whoever: Use this: topicwine.gif or even better, this: topicwine.jpg
Using a gif is just inexcusable here. The jpeg format compressed it much better, and have we forgotten about the UNISYS GIF patent issue so quickly?
OT RANT: It seems as if /. talks big about how they are going to boycott this, that, or the other, but then a couple weeks later we see movie reviews and gifs being used where they don't even belong. Come on! If we're going to seriously take on companies' bullying over IP issues, we need to have a unified front!
/OT RANT
KARMA--;
And really, who is responsible for that color scheme?
All else aside, I think WINE could be THE Killer App for Linux, as far as getting it established on the desktop of the average user is concerned.
Cheers,
Tim
Karma: Bored. (Thinking about resurrecting the "Anyone else is an imposter" joke.)
What's the team looking for non-wizards to contribute?
Want to work at Transmeta? MicronPC? Hedgefund.net? AT&T?
Can your IM do this?
A working WINE would be good in that it would allow the running of MSIE, as well as Shockwave and other plug-ins. Then at last one could play SissyFight without shelling out for VMWare and the RAM required to run it.
It might even be more stable than Netscape...
The Wine team is preparing to begin on the road towards the long-awaited Wine 1.0 release
(my bold)
So we're still at the preliminary commencement portion of the preporatory stage, eh?
Hee hee. Sorry.
===
-J
Karma: T-rexcellent.
Sort of, yes. They've written it around the current facilities/limitations of Wine (and built on Wine) because they wanted something out of the door Now. Since they've been working on both code bodies (Office and Wine) I imagine there's a good chance they know what they're doing and have only used stable stuff.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
<plug> I'm sort of working on the msvideo stuff. I need more hours in the day though :) See http://www.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/~bbaetz/win e/ for very very early patches with known bugs. (ie it doesn't display anything useful at all.)</plug>
Hopefully I'll have more time to work on it in the (short) uni holidays in a few weeks. Theres also a cosource.com request for this, but I haven't applied for it because I don't have the time.
With the regulations that will/are kicking in due to the anti-trust trial, will the Wine team be able to see source code -- or at a minimum the "missing" specs -- needed to find out how the Windows API really works?
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
..the very idea of emulating Windows on Linux. Sure, there is the argument that it allows people to move over to Linux and continue to use the software they have invested in. Sure there are any number of other positive reasons to use it -but when everything is taken into consideration the final reality is that this reduces the incentive for companies to write good code that can be easily ported. Native code? Why bother..
Should credit be given to the team for their hard work and effort - absolutely! But I recall this project having it's roots in a time when Linux wasn't in a position to *demand* native applications..
If you make a hierarchy of which closed-source software has the most potential to restrict freedom, [single-user] games come fairly low. The reason that the software market is such a mess is that, to get anything useful done, several pieces of software have to interact - this is even more true if you want to communicate with somebody else's computer. So the "lock-in" potential of software can be high - you might be forced to use one piece of software just so that you can use another. Compare this to, say, novels, where you only need to buy the books you want to read, and you'll see the problem.
Now to my mind, [single user] games are more like novels than like software, in that no other program depends upon a game. A game might tie you to a particular OS, but if (say) Wine can make it run on an open OS then this problem is alleviated.
OTOH closed-source drivers have a bit more lock-in potential because a piece of hardware *is* dependent on them. If the hardware specs are also secret (winmodems, hp printers etc) this could be quite serious. If the specs are available and freely implementable then an open driver can be written if a sufficient number of people want it.
So, to summarise, I think that it's more important that drivers are open-source than it is that [single user] games are.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
As opposed to a -1924562 release?
A wealthy eccentric who marches to the beat of a different drum. But you may call me "Noodle Noggin."
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
They currently (via Office) support 4 fairly distinct versions of Win32: Win95/98, NT 3.51, NT 4, and Windows 2000. So-called Linux fragmentation has *nothing* on these guys. Given that nearly all application software in the forseeable future is going to be supporting these same 3 platforms it makes the task of running it much easier. That in turn buys time to implement whatever trick new things get added in Win2000, Windows Millenium, etc, etc.
Even if MS suddenly started adding APIs to try and kill WINE, do you really think all the applications for Windows would follow suit? Not likely - software publishers wanna make money, and so they'll continue to run on all Win32 versions.
Does this mean I will be able to get the ILOVEYOU virus to work under Linux?
From the newsletter:
1.0 is not the end. The 1.0 release will not mean that Wine will run everything out there, maybe not even half of it. What it will mean, will be that the core, the foundation of all the functionality contained within, has finally been stabilized, and that from that point, Wine should be a robust and stable platform to implement additional functionality on top of, i.e. to implement additional MS dlls, and to port applications to Unix with Winelib.
I think what they are looking for is the famous quote: "This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
Rock on, guys.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
Media Player is audio-only at this time. And there are easier ways to play mp3s on Linux ;)
:)
There is a metric TON of Corel code in the current Wine tree, and more is added daily. The main reason Corel's tree is separate is so they can stablize things (and hack specifically for their stuff if they need to) without interference from the main Wine developers. Once Corel ships their next Wine(Lib) based stuff there should be an almost complete merge, except for any dirty hacks
While Wine is great / gets greater for all the old applications that folks would like to use, the best tribute the the *other* projects in the free software world is that not everyone awaits it anxiously.
... who needs it!? :) (A semi-serious question, as in, "What specific apps do you want Wine to run?")
True, the WordPerfect suite uses it, but for the most part
Imagine the future with:
(The distro of your choice, plus:)
- KDE 2.0 - KDE is already quite nice
- Eazel - looks insanely promising
- Gnome 2.0 - even 1.2 is jawdroppingly slick
There are plenty of competent solitaire games for Linux already;)
On the other hand, unless Adobe or Quark get on the ball, Wine may still be the fastest way to use a full-fledged DTP program under Linux. Has anyone had success with that?
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
..preparing to begin on the road towards..
;-)
So, exactly what kind of time frame is that, Hemos?
The death of Microsoft is no longer something we wish would happen. It's now a practical possibility, and may even be inevitable.
While I respect the amount of work that has been put into Wine, I have to wonder why they are doing it. The Win32 API is a continually evolving and complex target. As IBM found out, Microsoft is hostile towards anyone who tries to emulate Windows. If you release a perfect emulation today, Microsoft will add or change something tomorrow.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I fiddled around with Wine last year, got a few apps to work, but was unsucessful with either Quickbooks or browser plug-ins.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Media Player is audio-only at this time. And there are easier ways to play mp3s on Linux ;)
But WiMP (WindowsMedia Player) plays all the Microsoft trade-secret/patented formats (wma, asf, etc.) and XMMS doesn't. Now all we're missing is QuickTime (MPEG 4) audio.
(WindowsMedia is shoved together because WiMP also runs on Mac computers; therefore, WindowsMedia is a separate technology from Windows OS).Will I retire or break 10K?
I don't miss any vital application that doesn't under Linux already.
But most users at my location won't switch their home machines to GNU/Linux until it can run one or more of these apps:
- Netscape Communicator, connecting to the Internet through software modems (analog or DSL)
- Unreal Tournament
- EverQuest
- Freespace 2
- Ultima Online
- Diablo II (when it's released)
- Hlf-Life
- AutoCAD (we have a site license with permission to take it home)
- Microsoft Visual C++ (or another compiler that can make MotherFuckingCrap apps)
_________________________________________________It's DMCA, not DCMA, idiots!
Will I retire or break 10K?
This is very timely.
As others mentioned, the Microsoft antitrust decree, scheduled to be signed by the judge tomorrow, has a big impact on this. 91 days from now, Microsoft will have to disclose their key APIs. Here's the relevant language from the latest version:
Microsoft shall disclose to ISVs, IHVs, and OEMs in a Timely Manner, in whatever media Microsoft disseminates such information to its own personnel, all APIs, Technical Information and Communications Interfaces that Microsoft employs to enable--
- i. Microsoft applications to interoperate with Microsoft Platform Software installed on the same Personal Computer, or
- ii. a Microsoft Middleware Product to interoperate with Windows Operating System software (or Middleware distributed with such Operating System) installed on the same Personal Computer, or
- iii. any Microsoft software installed on one computer (including but not limited to server Operating Systems and operating systems for handheld devices) to interoperate with a Windows Operating System (or Middleware distributed with such Operating System) installed on a Personal Computer.
To facilitate compliance, and monitoring of compliance, with the foregoing, Microsoft shall create a secure facility where qualified representatives of OEMs, ISVs, and IHVs shall be permitted to study, interrogate and interact with relevant and necessary portions of the source code and any related documentation of Microsoft Platform Software for the sole purpose of enabling their products to interoperate effectively with Microsoft Platform Software (including exercising any of the options in section 3.a.iii).c. Knowing Interference with Performance.
Microsoft shall not take any action that it knows will interfere with or degrade the performance of any non-Microsoft Middleware when interoperating with any Windows Operating System Product without notifying the supplier of such non-Microsoft Middleware in writing that Microsoft intends to take such action, Microsoft's reasons for taking the action, and any ways known to Microsoft for the supplier to avoid or reduce interference with, or the degrading of, the performance of the supplier's Middleware.
When all the dust settles, operating systems that run Win32 apps will be a commodity anybody can build, like PCs and BIOS chips.
And remember, all this takes place before any appeals.
Uh, you probably meant Redmond. Unless your computer was poisoned by a native American.
[Robin Williams voice] "Hmmm...White man take our land, treat us like dogs...here, take some Tobacco! Heheheh....
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.