Wine Mainstream
by
CaptCanuk
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I'm sure if Wine 1.0 had no difficulties running MS Office, IE+Outlook Express, Halflife CounterStrike and ICQ, a large chunk of dual booters would never have to go back to Windows.
#include
-- ----
The geek shall inherit the Earth.
Re:Wine Mainstream
by
tempest303
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm sure if Wine 1.0 had no difficulties running MS Office, IE+Outlook Express, Halflife CounterStrike and ICQ
And for that matter, people could actually more fairly compare their linux equivilants. For now, it's true that MS Office currently lacks a full-fledged competitor. OpenOffice looks like it will become exactly that, but it'll be a little while yet in coming, and a transition period will be necessary. Halflife you've got me on too. However, the others you mentioned?
IE? Galeon. It's fast, stable, can use Netscape/Mozilla plugins, and a GREAT Gnome interface. (or Konq, for the KDE people:)
Outlook? Try Evolution. Like Outlook, but without the viruses, and features 35% less Suck(TM)!
And ICQ? GnomeICU, Gaim, Gabber... need I list more?
I really think that with the advent of StarOffice 6.0, Mozilla 1.0, and Ximian Connector, combined with a great, well-refined WINE, we may finally see the beginnings of the Year of Linux on the Desktop(TM)
Re:WINE necessary??
by
Ryu2
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Of course it is. People just aren't going to give up the apps they already use.
Look at Mac OS X -- this UNIX-based OS, has built in a Mac OS 9 emulator, expresslly so people can run their old apps. Is it necessary for OS X itself to run? NO! But without such a emulator, Mac OS X would probably have not taken off as quicky as it is.
The situation is exactly the same with Wine and Windows, especially if one views Linux as an "upgrade" to Windows and wishes to target disgruntled Windows users.
--
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Exactly my feelings. This incesssant desire to chase the dragon's tail instead of forging past it and leave it behind continues to baffle me. As much as I hate the over used term "innovate" - where is the innovation in the Linux community?
You cannot win by following, only by leading.
-- satire, n: 1) witty language used to convey insults or scorn; 2) a form of humor lost on most slashdot moderators.
From an embarrassed Windows user
by
Boiling_point_
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Submitter comment: "...WINE version 1.0 may be just what Linux needs to get users to migrate from Windows to Linux"
I felt the article dealt mainly with removing the need for dual-booting for more and more existing Linux users. Why would a Windows user go to the trouble of installing Linux+WINE just to get what they already have (working Win32 apps and games)?
I (and probably other Windows users) will switch when Linux outperforms Windows where it counts - when it does what they have come to expect a PC to do: when it installs without much hassle, when their hardware works immediately or with minimal driver hunting, when they are almost guaranteed a supply of games (remember the success of Commodore 64s?) and when the applications are simple to install and use, and are compatible with files made by colleagues and friends.
I love the idea of WINE. I love the idea of Linux. I've tried Linux. Unfortunately though, I still use Windows because near-enough isn't really good enough. WINE is handy, but a 'Killer App' needs to be something more than simply matching the competition - it has to be the one thing you don't get anywhere else.
-- "If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
I've heard all this "wine (or VM or wahtever) will convice users to switch from windows" before. For the last two or three years I've been hearing it. What I'd rather hear is "many new apps that kick the crap out of their windows counterparts in usability and compatability are coming out and people will have no logical choice but to swithch to Open Source". Linux is getting a bad rep by coming on too strong with this "I'm just as good as windows" crap. What we need is for linux or other open source alternatives to show that just because it isn't Microsoft dosen't mean it won't work "In the Real World". Too often, Linux looks good on paper, but when it comes right down to it, it still can't replace windows 100%. And I'm talking about the desktop, not the server here. In other words, I'm saying a bunch of shit that's been said time and time again, but no one seems to be listening.
--
Shift happens. Fire it up.
Re:WINE necessary??
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
What everyone has to remember is that it's not just about the software, but also about the hardware. Linux is had to accept not just because office doesn't run on it, but also because my digital camara doesen't run on it. There's a lot to it. But I think that by far the most important thing linux users can do is stop being so anti-corporate. Linux will not succeed unless you people let that go.
MOM
Meanwhile...
by
SlashChick
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
In the real world we use MS Office
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
So what idiot can still believe that one single application is so powerful that it's keeping millions of people from switching to (self-indulgent crap removed)
You see, the real world works like this:
1) You're running Linux at your workplace.
2) You get mail from your valued client: "Please find our budget attached". There is an Excel file as an attachment.
3) You try opening the file with StarOffice. It won't open, however, since it contains complex graphs and macros (happens to me all the time).
4) Are you REALLY going to mail your client and ask him not to mail you Microsoft Office attachments???
Grow up. Most people HAVE to use Microsoft at workplace. Not everyone is a network/sys-admin.
A native Windows is still mandatory for musicians
by
chrysalis
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The only reason I need Windows for (until I get a Mac) is music. There are excellent Windows/Mac apps with poor OSS alternatives yet.
So I tried various versions of Wine and VMWare.
Success was poor on Wine except with sample editors.
It was way better with VMWare except for one thing : latency. Although software was properly working, the sound card output had far too much latency. I guess the problem would be the same with any Windows emulator. The emulation part involves latency, especially when it comes to delivering signal to hardware.
So music makers will have to stick with a native Windows partition:(
-- {{.sig}}
Re:WHY SO MUCH EMPHASIS ON M$ OFFICE?
by
aussersterne
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
As a journalist and writer, I can tell you.
It's because publishers and everyone else in the publishing chain work in Word. No, import/export filters are not good enough -- because it's not just about the text. For example, Word has "revision marks" -- a system of keeping track of editorial changes to a document, who made them, when they were made, etc. An editor can easily step through each edit in a document, look at both the pre- and post-edit versions of a sentence, and certify the one of two (or of three or of four) versions which works best in context.
This type of data is not preserved across imports/exports because StarOffice, Applix, KWord, etc. have no concept of such a feature, so they have no reason to try to import the revision data; they just discard all of it (including the entire stream of edits and ceritifications from editors, co-authors, etc) and import the document in original form. WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux *did* have such a feature and imported it more or less correctly... but WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux has been pulled from the market.
This is only one specific instance, but it is not an isolated one. There are many other Word features which are closely tied to file format and vice-versa, and if the entire publishing chain of your publication or press has tied its processes and equipment to Word, you're not going to change this by waltzing in one day and saying "I use Linux so we're all switching to OpenOffice, you'll have to find new ways of doing W, X, Y and we'll now have to hire someone to do Z because OpenOffice won't do it!"
The features just aren't there for most Linux applications (even GIMP, when compared to Photoshop or Corel Draw, comes up far short), and at the same time, the inertia of Windows-world applications is there, in spades. The same can easily be said for other MS Apps. MS Office is a great product. The only general-purpose competitor which comes close is from Corel, and has been discontinued for Linux users.
That is not to say that I think Wine is a useful product. I've tried it over and over and over again for half a decade and it has never worked for anything other than Solitaire. I don't see the point in releasing a 1.0 version when it still won't install Internet Explorer (any version), MS Office (any version) or Photoshop (any version). Why bother?
-- STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Wine will not make users switch to Windows
by
skipp-99
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Even if wine were 100% complete today, and every program worked on Linux that does on Windows, it would not make Linux a viable desktop OS. For one thing, all applications would still "feel" like Windows applications because they were not designed for Linux. Secondly, Linux still needs more work done in the user interface department if it expects to compete with Windows. Linux also needs commercial software ported over to Linux. There is a big difference in running win32 api's in Linux and running a ported application, for an example of this, look at Office X. Then and only then will Linux become a mainsteam desktop operating system.
Re:WHY SO MUCH EMPHASIS ON M$ OFFICE?
by
harkal
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Word has "revision marks" -- a system of keeping track of editorial changes to a document, who made them, when they were made, etc. An editor can easily step through each edit in a document, look at both the pre- and post-edit versions of a sentence, and certify the one of two (or of three or of four) versions which works best in context.
The people that give you this solution, gave you the problem at the first place. If Word was not using binary files and used text files like OpenOffice or latex, you would be able to do versioning with your faivorite versioning software. You wouldn't have to just wait for WordXP to support it.
--
HarKal
Hear me out here.
by
Martigan80
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
So accourding to the article:
" WINE does not yet support applications that use Windows XP-only features such as.NET. White thinks that as XP-only applications start to appear, WINE will have to accommodate them, but he doesn't see this as a major issue yet, since those applications are few.
".
This is not a calling of doom for windows users that want to convert_because_a lot of windows users don't want to buy the newest version of windows, even future Service Packs. Especialy small buisnesses because they have to focus their resources on growth and survival. So since M$ has announced that it will stop supporting Win98X in 2003, this might be the window of oppertunity to switch them over to a more sensable alternative.
--
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
Re:Wine Mainstream..If you can't beat it...beat it
by
darkPHi3er
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
"I really think that with the advent of StarOffice 6.0, Mozilla 1.0, and Ximian Connector, combined with a great, well-refined WINE, we may finally see the beginnings of the Year of Linux on the Desktop(TM)"
while i seriously hope you are right, it isn't merely a question of "equaling" the features of MS Office or of the Windows Desktop (Bleech!), or bringing native Win32 code over to the LINUX platform (look at the history of Win emulators on the Mac), even if WINE is perfect, thunking is not free, performance wise, and Bill's Thing will be shipping on MILLIONS of new PCs every month for the foreseeable future
we in the community have to offer a significantly betteruser experience, with LINUX native apps
we come in strong on price, free support and passion
we come in weak on marketing, abilty to tie our LINUX products to a "Big Name" tech provider (like AOL) and we have no ability to make the OEM Mafia (Dell, Compaq, Gateway, HP, Sony, et al) dual boot enable any large portion of their new machines
also, "The Curse of *NIX", which i have been dealing in my work since before the widespread release of SRV, continues to haunt us....especially in the area of idiot proof desktop setup and functionality
X continues to be less than perfect and hard to get going really smoothly without SOME user experience and intervention
...and although I have great hopes that in the mid-term plus (18-36 months) the battle/conflict/thing between Gnome and KDE will result in KILLER desktop functionality, in the short term, the desktop setup continues to be a real weakness in selling LINUX to anyone not comfortable with at least a little diddling, twiddling and fiddling with their OS setup (and that is a LOT of people)
-- Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
No, it needs a better install package
by
kidneutron
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Until you can install Linux on 99% of the desktops and laptops out there and not have to spend a week getting your network card, sound, and video configured properly, Windows is still going to be the OS of choice for most people... even if you have a way to run all their favorite Win32 apps.
I've been a Unix admin for 12 years now and it still takes me some time getting Linux up and running... which honestly is the last thing I want to do when I get home from a day of solving Unix problems. You're not going to be able to tell Grandma that in order for her sound card to work properly, she'll have to recompile the kernel.
Yes, I'd like to see more people using Linux. It would be great to take some of the wind out of Microsoft's sails. Windows does have a history of being buggy and unstable.. but they are getting better with the likes of Win2K and unless Linux developers concentrate on getting an install package that configures everything right the first time, the window of opportunity for taking over the Windows market share will be lost.
Multimedia support is not linux's weakness
by
clubin
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"...anything multimedia works poorly if at all."
I definitely have to disagree to this broad statement. Recently I've found myself rebooting into Linux just to play movies. Mplayer is the video player I've used any operating system.
The following quotes a developer on it's major strengths -- speed, synchronization, and support (It's accompanying dozens of codecs & builtin format support doesn't hurt either):
I didn't write any codecs, just some players. I spent a lot of time finding the best way to parse bad damaged input files (both MPEG and AVI) and to do perfect A-V sync with seeking ability. My player is rock solid playing damaged MPEG files (useful for some VCDs), and it plays bad AVI files which are unplayable with the famous windows media player. Even AVI files without index chunk are playable, and you can rebuild their indexes with the -idx option, thus enabling seeking! As you see, stability and quality are the most important things for me, but the speed is also amazing.
I can't get too excited...
by
Eric+Damron
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I first discovered the WINE project back in 1994. I was using the Slackware distro which I painfully downloaded and installed from boxes and boxes of floppies.
I was excited! Hardly anything ran on it but the idea of running Linux and being able to use all of the programs that were coming out on a relatively new OS called Windows really got my blood pumping. OK, I could wait a few months for it to come out of beta....
One year later.... OK Wine wasn't there yet but hey, Microcrap came out with Windows 95 which meant that the project got more complex and they were making progress weren't they?...
Two years later... It runs Mine Sweep.... I guess they're making progress...
Three years... Four years... Five... Six... Still in beta...
So soon 1.0 will be out. I guess that means that it won't be in beta any more.... But didn't I hear that more programs fail to run than run?
I'm not trying to blame anyone. Writing a compatibility layer for a closed source OS is no easy task even if the company who controls that OS plays fair. Microsoft doesn't play fair and it isn't a difficult task to "tweak" things here and there to keep WINE incompatible with the newest software.
With this approach we will always be playing catch up. There are many challenges ahead if we want Linux to become an OS that is widely supported by major software companies. The prevailing Linux community attitude that all software must be free is a major block. We are in a sort of catch 22. To be well supported by major software companies they need to be able to make money selling software to the Linux community. This means that 1. That community needs to be large enough to make it worth while and 2. That community needs to be WILLING TO PAY for the hard work that these companies do for us. Where the catch 22 comes in is that we don't have the "critical mass" needed and we never will have unless we have some way to entice people to start using Linux. I.E. More software that they want to use. No commercial support = not enough users to warrant commercial support.
On the surface it seems that WINE could be an answer but in the many years that I've been watching it, it hasn't delivered. Maybe the "WINElet" strategy will work... Oh, but then there's that Linux community "I WON't PAY" mentality to deal with, isn't there?
I'm ranting now so I'll go away...
--
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
I'm sure if Wine 1.0 had no difficulties running MS Office, IE+Outlook Express, Halflife CounterStrike and ICQ, a large chunk of dual booters would never have to go back to Windows.
#include
---- The geek shall inherit the Earth.
Of course it is. People just aren't going to give up the apps they already use.
Look at Mac OS X -- this UNIX-based OS, has built in a Mac OS 9 emulator, expresslly so people can run their old apps. Is it necessary for OS X itself to run? NO! But without such a emulator, Mac OS X would probably have not taken off as quicky as it is.
The situation is exactly the same with Wine and Windows, especially if one views Linux as an "upgrade" to Windows and wishes to target disgruntled Windows users.
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Exactly my feelings. This incesssant desire to chase the dragon's tail instead of forging past it and leave it behind continues to baffle me. As much as I hate the over used term "innovate" - where is the innovation in the Linux community?
You cannot win by following, only by leading.
satire, n: 1) witty language used to convey insults or scorn; 2) a form of humor lost on most slashdot moderators.
I felt the article dealt mainly with removing the need for dual-booting for more and more existing Linux users. Why would a Windows user go to the trouble of installing Linux+WINE just to get what they already have (working Win32 apps and games)?
I (and probably other Windows users) will switch when Linux outperforms Windows where it counts - when it does what they have come to expect a PC to do: when it installs without much hassle, when their hardware works immediately or with minimal driver hunting, when they are almost guaranteed a supply of games (remember the success of Commodore 64s?) and when the applications are simple to install and use, and are compatible with files made by colleagues and friends.
I love the idea of WINE. I love the idea of Linux. I've tried Linux. Unfortunately though, I still use Windows because near-enough isn't really good enough. WINE is handy, but a 'Killer App' needs to be something more than simply matching the competition - it has to be the one thing you don't get anywhere else.
"If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
I've heard all this "wine (or VM or wahtever) will convice users to switch from windows" before. For the last two or three years I've been hearing it. What I'd rather hear is "many new apps that kick the crap out of their windows counterparts in usability and compatability are coming out and people will have no logical choice but to swithch to Open Source". Linux is getting a bad rep by coming on too strong with this "I'm just as good as windows" crap. What we need is for linux or other open source alternatives to show that just because it isn't Microsoft dosen't mean it won't work "In the Real World". Too often, Linux looks good on paper, but when it comes right down to it, it still can't replace windows 100%. And I'm talking about the desktop, not the server here. In other words, I'm saying a bunch of shit that's been said time and time again, but no one seems to be listening.
Shift happens. Fire it up.
What everyone has to remember is that it's not just about the software, but also about the hardware. Linux is had to accept not just because office doesn't run on it, but also because my digital camara doesen't run on it. There's a lot to it. But I think that by far the most important thing linux users can do is stop being so anti-corporate. Linux will not succeed unless you people let that go.
MOM
...while Lindows, Wine, and Mozilla are all struggling to get to the vaunted 1.0 mark, two copies of Windows XP are being sold every second.
If that doesn't motivate you to contribute to these projects and help get them out the door, I don't know what will.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
You see, the real world works like this:
1) You're running Linux at your workplace.
2) You get mail from your valued client: "Please find our budget attached". There is an Excel file as an attachment.
3) You try opening the file with StarOffice. It won't open, however, since it contains complex graphs and macros (happens to me all the time).
4) Are you REALLY going to mail your client and ask him not to mail you Microsoft Office attachments???
Grow up. Most people HAVE to use Microsoft at workplace. Not everyone is a network/sys-admin.
The only reason I need Windows for (until I get a Mac) is music. There are excellent Windows/Mac apps with poor OSS alternatives yet. :(
So I tried various versions of Wine and VMWare.
Success was poor on Wine except with sample editors.
It was way better with VMWare except for one thing : latency. Although software was properly working, the sound card output had far too much latency. I guess the problem would be the same with any Windows emulator. The emulation part involves latency, especially when it comes to delivering signal to hardware.
So music makers will have to stick with a native Windows partition
{{.sig}}
As a journalist and writer, I can tell you.
It's because publishers and everyone else in the publishing chain work in Word. No, import/export filters are not good enough -- because it's not just about the text. For example, Word has "revision marks" -- a system of keeping track of editorial changes to a document, who made them, when they were made, etc. An editor can easily step through each edit in a document, look at both the pre- and post-edit versions of a sentence, and certify the one of two (or of three or of four) versions which works best in context.
This type of data is not preserved across imports/exports because StarOffice, Applix, KWord, etc. have no concept of such a feature, so they have no reason to try to import the revision data; they just discard all of it (including the entire stream of edits and ceritifications from editors, co-authors, etc) and import the document in original form. WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux *did* have such a feature and imported it more or less correctly... but WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux has been pulled from the market.
This is only one specific instance, but it is not an isolated one. There are many other Word features which are closely tied to file format and vice-versa, and if the entire publishing chain of your publication or press has tied its processes and equipment to Word, you're not going to change this by waltzing in one day and saying "I use Linux so we're all switching to OpenOffice, you'll have to find new ways of doing W, X, Y and we'll now have to hire someone to do Z because OpenOffice won't do it!"
The features just aren't there for most Linux applications (even GIMP, when compared to Photoshop or Corel Draw, comes up far short), and at the same time, the inertia of Windows-world applications is there, in spades. The same can easily be said for other MS Apps. MS Office is a great product. The only general-purpose competitor which comes close is from Corel, and has been discontinued for Linux users.
That is not to say that I think Wine is a useful product. I've tried it over and over and over again for half a decade and it has never worked for anything other than Solitaire. I don't see the point in releasing a 1.0 version when it still won't install Internet Explorer (any version), MS Office (any version) or Photoshop (any version). Why bother?
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Even if wine were 100% complete today, and every program worked on Linux that does on Windows, it would not make Linux a viable desktop OS. For one thing, all applications would still "feel" like Windows applications because they were not designed for Linux. Secondly, Linux still needs more work done in the user interface department if it expects to compete with Windows. Linux also needs commercial software ported over to Linux. There is a big difference in running win32 api's in Linux and running a ported application, for an example of this, look at Office X. Then and only then will Linux become a mainsteam desktop operating system.
Word has "revision marks" -- a system of keeping track of editorial changes to a document, who made them, when they were made, etc. An editor can easily step through each edit in a document, look at both the pre- and post-edit versions of a sentence, and certify the one of two (or of three or of four) versions which works best in context.
The people that give you this solution, gave you the problem at the first place. If Word was not using binary files and used text files like OpenOffice or latex, you would be able to do versioning with your faivorite versioning software. You wouldn't have to just wait for WordXP to support it.
HarKal
" WINE does not yet support applications that use Windows XP-only features such as .NET. White thinks that as XP-only applications start to appear, WINE will have to accommodate them, but he doesn't see this as a major issue yet, since those applications are few.
.
This is not a calling of doom for windows users that want to convert_because_a lot of windows users don't want to buy the newest version of windows, even future Service Packs. Especialy small buisnesses because they have to focus their resources on growth and survival. So since M$ has announced that it will stop supporting Win98X in 2003, this might be the window of oppertunity to switch them over to a more sensable alternative."
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
"I really think that with the advent of StarOffice 6.0, Mozilla 1.0, and Ximian Connector, combined with a great, well-refined WINE, we may finally see the beginnings of the Year of Linux on the Desktop(TM)"
while i seriously hope you are right, it isn't merely a question of "equaling" the features of MS Office or of the Windows Desktop (Bleech!), or bringing native Win32 code over to the LINUX platform (look at the history of Win emulators on the Mac), even if WINE is perfect, thunking is not free, performance wise, and Bill's Thing will be shipping on MILLIONS of new PCs every month for the foreseeable future
we in the community have to offer a significantly better user experience, with LINUX native apps
we come in strong on price, free support and passion
we come in weak on marketing, abilty to tie our LINUX products to a "Big Name" tech provider (like AOL) and we have no ability to make the OEM Mafia (Dell, Compaq, Gateway, HP, Sony, et al) dual boot enable any large portion of their new machines
also, "The Curse of *NIX", which i have been dealing in my work since before the widespread release of SRV, continues to haunt us....especially in the area of idiot proof desktop setup and functionality
X continues to be less than perfect and hard to get going really smoothly without SOME user experience and intervention
...and although I have great hopes that in the mid-term plus (18-36 months) the battle/conflict/thing between Gnome and KDE will result in KILLER desktop functionality, in the short term, the desktop setup continues to be a real weakness in selling LINUX to anyone not comfortable with at least a little diddling, twiddling and fiddling with their OS setup (and that is a LOT of people)
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
Until you can install Linux on 99% of the desktops and laptops out there and not have to spend a week getting your network card, sound, and video configured properly, Windows is still going to be the OS of choice for most people... even if you have a way to run all their favorite Win32 apps.
I've been a Unix admin for 12 years now and it still takes me some time getting Linux up and running... which honestly is the last thing I want to do when I get home from a day of solving Unix problems. You're not going to be able to tell Grandma that in order for her sound card to work properly, she'll have to recompile the kernel.
Yes, I'd like to see more people using Linux. It would be great to take some of the wind out of Microsoft's sails. Windows does have a history of being buggy and unstable.. but they are getting better with the likes of Win2K and unless Linux developers concentrate on getting an install package that configures everything right the first time, the window of opportunity for taking over the Windows market share will be lost.
"...anything multimedia works poorly if at all."
I definitely have to disagree to this broad statement. Recently I've found myself rebooting into Linux just to play movies. Mplayer is the video player I've used any operating system.
The following quotes a developer on it's major strengths -- speed, synchronization, and support (It's accompanying dozens of codecs & builtin format support doesn't hurt either):I first discovered the WINE project back in 1994. I was using the Slackware distro which I painfully downloaded and installed from boxes and boxes of floppies. I was excited! Hardly anything ran on it but the idea of running Linux and being able to use all of the programs that were coming out on a relatively new OS called Windows really got my blood pumping. OK, I could wait a few months for it to come out of beta.... One year later.... OK Wine wasn't there yet but hey, Microcrap came out with Windows 95 which meant that the project got more complex and they were making progress weren't they?... Two years later... It runs Mine Sweep.... I guess they're making progress... Three years... Four years... Five... Six... Still in beta... So soon 1.0 will be out. I guess that means that it won't be in beta any more.... But didn't I hear that more programs fail to run than run? I'm not trying to blame anyone. Writing a compatibility layer for a closed source OS is no easy task even if the company who controls that OS plays fair. Microsoft doesn't play fair and it isn't a difficult task to "tweak" things here and there to keep WINE incompatible with the newest software. With this approach we will always be playing catch up. There are many challenges ahead if we want Linux to become an OS that is widely supported by major software companies. The prevailing Linux community attitude that all software must be free is a major block. We are in a sort of catch 22. To be well supported by major software companies they need to be able to make money selling software to the Linux community. This means that 1. That community needs to be large enough to make it worth while and 2. That community needs to be WILLING TO PAY for the hard work that these companies do for us. Where the catch 22 comes in is that we don't have the "critical mass" needed and we never will have unless we have some way to entice people to start using Linux. I.E. More software that they want to use. No commercial support = not enough users to warrant commercial support. On the surface it seems that WINE could be an answer but in the many years that I've been watching it, it hasn't delivered. Maybe the "WINElet" strategy will work... Oh, but then there's that Linux community "I WON't PAY" mentality to deal with, isn't there? I'm ranting now so I'll go away...
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!