Slashdot Mirror
Win4Lin 5.0 Reviewed
uninet writes "About a month ago, NeTraverse contacted OfB Labs with an early release copy of Win4Lin 5.0, the follow-up to the already impressive Win4Lin 4.0 released in May 2002. Win4Lin, for those not familiar with it, offers near-native (or better) speed "virtualization" of a Windows box so that one can run Windows 9x (95/98/Me) inside GNU/Linux."
Win4Lin 4.0 has been renamed to Win4Lin 5.0 Full-Speed!!!!
I'm willing to pay for one of these windows-emulation packages when they finally get some 3D going, which is why I _really_ want Windows at this point. What's stopping them from doing this?
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
why would I want to run the any of the 9x-based Windows? 95 is pretty aweful (compared to what is available now); both 98 and Me have a pretty bloated feel. Unfortunately, the article does not seem to mention any of the new Windows, XP and 2K, which are arguably the best and therefore most desireable. Does anyone know if 2000/XP can be run?
How about running Linux on Windows? Then maybe people would be more inclined to test the waters of the Linux world. Think of it as a way to migrate users off of the M$ titty.
Life is not for the lazy.
It looks like one of the most important new features is Winsock 2 support.
Check out Transgaming. They support a variety of DirectX games, including some 3d games iirc. They do this through extending wine to support DirectX. What I don't know is if they feed changes back into the mainline Wine. I do know that CodeWeavers do, but they don't support DirectX...
On the other hand, the age old question is that if Windows emulation works SO well on Linux, then will there ever be a commercial market for native Linux apps? I'd rather see native ports of these various apps/games, and I hope emulation is simply a stopgap...
It kills VMWare speed-wise. Boots up in about 15s on my old P-3 800MHz box.
Unfortunately, there's a lot of things people need Windows (or other specific operating systems) for.
There's no Linux equivalent to Microsoft Money, for example -- not something that can connect to my bank automatically and get statements and process transfers without having to import and export qif files. Same with Microsoft Streets&Trips -- there's simply no equivalent.
I can't connect a Linux box to my work's VPN either -- there's no working client.
And if I managed to do so, what would I use to connect to the Exchange server to get my emails and appointments?
Then there is, as the previous poster stated, the issue of games. Linux games are few and far between, especially 3D games.
Oh, and watching DVDs? (Legally, that is)
That said, there's similar cases where Unix-like systems can offer what Windows can't. cygwin helps, sure, but that's just like running a Windows emulator under Linux.
The real problem I see with the product is that Windows 9x isn't going to be supported for much longer, and new software more and more often require an NT5+ based OS (Windows 2000/XP/2003).
In which case Windows 9x compatibility won't help too much...
Regards,
--
*Art
Seems like having actual memory management code and a file system was sufficient to speed up a P133 from 'unacceptably slow" to "pretty quick".
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
On a related note, how come there are no Linux emulators for Windows? Is it because Windows has better alternatives to any Linux program, or is there some sort of GPL patent issue?
You can run linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux in vmware in windows in vmware in linux.
And from what I understand, you can do this in windows too.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Well, when I used Win4Lin (up to 3.0) it was fairly fast and efficient. The one concern was that it modified the kernel and that it was necessary to run this through a modified kernel in order to have access to your Win4Lin sessioms.
;)
It performs well. I used it to have access to GUI tools on my Linux box then so that I could administer a DB on the Linux box through Samba (same PC w/GUI interface then on Windows). Windows acted like a different host on the machine and it worked flawlessly for me but, as always, YMMV.
It's a lot faster than VMWare, but only supports 98 and ME, whereas VMWare supports all of that and 2000, XP Professional.
For those who want that sort of thing, it can also fool your users into thinking they are running Windows through their terminal server sort of applications. No games - No 3D - No DistractiveX though. If you want that, you should dual-boot or better yet - buy Linux games and stop buying Win based stuff.
Of course, games are what Windows was made for anyway - it doesn't really have the security needed to be taken as a serious business platform by anyone who really has to support their stuff. They would much rather have something stable and reliable that doesn't fall over quite so easily.
Just an honest opinion and my two centavos.
All Ad hominem replies happily ignored as the sender shall be deemed to lack the faculties to comprehend the equation.
What coders who copy Windows? You do realize that to install Win4Lin, you need to already own a Win9X CD. You go through the entire Windows installation process, including loading the Windows CD and typing in a valid product ID code. An entire standard Win9X installation is created on your PC, it just happens to live in a Linux file system.
Funny that you bring up SCO. Win4Lin is based on a DOS-virtualization technology called "merge" that SCO has also used. Here is a summary I found of its very convoluted history. (Google cache; real page is broken.)
Uh... hate to break it to you, but game developers aren't going to release their games for Linux regardless. The market is just too small. Every developer who has released anything for Linux has done so for one of two reasons: 1) to provide a dedicated server package only, since Linux makes an excellent server platform and you don't have to deal with graphics in a dedicated server, 2) Because they want to.
It makes absolutely no financial sense to release a game for Linux -- the market is too small, the market you're going after (individuals running Linux as opposed to corporations) is too hostile to commercial development, and the graphics support is generally completely different from what you have available in Windows (yeah, it's the same if you write for OpenGL, but there's a helluva lot more support for writing DirectX).
Yes, I run Linux. I also run Windows. Linux makes for an excellent server, an incredible development platform, and it's just fine for web surfing, but I still wouldn't recommend it as a desktop replacement to the average user, nor as a gaming box. Windows is a mediocre server, fine for web surfing, a decent development platform (obviously better than Linux if you're developing for Windows exclusively, but I'm a Unix coder so I'm biased), and a great gaming platform. Use the platforms where they perform well... if you want to use any single platform for all tasks, well, you're going to have gnashing of teeth whenever you hit the weak spots.
The obvious question is, how do you solve those weak spots, and I don't have a really good answer. But as far as gaming goes, I do suspect the answer will be improve Windows emulation, not try and woo developers over to Linux. It's a harsh reality.
Pros:
VERY fast. About 95% of the speed of a real Windows installation. In some cases faster, such as startup/shutdown, both of which are near-instant.
VERY easy to install. Run the graphical installer, it downloads the neccesary kernel patch (needed to make Windows think its running on top of DOS instead of Linux), installs everything. Reboot, and you're done.
VERY compatible. I've yet to find a program that runs on a normal WinME box that won't run on Win4Lin WinME.
Good networking support. You can have your Win4Lin install connect to your LAN (via a virtual NIC).
Cons:
Programs seemed to crash more often in Win4Lin than in actual Windows. This may be fixed in 5.0.
Windows doesn't get to use a lot of your hardware. Mouse, keyboard, CD-ROM, sound (thru your linux drivers), printers (thru your linux drivers) and serial ports are accessible. Almost anything else (scanners, other USB toys, etc) are not. May be improved in 5.0.
Clipboard isn't consistent between Linux and Windows. May be fixed in 5.0.
No 3D, and only limited DirectDraw. Not much can be done about this.
Yeah, so it's not perfect, but it definitely beat the hell out of VMware or any other similar programs.
I am astounded at the backlash the readers of ./ have vented at Netraverse. You people have never tried the product, but are willing to make unfounded claims about its speed and ability. I have used Win4Lin since the release of version 4, and I can tell you why you would use it, how it runs, and why it is cool:
I use it to encode videos in DivX format. DivX.com is the partner with one of my clients, and they do not have a encoding app for my mac, and the linux version is not as flexible (CLI) as the windows codec. So I run Adobe Premiere, Virtual Dub, and DivX 5.0.2 from within Linux! Prior to Win4Lin I had to reboot my machine to get into win2k for encoding. This has saved me so much time and frustration it is amazing. Also, I can simply back up the windows related directories (which are installed in my home folder on linux) and then I never have to install windows again, I can just install Win4Lin and restore the directories complete with programs, file associations, and serial numbers!
Win4Lin is fast! I noticed an incredible speed difference with windows 98 on a PIII 533 with 512 MB RAM! The OS booted in seconds even with Linux running with all of the bells and whistles of KDE (most of them anyways). Windows 98 is much, much snapier. And if it crashes (win98), I can easily kill the process and restart it in seconds! No rebooting, no headaches.
Finally, if you, as a geek, can not see the inherent coolness of running a virtual OS at higher than native speeds from within Linux, then you are no geek of mine... I have messed with WINE for years, hours of frustration to get the most basic apps working... but for a nominal fee (sometimes closed source is okay) I can get more work done, spend less time in windows, save my uptime, and forget about rebooting headaches! Have you ever tried to emulate win98 with VirtualPC on a mac?!? If you need windows, and your apps require speed, Win4Lin is the way to go. Period.
Ideally, Win4Lin would be open source, but these people have coded an incredible piece of software which was, to me, well worth the licensing fee! I don't need the true bloat of win2k or XP (nor do I need the EULA headaches!) all I need is a few win32 apps (for encoding video) and win4lin pulls this off for me with relative ease. No you can't play games, but shouldn't you be working anyways? Honestly, the waste of doing this with win2k or XP is obvious. If you just need the apps, you usually won't need all of the services and overhead that come with the latest versions of windows. Win98 runs most programs (albeit somewhat unstable) very quickly, it is solid in the sense that Linux isn't going to be brought down with it, it boots like a madman, and it does just about everything I need.
Quit being cheap, buy a copy and try it out. The support is very responsive, they have an active mailing list, and it actually does what the company claims. A successful Linux only vendor who provides support, upgrades, and a useful product. This is a model for other vendors regardless of OS!
Almost all (Windows) 3D nowadays is either DirectX or OpenGL. I'll ignore the former for a moment and stick to OpenGL. How hard can it be to 'emulate' a glVertex3f call? Ok, I'm not saying it is trivial, but it must be a lot easier than the average Win32 API call. I mean, the function already exists anywhere you have OpenGL.
Back to DirectX or rather Direct3D... although this uses COM interfaces, the functions available are pretty similar to those in OpenGL. Now there will be a number of 'slow' functions (loading a large texture), but these will always be slow. A little more overhead won't make a huge difference. There are only a few functions (vertex, texture coordinates, normals etc) which get called really often. It is here that optimization efforts should be directed. Not easy, but should be easier than the entire Win API.
I will admit to ignoring the problems of X being a network protocol rather than a graphics one. I suspect that to reach optimal frame rates you wouldn't want to run DirextX games in an X window on another terminal over the network. But unix has always done well at allowing multiple 'terminals', so do it that way.
You've got that all wrong! SCO licenses the technology from NetTraverse, not vice versa. It doesn't use any SCO code and you do them a disservice for claiming otherwise.
Sorry for shouting, but this is getting crazy! People are slamming NeTraverse for using SCO technology and are even calling to boycott NeTraverse. That is simply untrue. Below is a quote from Jim Curtin, the CEO of NeTraverse: "Win4Lin is not built on technology licensed from SCO. SCO licenses technology from NeTraverse as an OEM and packages the technology on their UNIX platforms under our name "Merge". We do not license anything from SCO (nor do we need to)." People should check their facts before posting accusations and calls to boycott. They (the posters) have done NeTraverse and the Slashdot community a grave diservice. Instead of boycotting Win4Lin, maybe the posters should go out and by a copy to make amends for the mis-information they've spread and the harm they've done. Dcnjoe60 NOTE: I have no affiliation, whatsoever with NeTraverse, Win4Lin, Jim Curtin or SCO. I just think the record should be set straight on this one issue.
Folks,
;-)
Win4Lin is not built on technology licensed from SCO. SCO licenses technology from NeTraverse as an OEM and packages the technology on their UNIX platforms under our name "Merge". We do not license anything from SCO (nor do we need to). From time to time we have used wording on our web site and in our literature that is accurate but perhaps on a quick read might be misconstrued. The comment "Win4Lin Terminal Server 2.0 is derived from proven technologies developed for Unix® based operating systems over the last 15 years, most notably those of SCO® (Caldera®), under the product name of Merge(tm)" is meant to convey that our technology has been in use on SCO variants of UNIX for some time - not that it is based on SCO technology. SCO Merge (or Sun Merge, or whatever Merge) is our product.
Rather than try and clarify the language on our web site, we will be taking it off
I hope this clears up the misinformation.
Jim Curtin
CEO NeTraverse