Slashdot Mirror
"Missing Link" In Windows Emulation Unveiled?
ben_ writes "According to this article on inq7.net, a Philippines company called SpecOps has revealed their Project David, a middleware layer that solves the problem Wine has been working at for years and will "enable all major Microsoft Windows applications to run on the free and open source Linux OS".
Further (and more sceptical) analysis at Linux Electrons." I'm with Linux Electrons on this; as nice as it sounds, the information about David comes via Press Release which as we all know are founts of dependability *cough*.
There is an interesting thread on wine-devel about this, basically we just don't know what its going on about:
4 /0578.html
http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-devel/2004/0
stuff
I hate to reply to myself.. but according to their development plan http://www.specopslabs.com/david_development.htm#d evelopment they're nowhere near finished.
"Phase 4
Engineering and
Development
" is at 0% for example..
and these two phases are complete:
The purpose of Phase One was to document a theoretical model of David. The theoretical model is primarily a mathematical flow chart description of how David and its component parts operate, accompanied by an artist's concept sketch.
Certified -
100% Completed
The purpose of Phase Two was to build a business case out of the theoretical model. The business and system requirements are analyzed and defined. The deliverable was an architectural framework that documents what David will do, including the functional requirements of each software component.
"
so yippiayee, they've so far calculated that there is a business need for this 'holy grail' and they somewhat know where it would sit at.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I remember a german compan called Omega that was going to do the same with the MacOS. Bold claims that ended up being vapor. Here is a websie with some info on COS.
Zoid.com
Full text, without comments:
SpecOpS Labs is developing a Systems Level product called David . The primary purpose of David is to
provide a platform, which will serve as a viable alternative to the MS Windows Operating System.
Our first release of David, version 1.0, will be a Middleware program that will sit on top of the free and
open-source Linux operating system, and enable it to seamlessly run most Windows applications. Working in the
background, David will enable users to run their favorite programs with the look-and-feel they are familiar with.
*COMMENTED OUT*
The next generation will, in effect, incorporate the operating system into the web browser, virtually eliminating
the need for an operating system eventually, except to boot the computer and launch the browser.
*END COMMENTED OUT*
David will be configured to be made available for installation either through the internet or from a compact disk
or DVD. It may either be pre-installed by OEMs, or may be easily installed by consumers themselves in plug-and-play
fashion.
*COMMENTED OUT*
David will be distributed to consumers in five releases. See the Information Memorandum within the Investor
Relations section for detailed information on each scheduled release. The David V 1.0 architectural framework has
been validated, prototyped, and copyrighted and has entered the full design and development stage.
*END COMMENTED OUT*
Running Windows Applications on Linux. Most of the popular software applications such as Word,
Excel, Quicken and PageMaker are designed to run exclusively on the Windows OS;
that is, Windows applications cannot natively run on the Linux operating system.
However there are three alternative methods of running Windows applications on
the Linux OS. These three methods include:
*COMMENTED OUT*
the David Technology
Link describes the simulation of the Windows Environment
Subsystem. For a detailed explanation of the other 3 methods,
click on the Our Market
- Competitors section of this website.
*END COMMENTED OUT*
did you check the homepage of project DAVID? especially the development part where they say they're at 0% of dev / engineering.
That is enough basis to say it's crap, since it's nonexistent.
did lindows pull off the 100% magical windows emulation? no it didn't. this system has just as much credibility.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Windows crashing itself instead of corrupting memory or something was a big step for Microsoft. I have a feeling they didn't want to go that way because Windows crashed enough already, but frankly I go days in between unintended reboots on my windows XP system. (Unless Microsoft issues a patch...)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Actually, would this even be illegal?
Yes.
For a start the phillipines are a signatory of the Berne convention and as such have to abide by it's terms.
Basically, they have to abide by international copyright laws.
I was talking about OSnews story last week, it seems they also picked up this article. Anyways their discussion was more mature than the average slashdot one so head on over and read theirs here.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Its not, it was a design decision to give people the speed the demanded from graphics hacks. It was a strategic move to get people into the NT world. Now people are in the NT world and msft is moving to shut down that flaw now that hardware and proc speed is fast enough to handle the performance hit.
Just for reference, a bad driver in the linux kernel can do the same thing, try running a S3 Savage driver in linux, you'll get all sorts of fireworks.
The writer is a Filipino. English isn't a second language to him/her, but the style of English is definitely Filipino English (such as we have Australian English, American English, etc.). I'm married to a Filipina, I've been there, they have no problems with the language. The site means what it says.
We've been discussing this on the Philippine LUG list for a week now; consensus is that it's BS.
Do you have ESP?
The irony (in your statement) is that Windows versions based on NT are operating systems in their own right (Although 9X based versions are GUIs on top of DOS), but Linux is not.
Linux is a kernel. A distro is an operating system.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
There WAS (is?) a link and details on the project plan. A little Google cache searching shows this. The direct link to http://www.specopslabs.com/david_development.htm still works, though it's not available from the home page (AFAICT).
Either way, the timeline breaks down like this (summary);
Phase 1 - 100% - Document theoretical model.
Phase 2 - 100% - Build business case.
Phase 3 - 10% - Produce architecture roadmap.
Phase 4 - 0% - Implement system design.
Phase 5 - 0% - Deployment and maintenance/updates.
This is a reasonable breakdown, though if Phase 4 is the coding stage, they have a boatload of work to do. Since most projects fail let alone products (more hostile environment), I would not be worried if I were Codeweavers, EMC (VMWare), ... let alone Microsoft.
Looks like they are attempting to get investment capital.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Bzzzt. Wrong.
The (academic) definition of "operating system" is "interface to the hardware".
"kernel" in unix terms is synonymous with "operating system".
"distro" is "operating environment".
If you *really* want a complete rant on this, I have written one, sad individual that I am.
In future, please refer to a recognised textbook (suggestions in the link above) before jumping in.
The problem is, this theory already has flown in "the real world." Check out MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511 (9th Cir. 1993). I happen to think it's a horrendous decision, but it's binding in the 9th Circuit and would probably be pretty persuasive in other circuits if they were looking at this issue since Congress' response to the decision (17 U.S.C. Section 117) only addresses lawfully obtained copies.
IANALBITSCH
Am I the only one who read this as "I ANAL BITCH"?
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
The only true OSes from Microsoft are those based on Windows NT, including Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
Huh? DOS is also a "true" OS from Microsoft.
This assertion is an untruthitude.
First of all, lets define an operating system (roughly, for the sake of argument): The operating system is software used to allow applications a standardized method for using system resources.
In DOS, applications would make calls to interrupt 0x21 to access system resources like files and memory.
If Windows 9X were a GUI that used DOS as it's operating system, then it would use interrupt 0x21 for all of its I/O.
Windows 9X, upon initialization, replaces the context of DOS with it's own. It switches the processor to 386 Protected mode and installs its own set of hardware, filesystem, network, and other drivers. It replaces the int 0x21 interface with its own. Applications use Windows 9X for access to system resources (ram, files, network, etc.) Also, this emulation is miserably slow.
Windows 9X does have code to allow Windows 9X to use DOS drivers (The 16bit drivers, if you will.) However, This is done by creating a virtual 8086 context, and making calls to int 0x21. This, however, is not recommended and is provided for backwards compatability. (Think of it as Windows 9X emulating DOS to allow the drivers to operate.)
Also, Windows 9X will return the computer to the DOS context that it replaced when it "quits". However, that context is not used (with the exception of the above paragraph) for the normal operation of the computer.
Windows 9X has its own kernel, its own drivers, and is very much a complete, functional operating system. Yes, it may be bug ridden and broken, however, it is a real operating system.
Honestly, a more accurate statement. would be that DOS is a bootloader for Windows 9X.
fnord.