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*.
It's only symbolic.
They do a very good job of debunking it. Its Crap. Don't believe evrything you read.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Hopefully this isn't a result of the supposed 'leaked' code awhile back. If it was, and Microsoft finds out, it could set them back twice as far as they've come.
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
it reads kind of like spam, using a lot of strange buzzwords ("windows environment subsystem"??) and a bizarre, apocryphal account of linux and WINE.
realistically, they'll probably just charge so much for it that it dilutes the linux TCO advantage.
All jokes aside, BSODs are very very few and far between (certainly on the *nix scale) since 2k/XP was released. Before 2k/XP most people blammed microsoft when in reality it was buggy drivers. Now with the new driver model these instances of drivers crashing the kernel are rather rare. When a company claims to have found a "bug" which was a relativly well-known design decision they have lost most all credibility. This is either a pump-and-dump scheme, vaporware or an instance of code stealing.
will enable all major Microsoft Windows applications to run
Yeah, but who decides what the major applications are?
Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
Comments on the article website seem to suggest that this *may* be a re-engineer of the Win32 api based on the stolen win2k codebase.
The phillipines is not known for its strict adherence to interlectual properties laws.
Actually, would this even be illegal?
If the codebase was stolen in the US, looked at in the phillipines and a program written based on that looking, would the program be legal in the US or not?
And what about elsewhere in the world?
Official GOD FAQ.
Hello,
this announcement reminds me of waht Lindows told us back then. I mean 100% Windows compatibility and such. The linked article seems quite ridiculous to me.
I mean "while all those projects emulating windows inherit the windows specific problems like instability, out new implementation does not contain those, thus is stabler then windows".
This is just another WINE-ripoff combined with good PR. Don't believe a thing!
Philip
"David is currently 25% completed with the Systems Design Phase of development."
... high on hyperbole with little to no substance.
If this works, great. Going through there website doesn't fill me with any confidence.
Very reminiscint of Infinium Labs [www.infiniumlabs.com]
One to watch, yes; but really, don't hold your breath.
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.
Apparently, you don't even need to install it! What will they think of next...
If this is a silver bullet app, then why does it only work on 'major' apps???
Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose.
I am not sure that MS would want to do anything about this. They aren't going to stop Linux, maybe slow it down , but not stop it, and I think they are smart enough to know that. If David actually passes puberty without dying, it would give MS another platform to sell their products on. Secondly it would give publishers little reason to spend time porting their code to Linux when they on't need to. That in itself might play well into MS's hand. This could be a double edged sword.
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
...my investment money?
I mean with a page like this I can trust them right?
You know, they DO have place holders. I guess it's better than all the fake links they have around the site.
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*
It's another closed-source implementation of the WinAPI by a company I dont trust, only this one is much smaller, and with less resources.
That's AWESOME!
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.
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?
If the codebase was stolen in the US, looked at in the phillipines and a program written based on that looking, would the program be legal in the US or not?
Well, for one, looking at a stolen codebase is not in itself illegal. Copying it is, so whoever gave them a copy has committed a crime. But that's beside the point.
The question is: Is the program itself a derivative work?
By looking at the codebase, it does make it more difficult to claim this, but it doesn't automatically make it a derivative work either. In the same way as reading a book and then writing your own on the same issue does not automatically make it plagiarized.
Ok, so this issue notwithstanding, "legal in the US" is a strange term. Legal how?
Redistribution?
If it is an illegal derivative work, then they have no right to distribute it, and thus noone can have the right to redistribute it either. Redistribution is illegal.
To own and use?
Well, with the possible exception of breaking a Microsoft EULA (the enforcability of which is questionable), the mere possession of a plagiarized work is NOT illegal.
(Although a cunning lawyer may argument that using it could be, since by running a program you are indeed copying it (to memory). But I doubt that'll fly in the real world.)
As for the USA:s DMCA laws. This is clearly not a copyright-circumvention device. None of that applies here.
IANALBITSCH
(I am not a lawyer, but I've taken some courses, haha.)
If I understand what I'm reading correctly, they're in essence taking advantage of how NT/XP is designed.
As I have learned it, the NT Kernel is separate from the Win32 API. The Win32 system makes calls into the kernel to get system things done (like disk and screen I/O), but tracks all the Win32 stuff itself (like windows and message queues). Win32 is, in essence, just a 'personality' running on the NT core. Someone (Microsoft themselves, I think) is doing another personality module for the NT kernel that will let it run Unixy stuff too, at the same time as the Win32 stuff.
What WINE is doing, which is incredibly difficult, is rewriting the entire Win32 API so that existing programs will run under Unix. This has taken them many, many years, and it's fairly good now, but it's far from a complete solution, largely because it's so difficult.
It sounds like the David project will probably run the *existing* Win32 API (which is hard to replace), and write a new set of kernel routines to emulate the NT kernel. AFAIK, most of the work on NT is at the Win32 level, the kernel itself doesn't get that much work, because it's really solid and really stable. So they're not chasing a moving target in quite the same way.
Presumably, the separation between the Win32 personality and the NT kernel is drawn clearly enough that they can replace the kernel without breaking things too badly. At least, that would appear to be how they're thinking about it.
This would probably mean you'd need to install Windows under Linux, in order to get a proper Win32 personality. The net effect would be very much like the way that OS/2 used to run Windows 3.1. (remember 'a better Windows than Windows'? It was!)
I believe this could work. It would not, however, remove the need to own a copy of Windows, so its use would be more for the pragmatists ('we want it to work') than the idealists ('we want it to be free').
This would dissasemble the x86 windows binaries, rewriting any low level OS library and hardware access code, emitting Linux compatible executable binaries. This could be done both Ahead Of Time, before execution, and Just In Time, during execution. Caching the resulting rewrite on disk would speed up execution a lot.
A neat trick if possible. However Soft Labs would have to reverse engineer a hell of a lot of Microsoft's OS to manage it.
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.
If Wine/David becomes so good that a windows program runs *as well* on Linux(under wine) as it does on windows, Linux may suffer the same fate as OS/2. Remember WIN/OS2? The development community saw this functionality as an excuse to write their apps. to windows (why worry about OS/2 when they have WIN/OS2?) Before you knew it, nobody was writing OS/2 apps..... and OS/2 cratered.
Wine has been evolving steadily.
The Wine developers have succeeded in modularizing just about every aspect of their Windows API to the point where a whole other operating system (ReactOS) can use it!
Not to mention that there has also been some cross-pollination of Wine with Cygwin.
THOSE are the solutions to bet on, and not simply because they're older and more established but because they are open-source and have been audited by thousands, with some of the best minds on the planet on top of it!
How is ONE company going to match that without the same number of developers and expertise?
I remain sceptical, but I do wish them luck.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
Sorry, but gimp is not even CLOSE to a replacement for photoshop. Is it a nice image editor? Sure. But there's no way it can compete with PS at this time.
That is the *one* thing that is keeping me from being Windows free at this point. I've found open source replacements for everything else I use and look forward to gimp being able to do the things I need to do in PS so I can make the switch. I'm rooting for it.
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 webpage isn't brokem it's just that they are running it on IIS under their emulation and there are still a few bugs to work out.... ...yeah, that's it...
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Linux really needs a killer usability app. Something like a personal google that would allow you to recollect ANY information you've ever viewed in your browser - complex search features that don't look complex. Instead of freaking out over google's 1GB email system, port that search functionality to the linux desktop and make it possible to do all the same stuff WITHOUT having to store your email on google's farm. Instead of trying to port games and catch up on drivers for fancy graphics cards, court a hardware maker and invest some GPL lovin' into a graphics engine. Or court IBM and get them to migrate even more of that functionality to the CPU cores - I'm sure Apple would love that too.
There's so many ways linux is this close to outdistancing Windows, but none of them are complete enough to be of use to joe average. And if WINE/David/whatever would allow windows apps to be used on linux AND linux has capabilities that windows doesn't - and people can see and feel those differences themselves - then this is a good thing. So long as linux is playing catch-up, 'tho, this is nothing but one more tool for MS to point at and say "See? We set the standards! Why would you look anywhere else?"
Your own citation of dictionary.com on your "complete rant" disagrees with you. "The low-level software which handles the interface to peripheral hardware, schedules tasks, allocates storage, and presents a default interface to the user when no application program is running
/ The foundation software of a machine; that which schedules tasks, allocates storage, and presents a default interface to the user between applications"
Default interface to the user? Sounds like a shell to me.
So there you go -- operating system = kernel + shell. (One could argue for a bootloader as well)
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence was false.
Therefore, I propose this naming scheme: the GNU stuff will be called "GNU", the kernel will be called "Linux" or "the Linux kernel", and the OS will be called "insert distro name here". RMS's foo/bar naming system gets too complicated if you really try for accuracy, and people will make fun of you if you use it, so perhaps we can appease him by throwing random links to the GNU project in our discussions of what OS we're running.
So there you go -- operating system = kernel + shell. (One could argue for a bootloader as well)
So you're telling me I have to start calling my OS Korn/Linux? (At least I'm not stuck running Csh/Linux. That OS sucks.)
Hey... MY name is David, and I don't appreciate it being associated with some windows crap. Can I sue them for using my intellectual property?
If they wanted to name it after someone, they should have called it 'Melinda'... I'm sure that would have bothered Bill in a way he couldn't legally do anything about (his wife's name).
I don't see anything on SpecOpsLabs site that talks about the fact that WINE falls under the LGPL. Rather they state, "Instead of simply using the WINE project as our basis, David has incorporated into its architecture the best features of all the windows compatibility projects such as WINE, WABI, TWIN and the others. David therefore is not a reinvention of the wheel. Rather, it takes the best of breed pieces from previous attempts to simulate the Windows Subsystem, and integrate it into a single product."
To the extent that this "incorporation" consists of copying over big blocks of code from WINE, this might raise some intricate legal issues. According to WineHQ, the copyright in WINE is held by the "WINE Project Authors," who now number over 600 people. I'm not sure exactly how such a large, disparate group of developers will be able to defend their copyright if it comes to that. Perhaps they should consider transferring copyright to the FSF, or setting up some nonprofit corporate entity to hold the rights?