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*.

21 of 458 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's only symbolic.

    1. Re:Yeah, but... by Negatyfus · · Score: 5, Funny
      The article has one thing right, though:
      Unlike Windows, Linux is an operating system
    2. Re:Yeah, but... by megabeck42 · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.
  2. Leaked code by SkiddyRowe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Not Legit by shaunbaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Not Legit by pheede · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, yeah.

      Not much you can do about buggy code running in priviledged mode no matter what operating system you're running.

  4. Stolen code base by VC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:Stolen code base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

  5. Reminds me of Lindows by the_pilif · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  6. Vapourware? by Jackdaw+Rookery · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "David is currently 25% completed with the Systems Design Phase of development."

    If this works, great. Going through there website doesn't fill me with any confidence.

    Very reminiscint of Infinium Labs [www.infiniumlabs.com] ... high on hyperbole with little to no substance.

    One to watch, yes; but really, don't hold your breath.

  7. It's magical! by MagicM · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There is no need for additional memory and disk storage to execute and store the middleware code

    Apparently, you don't even need to install it! What will they think of next...
  8. Silver Bullet by akaina · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  9. Re:Wonder what MS will do to quash this? by Blitzenn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. Go to the link and check the page source by tetrode · · Score: 5, Informative
    Some information is hidden in

    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:

    • Porting: which requires recompiling the application source code to run on Linux;
    • PC Emulation: commonly misunderstood as Windows Emulation;

    • Re implementation of the Windows Environment Subsystem

      *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*

  11. Re:the press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Haven't you seen the Microsoft ads? There is no TCO advantage in linux.

  12. possibly crap, but might work... by Malor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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').

  13. A Window-binary to Linux-binary Re-complier? by NZheretic · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I wonder if Specops' "David" is a recompiler?

    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.

  14. Re:Read the OSNews article on david by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "they're at 0% of dev / engineering."

    Well... you have to give it to them... they still don't have any bugs

  15. Re:Wonder what MS will do to quash this? by tsmithnj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  16. Re:Yeah, but... (I'll bite) by irw · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  17. Re:is the web page broken or am I retard? by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.