Slashdot Mirror


Jeremy White's Wine Answers

This almost turned into a "State of the Wine Project" discussion, but that's where your highest-moderated questions led, and Jeremy responded with his usual wit, wisdom, and candor. 1) Moving Target - by andrew_j_w

Do you ever get disheartened when Microsoft announces a new API, as that means you've suddenly got a whole load of new code to replicate? DirectX would seem to be a prime example of this. How do you see .Net/Mono in relation to Wine? Do you think they will ever become the prime method of running Windows applications under *nix?


Jeremy:

We really don't care what APIs Microsoft publishes - the only thing that matters to us is what APIs are used by the applications we want to support. In fact, Wine only implements about half of the Windows APIs. Now some (like my wife) might argue that's because we're just lazy, but the truth is that over half of the Windows APIs have never been used!

So we certainly do have a moving target, but it's a target that moves at a relatively slow pace. We'll begin to feel some serious pain when applications are released as 'Longhorn only', particularly if those applications are dependent on some form of DRM or on some technology that is locked up by patents.

But luckily for us ISVs move much more slowly than Microsoft, so we should have plenty of time to keep up.

In fact, we get more pain from Linux distributions, who work at break neck speed to break Wine.

2) Educational Software - by north.coaster

It seems like most of the effort so far has been to get office productivity software (ie. Microsoft Office) to work on Linux. However, there is a market for low cost home computers that Linix could help to fill if the educational software that kids use (such as the Reader Rabbit series) could run on Linux. Why is this potential market being ignored?

Jeremy:

Yes! I would dearly love to support schools and the use of Linux. Especially when you consider LTSP, Linux is just such a great fit for the educational environment.

Unfortunately, the reality of Wine and economics makes this hard. See, we do our best when we can focus in on a small number of applications (e.g. Microsoft Office) for which a lot of people are willing and able to pay money. Schools, unfortunately, have the reverse situation - they need support for tons and tons of applications, and they have no money .

Now the very first thing I'm going to do when I win the lottery is go buy a stack of kids games and pay some Wine hackers to get them to work (seriously; you can ask my co workers, they're sick of me talking about this pet project). Unfortunately, the last lottery ticket I bought was a bust.

But I am really encouraged in a variety of ways. First, we always hope that our paying customers will help us to do enough 'collateral damage' that more than just the applications we focus on will work; that seems to be really happening now. Second, there is a real growth in the games/DirectX support in the Wine project. There is a great group of games hackers on the Wine project - volunteers all - and their work is really helping Wine to run a lot of games (the fact that Half-Life now works in CrossOver has somehow made the proportion of QA time to development time go up around here *grin*).

Finally, we are starting to get some support for educational software; we have a very meaningful pledge for Acclerated Reader on our compatibility center (http://c4.codeweavers.com). We hope to get to that soon, and we're told that will help unblock a lot of educational organizations.

3) Isn't this effort endangered by software patents? - by rben

If the EU really does pass the software patent law under consideration and the U.S. adopts that treaty that Bush is pushing, won't MS just be able to sue any compatibility products out of business?


Jeremy:

Yes, I think that all xGPL software is seriously threatened by patents.

Wine, I think, is safer than a project like Mono, in large part because Microsoft has only really started an aggressive patent process recently. I am not aware of any patent that the Wine project infringes upon, and no such infringement has been brought to our attention in the 10 years of the projects history.

That doesn't mean that the patent laws cannot be used as a club against Free Software projects, particulary when you realize that volunteer projects and smaller companies like CodeWeavers generally cannot afford to even fight for a dismissal of a ridiculous claim.

With that said, I think that there is a large number of very determined people in our community, myself included, that will fight strenously to see that any such abuse of the patent system will be challenged.

Further, Microsoft making the choice to use patents as an offensive weapon will be a clear sign that they are becoming desperate. It is fairly rare for a large company to use patents offensively against a smaller entity; it is generally frowned upon by the courts, and would also play very poorly in PR circles.

So, yes, it's a worry, but there will be reasons to rejoice should Microsoft try to wield that hammer.

4) LGPL Licensing - by Stealth Dave

How has the switch to LGPL affected contributions to the project, both positively and negatively? When the switch happened, there was a lot of noise from groups like Transgaming who needed to license proprietary technology from third parties, and the formation of the ReWind project. Has there been a noticable effect on contributions to WINE from outside groups as result of the licensing change?


Jeremy:

Okay, I'm biased on this one. I am a strong advocate of the LGPL.

However, I think the effect has been extremely positive. For example, here is the historic count of lines of code added to Wine each year:

2003: +247,471
2002: +159,393
2001: +104,641
2000: +119,796
1999: +164,910
1998: +132,235
1997: +48,566
1996: +56,748
1995: +19,345
1994: +42,746
1993: +36,487

1998/1999 was when Corel's involvement in Wine was at its highest (and Wine owes Corel a debt of gratitude; they were great to Wine).

2003 was the first full year of the LGPL. You do the math.

Further, prior to the LGPL split, game development in the public Wine tree was pretty well dead. Everyone was waiting for Transgaming to return their changes, and nothing was happening.

After the split, it became clear that those changes weren't coming back to the public tree. This led to a number of volunteers taking up the challenge and improving Wine's DirectX and other game support. This has led to a resurgance in Wine's activity on games. Historically, Wine has always been focused on games, so I am personally gratified to see it return to those roots, since it's not an effort we've been able to help on much (because folks don't buy large corporate support contracts for games :-/).

Additionally, a number of people seem to prefer the LGPL; we seemed to get an influx of new blood to the project as a result of the change. Further, our cooperation with other xGPL projects like ReactOS improved, and so we got some further energy from there as well.

5) MS Security Updates Apply? - by PSaltyDS

I can see that security holes that come from Windows OS code shouldn't effect the CrossOver Office Win98-like implementation of the APIs. Security holes that come from the MS application's code may or may not be present in that environment, but how do I know? What types of MS security updates apply to my CrossOver environment, and which don't? Are any of the security houses (like e-Eye) testing for vulnerabilities in the Linux/CrossOver (or Linux/WINE) space?


Jeremy:

Actually, much to our great surprise, the Windows Update service runs fully and completely in CrossOver. Further, we go to great pains to make sure that Office service packs apply cleanly (and we mostly succeed :-/).

We also go to all kinds of interesting lengths to avoid problems with viruses and worms. For example, we have a hack in our flavor of Wine*, in the CreateProcess call (the code to start an executable) that basically checks to see if the parent process is outlook.exe, and if it is, we crash and burn, preventing many of the worms and such from running. We also have customers that have set up chroot environments, and since Wine runs in user space, that is a theoretically perfectly secure environment.

Finally, one advantage of Wine/CrossOver, is that any infection is cleaned quite quickly with rm -rf ~/.cxoffice (and easy backup/restore methods exist).

But, for all of that, I don't want to dismiss this issue. I think anyone using Outlook (anywhere, not just CrossOver) should use a strong server side scanning product. Further, I think that the use of IE in Wine should be constrained to only those cases where it absolutely has to be used. The real truth is that when you're running Linux, you're inevitably going to be less paranoid about updating and securing any Windows environment, and that sort of neglect can lead to trouble.
* Changes such as this hack to Wine are internally referred to as 'Proprietary advantages'. We are seeking patents on such methods of gaining a market advantage (grin).
6) Viral Licensing Question - by KlomDark

Aren't you worried that you'll corrupt Linux with the viral Windows licensing scheme?


Jeremy:

Now you've learned my dirty secret, and I'll have to kill you all. I've actually been hired by Microsoft to poison this little communist enclave you have going here. You'll note that since our introduction of CrossOver Office, OpenOffice has withered and died on the vine, clear proof that we do great harm to open source projects. The dissolution of Mozilla into Firefox was a clear gesture of despair on their part over our support for IE.

Further, our use of 'proprietary advantages' to create lock in has clearly emboldened companies such as Novell to preserve and extend their proprietary lock ins on products such as the Ximian Connector...

Bwahahahaha. You're all doomed!

[grin]

7) Source-level Compatibility? - by cgreuter

I hear a lot of talk about binary compatibility with Windows, but not so much about source-code-level compatibility. What sort of efforts, if any, are being made toward letting people trivially recompile existing Windows programs to run natively under Linux/X? Have any commercial software vendors considered taking this approach?


Jeremy:

My original passion for Wine had nothing to do with running existing code. I've always loved the source porting angle much better than binary compatibility (hence my ill fated affair with TWIN aka Twine).

The good news, is that after seeing the error of my ways, we put a lot of energy into making source compatibility work extremely well. Francois did a lot of work on this, and Dimi and a few others have picked it up and really made this process sing.

I understand that the Windows build of Abiword now compiles and runs cleanly in Wine. I know that simple applications, like all of the Petzold examples, build and run in Winelib.

What's interesting (to me, anyways, the rest of you can yawn and skip to the next question) is that I've come to realize that source compatibility really isn't that important. The difference to the end user between a gcc compiled Winelib app and a Visual C++ build Windows app running with Wine is...nothing, except maybe the Visi C compiler builds slightly better, faster code.

Corel realized this; they spent an enormous amount of energy working towards a source port, and eventually just shipped a binary solution. It wasn't popular, but it was wise, imho.

However, what Winelib does allow, that *is* wicked cool, is that you can port a Windows app to a non x86 platform quite easily. I don't really know of anyone that really values this (i.e. is willing to pay big bucks for it), but it's cool, nonetheless.

8) Microsoft Source? - by NinjaPablo

If Microsoft were to release more source code (legally, not the leaked source from a while back), or if Microsoft approached the Wine team and offered access to portions of the Windows source code, would you accept it? What if it involved an NDA or adding non-GPL portions to Wine?


Jeremy:

Well, I would refuse any kind of legal agreement that would jeapordize the ability of Wine to move forward openly and free of any MS license entanglements.

But that doesn't mean we couldn't use further help; there are certainly large areas of the Windows API that we struggle to understand, and we could certainly use some help. I, for one, would like to have seen the consent decree put in place an oversight board; while Microsoft has opened their documentation considerably since that decree, we have no one to turn to to ask for further clarifications and further information.

9) Tax Software? - by mengel

Every year I end up having to boot MSWindows in order to run Tax software. It's pretty much the only time I boot MSWindows anymore, and I end up doing a lot of work to keep that environment around and running just for that one, annual, task. And it's not just me, we have had several [slashdot.org] articles [slashdot.org] here at Slashdot discussing this topic at great length.

Are you guys working on a deal with any of the tax software publishers to ensure their software runs under Wine each year?

If not, would you consider it?


Jeremy:

Well, we're working very hard to encourage ISVs of all kinds to work with us to bring their products to the Linux market.

And we've had some very positive responses, but I can't really tell you much more than that just yet. However, I will tell you that we are not working with any of the Tax software providers.

Candidly, that's a pretty tricky one. Because each version of Tax Software is so ephmeral, and because we get such a short time window to test and work on it, they're really hard to nail. Further, it's not clear to me that we'd really make enough money to begin to cover the costs involved. If we could, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Feel free to assemble a possee of interested folks at http://c4.codeweavers.com; we will absolutely listen to customer demand.

10) Project David - by mfh

We've heard that Project David could be a CrossOver Office rip-off. To what extent is David a fraud and what are your options to combat those who would misrepresent themselves using your products for VC or even illegal/infringing sales revenue?


Jeremy:

Well, I don't know anything more about Project David than anyone else who reads Slashdot, but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I always say. It's clear from Mike McCormack's research that it uses a version of Wine that we've released. Note that that's not necessarily fraud or a rip off of any kind - our Wine is LGPL, and it allows for just that sort of thing.

My opinion is much like others on Slashdot - they're clearly in the early stages, and don't really have a particularly impressive set of web pages. Further, they haven't really described their technology in any meaningful way.

However, this is one of the great things about the LGPL. It allows for us to have competitors spring up and try to build on our work. This is - heaven forbid - good for customers. We have to work harder and better to make sure that we continue to give our customers what they crave.

The only thing that bothers me when folks like the Project David guys come along is when they don't honor the work of those that have gone before.

I am only here today because I am able to use the hard work of many, many people who have generously given their work to us all to use. I think Alexandre has successfully eradicated the last line of my code in Wine (and he stubbornly rejects my patches, too), so nothing is Wine is anything I have built. And yet my entire livelihood and that of my family is built on Wine.

I am deeply grateful to the people that let me sell their work - even though I have paid them nothing - and the least I can do is respect and acknowledge their work.

So it bugs me when people like Project David (and others like it) come along touting their wonderful Windows compatibility without giving any props to the people that have worked so hard on Wine.

Ain't illegal, ain't fraud, but it just isn't cool in my book.

[/soapbox]

At any rate, I think that's it. Thanks for asking!

Cheers,

Jeremy

208 comments

  1. Is it Friday yet? by jargoone · · Score: 3, Funny

    I read "Jeremy White's Wine answers" as "Jeremy's White Wine answers".

    1. Re:Is it Friday yet? by Theresa1 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I did exactly the same thing. I was thinking "why has slashdot got an article on white wine?"

      --
      This is a manual signature virus. Copy to your signiture file and help me spread.
    2. Re:Is it Friday yet? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1, Funny

      Aw, that's just the White Wine talking...

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    3. Re:Is it Friday yet? by dr_dank · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I did too. I wonder if Phil's Flank Steak has anything to say about that.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    4. Re:Is it Friday yet? by jellomizer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Nope its monday and it is going to be a long week for you.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    5. Re:Is it Friday yet? by EvanED · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was trying to get Wine to work a while ago, and asked one of my friends "What do you know about Wine", who proceeded to launch into a discussion about how he hates the taste.

    6. Re:Is it Friday yet? by rollingrock · · Score: 1

      Sounds like somebody's got a case of the mondays

    7. Re:Is it Friday yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not normally a spelling nazi, but having a spelling error in your .sig is just too much for me.

    8. Re:Is it Friday yet? by EvilLordSoth · · Score: 1

      heh, I was complaining to my friend that he couldn't game with the rest of us on his gentoo box, and i said "dammit man you have to get wine to work" his reply ? "I don't know man it seems to work fine on me, I'm pretty shitfaced."

  2. Easy by SirChris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder how long it will be before you won't question whether it will work with Wine. It will just be common place to say, "Hey if it works in windows, it will work with Wine.

    1. Re:Easy by Rei · · Score: 1

      If ever I can play my old copy of Dungeon Keeper, I'll be happy. ;)

      --
      "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
    2. Re:Easy by mahdi13 · · Score: 1

      Hell, I've been trying for 3 years to get Magic: The Gathering working! I'd be thrilled once that works under Linux!

      --
      "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
    3. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well here is your chance to see this happen..... :-)
      Just go to: http://www.codeweavers.com/site/compatibility/brow se/name?app_id=249
      and vote or pledge for future DirectX support.
      You can pledge that you will purchese a copy of CrossOver if
      this app is made to work. So round up all your "Dungeon Keeper" playing friends and vote for better gaming support.

    4. Re:Easy by Rei · · Score: 1

      I paid for it once. I don't want to have to pay for it again. :P What, will we have to start referring to the "linux tax"?

      --
      "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
    5. Re:Easy by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Then run it on Windows and quit your bitching, or support a project/product that might one day allow you to run it on *nix :-)

    6. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, will we have to start referring to the "linux tax"?

      No, I don't see it that way, you could look at this as a way for allot of people to chip in a little money so they all will have the chance to use there favorite application or play there favorite game on there OS of choice.

      So if you wan't/need a application to work this is a very valid way for that to take place. If you don't need any windows based application/games then your not out one red cent! So this is not a tax, it is a means to a solution!

      Tom

    7. Re:Easy by Rei · · Score: 1

      It's a serious issue, though. If to play games in Linux you have to purchase the game, and then pay extra to try and get someone to tweak their emulator to run it, you're paying extra for the inconvenience of running it through an emulator. This is a big problem.

      --
      "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
    8. Re:Easy by armando_wall · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a serious issue, though. If to play games in Linux you have to purchase the game, and then pay extra to try and get someone to tweak their emulator to run it, you're paying extra for the inconvenience of running it through an emulator. This is a big problem.

      How is that a big problem? If you don't want to pay extra in order to play your windows-game in Linux, go ahead and purchase a Windows license which, by the way, will cost you more. Case resolved.

    9. Re:Easy by Rei · · Score: 1

      What, the windows that comes with every laptop whether you want it or not?

      --
      "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
    10. Re:Easy by armando_wall · · Score: 1

      What, the windows that comes with every laptop whether you want it or not?

      Yes. And that is a really serious problem, since it means that the price of your laptop includes windows, so they are making you pay for that OS whether you like it or not.

    11. Re:Easy by Zardus · · Score: 1

      Your old version of Dungeon Keeper (if its DK1, not DK2) probably has a DOS version on the CD (mine did). You can install said DOS version and run it (definitely) in Dosbox or (possibly) in Dosemu. It probably won't run too fast, but it should work.

      --
      You can mod your friends, you can mod your nose, but you can't mod your friend's nose.
  3. Project David by nightsweat · · Score: 5, Funny

    So I guess Project David is then old WINE in new tarballs...

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  4. Wrong by FortKnox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but that's where your highest-moderated questions led

    No, that's where the highest-moderated questions you sent him led. There was a good variety of questions, some a little harsher than others, but I would have enjoyed reading his response to some of them. Granted, there is a lot of score:5's in the 'question' article, but I think you could have done a bit better on the variety of questions asked.

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd like to see moderation changed so that for questions and other "rate the question" type subjects that the cap be well above 5. Perhaps 15?

    2. Re:Wrong by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      With the number of moderators who have better things to do than seek out comments at 1 or 2 (with Karma-Bonus), we'll see the same posts go to 15, and no posts at 4 or 3 due to lack of moderation points. We may even get fewer posts going to 15, in which case we get a less diverse question pool. Don't expect to see a range between 7 and 15 for the top questions.

      However, a public vote for 1-2 favorite questions where the n questions with the most votes are forwarded is probably the same idea, but may work without messing up moderation. (Moderation is like the Social Security of Slashdot; you don't touch it for fear of breaking the parts of it that do work.)

  5. "All that talk about WINE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...and not a single mention of Chateauneuf du Pape '87. Niles will be scandalized!" /Frasier

    1. Re:"All that talk about WINE... by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1
      "Like a bottle of Chateau Neuf du Pape;
      I'm fine like wine when I start to rap."
      - The Beastie Boys
      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    2. Re:"All that talk about WINE... by cuteintern · · Score: 1

      Jeff White in Q#10 to Project David:

      "Can't stand it,
      I know you planned it.
      I'ma set it straight this Watergate"

  6. Only half of the API's are used? by Henrik+S.+Hansen · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In fact, Wine only implements about half of the Windows APIs. [...] the truth is that over half of the Windows APIs have never been used!

    I find it a little hard to believe that many W32 API's are never used by apps. But if it is really true, talk about code bloat!

    1. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Bobdoer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps it's those "unused" calls that are required for children's "educational" games to run.

    2. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Code bloat?

      Several things:

      1. It's not like having some extra functions sitting around in DLLs is taking up huge amounts of disk [or memory, when the DLL gets mapped].
      2. There are a lot of legacy APIs sitting around, which allows for backwards compatability [I'm glad I can run apps written for '98 on an XP box].
      3. I'm glad MS has additional functions for me to use - just because not everyone uses 'em doesn't mean they're worthless!

    3. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It's not so much that they are never used, the sheer number of apps out there pretty much guarantees somebody, somewhere will have used any given API.

      It's more that in all the apps we've tried to run on Wine, nothing has ever tried to use that feature (new features tend to be easier to add than fixing bugs in existing features). And yes, there are a whole ton of calls that simply aren't implemented because even large, complex apps like DreamWeaver, MS Office etc don't use them.

    4. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's still a lot of 16-bit cruft in the Win32 APIs.

    5. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by rabtech · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One man's "code bloat" is another man's BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY.

      There are many Windows APIs that only exist to be backwards-compatible; they are depreciated and are marked in the docs as such. This means some wierd app you use to control industrial machinery that was written for Windows 95 most likely still works on Windows XP.

      --
      Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
    6. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by ex_ottoyuhr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And it's the 5% that are used once in the history of Windows that have the most annoyance potential...

      I suspect that American development traditions just might not include about half of the API, but it might be useful if anyone ever bothers with it. I say "American" because My Favorite Program (tm), _Cossacks_, uses just enough relatively obscure system calls that Wine fails miserably to install it.

      This seems to me to be a trend in all software development these days: to give most users most of what they want, doing the easy 90% of the project (which consumes the first 90% of the time), and then leaving the difficult 10% of the project (which consumes the _next_ 90% of the time) unattempted.

      Granted, in WINE's case, they have a pair of really good excuses: they're aiming at a (rapidly!) moving target, and they have no employees, only volunteers. So, I don't blame them too much, although it annoys me that I'm currently dual-booting Windows 98 (for DOS games)and 2000 (for Visual Studio) when there's a Windows emulator (err, "compatibility layer") already under production in Linux-land.

      Of course, other groups don't have reasons for slipshod development. Microsoft is, or at least used to be, very bad about this (see: MSN Search, although I think they're learning). To some extent the commercial Linux developers are guilty of the same, and it was especially characteristic of Unix way back when it started...

    7. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especialy if Microsoft (or anybody else for that matter) wants to break some applications:

      MS Enginer: "Hey, Bill, new Wine can run our Office XP now!"
      MS Bill : "Make sure that some of ours
      ObscureFunctionXX(){};
      not present in wine, is included somewhere in new sevice pack..."

    8. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by groot · · Score: 1

      I guess I must have the software that uses the other half. With some of my apps, all I get is whines from Wine that it does not support this or that.

      --laz

      --
      "Just remember, it takes a village idiot." -- The Motley Fool.
    9. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by theendlessnow · · Score: 1

      ... and apparently the unused half have to do with security!! That'll teach them not to use coin toss based decision making again.

    10. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by tiger99 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Controlling industrial machinery in 95 or even XP? You have got to be kidding, unless of course it is a trivial bit of machinery that can't damage itself or anything/anyone else if it runs out of control. Controlling real machines with that load of excrement is legally, morally and economically highly questionable. Legally, because you will be sued when it BSODs and causes damage, morally because you are putting property and maybe lives at risk, and economically, because it will do your own business no good at all when it crashes.

      Yet, sadly I have heard of it being so used, IIRC this has been debated on /. before.

      In many countries you would be committing a criminal offence by using non-validated software to control anything that moves and could cause injury, and rightly so.

      So, I doubt that the weird APIs are there for controlling machinery, more likely they are there because in the random way he operates, Sir Bill once thought they were a good idea, then found that they were actually useless and was too proud and stubborn to have them removed. The unused and unwanted bloat is likely to be the cause of many of the bugs and security holes, the code tends to be messily commingled with vital bits, in fact the whole of Windoze seems to be structured in the most messy way possible.

      It seems that .Net is finally an admission that the Windoze API set was a complete load of rubbish, and it is time to start again, unfortunately sitting it on top of the mess that went before only makes the problem worse, and also sacrifices efficiency.

      But you are basically right, the bloat is caused by backwards compatability of the unnecessary kind. Longhorn will be the same, in order to sell it will need to be compatible with the trash that went before, so it will no doubt have an enormous XP emulation layer sitting on top of the new code, to faithfully reproduce the bugs. It is time to call a halt, throw away backwards compatability (except for reading and writing file formats used by applications of course) and start again. But it will never happen until M$ ceases to be significant, the sooner that happens, the better.

    11. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, we get more pain from Linux distributions, who work at break neck speed to break Wine. says the Jermey White.

      Maybe you Linux guys should try a little bootlicking yourself -- because Linux becomes incompatible with itself every couple years. Go head and run RedHat 6.0 application on Fedora and see how far you get.

    12. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, then Wine just emulates ObscureFunctionXX(), big deal.

      I imagine the real problem is obscure special-function parts of Windows like TAPI, MAPI, WinG, and so on. There's a lot of functionality in those libraries, but very little reward in emulating it.

    13. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by tiger99 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      When Unix began, it was a bit like that as you say, but the things that tended to get left unfinished, i.e. doing the easy 90% of the work, were tools, which were really intended only to do simple things. Even the Bourne shell was IMHO left half done, in early versions, but it was better to have a reduced-function but useable tool than no tool at all. The overall package was still way ahead of any possible competition.

      I saw no evidence, with one possible exception, that the kernel and file system were left half-done in any commercial version. As Unix was not really well funded in the beginning, it was far better to get good but simplistic things working than to go for complex, all-singing, all-dancing solutions that mostly would not be used.

      It has changed nowadays, if you look up the Linux or BSD manuals (or probably Solaris, AIX, SCOundrel etc) the modern options to some of the long-established commands have become positively bewildering. I am not sure that it really represents progress, it may have been better to to the 10% of the work to get 90% of the result, and spend the remaining 90% of the work doing 10% of the work on a set of 9 new tools, if you see what I mean, you nay get better value for money by doing a lot of quick things than one big one.

      Of course whether you favour quick and simple, or long and complex, and they are both valid point sof view, the thing that must never be forgotten is quality. A simple little tool that does half the job accurately and dependably can be used to accomplish things, a grossly complex thing that does everything including making a cup of tea, but crashes every Wednesday, unless the wind is from the east, is all but useless. And that, I think, must have been the view of some of the original Unix people, which is why you can do good but limited things with sed, awk, and so on. It is easier to string basic bits together with a pipe than to make the universal panacea.

      To put it in perspective, I was doing things under Unix V7 around 1983 easily that still can't be done in any M$ software without a major (and I mean major) programming exercise, or of course by using Cygwin, which sadly is not terribly efficient because the undellying OS is so poor (no fork() for example, it has to be emulated). Credit is due to the developers for getting it to work at all, on top of a so-called Posix-compatible OS that isn't.

    14. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm currently dual-booting Windows 98 (for DOS games)



      What about DOSBox?

    15. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by jsebrech · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Microsoft is doing a pretty good job with backwards compatibility. I have windows 3.11 games written in 1994 that still run in windows xp, a decade later, without modification. There are few operating systems which can boost that level of backwards compatibility (IBM's stuff comes to mind though, but they use the virtualization trick to do it).

      Still, I believe the future lies in the aforementioned inclusion of full virtualization to run previous OS versions into the base operating system. Apple included an OS9 environment that way into OS X, and microsoft could include a version of virtual pc (which they own). That way you can ease ancient API's out of the codebase and still allow people to run their old stuff. And given how much spare cpu cycles modern PC's have, this shouldn't even be much of a slowdown.

    16. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by julesh · · Score: 2, Funny

      There are many Windows APIs that [...] are depreciated

      How can Windows APIs depreciate? I thought they were worthless to start with.

    17. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by huckda · · Score: 1

      according to wine's website they listed that Visual Studio was a working app in linux via wine...

      *that was a month ago anyway, last I looked*

      --
      "Just Smile and Nod." --Huck
    18. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Still, I believe the future lies in the aforementioned inclusion of full virtualization to run previous OS versions into the base operating system. Apple included an OS9 environment that way into OS X, and microsoft could include a version of virtual pc (which they own).


      From what I can tell, Microsoft internally is very big on the virtualization technique. Developers I know who have worked at and/or with Microsoft all tell me that their internal dev teams basically install a minimal functioning copy of Windows XP, then Virtual PC, then boot a Windows XP/2K/2K3 Virtual OS to do their work. The demos they give at their free MSDN Conferences are all run from virtual Windows 2003 machines running in a Virtual PC. I think it's a great idea :)
    19. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by hkb · · Score: 1

      I have windows 3.11 games written in 1994 that still run in windows xp, a decade later, without modification. There are few operating systems which can boost that level of backwards compatibility

      Few? I guess so, if you count all of the OSes who have even a small niche of the market:

      UNIX/Linux/*BSD - Stuff written 30 years back still runs
      Mac OS X - See above. See also Classic, NeXTSTEP compaitiblity, and Carbon.

      --
      /* Moderating all non-anonymous trolls up since 2004 */
    20. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by theantix · · Score: 3, Funny

      This means some wierd app you use to control industrial machinery that was written for Windows 95 most likely still works on Windows XP.

      Ha! Let me guess, you've never worked with implementing an application of any consequence across different versions of Windows before and you are talking out of your ass here. I'm right, aren't I? I have enough issues with upgrading relatively simple business applications from 2K or 98 to WinXP.

      If you assume that your industrial control code that you wrote for win95 will work in WinXP, please let me and others know first so we can evacuate ourselves from the building. Sheesh...

      --
      501 Not Implemented
    21. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Let's say there's one thousand APIs out there, beyond the "core" interfaces, each of which are only used by a very few applications. Unfortunately, this still means that there's a heck of a lot of Windows applications that will never run under Wine because they use one of those rare APIs.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    22. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you help me get the followig to work under Win98, then?

      Privateer2
      WC1,2 and 3
      Terminator:FutureShock
      MegaTraveller 1 & 2

      Yes, they are doing *well* in backward compatability, but not as great as you would hope, what with them being the only purveyors of the original code...

      Ta.

    23. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Controlling industrial machinery in 95 or even XP? You have got to be kidding, unless of course it is a trivial bit of machinery that can't damage itself or anything/anyone else if it runs out of control. Controlling real machines with that load of excrement is legally, morally and economically highly questionable. Legally, because you will be sued when it BSODs and causes damage, morally because you are putting property and maybe lives at risk, and economically, because it will do your own business no good at all when it crashes.

      Actually I maintain software for controlling an older, million dollar piece of semiconductor equipment that runs on Windows 3.11 (very nicely, thank you very much). We're currently "upgrading" the computer to Windows 98SE (it won't run on NT because the software talks directly to the hardware). Intel and AMD are two companies that use this particular piece of equipment to manufacture microprocessors.

      Our current generation of equipment runs nicely on Windows 2000 and XP.

      Granted, in my department we use Windows for historical reasons. Other, even larger projects in our company use Solaris and Sun systems.

    24. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by RogerWilco · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've worked in a company that has made software for industrial water/sewage treatment plants. They have made software from DOS, trough win3, win 95, win NT, win 2000, win XP and (embedded) linux
      We recently had a client complaining his WinXP laptop did not run our version 4 (win3.0) software properly (his win98 laptop did)
      His company had put his laptop in "win95 compatibility mode", which came out to be a win95 installed in VMware, quite a lot more as "compatibility mode".
      We told him we could not support win3.0 app on win 95 in VMware on windowsXP. He left with version 7 of the application, still capable of talking to his early nineties equipment.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    25. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      Linux? If one includes recompiling sure, but at a binary level I don't know about that. I've heard a lot of people complain about loki games they can't get working on modern distros, and offhand I remember having a lot of problems with opera when a new version of...I think it was libpng was released, before they started making new opera releases specifically for it.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    26. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1
      UNIX/Linux/*BSD - Stuff written 30 years back still runs

      At least for linux, this doesn't seem to be true. I think all of the people in the thread below who are "tired of trying to play matchup with GLIBC versions" would disagree. As would Jeremy White who talks about the "pain" of having Wine, his linux app, broken by constantly by various distros. And these are programs that are far less than 30 years old. You may find it difficult to acknowledge that Windows does something better (gasp!), but it's backward compatibility is actually quite good.
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    27. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I *HAVE* it is not as bad as you make it out to be. When a new rev comes out there is usually 1 or 2 calls *WE* were using wrong. I have even went and looked up old docs to prove that point more than once. The ones that 'break' are the ones people have usually hacked on till they worked in a fashion. I have even had MS eng's tell me they are surprised it worked AT ALL (we have the pay through the nose contract). I even had one programmer tell me it was not documented so he started feeding it black box style variables till it worked. I am of the opinion he should have used the docs to help him. I also think open source would have maybe stoped him from doing this in this case. It would not cure him of a bad habit. Making him FIX the problem cured it :)

      Now I have also found the oposite to be true. Older docs tell to use something one way and magicly they change 6 months later. Usually by that time though it is quite obvious the call does not do what it is documented to do.

      This is the nature of the windows beast. You can sit there and bitch and moan about it all you like. But MS is selling scads of the stuff. Supporting it pays the bills QUITE handsomly.

      Also some one in one of the other threads stated something like '.net is microsofts admision that windoze api sucks'. Well I am here to tell you that it is GOOD ENOUGH. I predict in 3-4 years time .net will not be the way of microsoft. They will have some all new all being API that is the way it has always been and will always be. Then we all get to support just another MS API. I have seen them come and seen them go, .net is just another one with its own twist on the windows world.

      Also MS bends over quite a bit to make sure MOST apps still work. They have a whole group of people whos job it is to make sure things do not break to badly on the next release. I would be willing to bet cold hard cash that is the reason we have not seen SP2 for XP yet. It probably breaks too many things! I would be willing to bet one of em is word. MS knows what apps 'must work' or they will not ship. The rest well we just have to wait for the patches for them if they ever come...

      Also I am not surprised that there are 'industrial' uses for windows. Why are you? 'Industrial' covers a multitude of sins. All the way from a garage door to a battleship. DOS for however flakey it could be, was and STILL is used for this sort of thing. From when you get up in the morning till the time you goto sleep. You probably interact with dozens of different versions of DOS/Windows/Unix. You probably dont even know that the stop light was some flavor of windows. The pump that makes sure you get water was some Unix. The gas pump you used to get gas was DOS. The truck that passed you on the highway was rerouted using windows. The boxes on those trucks were put there using DOS. etc... 'industrial' can mean a LOT of things.

    28. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by hkb · · Score: 1

      Uhm and there's plenty of Windows apps that behave in this manner, too. I'm not talking about the exceptions, I'm talking about the average app. And yes, it indeed keeps running.

      You may find it difficult to acknowledge that Windows does something better (gasp!), but it's backward compatibility is actually quite good.

      You may find it difficult to acknowledge, but I like Windows more than I like Linux (gasp!). For my daily work I prefer OS X and Windows.

      So bite it, cowboy.

      --
      /* Moderating all non-anonymous trolls up since 2004 */
    29. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Deprecated, not depreciated. Depreciation means a gradual loss in value, as with your industrial machinery. Deprecation means someone important says that this is instantly not to be used anymore, as with Windows 95. ;-)

    30. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you Linux guys should try a little bootlicking yourself

      Well, you know anyway you want to get your kicks. But your implication that binaries don't work from one distro to another is the great strength of Open Souce. See, it's not Free Binary, it's Open Source. There's a big difference. You can compile the source not just on different distros, but different platforms even.

    31. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by shadow_slicer · · Score: 1

      Leave the Visual Basic Programmer alone....

      sheesh...he's pathetic enough already...

    32. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Booting to Win98 for DOS games? Try Dosbox.... runs on linux quite well.

    33. Re:Only half of the API's are used? by frfriel · · Score: 1

      Is it true that many API's exist for certain Windows services that may never be used (such as the clip book service)?

  7. Breaking WINE by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In fact, we get more pain from Linux distributions, who work at break neck speed to break Wine.

    And all other software too. Am I the only one who's getting tired of trying to play matchup with GLIBC versions?

    1. Re:Breaking WINE by Tet · · Score: 2, Funny
      Am I the only one who's getting tired of trying to play matchup with GLIBC versions?

      Yes...

      --
      "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
    2. Re:Breaking WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh heh heh... Very clever subject line! (Er, you did do it on purpose, right?)

    3. Re:Breaking WINE by Joel+Carr · · Score: 5, Informative
      Am I the only one who's getting tired of trying to play matchup with GLIBC versions?

      No you're not, and since the artical is about Wine, you may be interested in knowing that Alexandre Julliard is also fed up with it.

      On Wine Devel he posted this:
      Also, frankly, I've spent the last year chasing glibc breakages, and I don't particularly feel like spending the next year chasing kernel breakages. I was kind of hoping someone else would pick that fight, so I could go back to writing some real Wine code for a change...

      http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-devel/2003/12 /0384.html

      ---
      --
      Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. -- AE
    4. Re:Breaking WINE by Apreche · · Score: 3, Interesting

      you only have to play matchup if you use a binary package based distribution. Actually I think debian makes sure this problem doesn't happen, so its mostly with the rpm based distros. Source based distros like gentoo, slackware or lunar linux don't have problems like this. You download the source to an app and build it against whatever glibc you are currently using. With binary distros you have to hope you have the same glibc as the guy who made the package.

      Yeah, offtopic, but I'm just helping this guy out. Wine rules.

      --
      The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    5. Re:Breaking WINE by jlp2097 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's been over a year since the last offical release.

      But you probably haven't heard the news ? There will be no more official glibc release. Ulrich Drepper has decided, that it is just a waste of time because "nobody tests it anyway" and because he does not see any big changes ahead. That's why distributions like Linux From Scratch and Rock Linux (and just about every big distribution) doesn't include 2.3.2 but some CVS snapshot deemed stable enough.

    6. Re:Breaking WINE by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Funny

      But you probably haven't heard the news ? There will be no more official glibc release.

      [Post censored by the committee for clean language in /. posts]

    7. Re:Breaking WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My eyes are going bad. I read the title as "Breaking Wind".

    8. Re:Breaking WINE by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      That's a bit unfair. What that post actually says is that they are going to move to time based releases rather than functionality based releases, which makes a good deal of sense.

    9. Re:Breaking WINE by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      No. But then again, I don't use glibc...

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    10. Re:Breaking WINE by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      OK, I should have read the entire thread before posting. I eat my words. That is indeed incredibly silly.

    11. Re:Breaking WINE by zozie · · Score: 2, Informative

      This problem has nothing to do with binary vs. source. In fact most applications will continue to work if you upgrade your glibc, though the other way around is trickier. Just link the app versus the lowest glibc version you want (possibly trading some new APIs).

      What we're having here are
      • fundamental (source+binary) changes such as NPTL support (introduced in RH 9)
      • source breakage -- successive glibc versions are stricter about the functions they supply when you #include .

      at least that's my experience with dosemu, it can't be very different with wine from what i read (both these two programs use a lot of OS specific features). It's not only glibc by the way, also a new gcc with a less forgiving optimizer that also removes extensions (lvalue casts, multiline string literals), flex, bison and so on.

      Not that all these changes are bad, but I understood that especially NPTL has been quite a biggie for wine.

      For one thing the Linux world tends to break backwards compatibility towards less-than-standard programs easier than Windows and DOS before that, where lots of programs use undocumented features and lots of people would complain if they stopped working. But for Linux after all the source is often available, so one can simply say "f*ck it" to those who use undocumented interfaces.

    12. Re:Breaking WINE by mi · · Score: 1
      Am I the only one who's getting tired of trying to play matchup with GLIBC versions?

      Switch to FreeBSD and petition WINE to follow. If FreeBSD becomes their primary platform, vendors of the various distros will become responsible for porting WINE.

      As it stands, FreeBSD wine-port end up having to untangle various hacks put in for Linux' sake.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    13. Re:Breaking WINE by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      This is why sane people haven't used glibc for quite some time. Just search for glibc on an installed debian (or, I think gentoo) system. You won't (shouldn't!) find it.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    14. Re:Breaking WINE by arose · · Score: 1
      FreeBSD: Open Source without that fishy smell
      No need to put OpenBSD down like that in your sig... :-P
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    15. Re:Breaking WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is why sane people haven't used glibc for quite some time. Just search for glibc on an installed debian (or, I think gentoo) system. You won't (shouldn't!) find it.

      ROFL!!

      You are a true Slashdork.

    16. Re:Breaking WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh? WTF? What do you use then, uClibc?

      You idiot!

  8. how about a foundation, instead of lottery tickets by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Now the very first thing I'm going to do when I win the lottery is go buy a stack of kids games and pay some Wine hackers to get them to work (seriously; you can ask my co workers, they're sick of me talking about this pet project). Unfortunately, the last lottery ticket I bought was a bust.

    How about setting up something like the "WINE Foundation" (perhaps with a more creative name) and include a DONATE file in the distro, and a link off the WINE homepage? Ask for a)legal/tax/investing help and b)money. Seek more than one opinion about all matters under (a).

    Or, just ask people to "donate" by maintaining a wishlist of packages schools are looking to run. People buy a copy, get it to work, donate the patches back to the community and the copy of the software (which they no longer need) to the school in question. Whole lot easier than my first suggestion.

  9. Re:I work for one of those Tax software companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last I checked Mac OS X was not free.

  10. Re:I work for one of those Tax software companies by Darth+Maul · · Score: 1

    No. The core of OS X is UNIX (Mach, Darwin, etc) but not "linux".

    --
    --- witty signature
  11. Re:I work for one of those Tax software companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No dumbass. OSX is Mach and BSD based.

  12. Re:I work for one of those Tax software companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's not. Nice try though.

  13. Bad markup! by Otter · · Score: 4, Informative

    The "<grin" at the end of question 5 seems to be breaking a closing blockquote tag...

    1. Re:Bad markup! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The "grin" at the end of question 5 seems to be
      > breaking a closing blockquote tag...

      I guess that Jeremy and the rest of Slashdot are still grinning.

      Stop that now and get back to work!
      [/grin]

      -- your boss

    2. Re:Bad markup! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Stop that now and get back to work!
      > -- your boss

      How did my wife get on Slashdot?

      [Run for cover]

    3. Re:Bad markup! by jlp2097 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Slashdot is probably the only site where something like this gets modded +4 Informative :-)

    4. Re:Bad markup! by Otter · · Score: 1

      It's certainly the only site where, hours later, none of the "editors" have noticed either the glaring problem (and another formatting bug at the top) or a post pointing out the problem.

  14. the question about "tax software" by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have always wondered WHY there is no "open taxes" projects going.

    we could simply create a framework that run's say a python script thtat describs the rules and calculations of the tax form and simply print out the postscript from there...

    That way the only changes needed to be done to the program from year to year only need to be done to the form descriptor script.

    and if this was done right, the form printout plus the rules, etc were in the descriptor file, then the "open taxes" program could work for multiple countries...

    alas, I cant write a lick of C++ or C so there is no chance of me writing it or starting it. also there is that sticky issue of what happens if the softwear makes a mistake causing the users to have to pay $$$billions in fines??

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:the question about "tax software" by Tim+Macinta · · Score: 5, Informative
      I have always wondered WHY there is no "open taxes" projects going. we could simply create a framework that run's say a python script thtat describs the rules and calculations of the tax form and simply print out the postscript from there...
      You mean like this?
    2. Re:the question about "tax software" by duffbeer703 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I always wondered why the IRS didn't issue tax software. Why should I have to pay for the privilege of filling out & filing forms electronically instead of picking up paper forms at the post office.

      Electronic filing in particular saves the IRS tons of cash. But I prefer to pay $0.37 for a stamp than $20 to e-file.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    3. Re:the question about "tax software" by SquadBoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because it would be impossible.

      This is not a project where folks are going to put up with "good enough" or even "very good". This is a project that would have to be perfect. We are talking larga amounts of money in paticular if something goes wrong. Also it is not just a matter of rules and calculations from one form. Any tax app basically needs to know the entire US tax code.

      I for example have a house, 3 kids, a big chunk of charitable contribs and a bunch of other stuff. Any tax app needs to be able to do all that math for me and it needs to be up to date. It also needs to be able to efile. I don't know how hard or easy that is but it has to be able to do it. There is *much* more to it than the 1040 book. Oh and states, Oregon has had tax votes in January for the last 2 years. Who is going to update the code for state changes in anything resembling a timely matter and there are strict IRS rules on liablity for all of this.

      The best way to do this is to convince one of the vendors to try and make it work with wine.

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    4. Re:the question about "tax software" by Tarantolato · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The code part of tax software is fairly trivial. The problem is the data part: your code has to be working with good information about tax laws federally and in all fifty states.

      So even if you could code in C or C++, it wouldn't matter. You need tax lawyers and CPAs for this project rather than just coders. And they don't work for free.

    5. Re:the question about "tax software" by mikehoskins · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I'm not mistaken, it seems that the tax software companies primarily use the Government's PDF forms. They sure look like them.

      If you can open the PDF and make an FDF out of it, couldn't you do EXACTLY what the poster of this message asked?

      So, if you have an interactive FDF viewer that made calculations, etc., you should be able to do it easier than many think you might.

      Of course Python is the wrong language to do it in. Kidding. (Self-confessed Perl/PHP bigot.)

    6. Re:the question about "tax software" by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

      There are some great rebates on tax software every year that might make it worthwhile. It's like a late Christmas present or something. Buy TurboTax and a $60GB hard drive, get full rebates for both! We use TurboTax, and always just print out the forms and mail them(and a hardcopy to keep). Why the heck should I pay that horrible amount for e-filing?

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    7. Re:the question about "tax software" by jfruhlinger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Believe it or not, the IRS has been pushing to do this for some time. However, the congressman whose district includes Intuit (I think it's in San Diego) has repeatedly stalled the proposal. Apparently there is a law saying that the government can't compete with a private business, and he claims that the IRS making a free electronic tax-filing service available would unfairly compete with Intuit.

      jf

    8. Re:the question about "tax software" by nizo · · Score: 2, Informative

      You could also use the online tax software (i.e. Intuit). You can do your taxes from their website, and if I recall I used mozilla under Linux just fine the last time I did them there. Luckily my credit is so horrible I am not too worried about my personal info on the web :-(

    9. Re:the question about "tax software" by theCat · · Score: 3, Informative

      Been using TurboTax online from my Mac running OSX (*BSD) for years now. It's a great service and I do not even think about buying tax software.

      Taxes are one of the few times where it makes sense to run an online application. They can keep tax data and rules up to date to the last minute without issuing and distributing patches, and retain my data even if I change PCs over the years.

      Not here to pitch their product, just trying to address the question of when it makes sense to have software on your harddrive vs software on an app server. As far as it goes, one can run any software from a remote app server and this might make more sense in the future, but right now tax software is a no-brainer.

      --
      =^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
    10. Re:the question about "tax software" by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe the IRS should start auditing this congressman aggressively...

    11. Re:the question about "tax software" by Zak3056 · · Score: 2, Informative


      Electronic filing in particular saves the IRS tons of cash. But I prefer to pay $0.37 for a stamp than $20 to e-file.


      So don't pay $20 to e-file.

      Here is a list of IRS "Free File Alliance" partners. The law requires a certain percentage of US taxpayers have free access to e-file, and this is accomplished through these vendors. All of these vendors have different criteria as to who can file for free, but if you dig around you can find one to suit your needs.

      For example, when I filed my taxes back in Feb, there was one outfit providing free e-file if your AGI was above $28,000 a year.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    12. Re:the question about "tax software" by swb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was pretty certain that the tax industry was getting congress to run interfernce over something like this so that they can maintain their "business model". What's next, lawsuits against the IRS for patent infringement?

      So instead of the government providing a service we basically pay for already that would essentially save the government millions and millions, we've got to prop up a bunch of execs at Intuit and get a much less efficient tax system as a result. That's just great.

      By this same logic, the police and military should be disbanded; those wanting law enforcement or military should just contract individually with a security company, Blackpool or the militia/warlord of their choosing, since the police and military are unfairly competing with private business, not to mention their legal monopolies on the use of force and many weapons systems.

    13. Re:the question about "tax software" by Laxitive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, they don't have to publish tax _software_. They just have to publish tax rules in a form that is easily parsable by computer programs.

      So instead of picking up a tax form that describes stuff in english, you'd have some formal specification. You could probably find a set of basis combinators that can represent all possible tax rules down to the finest detail. Then the IRS just has to publish this rulebook in some electronic form.

      It's not competing with private business, since it isn't software - simply a specification. It also encourages competition in the private marketplace, since it lowers the barrier of entry for people trying to write tax software.

      -EB

    14. Re:the question about "tax software" by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      Apparently there is a law saying that the government can't compete with a private business

      I'd be surprised if such a law exists, at least if it does it's well buried. If it did exist, then UPS and FedEx would have presumably sued the USPS out of existence. Also, things like the public defenders (private attorneys) and the police (security firms) would presumably be illegal. However, I have no doubt Intuit would actively lobby against free software from the IRS.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    15. Re:the question about "tax software" by omarques · · Score: 0

      Here in Brasil, since 1999 IIRC, every year our IRS releases a software to do our taxes.
      The software calculates everything, and at the end, registers your taxes at the IRS server, and prints a receipt. If you dont have a internet connection, you save the data in a 1.44 floppy disk and delivers it in a post office.
      This year, for the first time, they released a java version, so you can run in any OS with a java VM.

    16. Re:the question about "tax software" by iabervon · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing would be to do a tax program where the code part and the data part were completely separate, and distribute each of them separately. The code part could be free software, and the data could be purchased in stores or online for the usual price of tax software. The free software project could even have paid developers funded by the makers of the tax law data packages, on the "give away the razors, sell the blades" model.

    17. Re:the question about "tax software" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I used H&R Online Tax Cut w/ mozilla and FreeBSD - it worked pretty well.

      I also used the California franchise board's online tax filing (with the same configuration). It worked, but the interface is piss-poor. On the other hand it's free, unlike H&R.

      It is alleged that the windows version of H&R Tax Cut will run under Wine, but I haven't actually tried it.

      S.

    18. Re:the question about "tax software" by rthille · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think the 'right' approach is to require congress to produce the tax laws as valid pseudo-code in some high level script. That way the laws are well codified, and some hacker can translate the pseudo-code into 'real' executable code and then wrap it with a decent UI...

      Of course, the tax laws would _never_ actually compile :-)

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    19. Re:the question about "tax software" by neurojab · · Score: 1

      >a law saying that the government can't compete with a private business

      I've heard that before too. It seems to me such a law is quite useless and stupid, because the government can, will, and does compete with private business on a regular basis.
      For example: There are public and private schools (esp at the secondary level). There are government-sponsored and private hospitals. There are public and private research facilities, security guards... the list goes on and on. I can't imagine how provding electronic tax form submission could be lumped into that and not any of those other things. It would be interesting to read the text of the law to see just how much smoke this congressman is blowing.

    20. Re:the question about "tax software" by Jameth · · Score: 1

      "The best way to do this is to convince one of the vendors to try and make it work with wine."

      I'd say the best way to do this is to convince a vendor to do it in Java. Then, it could be really, reliably cross-platform.

    21. Re:the question about "tax software" by SquadBoy · · Score: 1

      You don't work with a lot of Java devs do you?

      Having said that if they write it in Java it would be much easier to port. :)

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    22. Re:the question about "tax software" by hawkestein · · Score: 1

      (I couldn't resist...)

      There once was a programmer who was attached to the court of the warlord of Wu. The warlord asked the programmer: "Which is easier to design: an accounting package or an operating system?"

      "An operating system", replied the programmer.

      The warlord uttered an exclamation of disbelief. "Surely an accounting package is trivial next to the complexity of an operating system", he said.

      "Not so", said the programmer, "when designing an accounting package, the programmer operates as a mediator between people having different ideas: How it must operate, how its reports must appear, and how it must conform to the tax laws. By contrast, an operating system is not limited by outside appearances. When designing an operating system the programmer seeks the simplest harmony between machine and ideas. This is why an operating system is easier to design."

      The warlord of Wu nodded and smiled. "That is all good and well, but which is easier to debug?"

      The programmer made no reply.

      -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

      --
      -- Will quantum computers run imaginary-time operating systems?
    23. Re:the question about "tax software" by EvanED · · Score: 1

      These would be exceptions. In fact, the USPS has a written monopoly into the law.

    24. Re:the question about "tax software" by Jameth · · Score: 1

      Lots of Java stuff sucks at being cross-platform. However, tax software is completely algorithmic. It's extremely simple math, it just needs a large rule set.

      If written properly, it would run anywhere.

    25. Re:the question about "tax software" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are all services for which the government is Constitutionally *obligated* to provide service.

    26. Re:the question about "tax software" by neurojab · · Score: 1

      >These are all services for which the government is Constitutionally *obligated* to provide service.

      Um... no. You've got it backwards.

      The constitution says nothing about schools, security guards or research institutions. The constitution provides very little in the way of federal services.

      However, I would argue that since the federal government has decided to levy an income tax, it IS obligated to provide for the preperation of the necessary documentation in the most secure fashion possible, using the technologies of the day. I should not be required to use the pony express to submit my forms if a much cheaper and more reliable method is available. Additionally, the IRS could reduce operating expenses (and hence reduce my taxes) if it provided free electronic form submission. This situation is pure "pork".

    27. Re:the question about "tax software" by trmcdougle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This applies in the UK as well, I have had to work backwards from the published info to the actual rules that they obviously used (for an in-house accounts package). They do seem to be getting better here though.

    28. Re:the question about "tax software" by an_mo · · Score: 1

      The idea is that with enough competition the government would be inefficient at creating a private good such as tax software. The $20 you pay to TurboTax is less than you would have to pay in taxes to fund the government programmers.

    29. Re:the question about "tax software" by duffbeer703 · · Score: 1

      What?

      TurboTax/TaxCut/etc is simply converting the IRS-developed forms into an electronic format. That's not hard work.

      All of the "heavy lifting" is done by the IRS folks who develop the actual forms. The IRS could effectively eliminate paper filing for individuals if it produce a free electronic filing method.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    30. Re:the question about "tax software" by JediTrainer · · Score: 1

      your code has to be working with good information about tax laws federally and in all fifty states.

      Psst: some of us in other countries use tax software too... I for one would like to have an alternative to paying my insane Canadian taxes using QuickTax or TurboTax. (who else in Ontario is sick of our brand new $300-900 annual health care premium [aka tax increase] as of today?)

      You know... I don't mind paying for the software. I just hate that they all run on Windows. And I also hate it that they'll only print a limited number of returns before the license runs out. So if I make a mistake... to bad.

      --

      You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
    31. Re:the question about "tax software" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Web Browser. I've always done my taxes in a web browser; first few years was Netscape 4 on an SGI Indy then an O2, last couple of years was Mozilla on X86 Linux.

    32. Re:the question about "tax software" by an_mo · · Score: 1

      that's not hard work, right, and assuming there is enough competition, $20 is the cost of that work. The implicit assumption is that the government would spend more.

  15. Software Patents by atheos · · Score: 1, Insightful

    correct me if I'm wrong, but one one hand he says

    "Yes, I think that all xGPL software is seriously threatened by patents."

    and the other hand says:

    "* Changes such as this hack to Wine are internally referred to as 'Proprietary advantages'. We are seeking patents on such methods of gaining a market advantage"

    So, which is it?
    Software patents are EVIL EVIL EVIL
    or
    Software patents are great for market advantage.

    Can you really have it both ways?

    1. Re:Software Patents by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have just secured the patent for "Telling a joke using a networked computer". Jeremy White now owes me $20 but it doesn't look like you are in any danger.

    2. Re:Software Patents by shadow303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am pretty sure the second bit was a joke.

      --
      I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
    3. Re:Software Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, since you seem to have a humour impediment, I probably shouldn't reply sarcastically. What's more interesting, though, is that apparently a couple of moderators also missed the boat. Anyhoo, it's a joke. If you don't get it, just laugh with the rest of us. That way, we won't look at you funny or throw you off the boat to go "swimming with the fishees, see?"

    4. Re:Software Patents by bodrell · · Score: 1
      So, which is it?
      Software patents are EVIL EVIL EVIL
      or
      Software patents are great for market advantage.

      Can you really have it both ways?

      Sure!
      It's the way the patents are used that can be EVIL EVIL EVIL, as you say. Patents are rights to exclude, so if WINE has a patent, they can easily exclude proprietary software from using it. But they can also allow open source projects to use the patent. I just read a second ago that Apple is trying to patent translucent windows. If they try to enforce their patent to prevent translucent windows in Linux, that would be bad. But if they just use the patent as leverage against Micro$oft, it doesn't bother me any. Microsoft can afford to license a patent or two.

      --
      Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
    5. Re:Software Patents by David+McBride · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a joke!

    6. Re:Software Patents by MasterD · · Score: 1

      Press tounge into cheek.

    7. Re:Software Patents by jeremy_white · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry for the confusion. There was a [grin] in angle brackets after that, only that seems not to go through to HTML posts very well.
      It was all meant as a jest. I think Software Patents are an evil blight on the land.

    8. Re:Software Patents by girgit · · Score: 1

      I don't know this first-hand, but I am pretty sure that the response to the next question is also meant to be a joke. I don't want you to worry when you get to that part of the post. Fear not, he Jeremy does not work for MicroSoft.

    9. Re:Software Patents by NonSequor · · Score: 1

      It wasn't a joke. He was just trolling.

      --
      My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
    10. Re:Software Patents by neurojab · · Score: 1

      >Patents are rights to exclude

      Technically yes, but that's not how they're defined or intended to be used. Patents are about licensing. If I patent a particular widget, I would expect other people to produce that same widget and give me royalties. The patent system was designed around physical processes and widgets.
      This is so a the inventor of a particular widget is duly compensated.

      Now, in the software world, things slightly completely different. Software, unlike your typical physical widget, is protected by copyright. Absent a patent, you already have the ability to lisence a particular software widget. Naturally, this means that few patent holders are interested in licensing their patents. This changes the nature of patents to be a more exclusive model, where all many are interested in doing is suing the crap out of any small fish who come up with the same idea. If you don't want to have your company squashed in patent litigation, the only available defense at the moment is to have your own patent portfolio, with the hope that you can countersue anyone that sues you.

      Apple does indeed need to patent a lot of seemingly obvious things for this very reason. If Microsoft sues them over patent A, they counter with patent B, and they're at a stalemate.

  16. OMG!!!!! by Giant+Panda · · Score: 0, Funny
    See, we do our best when we can focus in on a small number of applications (e.g. Microsoft Office) for which a lot of people are willing and able to pay money. Schools, unfortunately, have the reverse situation - they need support for tons and tons of applications, and they have no money...

    [joke] OMG! This guy is a Capitalist Pig! And Slashdot publishes his swill??? [/joke]

    1. Re:OMG!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And for schools there is OpenOffice.

  17. Tax Software by A.+Pizmo+Clam · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most of the larger/more reputable tax packages are already phasing in web-based clients alongside or in place of their shrinkwrap offerings. This will become a non-issue for the Wine team before very long.

    This is a good thing. It's nice to have more Windows apps that work under emulation, it's better to have more native Linux apps, but it's best to have more apps that are entirely platform-neutral. (We need to make sure they aren't IE-only though.)

    --

    Thank you for your support.
    1. Re:Tax Software by blunte · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't see what the fuss is. I hand a CPA a file full of junk, a $50 check, and come back a couple days later for my file + tax forms to sign.

      My method works regardless of what OS I use.

      To my favorite anti-blunte moderator, this post may start out at 2, but I'm sure it's worth you marking Overrated as usual. Thanks in advance.

      --
      .sigs are for post^Hers.
    2. Re:Tax Software by brer_rabbit · · Score: 1
      Most of the larger/more reputable tax packages are already phasing in web-based clients alongside or in place of their shrinkwrap offerings. This will become a non-issue for the Wine team before very long.

      I agree that web-based clients are a good thing from a portability standpoint. But let me dawn my tinfoil hat and disagree with web applications for my financial data. Do you really want Some Random Webserver(tm) to have access to all your tax data? I don't care if they use SSL, some machine out of your control will be decrypting and storing a database of your finances.

    3. Re:Tax Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      To my favorite anti-blunte moderator, this post may start out at 2, but I'm sure it's worth you marking Overrated as usual. Thanks in advance.

      I too am getting sick of these people who have discovered that mod'ing as overrated makes them immune to being meta-moded. There is a whole lot of overrated modding going on that is motivated by personal bias rather than the merits of the message being moderated.

  18. Just do them online by b0bby · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, I don't know about that, but I do know that I did my taxes in Firefox with TurboTax online (under Windows, admittedly) and it worked fine, so I imagine that you could do that with Firefox under Linux. I've used the online service for 5 or so years now, it works well, I get a pdf of the whole form at the end and they remember my basic information from one year to the next. No need to get a boxed cd for something you'll use for a week or so, and certainly no need to maintain a windows box for that sole purpose.

    1. Re:Just do them online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Well, I don't know about that, but I do know that I did my taxes in Firefox with TurboTax online (under Windows, admittedly) and it worked fine, so I imagine that you could do that with Firefox under Linux."

      I doubt it. It definately works with the rest of the GNU system installed but with just the kernel and Firefox? No, it doesn't work. You would need at least a login shell, libc, an implementation of X11 and perhaps a window manager. Not to mention the library dependencies required for Firefox but I suppose you could use a statically linked binary.

    2. Re:Just do them online by Snodgrass · · Score: 5, Informative

      For the record I did mine in Firefox on FreeBSD.

      Worked like a charm.

    3. Re:Just do them online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, you're an idiot. Quick nit-picking.

    4. Re:Just do them online by jsebrech · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I disagree that you would need a login shell. You could conceivably modify init to start up X11 and firefox hardwired. And you definitely wouldn't need a window manager. Window managers are pure eye candy.

    5. Re:Just do them online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did mine using Firefox on Linux. TurboTax insisted that I have Adobe Acrobat, but I clicked through anyway, and everything worked fine using xpdf. Go Linux!

    6. Re:Just do them online by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


      Well, I don't know about that, but I do know that I did my taxes in Firefox with TurboTax online (under Windows, admittedly) and it worked fine, so I imagine that you could do that with Firefox under Linux.


      It does. I used Firefox (or was it Firebird at the time?) on Linux to do my taxes last year. No problem. And the year before that, I used Galeon.
    7. Re:Just do them online by OneDeeTenTee · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm almost done doing mine using a Bochs VM.

      --
      Stop the world; I need to get off.
    8. Re:Just do them online by demon · · Score: 1

      I did mine in Firefox on Linux - on my PowerBook. It worked just fine. Didn't have to boot MacOS, didn't have to use Wine in qemu, didn't have to go to a Windows machine. Pretty good, if you ask me.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  19. Uh NO (BSD is not Linux) by mrnick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Max OS X is BSD (Darwin) based.

    Nick Powers

    --

    Encryption: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to encrypt it...
  20. ooh, i know, i know! by torpor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    However, what Winelib does allow, that *is* wicked cool, is that you can port a Windows app to a non x86 platform quite easily. I don't really know of anyone that really values this (i.e. is willing to pay big bucks for it), but it's cool, nonetheless.

    Software Synthesizer Plugins!

    I've see, I think it is now, three different VST-plugin efforts that are going on, to get Linux up as a primo VST host ... but I can really see this going weird when linuxPPC folks can take a VST .DLL and run it ...)

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  21. Didn't much care for the questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They were mostly about politics and procedure. Nothing with any meat. There was one question where he slightly got into updating Office software but that's it.
    Since this seems to be the first high profile interview in a while why weren't there more technical questions? What's next for Wine? Is there some particular program that's about to work well?

    Finally, is there any future potential conflict of interest between codeweavers and Wine. Say Codeweavers reaches the point where it can run most Windows software easily. What is the incentive to get those features back into Wine so that its as good as Codeweavers? IMHO once mainline Wine becomes moron proof and works as well as the cross-over products there just won't be much use for Codeweavers products. Are you not worried or will someone make sure this doesn't happen? That may sound negative but its a real concern that this delicate balancing act may indeed hold back mainline Wine.

  22. What about a really important by SquadBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    app like itunes?

    --

    Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    1. Re:What about a really important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      There are some tip's in C4 about running itunes just mozey on over to http://www.codeweavers.com/site/compatibility/brow se/name?app_id=134

      Tom

    2. Re:What about a really important by nbahi15 · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can offer a cash bounty for specific applications to be supported by Codeweavers. It is in the Compatibility section of their website. Once you have located the application you would like to have supported (e.g. iTunes, which I offer $50 for) then you make a pledge. Kinda like NPR/PBS for nerds.

    3. Re:What about a really important by rtaylor · · Score: 1

      How big does the pledge have to be before it is acted upon?

      --
      Rod Taylor
  23. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by tweakr · · Score: 2, Interesting
    > Or, just ask people to "donate" by maintaining a wishlist of packages schools are looking to run.

    Umm - that's the whole purpose of the "Compatibility" area of the CodeWeavers website is for....? Why not just get schools (or related people) who are willing to add such programs to the list, "advocate" the project (provide help and testing), and/or pledge (donate) towards them? If there are enough people (parents??) who are willing to vote or drop in a few dollars, I'm sure that would make a good difference...

    http://www.codeweavers.com/site/compatibility/topl ists/
    --
    Worrying works!! 99% of all the stuff I worry about never happens :)
  24. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This to some extent is already in place.
    Here is the link http://www.winehq.org/site/contributing#wpf

    If you have some insightful recommendations please send them to the wine-devel list.

    Tom

  25. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by jeremy_white · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, that is pretty much the idea behind our compatibility center.

    And, if you donate to WineHQ, I'll see that that money flows through to buy apps for Wine hackers (mostly games, I want to send Lionel a tub full).

  26. plug it, Luke! by SuperBanana · · Score: 1
    Well, that is pretty much the idea behind our compatibility center [codeweavers.com].

    Ok, so why didn't you plug it in your answer? :-)

    1. Re:plug it, Luke! by jeremy_white · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Well, I was trying to be non commercial in my answers; it always bugs me when others do nothing but plug their products.

      The sales and marketing guys are already on my case about this; I'm trying to do better. (Actually, that last link is pretty darn cool, imho).

  27. Agreed by Apostata · · Score: 1

    I'm actually a little surprised by the questions chosen, and the fact that they're mostly middle-of-the-road in terms of challenge.

    --

    This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
  28. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or a way to set up bounties.

    Like donating money for the first guy that will report a specific application as working.

    This way, people with the same center of interest could donate directly toward getting some specific app working.

  29. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by Can · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure this is more or less what http://c4.codeweavers.com allows you to do.

  30. Just curious by edxwelch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "there are certainly large areas of the Windows API that we struggle to understand, and we could certainly use some help"
    Does anyone know which APIs he's talking about?

    1. Re:Just curious by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Informative
      most of NTDLL, parts of the shell interface, exactly what message orderings/sequences are generated by Windows in certain circumstances, the full TEB layout, that sort of thing ...

      Those are just the undocumented/poorly documented bits. Then there's a whole ton of extra APIs for which documentation exists, but the APIs are so complex or obscure that hardly anybody understands them. This is especially true of things like the RPC runtime which not many developers use directly, and the more intricate parts of DCOM (which you need to read several books to be completely au fait with).

  31. Linux Tax Software by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At the moment, do my taxes at turbotax.com (online). I find that there are disadvantages compared to the boxed software, but it works well enough, and they have done a great job of improving it over the next few years.

    What we REALLY need is for the government to use some of our tax dollars to release a BSD-licensed tax software engine and database. That way, we could build open source tax software relatively easily. The reason why this doesn't happen is that the cost of tax software really is the cost of the tax law review process by acountants and lawyers, and this is not something conducive to open source development yet.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:Linux Tax Software by girgit · · Score: 1

      they have done a great job of improving it over the next few years
      Since you seem to be able to look into the future, can you please tell us when Jeremy is going to win that lottery?

  32. Cue the music. by gregarican · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Spill the wine, dig that girl...Spill the wine, dig that girl..." I know it's OT, but the song is stuck in my head now.

    1. Re:Cue the music. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The correct lyrics are: "spill the wine, take that pearl."

  33. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by jsebrech · · Score: 1

    Like donating money for the first guy that will report a specific application as working.

    The problem is that often you can do hacks to enable some specific app, while regressing on overall api compatility. Like how the earlier implementations of the installshield support worked.

  34. ATTN: Moderators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up

    [+5 Troll]

  35. Re:Jeez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking retard, did you mean

    1. Wiener - a Hot Dog? or,
    2. Whiner - a Complainer? or,
    3. Winner - a Success?

    or something else completely?

  36. Interesting length: Outlook crash and burn by eltoyoboyo · · Score: 1

    We also go to all kinds of interesting lengths to avoid problems with viruses and worms. For example, we have a hack in our flavor of Wine*, in the CreateProcess call (the code to start an executable) that basically checks to see if the parent process is outlook.exe, and if it is, we crash and burn, preventing many of the worms and such from running.

    OK, how about Outlook express, Netscape Mail, Lotus notes or any other e-mail client where the user can recieve files such as self-extracting ZIP files?

    Pulling the ripcord is not the solution.

    --
    Have you Meta Moderated t
    1. Re:Interesting length: Outlook crash and burn by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Lotus Notes is not sandboxed, but Notes uses its own rendering engine (not IE) for email which means it's less likely to suffer from random auto-execute holes than Outlook. Notes also has significantly less userbase than Outlook so it's less likely to be targetted by worms.

      Having said that, these sort of things are rather crude hacks. The correct solution to security/sandboxing in Wine is the same solution as for native Linux apps, namely locking down the program using the SELinux policy enforcement engine. Currently Wine doesn't integrate with SELinux at all, but it'd not be hard to do if somebody wished to make it a project of theirs.

  37. Hate to say it, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Me too. (Is it Thursday yet? Nothing important ever happens on Thursdays.)

  38. It's a serious foil hat issue! by swb · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty un-tinfoil hat on most issues, but the online-tax thing scares the shite out of me. It's not that I worry about my data getting stolen by l33t d00dz with m4d ski11z. What I worry about is it getting used/traded/sold for financial benefit of the tax company.

    I don't know if they would or would not do this, but I do know that "financial planning" (ie, high pressure marketing of crap grade securities) is a huge growth target for most tax prep companies.

    Besides, doing your taxes isn't all that hard. I own a home, have some minor non-401k investments, make charitable contributions and am married; I do the 1040 long form and some of the supplementals, and with photocopying it took maybe 3 hours, tops.

    And besides, we shouldn't make tax collection that easy for the government. If you want to take my money, you should have to deal with a paper bureaucracy.

    1. Re:It's a serious foil hat issue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to take my money, you should have to deal with a paper bureaucracy.

      I don't know about you, but I have to deal with paper bureaucracy to get my money back. Pretty unfair if you ask me.

  39. Wine lib and MFC by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Yes MFC sucks but I wounder how well MFC source will compile using the wine libs it will at all.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  40. And... by macmaxbh · · Score: 1

    DarWine--the WINE app for Mac OS X, which actually uses Winelib!

  41. Kids games in Wine by Kludge · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've found that the wonderful Humungous adventure games work well under wine.
    Also kutoka games also work well.

  42. Real reason to buy VirtualPC by alexhmit01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Perhaps we can all take off our tinfoil hats and realize the REAL reason Microsoft bought VirtualPC...

    1. They've been trying to divorce themselves from Intel for the better part of a decade... The point of a monopoly is to extract monopoly rents... they currently split those...

    2. If they could virtualize all pre-Longhorn calls into a clean emulation layer, then they don't have to "maintain" them... i.e. they could leave Win32 sitting there in its happy emulation layer forever, simply maintaining that one layer that talks to the OS via the CLR... In that world, they can move everything to CLR, and legacy Win32 runs in the VM that gets recompiled all the time.

    3. Look at an old (pre NT 4) Win32 diagram... the Win32 subsystem was just a subsystem, with equal billing to POSIX and others... the idea was to be able to have the flexibility, but it didn't work out that way, as the Windows/DOS combination took 10 years to transition away from... moving the Win32 subsystem into a virtual layer underneath CLR (like WOW - Windows On Windows) would make maintenance easier...

    Remember, sales growth is pretty flat for Microsoft, but they need to keep increasing earnings. Lowering development costs could DRASTICALLY increase earnings, so Microsoft could see 15% earnings growth on flat sales... look at Phillip Morris, declining market (decreases around 1%/year IIRC), increasing earnings each year, happy owners.

    Alex

  43. Re:how about a foundation, instead of lottery tick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummm Wine for Kids - I've got the perfect name for it - The Jesus Juice Foundation.

  44. Whatever happened to Crossover Plugin? by tigre · · Score: 1

    I just noticed today that Crossover Plugin is nowhere to be found on the Codeweavers site. What gives?

    1. Re:Whatever happened to Crossover Plugin? by jeremy_white · · Score: 1

      The CrossOver Plugin functionality was rolled into CrossOver Office (that was one of the key changes in 3.0).

  45. Well let's see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's look at the article. It says the Wine project has been public and running since 1993.

    That's 11 years and hey're nowhere near the point you describe yet.

    Something tells me the answer to your question is "a really long time".

  46. Pot...Kettle...Black... by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

    "I too am getting sick of these people who have discovered that mod'ing as overrated makes them immune to being meta-moded."

    How do you feel about people who post complaints about moderation as AC because it makes them immune to losing karma?

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  47. Re:Americans == NAZI pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (laughs) (fishing reel sound) - Hey look, I caught me a Troll!

  48. Stop paying the stupid tax! by bluGill · · Score: 2

    Next time you are tempted to buy a lottery ticket, instead send $.50 to the wine foundation, and $.50 to a foundation to end gamboling addiction. If everyone reading slashdot followed this strategy games would run perfectly under wine, and gamboling wouldn't be a solcal problem anymore.

    Your odds of winning the lottery about about equal to your ever collecting a social security check, and substantially less than you getting hit by lightning. (Specific to Jeremy White, I know his age close enough to know he won't get a check, someone reading this is old enough that they will get one)

    Keep your eyes open, your odds are finding the winning ticket on the sidewalk are about the same as buying the ticket, you never know when it will happen.

    1. Re:Stop paying the stupid tax! by exchangekiller · · Score: 1

      gamboling = the act of running about happily... this is a real problem. maybe you mean gambling?

  49. The problem with VST plugins... by acb · · Score: 1

    The problem with VST plugins is that most of the commercial ones use various low-level API calls to implement copy protection. (The music software industry is very much into copy protection of all sorts, sometimes in three different layers for one app.) This is the reason why MacOS 9 VST plugins are unsupported under OSX: because enough plugins wouldn't work that it wouldn't make commercial sense to implement such a feature.

    I'm not sure if this is the case for Windows VST plugins; I tried a few with an early version of vstserver, and was able to get the MDA free plugins working, though I had no luck with commercial plugins like Steinberg's LM4 and Waldorf Attack.

  50. The *GOOD* thing about VST plugins... by torpor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... is that there are thousands and thousands of free ones.

    At the Linux Audio Developers conference this year in Karlsruhe, Paul Davis showed us quite a few commercial VST plugins running under Linux, some with copy protection also running. Kontakt, for example, ran great!

    But regardless, cross-platform sound-generating plugins are cool. (Except for the .DLL part, eww...)

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  51. max points limit - was: Re:Wrong by Nivag353 · · Score: 1

    I would like to see the maximum score increased to 7 (or even 9, but certainly no higher) - for all articles.

    Because, I tend to increae my threshold until the number of comments is 50 or less. At 5, sometimes there are still over a 100 comments!


    - Nivag

  52. Port Windows apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...what Winelib does allow, that *is* wicked cool, is that you can port a Windows app to a non x86 platform quite easily. I don't really know of anyone that really values this (i.e. is willing to pay big bucks for it), but it's cool, nonetheless.
    I wonder if Discreet are listening. A port of 3D Studio to other environments would be great. We already have Photoshop in CrossOver, with 3D Studio in the mix, we gfx guys could finally ditch windows. (No one start touting Maya, or XSI linux support, they are entirely different beasts than Max)
  53. Tax software by ripcrd · · Score: 2, Informative

    You might just want to use ssl encrypted web-based tax software. I used www.taxact.com and it worked pretty good. Now granted, I used Win2K on my laptop, but the current browsers running on linux should be OK. In fact I think I used Firefox for most of the tax prep work. I much prefer this to loading more software on my PC. At the end I print stuff out and I'm done.

    --
    --Somewhere there is a village missing an idiot.
  54. you're right--I should've been more specific by bodrell · · Score: 1
    Ideally, I think there should be no software patents at all, since copyright would be a perfectly adequate protection. But given that the US patent office is handing out software patents left and right, I think it's possible for someone to obtain a software patent and not do something evil with it.

    In this case, I agree with you that Apple is just stocking its arsenal so they can countersue in future attacks by Micro$oft/SCO/whoever.

    --
    Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar