Slashdot Mirror


No Wine for Dell Ubuntu Users, Says Shuttleworth

yuna49 writes "News from last week, but still worth noting: Mark Shuttleworth told eWeek in a May 3rd interview that Dell will not include open-source software such as Wine with the PCs it plans to bundle with Ubuntu Linux. Says Shuttleworth: 'I do not want to position Ubuntu and Linux as a cheap alternative to Windows ... While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows ... Often we see proprietary software companies just completely fail to understand not only the motivations of the Linux community, but also the processes. It's very practical, there's a way to get things done, and it's different. The VMware guys have really engaged with us completely and worked to the agenda set by the Linux community, which is not an ideological agenda but a practical one.' Does that mean Wine won't even be listed in the package manager?"

35 of 328 comments (clear)

  1. And one of those is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows

    And one of those strengths is that you can still install WINE after you buy the computer despite the decisions made by a large company or single individual.

    1. Re:And one of those is by jimstapleton · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's an option with any OS though.

      I've yet to see a company ship windows with Corel Photopaint, many don't ship with Nero, or McAffee Enterprise. Often the do ship with Adobe Acrobat, but never with Foxit...

      And I uninstall acrobat, and then install the rest.

      That's the whole point of having a computer, and it can be done with any OS, as long as the software is available.

      Now occasionally a new version of one will break the compatability with another, but I've seen that in OSS software, and while yes, I could fix it in OSS software, I don't (and most people) don't have that kind of time to waste for every application they use, and will end up doing the same thing I would with non OSS software - finding versions that do work.

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    2. Re:And one of those is by Robber+Baron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In fact if it's all the same to you guys, I'd prefer it if Dell DIDN'T bundle their computers with all that useless bloatware that they currently do (not that WINE is useless or bloatware)! It's almost at the point where it's better to wipe the damn thing clean immediately and then re-install the OS from scratch!

      --

      You're using her as bait, Master!

    3. Re:And one of those is by 0racle · · Score: 5, Informative

      What in the hell are you talking about? The Ubuntu that will ship not have Wine installed by default. The article does not say it will not have Wine available. You will still be able to launch Aptitude or whatever Ubuntu actually uses and install Wine from the Ubuntu repositories.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    4. Re:And one of those is by popejeremy · · Score: 3, Informative
      1. Click on "Applications"
      2. Click on "Add/Remove"
      3. Choose WINE from the list.

      It's not any harder than that. I don't see what you're raising a stink about.

      WINE isn't included in the main distribution Ubuntu by default, and there's a good reason. It's still a beta. The current version in Ubuntu is 0.9.36. But anyone who wants to have WINE can add it easily in three, easy-to-understand clicks. Why should Dell do anything differently than the main distribution?

    5. Re:And one of those is by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean Linux lets you install software now?!?! Wow, maybe this really is the year for Linux on the desktop...

    6. Re:And one of those is by Narcissus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If a package isn't included in Ubuntu, your only option is either to compile it from source (good luck with that if you aren't technical) or using something like an autopackage. Neither Windows nor MacOS X practice this kind of software censorship.

      That line intrigued me. This is an honest question: nothing else. Can you explain to me, please, how 'source or autopackage' for Ubuntu (specifically) is different to 'source or installer' for Windows, say? I mean, Windows installers don't magically appear... the developer has to create it, so how is 'requiring' an installer different to 'requiring' an autopackage package (or whatever it's called)?

      Hopefully you understand the question... Following on from that: a Windows installer isn't required as you could just put a built executable in a ZIP file and run it like that. But can you not do that in Ubuntu, too (so long as the app is built for Ubuntu)?

      I mean, as far as I can see, there are a number of options for Windows: download source, provide a ZIP of the built code or provide an installer, which the developer has to create: it's not magically there. For Ubuntu, you could provide source, a ZIP of the built code or an autopackage (which again is not magic: the developer needs to make it). So how is it that Ubuntu is 'censoring' while Windows is not? The way I see it, Ubuntu is ENABLING by providing a way to install many pre-selected packages while Windows does not. For the situations where a package has not been selected for this 'enablement' (which is the case for all packages in Windows), how is the Ubuntu process any worse than the Windows one?

    7. Re:And one of those is by sgholt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you and many of the other posters have missed Shuttleworth's point.
      He doesn't want linux to be a platform to run windows software. Wine is a great application, but windows software with a few exceptions is never going to run as well as it would on the Windows OS.
      That can only hinder linux adoption by those still tied to windows applications.
      The key to linux adoption has not changed...we need software companies to make software for linux.

      Shuttleworth has put a lot of money into advertising and promotion of linux...he is doing what needs to be done. The more linux users there are, the more interest software companies will take. Wine is a temporary fix to the bigger problem...it will always just be a temporary fix. These things take time but I think his comments do show a good understanding of the real problems.

    8. Re:And one of those is by mhall119 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um, WTF? If Windows doesn't include software I want, I download it and install in. For linux, it's probably in the distro's repository, so downloading and installing it is even easier. If it's not, then I'm back to where I am on Windows, download it and install it.

      Now I doubt Ubuntu will setup a different repository for Dell installs, so Wine will likely be only an apt-get away. The announcement is just saying that Wine will not be in the default installation, for the logical reasons given.

      But lets say you're right, and Ubuntu doesn't offer it for Dell installs, you just download it and install it yourself, it'll even handle downloading and installing any dependencies for you.

      So the absolute worst case scenario here is that installing software in Ubuntu is as easy as installing software on Windows, but chances are it will be much much easier. Basically everything about your post was FUD, and not even intentional FUD, but ignorant FUD. From someone who claims to be a Linux developer (and a Wine developer too?), I can't fathom how you could not know this.

      --
      http://www.mhall119.com
    9. Re:And one of those is by mhall119 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Again, WTF?

      What happens if you are not included in a distribution (or just as badly, included but packaged wrong or out of date)? As there's a lot of confusion around what this means, it means you aren't apt-gettable by end users. Not in the repositories.
      You offer the file for download directly from you. How do you do it in Windows?

      That's OK if it's only one distro, but it quickly becomes annoying if it's several.
      No it's not, there are about 4 packages you can make that will cover 99% of users: RPM, DEB, TGZ and source. Just configure your build script to make each one every time you build, it's a 1-time cost in effort for the author.

      A package for Feisty isn't good enough. You need the last couple of versions as well, because not everybody upgrades at the same time. To do that you need a separate install of each version, and you need to build the package on each install, using multi-boots, or VMware, or chroots, or just relying on volunteers to fill in the gaps for you. So if there are 3 distros you want to support, each with 3 versions in the wild, that's 9 packages you need (therefore 9 independent OS installs).
      Only if your program is written to require the latest and greatest versions of dependent libraries, otherwise if Feisty has a binary compatible version of your dependency, you don't need to create a new package. And your autopackage system will improve on this how? You can create a single package that works with multiple incompatible versions of dependent libraries?

      Then you have to tell your users how to install it. Look at the complexity of the page you linked to. This is a light year away from "just download and install it yourself".
      That is only because WineHQ offers a repository for easy updating. They could just offer the .deb file for you to "just download and install".

      See, this is what I have problems with. It's the general design of the software distribution scheme that's bogus. It can never work reliably. It's like Microsoft announcing that Vista will only install software you got from Microsoft Download Center ... nobody would accept that: it doesn't scale, MS aren't trusted to be impartial, etc. It wouldn't work for Microsoft, so why would it work for anybody else
      Or, you can just download and install the RPM or DEB. Seriously, how can you not know this?
      --
      http://www.mhall119.com
    10. Re:And one of those is by yahooadam · · Score: 5, Informative

      sudo apt-get install wine

      seriously - whats so hard about that ?

      TBH i think this is a good idea, why should dell install a boatload of rubbish on your PC, the same goes for windows, you can install it yourself if you want, that's why its a PERSONAL computer

      also - although wine is good, it is no alternative to windows yet, its still not simple and easy to use, and its not 100% there, but if you are moving over its definitely a nice way to keep your favorite windows apps going (if they work)

    11. Re:And one of those is by sgholt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Come on now...try thinking 10 years from now...do you really think linux users will be using wine? I really doubt it...linux is on a long road one that does not end tomorrow. It needs to stand on its own and not rely on the ability to run non-native software. You and many others are blinded by what they need right now...but in the bigger picture it can not remain that way.

    12. Re:And one of those is by Dan+Ost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That someone will come and make an even better tool which does run in Linux, thus making wine unnecessary.

      I'm trying to decide if that's a presumptuous statement or merely an optimistic one. In either case, it might be true that eventually a better app will be written that runs in Linux, but that doesn't solve my problem right now. If the tool for the job is a Windows app and I'm running Linux, having Wine can make my life easier. Therefore, Wine has value since it helps me solve my problem right now.

      The goal is that all the good tools are cross-platform, or at least work on linux

      Wouldn't Wine help achieve this goal?
      I guess I still don't understand your position.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
  2. omg.. you might have d/l it yourself.. by uncledrax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Um.. so it's not included? Big deal..

    apt-get install wine

    done...

    What's the problem?

    --
    ----- The internet has given everyone the ability to have their voice heard equally as loud.. even if they shouldn't be
    1. Re:omg.. you might have d/l it yourself.. by HoosierPeschke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clearly, the "problem" is that we, the Linux community, should be trying to "convert" the n00bs out there who don't know what apt-get is. Having WINE preinstalled would help them get over the fact that they're not running Windows, yet everything is fine, and they can do pretty much everything today they that they could when they were running Windows yesterday.


      But the problem is, WINE doesn't always work like it supposed to. Sometimes it requires tweaking. In my opinion, I would rather a "n00b" learn about a native Linux application that can do what they want it to than fiddle with WINE just to get their Windows application to work.
      --
      Mr. Universe: "They can't stop the signal, Mal. They can never stop the signal."
    2. Re:omg.. you might have d/l it yourself.. by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the problem is, WINE doesn't always work like it supposed to. Sometimes it requires tweaking.

      I think you're wrong. About the "sometimes". Take it out and the sentence is good.

    3. Re:omg.. you might have d/l it yourself.. by metalzelot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Acutally the 'sometimes' is correct. I'm able to run windows-only applications (including games) without tweaking wine for it. Of course there are things where you have to tweak wine a bit, but fortunately many applications work "out of the box". But despite of that I think its better for linux newbies to get common to native linux applications. Because most of the time they are better anyway :)

  3. Way to go, Mark by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I read something about Mark Shuttleworth, I become just a little bit more of a fan.

    While I have nothing against WINE—indeed, I use it myself for several things—I have to agree that it's just not right for distribution by a company like Dell. There's an art to getting it set up and configured, and while it's good, there are still a lot of applications that either don't work at all or don't quite work right in it.

    This is a massive problem, and could seriously backfire on Ubuntu. If people buy a Dell machine with Ubuntu and WINE installed thinking that it will run Windows software, when something doesn't work right (and there will be things that don't work right), the average consumers will get mad at the wrong people: Ubuntu and WINE, not Microsoft. The focus will be on how Ubuntu sucks at running Windows software, not on how Ubuntu rocks at running Linux software.

    I see here a golden opportunity for desktop Linux to make major inroads with the public and take a significant step towards advancing free open source software. I also see here a golden opportunity to destroy the reputation of desktop Linux as a viable alternative to Windows and give people the impression that free open source software really sucks. Don't you think for a second that Microsoft is going to be trying their damned best to see that Linux on Dell machines gives people a bad taste for open source software.

    I have to give Mark Shuttleworth a pat on the back for seeing the big picture, for sacrificing trying to please everyone for the sake of making sure that this is done right, and that the software that people get is great, not just "it works good enough with a few hours of tweaking."

    1. Re:Way to go, Mark by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The focus will be on how Ubuntu sucks at running Windows software, not on how Ubuntu rocks at running Linux software.

      Well, that's great as long as there are perfect 1:1 replacements for all the Windows software somebody wants. That isn't true for any serious gamer, for instance, or people who use custom business apps, which basically means every business that uses IT, or anybody with kids who wants to use a particular educational software package.

      Hell I'll happily admit I'm biased, because I used to work on Crossover and Wine, but even the MS Office+Wine combination handily beats OpenOffice. Even when not doing anything Wine or software related, I'd use Word/Excel for office tasks on Linux, because it worked a lot better than OpenOffice did, and the small amount of integration OO had into the desktop wasn't a big deal to me compared to things like, not being sluggish, and being able to perfectly import Word docs. Now don't get me wrong, OO has improved a lot since those days and I want to love it, I really do, but I know there are still a lot of people who use MS Office on Linux over OpenOffice just because they prefer it.

      This is just a re-run of the ancient debate about whether Win32 emulation is harmful or good. It never interested me, because it assumes an operating system can be a closed world. That's clearly not true and never has been true, if it was, you should argue that MPlayer being able to play non-Ogg codecs is bad and should be pulled, or OpenOffice being able to read .DOCs is bad and should be pulled, or Linux being able to read FAT32 partitions is harmful and should be pulled. It just makes no sense, actually, because if people need that compatibility they'll either use the compatibility layer or they'll just stay with Windows, in which case you haven't even helped them a little bit.

    2. Re:Way to go, Mark by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 3, Informative

      if independent developers would test their stuff under WINE and label the retail boxes with "Runs under WINE"

      If they want to go that far, they can just compile the app with winelib and have a Linux binary. That way they don't need to worry about a new version of wine changing out from under them at all.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  4. That's fine by me by cHALiTO · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's their choice, and I'm ok with it. Other distros also add or remove support for certain packages based on ideological positions (non free software, no binaries, stuff like that), so ubuntu and Dell can very well agree to do this to promote that way of considering GNU/Linux.

    And besides, it's still ubuntu, so nothing prevents those who MUST have wine to add a rep to their sources.list and get it somewhere else.

    --
    "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
  5. No. by otacon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, he probably didn't want to include WINE because it will make Ubuntu bad because WINE is too hard for most novice users or a beginner to get working properly...if you make promises that it can run windows software to people, then you have to be able to be able to deliver on that.

    --
    In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. I agree by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think we need a rule: "No Wine for Ubuntu users." That might make them less likely to think up names like "Breezy Badger" and "Dapper Drake". Although perhaps extend the rule to Beer, Liquor, and perhaps Shrooms as well?

  8. Re:Well by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Er... but you're a techie. For the other 99.9% of PC purchasers who want their machine to 'just work' what is, or is not installed by default is quite important. After all, the reason Windows is the most popular OS is because Windows is the most popular OS.

    --
    init 11 - for when you need that edge.
  9. Good by Tribbin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I haven't installed MS software on my computer for about seven years now. People ask me if I got MS Office working on it; it is the first thing they try when they install linux.

    "I haven't tried it."

    People find that awkward.

    Also people often say that 'app X does not work the same as commercial product X'.

    Sure, intercompatability is pushed from the open side because of demand. But ...

    LINUX IS NOT WINDOWS!

    People find that hard to understand.

    I think this step by DELL + Ubuntu is a step in the right direction of bringing that understanding.

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
  10. if you're angry @ dell because this... by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    it's because you haven't faced up to the reality: Wine isn't very good.

    Sure you can make some programs work, sometimes. And sometimes when applications do work under Wine they act horribly, weird, strange, lots of font issues. It's not that the wine developers havent tried, it's just that emulating a Piece of Shit like Windows is nearly fucking impossible.. nobody can emulate the development hysteria that went into building windows. I don't fault the Wine devs, they tried mimic microsofts bullshit, but failed...

    It's a work in progress, I know... but now Vista is out now.. and microsoft will release another POS of OS soon enough... they have no chance to keep up with the Redmond madness.

  11. Great idea by sootman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've seen for a decade in my LUG what people go through when they try to use Linux as a 1:1 replacement for Windows. It's miserable. Linux should not be positioned as "like Windows but cheaper." (Especially since Dell's OEM deal with MS and crapware vendors means that a Linux system from Dell will probably cost exactly as much as a Windows system.) Mark S. is doing exactly the right thing here.

    That said, I have the feeling that these things won't sell well at all. (Not that adding Wine would make much of a difference.) Be honest: what does Linux offer the average user that Windows doesn't? The main one is "won't get infected with crap."* That's great, but that's not enough. People have put up with crappy Windows systems for so long that they think it's normal to reinstall Windows periodically, or pay a neighborhood kid or local shop $50-150 to clean off the spyware every few months (if they even bother at all), and to buy a new computer every couple years when the one the old one gets slow. People are used to Windows. They fear change. "The devil you know is better than the devil you don't." We love Linux, but we know what's involved, and we understand what the million little differences are and why they're there. The rest of the world just thinks "this isn't working right." The result of all this is, Joe User will NOT be buying Ubuntu machines from Dell. Dell will sell a few, but not many, and there's a very good chance this program will be axed within 6-12 months.

    * OS X offers this same benefit, plus it has the great iLife suite, gorgeous hardware, and unbeatable hardware/software integration. Not perfect, but miles ahead of anything else. That is a compelling reason to change, and I've seen a few people go from Windows to Mac, but even so, Windows has 90%+ share and will continue to dominate for quite a while.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  12. Nothing to see here, move alon by Brunellus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WINE isn't even in a default Ubuntu install. With or without Dell, Ubuntu does not ship with WINE. It never has. I hope it never does.

    One gripe I have with the community is that we tend to oversell WINE. Even though the WINE team have made a lot of progress lately, I still find WINE to be an imperfect solution, at best. Knowledgeable users know this. But the community insists on preaching WINE to every Windows convert. This is counterproductive.

    Rabid WINE advocacy builds unreasonably high expectations of 100% compatibility. This is not yet possible, and it is debatable whether this will ever be possible. New users don't appreciate the difficulty in the project, though. All they know is that NIFTY.EXE won't run. They resent the fact that they've been given "Broken Windows," rather than a "real OS."

    This is not to say that I'm against the WINE project at all. Quite the contrary: the compatibility layer gives the Linux community an extra tool. But I cringe every time I see people treating WINE as some sort of panacea, rather than using it correctly as a tool of last resort.

  13. Perfect decision by FullCircle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I completely agree with their decision. If you want Windows, buy Windows.

    Linux needs to stand on its own merits. Running Linux to use your Windows apps would make Dell and Linux look bad by giving a bad user experience.

    Wine as a Windows replacement is hard to set up, largely incompatible and the wrong solution for more than one or two applications.

    Let Linux have a fair chance on the desktop without false expectations of running Windows applications. If that's not enough, then Linux isn't ready for mass market adoption.

    --
    If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
  14. OS/2 by thetagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good. Windows compatibility is one of the things that killed OS/2.

  15. The real reason is they don't want to support it by bberens · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine average joe user calling Dell because [insert Windows app] doesn't work in wine. Dell doesn't want that.

    --
    Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  16. Hardware compatibility is the reason to buy a Dell by q2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason to buy a Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed is not Windows related at all. It's all about hardware. A Dell desktop or notebook PC with Ubuntu pre-installed should work out of the box. The stuff we fight with any Linux distro, wireless drivers (although that's gotten much better with Feisty), suspend / hibernate not working, etc should not be an issue with the Dells.

    My wife's XP box is 6+ years old, so I'm expecting it to die soon. She doesn't do anything on it that requires Windows, so her next computer will have Ubuntu on it. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one of the Dells. The market for these (at least initially) is not newbies looking for their first Linux box, it's people that are already at least a little Linux savvy that want a new box with minimum hassle involved.

  17. Great Idea by MrCrassic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Honestly, I think that the decision to not include WINE in the Dell-packaged Ubuntu install is a great idea. As many pointed out already, WINE is really a crapshoot application (at least in my experience). Some applications will work wonderfully (like Internet Explorer or Winamp), while others will not work at all (Microsoft Office, Photoshop, etc). I'm sure that if the application were more mature and had support for most applications, then it would be valuable to include it (and charge for it as well).

    Plus, it's not like the option to install it disappears when you get a Linuxed Dell. There are still repos and other outlets that will make the software available, so it's really just up to the user as to whether he wants to try it or not. Then again, in a couple of months or years time when more people unfamiliar to the Linux platform start purchasing these laptops, there is a very small possibility that they would have an interest in using it as supposed to, say, VMWare (free).

    On top of THAT, Ubuntu doesn't even install WINE by default so this is a non-issue to begin with.

  18. Who will this hurt? by ZombieRoboNinja · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously techies can just apt-get WINE, and semi-techies can just go to the website and download it. The only people this would seem to HURT are non-techies who can't even manage that much. Can you imagine even explaining the situation to those people?

    SLASHDOTTER: Bad news, Grandma. That new Linux Dell you're getting won't come with WINE.
    GRANDMA: Wine? Like, alcohol?
    S: No, no. It's a program CALLED "WINE."
    G: Why's it called that?
    S: It's an acronym.
    G: What for?
    S: Um, "WINE is not an emulator."
    G: It's in its own acronym?
    S: Well, yeah, it's recursive. I think it's kind of a joke.
    G: Okay, well, what does it do?
    S: It emulates Windows so you can...
    G: I thought you just said it's NOT an emulator.
    S: Well, right.
    G: It's in the name of the program.
    S: Yeah. So technically it's an interpreter, I think, but EFFECTIVELY what it does is let you run Windows programs in Linux.
    G: But didn't you say that Windows programs are buggy and full of viruses?
    S: Well, yeah.
    G: And that's why you're making me learn this Linux thing instead of just running Windows in the first place?
    S: Yeah.
    G: So why would I WANT to run Windows programs?
    S: ...NO CARRIER.
    G: Oh my stars, not again.