Slashdot Mirror
Wine 1.0 — Uncorked After 15 Years
pshuke writes "After 15 years of development, Wine version 1.0 has been released. Wine is an Open Source implementation of the Windows API on top of X, OpenGL, and Unix. While perfect windows compatibility has not yet been achieved, full support for Photoshop CS2, Excel Viewer 2003, Word Viewer 2003 and PowerPoint Viewer 2003 have been among the goals prior to the release. For further information about supported applications, head over to the appdb. Get it (source) while it's hot."
Obviously, sooner is better for actual use; but releasing it on June 30th would have been more amusing.
And of course such a program would be pointless anyway. If 'Designed For Windows' apps don't work under Wine then Wine itself has failed its objective.
There's a lot of us out there who really dislike Office 2007, that doesn't mean that we're promoting OpenOffice, it may mean that Office 2003 is the better product.
Your logic is ridiculous, at 99% compatibility for Open Office, it outdoes Microsoft Office's general compatibility with itself.
The situation you provided is very exclusive to a boss who is intelligent enough to realize the difference between MS Office and Open Office and having to work 100% of the year long.
In a normal business year, 99% compatibility is much closer to 1 day something going wrong, assuming your claimed statistics are even worth arguing.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Send "presentation important" documents as PDFs. Always. Even if you're going from MS Office to MS Office.
Problem solved!
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
It's not necessarily the toolbars we document processors/writers/editors miss in 2007--it's the hot keys and the functions usable from the keyboard through drop down menus. In spite of MS's assurances that those haven't been changed, many many have been. Not to mention the whole thing works damned inconsistently from the keyboard.
In this end of things typing speeds above 75 wpm are a matter of course; at that speed, taking your hands off the keyboard to use a mouse is a big productivity hit. Taking that hit plus the hit necessary to relearn an interface? Sorry, but I have deadlines to meet.
The most galling thing about it is MS's hubris (yes, I know, par for the course). They could have at least put in the ability to switch between the old and new interfaces to ease the transition and allow user choice. So confident were they that the new interface was better, that they forced us to make an either/or choice. If I had both, I could use the old interface when I had to and spend some time every day learning the new one. Instead it decreased our productivity.
Thanks guys...this is the worst call since they changed the help system to an online web-imitative help system.
It goes great with vintage Windows apps.
Many a true word was said in jest. Back in 1998 I wrote a small Windows program at work (~3000 lines of Turbo Pascal 7.0, Win 3.1) and tested it at home on Wine on Slackware. It worked fine.
Wine is an astonishing project. It deserves a lot of credit.
Stick Men
the same can be said of Windows....
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
Using wine is a stop-gap measure for running Windows apps on Linux. All users of wine (and I am one) should write to their applications' developers and let them know that they would like native Linux support. I have a list of tens of software house and their contact info, for writing to software developers. Please, if you use wine, at least write to the application developers and let them know that there is demand for their products on Linux. Whether the apps work in wine or not.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
And of course such a program would be pointless anyway. If 'Designed For Windows' apps don't work under Wine then Wine itself has failed its objective.
I disagree. What that would mean is that software producers have tested against the platform, and certified it as a working alternative. That would be a level of awareness that has yet to be seen. It's also no different than having both XP and Vista, or only one, listed on the box. And that's besides the publicity that Wine would get.Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
At the very least, write to them if it doesn't run in Wine.
Porting a software project can be a very nontrivial task, taking many manyears of work to complete. Few companies are willing to invest this kind of work (and money) for what seems to be a rather small customer base. They could, though, be willing to invest in a few tweaks to make it run on an emulator that would accomplish, from their point of view, the same thing: Letting Linux users use their software.
Companies are usually reluctant to develop for a platform with a small customer base. They do, though, accept making a few tweaks to get a foot into the market.
Currently, the only argument for people to keep using Windows is that Wine can't handle EVERY SINGLE Windows application. When there is no important application left that doesn't run well on Wine, people will more readily switch (Linux+Wine == Windows, from a user's point of view, but about 100-300 bucks cheaper).
And THEN it's time to ask software companies to develop for Linux, with it being the bigger market.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Dear software dev,
I am writing you to inform you that even though you only write Windows apps, I (somewhat) successfully managed to get it to run on my Linux operating system. Please start making a Linux version of this application post haste so you can not gain a customer (I have already hacked your app to run in linux) and increase your development costs. An added perk is the fact that you will be required to support the Linux version rather than just telling me to "run it in Windows" when I call. The extra staff you hire for your support center should help the unemployment rate.
Thanks Again,
A Wine User
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
If that were true, the default permission level would not be Administrator unless you go out of your way to reconfigure it.
You are conflating two very different things. The permissions in the system and privilege level of the user.
The default permission level for new users in Vista is still Administrator: Not sane.
This is simply confirming your ignorance. An "Administrator" in Vista is simply someone who is allowed to elevate their privilege level. It is loosely equivalent to the "admin" group in OS X or the "wheel" group in UNIX.
You can leave Portage out of it.
Its a very nice niche PM.
It will never really hit mainstream thus wont do any damage.
RPM does need to die though.