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."

Comments

What will interest me is

[Toreo asesino]

...how many applications will state "Designed for Windows XP, Vista, and Wine 1.0" as a supported platform. That will be the metre stick for success IMHO.

Re:What will interest me is

[cybrthng]

How about NONE? Wine doesn't have a "logo" nor a certification program. Being 1.0 release as well means it would be premature for a developer to market towards it (thus accepting liability for what could be shortcomings in the WINE system itself)

Re:What will interest me is

[SirMeliot]

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.

Re:What will interest me is

[cerberusss]

The chaps at Sparx Systems make software and have designed their UML tools to be compatible with Crossover Office, the commercial Wine variant: http://www.sparxsystems.com/support/faq/ea_on_linux.html.

For others, I would advise to check whether your favorite application is in CodeWeaver's compatibility database. This database is maintained pretty well.

Re:What will interest me is

[Firehed]

Premature? For a product that took a decade and a half to reach 1.0, I'm not sure that's the correct word.

Re:What will interest me is

[The MAZZTer]

uTorrent already does, last time I checked.

I was debugging a Half-Life crash once and I noticed it checks the registry for Wine keys while starting up, probably for compatibility hacks.

Re:What will interest me is

[QBasicer]

uTorrent does, and lists Wine first.

Re:What will interest me is

[daveisadork]

REAPER already lists Wine as a supported platform.

Re:What will interest me is

[TheNetAvenger]

how many applications will state "Designed for Windows XP, Vista, and Wine 1.0" as a supported platform. That will be the metre stick for success IMHO

Quite a few in the non-commerical areana already do list Wine/XP/Vista etc...

However,Wine may be a little late to the game. Virtualization will give us all the features we once needed Wine for if done properly.

The other problem with Wine is the evolution of the Win32/64 API, and how it is slowly being replaced. Vista API technologies are not even on the radar, and have the potential to shake up the next generation of application development. (Search Channel9 on WPF .NET 3.5 SP1 for some interesting demos of how far WPF has already gone in just a year.)

Microsoft sees a movement away from Win32 before too long, and even current applciations a lot of developers are working on projects that stretch from generic Win32 to fully hybrind Win32/WPF/DirectX all in one application.

If Virtualiation doesn't solve the divide, we still have Wine and Mono, and for any future, some of the backend of the current Linux kernel will need to extend to handle hardware with the same levels of abstraction, or shoving DX to OpenGL will not be enough when some of the core aspects of WPF is based around 3D UI that uses aspects of the OS to schedule and manage the 3D aspects so that two applications don't fight for 3D GPU resources, and currently only Vista's design allows for this.

(Didn't mean for this post to go negative, as there is a congrats to the Wine peeps in order, and even if Wine translation doesn't last forever is meeting a lot of people's needs now.)

Re:What will interest me is

[MighMoS]

Wine doesn't have a logo? I'd send you a link, but the website is down. Oh wait! All I had to do was scroll up to see it ON SLASHDOT!

Re:What will interest me is

[PRMan]

But Wine and Mono don't require a commercial license and virtualization does. So while it may "seem" the same while running the application, there is a cost difference (unless you are pirating Windows).

Re:What will interest me is

[SanityInAnarchy]

There's a cost difference with virtualization. There's also a difference in boot times (2-5 seconds with Wine vs a whole XP boot with virtualization), in performance (wrapped FS API is very likely faster than virtual hard disk on top of a real FS, for instance), and in RAM usage (duh).

Vista API technologies are not even on the radar, and have the potential to shake up the next generation of application development. (Search Channel9 on WPF .NET 3.5 SP1 for some interesting demos of how far WPF has already gone in just a year.) If WPF .NET is the future, Mono is already on that job -- and Mono can, in theory, be better than Wine, as .NET was at least half-assedly designed to be portable.

Keep in mind, also, that there's a whole class of people who only need one or two killer apps to work. Sometimes it's something recent (Photoshop); often it's something like an old version of QuickBooks, or some obscure app that no one makes anymore. So if Wine runs legacy apps well, that's a very good start.

Re:What will interest me is

[Baloo Ursidae]

uTorrent does, and lists Wine first.

What's more impressive is that there are far better options that run natively on Linux and they still have the balls to say that.

Re:What will interest me is

[Koiu Lpoi]

I suggest you google "VMWare Fusion". It's a Mac VM designed to run Windows, fully, seamlessly, and (in the latest beta versions, which you can download for free (for the time being)), full support of DirectX.

Re:What will interest me is

[linuxrocks123]

Virtualization still requires running actual Windows, just inside an emulator. WINE allows running Windows programs without doing that.

OpenGL isn't in the Linux kernel right now; it's done through an X11 library. That could be extended if it's needed, but I'm not sure it is; it's possible to play Q3 in Linux while also running Compiz.

Re:What will interest me is

[mdielmann]

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.

Re:What will interest me is

[Hatta]

rTorrent. I don't know any others because I stopped looking when I found rTorrent.

Re:What will interest me is

[Baloo Ursidae]

ktorrent, and bittorrent itself.

Re:What will interest me is

[Opportunist]

Wine has a logo. More yet, you don't have to go to some authenticating company and dump a load of greens on them to get it.

Actually I'm fairly sure we'll soon see it appear on some games. It's a pleasant looking logo to slap on the box, doesn't cost a dime and even if it doesn't work as well as it "should", or does under Windows, who cares, it's a game. Would you go to court for it and sue them?

Re:What will interest me is

[amrik98]

Deluge works great and has a similar UI to uTorrent. I used to use utorrent in wine until I found it and haven't looked back since.

Re:What will interest me is

[Opportunist]

I just know there's a Vista and a DNF joke lurking somewhere in there, I just can't put my finger on it...

Re:What will interest me is

[Junta]

Two problems with that:
-No virtualization seems to be in shape to provide a good quality hardware 3d acceleration functionality. Among the most desired software, games are high on the list. Wine can play many of them accelerated, Virtualization can not.

-You are still required to buy a product from a monopolist. Well, to be legal at least. Part of the goal is to have a competing implementation of MS APIs, so that users are given a viable choice. Virtualization does not address this.

The best thing I think would be for the industry to move toward cross-platform toolkits (DirectX->SDL, Direct3D->OpenGL, MFC (or whatever it is)->wx (or any number of toolkits). They could still target Windows first, but be left with a portable codebase. Jumping on .Net because of mono is a braindead approach when you have so many other similar sorts of implementations that aren't driven by one platform vendor.

Re:What will interest me is

[Hyppy]

Let me summarize the last few posts in line-by-line format for you.

How about NONE? Perhaps not commercial applications, yet, but many open source and freely distributed applications do. Case in point: uTorrent.

Wine doesn't have a "logo" Did you miss the Wine logo on its front page? Or on the top of the story?

nor a certification program. Wine's AppDB begs to differ

Being 1.0 release as well means it would be premature Over a decade of development, and its premature?

for a developer to market towards it (thus accepting liability for what could be shortcomings in the WINE system itself) Like that stopped developers or even hardware vendors from marketing for WindowsME.

Re:What will interest me is

[bberens]

I can name 1 app that advertises that it runs under wine. It's called Picasa, and that's produced by one of the largest firms in the industry. Thanks for playing though.

Re:What will interest me is

[garett_spencley]

Virtualization still requires running actual Windows, just inside an emulator.

I don't mean to nitpick, but just for the sake of accuracy, emulation and virtualization are not the same thing.

Virtualization is the process of abstracting computer resources in order to hide it's physical characteristics from it's users. IE: running more than one operating system simultaneously by "virtually splitting" the hardware. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization

Emulation is software "pretending" to be hardware. An emulator is a stand-alone application that loads the binaries, interprets them and translates the instructions to it's native hardware. Another example of emulation may be software that tries to mimick the behaviour of another application or system (xterm is a good example). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulation

For further clarity: you can not run, for example, SNES games on an x86 system using virtualization because the games were not written / compiled for the x86 processor. You can run an SNES emulator, however, that understands the SNES instruction set and translates it to x86 instructions. For this reason virtualization is much faster than emulation since the instructions run natively and there is no translation involved (but there are other uses for virtualization as well, such as making one system behave as many for security purposes etc.).

Re:What will interest me is

[TheNetAvenger]

don't see that this is true, you can open multiple OpenGL apps at the same time with no problems at all. OpenGL already enables sharing 3D GPU resources between multiple apps.

In your example, DirectX also does this...

However you are arguing that cooperative multi-tasking (applicaiton controlled locking) is just as good as pre-emptive multi-tasking (OS controlled scheduling/locking)...

I think most would agree that Applications 'self' managing themselves in a cooperative multi-tasking method is a horrible solution when compared to an OS controlled multi-tasking solution (ie. pre-emptive, etc.)

When you have EVERY application using 3D aspects or using GPU functions for the UI, for physics, to simple 2D acceleration through the 3D GPU side, which happens every second in Vista, then depending on Application yeilding like OpenGL and DirectX already provide would be a nightmare.

When you have every application dipping into the GPU, you need the OS handling the scheduling or things get ugly really quick.

Re:What will interest me is

[loutr]

Wrong

Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Ash-Fox]

By deleting the incomplete msxml dlls and setting winecfg's settings to use the native versions, then installing microsoft xml..

You can install and run Microsoft Office 2007.

I do find it a little disappointing that Wine didn't set getting Office 2007 working out of the box as a goal for 1.0, as it really currently just relies upon finishing two DLLs.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

Some would consider not running Office 2007 to be a feature.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Phyrexicaid]

By deleting the incomplete msxml dlls and setting winecfg's settings to use the native versions, then installing microsoft xml.. You can install and run Microsoft Office 2007. I do find it a little disappointing that Wine didn't set getting Office 2007 working out of the box as a goal for 1.0, as it really currently just relies upon finishing two DLLs. Sad to say, but probably because

7.0.0 CrossOver Linux - June 17, 2008
* New application support:
o Office 2007 (Including Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and limited Outlook) I'll still be buying a copy though.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Nursie]

Oh, so it's about not workoing for brainless, intolerant morons?

I can handle that.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Hatta]

I find it a little disappointing that they couldn't fix bug #6971. That's a vast quantity of games that are unplayable because they won't warp the mouse from one side of the screen to another when it hits the edge. They won't even mark it as a high severity bug, even though it meets the qualifications (makes many applications unusable), it's one of the most duplicated bugs, and it's one of the most highly voted bugs.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Aphoxema]

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.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[djdavetrouble]

This is funny and true. As a desktop admin, there is nothing harder than
getting someone to take the time to learn a new application. Even worse
is asking someone to relearn the same application that they have been using
for over a decade. 2007 completely changes the user interface, which
is not a good thing for the target audience: people that use computers for
document editing. All I hear is people wishing for the "old toolbars" back.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Phyrexicaid]

I can only say one thing regarding Crossover: Greedy bastards. I wouldn't go that far! In your signature, you tell people to donate to Wine, and Codeweavers is probably the largest sponsor of the Wine project. I see nothing wrong with them making some money for a polished product. I use Crossover 6.2 and it's great.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[iroll]

Send "presentation important" documents as PDFs. Always. Even if you're going from MS Office to MS Office.

Problem solved!

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Born2bwire]

I'm a brainless, intolerant moron you insensitive clod!

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[AndyCR]

If one of those days is a doc from your boss that either looks great on you computer and not on his or good on his and bad on yours. Could cause the question on why you are using that free crap. If Office 2007 works anything like the previous versions, the documents will look completely different on different computers anyway. Document consistency from MSO to OOO is the least of your worries. Citing http://ancaluca.blogspot.com/2007/09/please-dont-send-me-doc-attachments.html , http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/no-word/attach.html#tth_sEc1.8 , and others.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[greg1104]

No, it's much higher--for me Open Office fails to be a suitable replacement for Word/Excel during every single attempt to interoperate with the genuine article. Documents never look right, and I don't dare edit anything and send it back lest I corrupt something that destroys the file.

I find OO a useful tool for basic previewing of MS Office documents and doing trivial word processing and spreadsheet tasks. For those purposes, it's nice, and I really appreciate having it available. The GP's view that it's 99% there is a still a wild overestimation of its utility from where I sit.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[maxume]

Recognition is the first step.

The next step is to eat some pudding, it will make you feel better.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[damn_registrars]

having 99% compatability means 3 days a year where that is a problem
Not necessarily. It could also mean that only 1 user in 100 will have a problem with it. I've been running Open Office for well over a year without encountering any problems (in Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD) that prevented me from getting my work done.

And as someone else already pointed out, even MS products don't accomplish 100% compatibility. I've had more problems with moving files between different versions of Microsoft Office than between Microsoft Office and Open Office (or different versions of Open Office).

Although of course, your mileage may vary.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Ultra64]

Crossover pays the salaries of the people who work on wine

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Ultra64]

That is a bug in X windows, it will be fixed in an upcoming release

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Hatta]

I am aware that X doesn't give you any information on mouse motion when it hits the edge of the screen. That shouldn't stop them from using the kernel driver. Sure it's not portable, but it would fix the issue for >90% of wine users.

That said, how do you know this is fixed in an upcoming release (release of X or wine?). Do you have a change log, bug report, or mailing list posting you could refer me to? I'd like to be hopeful for progress again.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[jellomizer]

I cant open PDFs can you send to me as a DOC

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[Lumpy]

In a normal business year, 99% compatibility is much closer to 1 day something going wrong

Then Microsoft Office is only 85% compatible and stable to it's self. when we did a office 2000 to Office 2003 rollout we had at LEAST 10 failures a day. Images reversed, bad formatting, scripts not running, etc.... Office 2007 has even WORSE compatibility.

So the difference between OO.o and Office are the SAME as the difference between office and office and office.

So I'd rather spend $0.00 on OO.o and the rest on training than the insane $499.00 a license for Office 2007 (corp discount) and the SAME MONEY on training.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[iroll]

Where I work (public high school district), completely computer illiterate people (teachers) are required to Telnet into a VAX to input attendance and grades.

Telnet. Into a VAX.

They are shown how to do this on their first day. Their coworkers can show them how if they forget. The IT guy will come hold their hands ONE MORE TIME if they still can't handle it. And if all that fails, guess what? Find another job.

If your workplace says "save it as a PDF," your workers will learn to put it in a fucking PDF, even if they whine for the first week. The slowest and stupidest of them will eventually have the steps "save as... PDF!" on a sticky on their monitor and it will get done. It only takes one boss to get 'er done.

For your stupidest customers, guess what you can do? EMBED THE FUCKIN PDF IN A DOC, LOL!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, I recently received a contract from a residential contractor in this exact manner.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[rmcd]

It depends on what you're doing and with whom you're working. For example, the equation editor changed between 2003 and 2007. If you create a document with equations using the native 2007 editor, there is no way for a 2003 user to edit the document. It's not a matter of the file format, the ability to edit that kind of equation simply doesn't exist in 2003. And similarly, 2003 equations are not readily edited in 2007 unless you find the old editor and make it available. So it's a mess, but upgrading everyone is one way to get compatibility going forward. Keeping everyone in 2003 is another solution. But, I mean, WTF?? Who makes decisions like this? I read the blogs from the Microsoft programmers about the new equation editor and my jaw hit the floor. They're goofing around with half-implementing things (such as equation numbering) that LaTeX nailed 20 years ago. They should be ashamed.

It's as if a kindergartner was in charge of the release process.

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[tkw954]

I find it a little disappointing that they couldn't fix bug #6971. That's a vast quantity of games that are unplayable because they won't warp the mouse from one side of the screen to another when it hits the edge. They won't even mark it as a high severity bug, even though it meets the qualifications (makes many applications unusable), it's one of the most duplicated bugs, and it's one of the most highly voted bugs.

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6971

Apparently, the bug is "Can't connect to local MySQL server"

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[zsau]

As a desktop admin, there is nothing harder than... Even worse is...

You really should take the time to think before you write. Or even after you've written, but before you've previewed!

Re:Office 2007 runs on Wine 1.0 too.

[David Gerard]

Buying Crossover is an excellent way to directly support the Wine project - they donate a lot of the code and directly employ a lot of the developers.

Let me be the first to say....

[Tetsujin]

Holy shit!

Re:Let me be the first to say....

[SwordsmanLuke]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I'm pretty sure you're not the first to say "Holy Shit!" I mean, there's even an album.
If you wanted to be truly the first to say, you should have tried something more like: "Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."

reference

Perfect windows compatibility?

[nurb432]

Even Microsoft cant do that between versions.

Not slighting them in the least as they have done a Herculean task to get to this point, but i do wish they had made the actual MS office suite a requirement for 1.0, not just the viewers.

Re:Perfect windows compatibility?

[Ash-Fox]

Microsoft Office 2003, XP should install and run out of the box in Wine 1.0. Office 2007 requires a few tweaks before you can install it though.

Re:Perfect windows compatibility?

[prestomation]

Indeed, I run Word and Excel 2007 just great here under Wine .9.59. Funny thing, it doesn't start under 1.0RC1. Too bad the rest of the Office doesn't work

Next step is to ship this with Linux UMPCs

[Animats]

The next step is to encourage the makers of UMPCs to ship Wine with their units. Then users can run some of their legacy apps on the sub-$500 machines.

Bah! I'll wait for version 3

[thomasdz]

As I've learned well in the Microsoft world... always wait for the THIRD version.
I've marked my calendar for June 2038...

Should have delayed the release slightly.

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Obviously, sooner is better for actual use; but releasing it on June 30th would have been more amusing.

Don't forget the main commercial sponsor

[cerberusss]

Don't forget the main commercial sponsor CodeWeavers. Alexandre Julliard, one of the leading developers of Wine, now works for them. Their main product is CrossoverOffice, which regularly snapshots the Wine branch and then does bugfixing on it. Then they charge $40 for a solid and stable version, and include a GUI to make installing IE and other applications a cinch.

It's a small shop and very sympathetic. They also read Slashdot. Jeremy, the CEO, is active here as user jeremy_white. Befriend him to let his comments show up as +5.

Disclaimer: I'm just a happy customer since version 4 (about 5 years ago).

Re:Don't forget the main commercial sponsor

[Splab]

Isn't it a bit of conflict of interests?

The lead developer also happens to make money on the working branch of the program. What happened to all the hippie good feel? And the fix to get current version to work with 2007; http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=586545&cid=23825339 requires people to remove a couple of file and install the right ones, bit convenient they left that thing out?

Re:Don't forget the main commercial sponsor

[cerberusss]

Looking at the amount of GPL code they put back in Wine, I don't care about tricks they leave out in the open source version but which people can share on the web.

Great, something to download

[mgiuca]

while I wait for you bastards to stop hammering poor mozilla.com.

Re:Everyone's downloading Firefox 3 right now!

[Anonymous Coward]

For every copy you downland I upload 2 thus negating your record setting pursuit.

Better luck next time hippie.

Re:SMAC

[Hatta]

Last I checked it wasn't possible to get it to work with recent versions of glibc. At least without a lot of work first. Wine support would be a major step up.

Get it while it's hot?

[JKFLBOB]

I dunno...Personally, I like my wine at room temperature.

site is dead

[hey]

What a surprise the WINE site is dead as is getfirefox. Victims of their own success.

Re:site is dead

[Rapidity]

Afraid so. Care to help me spread the link?

Duke Nukem Forever!

[Anonymous Coward]

I do find it a little disappointing that Wine didn't set getting Duke Nukem Forever working out of the box as a goal for 1.0!

I predict a multitude of such responses- "Wine 1.0 shouldn't have been released until it could run..."

It would be interesting to know what factors determined that it was ready for 1.0 release. Personally, I suspect it was a rounding error (perhaps they were using Excel in Wine 0.91 and it accidentally rounded up to version 1.0).

Re:FINALLY!

[mrsteveman1]

It goes great with vintage Windows apps.

Oh, and bread.

I would really like to try this out

[an.echte.trilingue]

I would really like to try out Wine, but I couldn't find the WinXP version on the site, which is strange because usually open source apps get ported over really quickly. I tried installing the source tarball in CYGWIN, but no avail. Anybody know where I can get the Win32 binaries?

Re:I would really like to try this out

[jonasj]

I tried installing the source tarball in CYGWIN, but no avail. I know you're joking, but might wine-under-cygwin actually be a solution to Vista's incompability with some software written for older versions of windows?

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anpheus]

Or using the compatbility modes designed for that purpose.

To be honest, I've only ever had to run one or two programs with those compatibility modes.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anonymous Coward]

There's something to be said for being able to use a Windows application remotely over X11, even if both hosts are running Windows. Remote desktop is kind of a joke in comparison.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Bob-taro]

Anybody know where I can get the Win32 binaries?

There actually is a win32 binary version of wine that runs in cygwin. They say it was created as an additional test of the code's portability, and for some other reasons that I can't remember right now. Funny but TRUE!

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I've used Wine to gimmick ancient 16-bit installers into proceeding under XP64 and Vista64.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[drsmithy]

Remote desktop is kind of a joke in comparison.

Remote desktop is just better. Vastly more usable on low-bandwidth (or high latency) links and when your session drops out for some reason you can reconnect and not have lost everything you were working on.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[lbgator]

Pay no attention to that "whoosh" sound. It'll pass in a second.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anonymous Coward]

I once promised myself that I would never do this to somebody, but this is just too much.<br>
Joke -->*
You --> O
       /|\
        /\

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Toll_Free]

After spending the better part of a couple days attempting to fool C & C Gold under Vista X64, I think I found my solution.

16 bit and 64 bit = bloods n crips.

--Toll_Free

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anpheus]

Oh god! Watch out there's a huge arrow approaching your head!

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Doug Neal]

Remote desktop is kind of a joke in comparison.

Remote desktop is just better. Vastly more usable on low-bandwidth (or high latency) links and when your session drops out for some reason you can reconnect and not have lost everything you were working on.

If you haven't already, I recommend taking a look at NX (proprietary with free edition) or FreeNX (GPL). RDP/VNC style remote access to Unix and Linux servers, but actually better and faster than both, especially on lower quality links. It uses a combination of SSH tunneling and X11 protocol compression. Very easy to set up and use, too.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[iampriteshdesai]

Wat do U mean by it???

Re:I would really like to try this out

[erudified]

Remote desktop is just better [EDIT: than X11]. Vastly more usable on low-bandwidth (or high latency) links and when your session drops out for some reason you can reconnect and not have lost everything you were working on.

It's this kind of simple, obvious, in-your-face observation that the OSS community seems to be constitutionally incapable of making. I can't understand it. I come here, and I see everyone talking about the inherent technological superiority of the Linux GUI system, and how great X11 is, but as far as I know, there's nothing that even approaches the functionality of Remote Desktop. It's like screen meets XDMCP, except it's actually usable over real internet connections and doesn't require a PhD to use.

And, seriously, resizing windows is just broken with AIGLX. It doesn't work at anywhere near acceptable speeds. If Windows or OSX shipped it, they'd be relentlessly attacked. I kid you not: with Firefox 3, you can get better resizing performance on OSX with acceleration completely turned off. You can talk all you'd like about how it's a toolkit issue and there's actually, blah blah blah. It's broken. Not to mention the horrific screen tearing, etc. It's just nowhere near production quality, sorry.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[Anpheus]

A lot of old compatibility fixes are actually problems with the game itself, especially because you mention pre-2000 as the release date. I'm reminded of the Sim City example. Source: http://ianmurdock.com/2007/01/14/on-the-importance-of-backward-compatibility/

Raymond Chen is a developer on the Windows team at Microsoft. He's been there since 1992, and his weblog The Old New Thing is chock-full of detailed technical stories about why certain things are the way they are in Windows, even silly things, which turn out to have very good reasons.

The most impressive things to read on Raymond's weblog are the stories of the incredible efforts the Windows team has made over the years to support backwards compatibility: "Look at the scenario from the customer's standpoint. You bought programs X, Y and Z. You then upgraded to Windows XP. Your computer now crashes randomly, and program Z doesn't work at all. You're going to tell your friends, 'Don't upgrade to Windows XP. It crashes randomly, and it's not compatible with program Z.' Are you going to debug your system to determine that program X is causing the crashes, and that program Z doesn't work because it is using undocumented window messages? Of course not. You're going to return the Windows XP box for a refund. (You bought programs X, Y, and Z some months ago. The 30-day return policy no longer applies to them. The only thing you can return is Windows XP.)"

I first heard about this from one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Windows team were going through various popular applications, testing them to make sure they worked OK, but SimCity kept crashing. They reported this to the Windows developers, who disassembled SimCity, stepped through it in a debugger, found the bug, and added special code that checked if SimCity was running, and if it did, ran the memory allocator in a special mode in which you could still use memory after freeing it.

This was not an unusual case. The Windows testing team is huge and one of their most important responsibilities is guaranteeing that everyone can safely upgrade their operating system, no matter what applications they have installed, and those applications will continue to run, even if those applications do bad things or use undocumented functions or rely on buggy behavior that happens to be buggy in Windows n but is no longer buggy in Windows n+1...

A lot of developers and engineers don't agree with this way of working. If the application did something bad, or relied on some undocumented behavior, they think, it should just break when the OS gets upgraded. The developers of the Macintosh OS at Apple have always been in this camp. It's why so few applications from the early days of the Macintosh still work...

To contrast, I've got DOS applications that I wrote in 1983 for the very original IBM PC that still run flawlessly, thanks to the Raymond Chen Camp at Microsoft.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[pato101]

X is the worst way imaginable to do graphics (a giant frame buffer). Stop trolling about what you don't know about!.
X is not a giant frame buffer. It has vector operations, combined with raster operations.
X11 is a wrong option over high latency links because it is designed to provide a very high performance at low latency ones.
For high latency links, use NX which is much faster than VNC + compression (being VNC a giant frame buffer, is faster than X11 because the latency issues).
NX does compression, but most importantly solves the latency issues by cumulating requests avoiding roundtrips.

Re:I would really like to try this out

[erudified]

I agree that the types of experiences are different, and it's good that you point it out. Essentially, my beef with X11 style forwarding is that there's never been a killer app for it. XDMCP takes a backseat to the screen-esque experience of rdesktop, and I just don't know of any *nix applications that are seriously worth using over a network link, particularly when the possibility exists of me losing work when the link goes down.

This has been exacerbated by the comeuppance of genuinely usable web applications -- sure, they kinda suck now, but in terms of delivering applications over the network, that's the future, period. I really agree with the anonymous coward who got modded down. Other than novelty value and it being what most *nix folks are used to, I just don't see the point of X11 style forwarding nowadays, and XDMCP is relatively useless for the reasons outlined above.

I realize this is offtopic, but what do you feel is the 'killer app' that takes advantage of the X protocol? Why couldn't it be done as a simple client/server app?

Re:I would really like to try this out

[shoor]

Yeah, I bought "Civilization, Call To Power" from Loki, the version specifically for linux. I still like to crank it up once in awhile to relax with, but it doesn't run on most current linux distros. I suppose I could google around and find a fix of some kind, but it still runs on slackware, so I haven't bothered.

This is an example of a commercial application on linux, so one doesn't have open source that can be upgraded. I suppose if I'd purchased a windows version of the game, I'd be running all fine and dandy now under wine.

Re:Personally ...

[shystershep]

Personally, I get at least as good stability, and usually better performance, running (supported) Windows apps using CrossoverOffice, the commercial version of Wine. The two main Windows apps I use are MS Word and World of Warcraft. Word seems more stable, and I get better fps in WoW, running in Linux rather than Windows.

Re:Get it while it's hot?

[PolyDwarf]

If there's one thing I've learned from SCO, it's that lawsuits don't need a basis in reality.

Re:FINALLY!

[mrsteveman1]

Sure, you can sue anything with nipples

winehq slashdotted

[damn_registrars]

Hmm, their webserver appears to be having trouble keeping up with the traffic.

I wonder if they were running IIS through wine to serve the page?

Not really

[an.echte.trilingue]

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.

IIRC, Wine's objective is to give software vendors a set of libraries to compile their Windows software against so that it will run under Linux, not necessarily run all windows software natively in Linux. The idea is that if it is so simple to do, people like Adobe will release a Linux version of Photoshop compiled against Wine.

So actually, getting products to say that they are "compatible with Wine 1.0" is the goal. That is also the reason that they are releasing: it gives vendors a stable branch to work with.

Re:Not really

[linuxrocks123]

Actually, the original purpose was dual: they wanted to provide a way to natively run Windows binaries, and also provide a method for porting Win32 applications to Linux. Both efforts are still ongoing, but there's never been much uptake for the porting approach. WordPerfect 2000 for Linux was the flagship success of the porting project, and it was years ago (and the native WordPerfect 8.x was better anyway). I think it's fair to say that the main goal of Wine at this point is to provide a method to run Win32 applications natively in Linux, and that a secondary goal is to provide a porting library.

Re:FINALLY!

[igibo]

I've got nipples, Greg. Can you sue me?

Re:Personally ...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Personally I've always found it better to run windows applications on Windows, either installed on the machine or in a VM. Personally, I get at least as good stability, and usually better performance, running (supported) Windows apps using CrossoverOffice, the commercial version of Wine.

Crossover is fine if it just happens to work well with the one or two applications you actually need. If you're looking to run a larger selection of applications or something they don't support well, then a VM or native install is really the only option. Personally, I don't think this needs to be the case. I think CodeWeavers has a very flawed business model that has hampered them more than anything else. They could be making significant money from small business (and larger business).

The problem I have is with CodeWeavers' method of deciding what applications to support. They ask users to pledge a certain amount of money if they get an application supported and working well. That's a fine method of deciding what to work on if your users are hobbyists looking for support for some video game. It is a complete non-starter in business. For example, I tested it out for use with a certain Adobe application and it was nonfunctional. I looked into when they would support it, and the answer seemed to be "never" because not enough people pledged money. Since this is mainly a business application, what do they expect people to do? Have you ever tried getting approval for a purchase order that says if CodeWeavers ever gets this application supported we'll give them some amount of money... but we have no idea when or if that will ever happen? Not a chance. So, of course, we moved on and purchased a bunch of copies of a virtualization environment and Windows to run in it. Now in my case, they only lost a few dozen sales, but I know another, very, very big company that did a similar evaluation... but they needed a solution within a few weeks. They easily lost 500 sales there for the same application.

Basically, I think if they started targeting business customers with a plan that made even a lick of sense to potential business users they'd be pulling in a lot more money, money they could reinvest to make faster progress and more fully support a wide range of programs.

OOo - For The Rest Of Us

[copponex]

Sorry, compadre. In heterogeneous environments which are a lot more commonplace these days, Office is prohibitively expensive. You either need Terminal Servers, or Parallels plus a windows license, or I can hand out OOo to everyone, not worry about file formats, and get on with my life.

I switched another office that had already bought copies of Office 2008 for Mac, but the spreadsheets from Office 2003 never translated quite right. So they converted everything to OOo instead of wasting another couple of thousand dollars upgrading to office 2007.

Access and Infopath are dead because of web services. Graphic guys are going to buy Adobe anyway. That leaves Word, Excel, and Powerpoint. Which are handily beat by OOo 3.0, which works all the time, every time, on Linux, Windows, and Mac.

Re:SMAC

[TheRaven64]

I have a couple of old games that shipped with MacOS Classic and Windows 95 versions on the same CD. On an Intel Mac, I can run the Windows version in WINE, but can't run the MacOS version. For some reason, this amuses me.

Re:Slightly offtopic question

[TheRaven64]

If you want a really ugly hacky 'solution', then configure your VM with a printer which prints to a file, and export this as a network share. Then set up two printers in CUPS, one which takes postscript input and sends it to the printer shared by the VM and another which takes the resulting file and sends it as raw data to the printer. It's ugly as hell, but it should work.

Re:FINALLY!

[turgid]

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.

Re:FINALLY!

[KillerBob]

wine sucks.... never worked 100% and never will

the same can be said of Windows....

Re:Quickbooks?

[technoid_]

Quickbooks now has web based Qucikbooks Online, which with IE4Linux, you can access.

This is the solution I found for my business.

technoid_

Re:Personally ...

[Bushman624]

VMware player and workstation now have experimental 3d acceleration support. I have a Windows XP player running Google Sketchup in accelerated mode currently. Works great.

http://www.easyvmx.com/blog/?q=vmware_with_3d_acceleration

I've seen reports that it can run many older DX8 type games. Of course wine runs most of those just fine so why bother with a VM.

Re:FINALLY!

[dotancohen]

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.

Re:FINALLY!

[tehbunneh]

And there is a fatal flaw in your pointing out that he has a fatal flaw in his last argument, namely - Wine is not an emulator

Take it step by step

[Opportunist]

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.

Re:Take it step by step

[dotancohen]

While I agree with most of your comment, I would like to point out the obvious:

Few companies are willing to invest this kind of work (and money) for what seems to be a rather small customer base. The key word here is "seems". Linux users need to make themselves more visible, so that the market will not seem so small.

Re:Take it step by step

[zacronos]

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. I think you're confusing two sides of the issue.

At the point in time you describe, it will be easy for Windows users to switch to Linux, and there will be incentive for them to do so since it is generally cheaper and they would have more apps available (all Linux apps plus Windows apps under Wine) -- that much I agree with. However, one could argue that developing for the Windows API would still be the bigger market, since developing for Windows would give you an application which would work on Windows or Linux-with-Wine. Until the size of the Windows-only customer base is smaller than the Linux-only-and-I-won't-or-can't-use-Wine customer base, there will still be incentive to develop for Windows. There may be other reasons to develop for Linux instead (ease of development, more plentiful developers, etc), but a bigger market is not one of them as long as you continue to account for Wine.

On the other hand, having an easy-to-use and easy-on-developers Linux API available on Windows does the opposite -- software companies could develop for Linux and get apps that target both the Linux and Windows markets, thus targeting a bigger market than just Windows.

Re:Take it step by step

[RulerOf]

Currently, the only argument for people to keep using Windows is that Wine can't handle EVERY SINGLE Windows application.
Don't forget, some people actually like Windows as a Desktop/Server OS, and it's not because they haven't "experienced the glory of Linux" or some other epiphany. Granted, I don't think anyone likes licensing it, but that's a totally different story.

Re:Take it step by step

[Opportunist]

Well, you sure as hell won't sell a lot of Office suits or network tools for Linux.

But there is room for commercial software, even on Linux. Commercial software has one advantage, usually, and that's development speed. Wine took 15 years, and it's a good example of the development cycle of FOSS. FOSS takes time. Lots of it.

Re:FINALLY!

[neokushan]

Except that you're argument against gaming refers to newer versions of windows, which try to encourage both you AND developers (because they're just as much to blame for this by making crap installers and such) to not always stay in or require Administrator access.
Besides, you're blaming the OS for something a user has near completely control over. You'd be better blaming Microsoft for not discouraging this practice instead of the OS.

Re:FINALLY!

[mcrbids]

I don't think you understand the reality of WINE, especially to Microsoft!

With WINE, Microsoft officially loses control over their Windows API. It's like IBM with the ISA vs. MCA architectures around the 286 era. Microsoft desperately wants to move to something else, ANYTHING else, so that they can maintain control of their API, so that developers have to write to the Microsoft API, and so that customers still have to buy Windows.

But if there is a WINE that is reasonably stable, that's no longer the case. Case in point: I develop a cross-platform application with PHP-GTK, which has been ported over using the Win32 API. I can write software that's immediately usable on Windows, Macintosh, and *nix. But I haven't released an actual installer for *nix, simply because nobody's asked for one. And if I decide that I want to support *nix, I have to go with at least one of two options:

1) Pick a distro or five and build packages for each every time I issue a new release. (as often as weekly!) This is pretty much a guaranteed FAIL since everybody has their own fav distro...

2) Release a Windows installer and test it against WINE to ensure reasonable compatibility.

I'm going with option 2 for now. Note that I prefer this even when using a toolkit that's natively a *nix toolkit. It's not because I don't love *nix, it's because I have no desire whatsoever to deal with customers who are often barely competent to turn their computer(s) on and try to get them to recompile ANYTHING.

Win WINE, the most successful development platform in existence becomes an open-source platform, and will quickly deflate the Microsoft monopoly. Microsoft has no choice, simply because the very thing that's kept them in the business (the massive base of WinXX applications) now becomes the very thing that they cannot abandon.

Re:FINALLY!

[BillGod]

I never use anything 1.0.. Will wait for 2.0 before I upgrade!!!!

Re:FINALLY!

[thetoadwarrior]

The great thing about America is you can use anything. I sued my next door neighbor's dog for keeping me awake for two nights. I won all his kibble and there is a restraining order on him.

Re:FINALLY!

[VGPowerlord]

Correction, a lot of Windows games require Administrator access because they insist on writing files to the application's directory rather than to the user's home directory.

Rumor has it that Microsoft introduced the annoying UAC prompt to get developers to stop this practice by getting users to bitch at developers until they adjusted applications and games to get rid of the prompts.

Re:Oblig

[mrsteveman1]

Sure i can try, but you have to put these clamps on first....

Re:FINALLY!

[SBrach]

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

Re:FINALLY!

[Lennie]

OK, I'll bite, straight from the Synaptic package manager (and I think it's a pretty good explanation):

Microsoft Windows Compatibility Layer (Binary Emulator and Library)
Wine is a compatibility layer for running Windows applications on Linux.
Applications are run at full speed without the need of cpu emulation. Wine
does not require Microsoft Windows, however it can use native system dll
files in place of its own if they are available.

This package includes a program loader for running unmodified Windows executables
as well as the Wine project's free version of the Windows API for running programs
ported from Windows.

  Homepage: http://www.winehq.org/

Re:FINALLY!

[dotancohen]

I think that the point that you make is very important. I've filed a bug at Ubuntu on the subject of collaborating the different package managers:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/240770

Please add your thoughts as a developer to the bug. Thanks.

Re:FINALLY!

[dotancohen]

Dear software dev, That's a good start. The rest could use some work, though.

Re:FINALLY!

[DaveV1.0]

The fanboy response:

But, but, but, choice is good! And, the more choices the better! It can't possibly hurt the community to have to choose from 15 different possibilities! That's just crazy talk!

If Microsoft is shutting down XP ...

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Get it before Microsoft sues.

Too true. But one nice thing...

If Microsoft is shutting down distribution of XP they're going to have a difficult time showing financial losses on a product they don't sell any more. B-)

Re:1.0 premature, Wine does not work well

[Ash-Fox]

One that would not run at all is acrobat.

I used to run Acrobat 7 a while back under Wine. But I found most of the pdf software on Linux was good enough to replace it.

Firefox crashes constantly.

Why don't you run the native version for Linux?

I could not get AOL online service client to run.

I cannot find "AOL online service client" on Google, so I assumed you meant AOL Instant Messenger, which works fine.

Office XP doesnt run.

Yes it does and you can run different versions of Office simultaneously if you know how to use the wineprefix parameter.

Its misleading since the software does not fully emulate windows

Wine is not a emulator, it simply implements the Windows API on top of a unix-like environment.

even reasonably well.

I beg to differ. I find that some of my games tend to run faster under Wine (compared to running them under Windows XP/Vista on the same hardware), I also use it to run older software that does not run under Windows XP SP2, Vista etc.

Release 1.0 when you finally get everything working right.

Feel free to contribute.

Re:FINALLY!

[krystar]

Wine is best when aged. serve chilled with a side app of Cheese(tm)

Re:FINALLY!

[Baloo Ursidae]

The most you can say is that poorly coded client apps encourage you to do something stupid.

Not when they're going with the reasonable assumption that Windows has given that user administrator rights by default. That's a design flaw at the OS level that developers are stupidly taking advantage of. At best, it's a co-moronic situation where both sides are the loser. Windows isn't the white knight on this one, and neither are the developers. Both suck.

Re:FINALLY!

[tirnacopu]

There is a very serious need for such an emulator, and Microsoft has provided three of them: one is an actual emulator (Virtual PC), the other two are delivered in the installation kit and are called WOW (Windows on Windows), one for 32-16 bit compatibility, the other one for 64-32. To be complete, there is also a fourth one, for MS-DOS legacy applications, NTVDM (Virtual DOS Machine). Neither of the above does a splendid job, but they do exist and are useful in a number of cases.

Re:FINALLY!

[dtremenak]

Have you considered using a distribution-neutral package format like autopackage? There are solutions written specifically for developers in your situation. Not everyone needs to build packages in native formats; really those are mostly for central repositories. If you're not distributing your app through a central repository, there's no reason not to use something like autopackage.

Re:FINALLY!

[drsmithy]

You should never log in as Administrator or root to play games, and, unfortunately, Windows often makes you to do just that. That kind of behavior just isn't ready for the desktop at all.

Windows does nothing of the sort. Stupid developers make you "login" (really, just "Run As) as Administrator, and they're as likely to do it targeting Linux as they have been targeting Windows.

Re:FINALLY!

[SBrach]

Joking aside Wine, Ndiswrapper, and the like are a step backwards for Linux in some respect. I use Linux, Windows, and OSX and honestly the majority of problems with Windows (2000-Vista) are caused by crappy drivers and even crappier applications. Whats the point of getting everyone to switch to Linux if we are still going to have to deal with all the crappy applications written in 1993.

I understand some hardware doesn't have drivers and some applications don't have Linux versions and people want to use their hardware and programs but where is the incentive for the producers of these products to support Linux if the open source community "makes it work" for them for free?

Re:FINALLY!

[Baloo Ursidae]

What is you, boss, a politician? It's reasonable or stupid: take your pick. ;)

It's reasonable for developers to take advantage of security flaws in an operating system, especially when they go long-unfixed, even if doing so is a stupid thing to do.

A quality app targets a Limited Account, period.

And a quality OS makes those by default. It doesn't matter if you and I know better. If the defaults suck, your average layman is going to use crap permissions and figure they're secure. If your average layman doesn't know better and don't care, what's the motivation for developers to get it right?

You can't implement security top-down and expect it to stick on it's own as an afterhtought, it has to be top down from the stop.

Re:FINALLY!

[drsmithy]

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.

Re:FINALLY!

[cheater512]

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.

Re:FINALLY!

[dotancohen]

You know, I read your post, and immediately thought you were trying to be funny. Instead, I find you've been modded +5 insightful! Whilst what you say would be insightful in an ideal world, I have to reply, "You MUST be joking!".

There are probably MILLIONS of programs written for Windows. Maybe a slight exageration, but maybe not. WINE is extremely useful to me for old, but still useful programs, that may have been written in VB6 or whatever. I personnaly have 4 such apps that will only run under Windows (or emulation), or WINE.

I use WINE whenever I can, it's easier and cleaner for me than emulation.

Just my 2c

I certainly was not joking. But I am not referring to the legacy software that is already out there, rather, I want to see developers write _new_ applications for Linux. We don't need Photoshop 7 on Linux, we need Photoshop CS4 (whenever that will be) on Linux.

Re:FINALLY!

[hairyfeet]

Because otherwise it gives Windows an even better lock-in? I have switched a couple of SMBs to Linux and I have long since given up switching home users and most businesses except for the older "giveaway" computers that I get from SOHOs and SMBs updating their hardware which I give to single moms and charities. Why? Because in the SOHO and SMB cases there is always 1 mission critical app that HAS to run for the business to function and that is always a Windows only app. Which is one of the reasons I keep Xandros 4 Business with the latest Crossover installed on my laptop. That way I can try any mission critical apps in Crossover before I even THINK about suggesting Linux.

And in the home users case it is always those damned cheapy Lexmark/HP/etc "Winprinters" or even worse the ever popular all-in one Winprinter/scanner/fax that is pointless to even try to convert. If there was a Ndiswrapper equivalent for printers there would be a huge amount of home users that I could easily convert to Linux. Most of these simply check email,surf,print their pictures,etc and would be perfect candidates for Linux,but those damned Winprinters get you every time.

IMHO the easier we make it for users to have their "must have" apps and hardware the better it will be for us all. The Linux market will grow larger, we will get more and more machines like the EEE with Linux preinstalled,and most importantly,the hardware and software manufacturers might actually start paying attention and make native solutions so in the future we won't HAVE to have things like Wine and Ndiswrapper. But that is my 02c from down here in consumer land,YMMV

Re:FINALLY!

[smittyoneeach]

It's reasonable for developers to take advantage of security flaws in an operating system, especially when they go long-unfixed, even if doing so is a stupid thing to do.

I'm from the "you're part of the problem, or part of the solution" school of thought on this one.

Re:FINALLY!

[nschubach]

The PM that works on all distros will win. That's competition. Take the load off the developer in figuring out what distro they are on and let the installer put files where they need. It could also set flags for the program being installed to locate appropriate locations to save and load information from.

At least, that's what I'm rooting for.

Re:1.0 premature, Wine does not work well

[Ash-Fox]

I use Windows firefox because I am on FreeBSD and there is no flash player for FreeBSD.

Why don't you enable the Linux ELF compatibility support in FreeBSD, install Linux Firefox with Linux flash plugin?

I suspect the Wine issues you are suffering might be due to Wine issues with the FreeBSD specific port. I do recall listening to a podcast on BSDtalk where Jeremy White said the Wine support shouldn't even be considered beta on the BSDs. In theory you could run the Linux version through the Linux ELF binary support - but I haven't tried that myself, but I doubt there should be any issues.

I have used Firefox through the Linux ELF binary support though.

I was talking about the AOL online service client, not AOL instant messager. That is AOL 9.0.
http://daol.aol.com/software/90vr

Okay... I'm not touching that with a ten foot pole.

Re:1.0 premature, Wine does not work well

[LinuxLlama]

There is a program for linux called "Penggy" that allows you to use AOLs internet.

Irfanview as well

[cbhacking]

Irfanview (http://irfanview.com) also advertises that it works under Wine. From the FAQ:

Q: Can I use IrfanView on Linux?
A: Yes. There is no native-Linux version of IrfanView. However, you can use IrfanView in conjunction with Linux programs like WINE, Windows Linux emulators and Linux-based virtual machines.

It would be great to see more of this kind of thing.

No, I'm not affiliated with Irfanview in any way other than being a long-time user.

Re:FINALLY!

[JasterBobaMereel]

No! No not autopackage - it's a just bunch of scripts that make assumptions about the filesystem which may not be true, cannot correctly determine the dependencies (no matter what Autopackage claims) I have been burnt by Autopackage too often (they never seem to work and leave debris in some very odd places...)

Use either DEB or RPM ... Alien can convert it to other formats and the native package manager can sort out dependencies far better ....