Sonicboom wrote:
Over the years alot of great apps such as GiMP, StarOffice, etc.. have come along to keep people like me from going back towards using MS Windows.
I don't understand the point of installing MS Windows to run ontop of linux. Sure - it's fun from a software hacker's point of view - but in all sense it is almost a step in the wrong direction.
I'm not discounting the MS oper sys's - they have their place in the world - but for me I can't see the point. I run Linux as an ALTERNATIVE to running MS Windows...
What it boils down to is choice.
Running an emulator (of whatever kind) gives one even more choice, more freedom. You can have your cake and eat it too. Of course, that still leaves the original question -- Why would anyone who is running a lovely stable operating system like Linux, want to us M$ Windows as well? People have already given a number of reasons:
To check compatibility with M$ Windows
(for example -- to check if your web pages
work for those people who do use M$ Windows)
To run M$ Windows software
Because a Linux equivalent does not yet exist
Because you need to be able to exchange data with others using the M$ product (and
a good enough Linux equivalent still does not
exist)
Because you have a bunch of existing data
(whether that be some WP format or DB format) which it would just take too much effort to convert over to a Linux equivalent
I myself have encountered situations like this. For example, the documentation for a project I work on is required by the client, to be in an M$ Word electronic format. We managed to get them to agree to RTF. We thought, hey, we'll use the same RTF source to produce an online HTML version of the docs, that'll wow 'em! We're a Unix house, we ended up writing our own RTF2HTML converter based on a public skeleton one... we dug into the spec for RTF, finding that, yes, we could link PNG pictures rather than embedding WMF pictures into the RTF files... we produced the HTML, after much wrestling with M$ Word to actually allow us to link the PNG pictures (it kept on wanting to produce WMF as well)... we produced the HTML! And the resultant RTF files... cannot be edited in StarOffice without completely messing them up. StarOffice simply wasn't good enough.
I would really like to have a Windows emulator running on my box instead of having to go to the PC at the other end of the office to update the documentation.
(Yes, I have raised the possibility of converting the documentation to
LyX and producing PDF and HTML, but TPTB haven't gone for it)
Another example: at home, I have a very old version of M$ Access running on my PC,
(why get an upgrade when the old one still worked?) which holds information about my video collection (about 500+ tapes). That data has been collected over many years, as my collection has grown, and I need it. I have a few choices:
I can dual-boot M$ Windows. This is what I currently do, but I am getting tired of it.
I can run a M$ Windows emulator. (Another pain, because unfortunately WINE won't work on my old software; I've yet to try the others)
I can convert the entire database into something completely different, like PostgreSQL. This is also a pain, and takes time to do.
Another example: I have a DVD disk on my PC (as many new PCs do). I want to play DVDs on it. Fortunately, with vlc I can, but its featureset is still not not full; it can play DVDs but you don't get the menu screens etc. I am willing to put up with that, but others want more features. If a windows emulation will enable them to run specific software that they like better, surely this is a Good Thing? Freedom of choice!
What it boils down to is what kind of tradeoffs one is willing to make, to get the things you want. And for many, a M$ Windows emulator will give them a solution which
saves them time/money/effort/hassle.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand the point of installing MS Windows to run ontop of linux. Sure - it's fun from a software hacker's point of view - but in all sense it is almost a step in the wrong direction.
I'm not discounting the MS oper sys's - they have their place in the world - but for me I can't see the point. I run Linux as an ALTERNATIVE to running MS Windows...
What it boils down to is choice. Running an emulator (of whatever kind) gives one even more choice, more freedom. You can have your cake and eat it too. Of course, that still leaves the original question -- Why would anyone who is running a lovely stable operating system like Linux, want to us M$ Windows as well? People have already given a number of reasons:
I myself have encountered situations like this. For example, the documentation for a project I work on is required by the client, to be in an M$ Word electronic format. We managed to get them to agree to RTF. We thought, hey, we'll use the same RTF source to produce an online HTML version of the docs, that'll wow 'em! We're a Unix house, we ended up writing our own RTF2HTML converter based on a public skeleton one... we dug into the spec for RTF, finding that, yes, we could link PNG pictures rather than embedding WMF pictures into the RTF files... we produced the HTML, after much wrestling with M$ Word to actually allow us to link the PNG pictures (it kept on wanting to produce WMF as well)... we produced the HTML! And the resultant RTF files... cannot be edited in StarOffice without completely messing them up. StarOffice simply wasn't good enough. I would really like to have a Windows emulator running on my box instead of having to go to the PC at the other end of the office to update the documentation. (Yes, I have raised the possibility of converting the documentation to LyX and producing PDF and HTML, but TPTB haven't gone for it)
Another example: at home, I have a very old version of M$ Access running on my PC, (why get an upgrade when the old one still worked?) which holds information about my video collection (about 500+ tapes). That data has been collected over many years, as my collection has grown, and I need it. I have a few choices:
Another example: I have a DVD disk on my PC (as many new PCs do). I want to play DVDs on it. Fortunately, with vlc I can, but its featureset is still not not full; it can play DVDs but you don't get the menu screens etc. I am willing to put up with that, but others want more features. If a windows emulation will enable them to run specific software that they like better, surely this is a Good Thing? Freedom of choice!
What it boils down to is what kind of tradeoffs one is willing to make, to get the things you want. And for many, a M$ Windows emulator will give them a solution which saves them time/money/effort/hassle.