At current steam Wine releases biweekly a new release which kills around 45 bugs. 2500 open bugs, so in theory it takes another 2 years.
Microsoft implemented several times the Win32 api. If you get more developer capacity attached it becomes feasible for an open source project to achieve compatibility.
If you focus just on a single application and put some money in the ring, then it is absolutely feasible to achieve full Adobe support because it would happen anyway.
Binary compatibility is no design goal. Linux is just great when you use open source, you just miss the Adobe Tools. Wine will solve the problem and provide perfect Adobe support sooner or later.
We don't know. The Wine support of Adobe products is already not bad given the difficulty of the task. Since you can always install the latest deb packages of Wine, wine support is getting better and better. It was the same with dosbox, now there is almost no game left which does not run in dosbox. Some Adobe applications as Photoshop Elements already fun great under Wine.
Linux versions currently do not make much sense as Linux is a moving target.
Less taxes is a typical American argument. And then the American government spends a shitload of public money on the military and foreign interventions, the war keynesianism of the right. Why? To safeguard resource access, the strategists explain.
Efficiency is about lowering these costly dependencies on limited resources.
Ceteris paribus more Wine professionals paid to work on it mean faster progress of the Wine project. So the question is, what are the costs of reasonable support of all Adobe products by Wine? Whether the problem "does not run" can be solved with money or expertise by Adobe, I don't know. And here Adobe support, given the importance of the products, is already great. How much money would it take to close the feature gaps to make all Adobe apps Platinum?
Say, I take 30 Million$. Can the problem be solved with this investment? If so the Wine feature gap is worth 30 million dollar. Probably it is less. In a simple business calculation you can ask yourself what profits or business opportunities perfect Adobe support generates for a company with a revenue of 3 billion per anno. Now, others may be interested as well. I am sure Linux adoption would rise when mission-critical Adobe software is supported. And then there is the special opportunity to run Adobe software on high end workstations with Linux, an entirely new special market for creative and movie studios.
Development is paid by those who see a business opportunity or are otherwise capable. Adobe applications are extremely complex, so it would be expensive to start support from scratch but now it looks like Wine development grows into something reasonable. Developer time is limited, so need to hire comeone to get it done. Peanuts for Abobe and you get the Linux platform for your products which makes a whole lot of sense.
What I mean is: Here are the current Adobe results for Wine AppDb and here the Wine wiki. Wine developers do not specialise on Adobe products and have no access to the source code. It is just a matter of investment to kill the Adobe bugs and get platinum rating for the applications. And then you can really use Linux powered clusters and workstations for rendering. I mean, Windows machines have more limitations for professionals. In the high end production environment you need really fast machines with huge storage capacity. Costs do not really matter. It is difficult to buy a 30 000$ PC but having a high end video processing machine with Adobe tools would be very useful. Whether it is 400 000$ per work station hardware does not really matter when your graphics specialists get more productive. Linux virtually runs on each and every machine out there.
Which is a good scheme because the classic light bulb is very energy inefficient. The new LED devices are great, also for streets or traffic lights. The lamb industry will come up with new devices. And then there is haitz law. The only thing that speaks for classic light bulbs is sentimentality. And be sure, the lamb industry will find a way to meet consumer demands.
That is targeted to provide economic incentives. You can trade waste permissions, so pollution gets more efficiently allocated, the idea is to use a market mechanism.
Energy efficiency means for me it should be possible to reduce household energy demand without a loss of life style. On the other edge you can reduce the efficiency of power plants and energy transport. So you even with constant energy supply you have to burn less coal. And as we know coal resources are limited.
As an example consider waste. We had these government programs to reduce waste which were quite successful. As a result today we import waste from Italy to burn it in our waste plants while Italy undergoes a waste deposit crisis.
Come on, I really don't get why Adobe does not finance Wine support for its products. Shouldn't be too expensive. The advantage of Linux is that it runs on super-computers.
I am speaking about energy consumption/demand, not supply. Ideally I want to live energy autark, not depend on oil or other power supply I have to buy each months. The less electricity my computer consumes the cheaper for me. When you look at the progress with cell phones I expect laptops to be zero energy in 10 years. Like my calculator.
My cell phone keeps up for 72 hours thanks to new electronics which consumes less. Seven years ago I was lucky to get 7h uptime.
Probably my computer monitor consumes a whole lot of energy and it is possible to reduce that.
In Germany our household consumption is 11% for TV/Radio, 11% Lights, 12% PC/telco, 8,5% Cooking. That shows the potential when you aggregate the national consumption. Adopt tiny improvements in technology and get rid off 2 or 3 nuclear power plants.
For me effiency is about achieving the same with less. And ideally I want to be energy autark, farm my own energy without any dependency on crazy sheiks and rising oil prices. My dream would be zero energy costs.
Take your computer, we get a new generation every three years. I just don't know what energy operating my computer consume. For larger companies it may be worth to look at these figures.
For cell phones I noticed that battery time increases or the cell phone electronic consumes less. The government would for instance get the monitor manufacturers to display their energy effiency class, like they did with Swedish radiation standards. So within three years there are no other monitors but AAA.
I mean, just expect the next generation of TV sets and computer monitors to consume 60%. Can it be achieved? I guess so. What would that imply to national power consumption?
Or take the new LED lamps for street light and compare that with power consumption of the old light bulbs.
Slashdot Mirror
OpenSolaris is far too big to fail. It has a large user base.
You know even FreeBSD is still supported, OpenSolaris will be, too.
Unlike Linux OpenSolaris stands for real quality and maturity.
It is about the freedom to leave an online service with your data, which has nothing to do with the GPL for the client.
Ever hear of TIO principles?
If they try it in Europe you ought to file an antitrust complaint as a consumer or as a competitor.
But it is just a Apache licensed library, no? Why do you have to copypaste it?
For licensing reasons = because of soft patent madness?
There is a simple method to make that happen. Abobe which makes billions attaches three developers to Wine Adobe support.
Actually where is the problem? Web site owners do not have to support IE6 anymore.
If people want to use IE6, fine for them. It is easy for them to change that provided there is an incentive.
At current steam Wine releases biweekly a new release which kills around 45 bugs. 2500 open bugs, so in theory it takes another 2 years.
Microsoft implemented several times the Win32 api. If you get more developer capacity attached it becomes feasible for an open source project to achieve compatibility.
If you focus just on a single application and put some money in the ring, then it is absolutely feasible to achieve full Adobe support because it would happen anyway.
Binary compatibility is no design goal. Linux is just great when you use open source, you just miss the Adobe Tools. Wine will solve the problem and provide perfect Adobe support sooner or later.
We don't know. The Wine support of Adobe products is already not bad given the difficulty of the task. Since you can always install the latest deb packages of Wine, wine support is getting better and better. It was the same with dosbox, now there is almost no game left which does not run in dosbox. Some Adobe applications as Photoshop Elements already fun great under Wine.
Linux versions currently do not make much sense as Linux is a moving target.
I expect you to be right. You can be pro-efficiency and contra-carbon trade schemes.
Less taxes is a typical American argument. And then the American government spends a shitload of public money on the military and foreign interventions, the war keynesianism of the right. Why? To safeguard resource access, the strategists explain.
Efficiency is about lowering these costly dependencies on limited resources.
Ceteris paribus more Wine professionals paid to work on it mean faster progress of the Wine project. So the question is, what are the costs of reasonable support of all Adobe products by Wine? Whether the problem "does not run" can be solved with money or expertise by Adobe, I don't know. And here Adobe support, given the importance of the products, is already great. How much money would it take to close the feature gaps to make all Adobe apps Platinum?
Say, I take 30 Million$. Can the problem be solved with this investment? If so the Wine feature gap is worth 30 million dollar. Probably it is less. In a simple business calculation you can ask yourself what profits or business opportunities perfect Adobe support generates for a company with a revenue of 3 billion per anno. Now, others may be interested as well. I am sure Linux adoption would rise when mission-critical Adobe software is supported. And then there is the special opportunity to run Adobe software on high end workstations with Linux, an entirely new special market for creative and movie studios.
Development is paid by those who see a business opportunity or are otherwise capable. Adobe applications are extremely complex, so it would be expensive to start support from scratch but now it looks like Wine development grows into something reasonable. Developer time is limited, so need to hire comeone to get it done. Peanuts for Abobe and you get the Linux platform for your products which makes a whole lot of sense.
So whether there is warming or not, it still makes sense to increase energy efficiency.
What I mean is: Here are the current Adobe results for Wine AppDb and here the Wine wiki. Wine developers do not specialise on Adobe products and have no access to the source code. It is just a matter of investment to kill the Adobe bugs and get platinum rating for the applications. And then you can really use Linux powered clusters and workstations for rendering. I mean, Windows machines have more limitations for professionals. In the high end production environment you need really fast machines with huge storage capacity. Costs do not really matter. It is difficult to buy a 30 000$ PC but having a high end video processing machine with Adobe tools would be very useful. Whether it is 400 000$ per work station hardware does not really matter when your graphics specialists get more productive. Linux virtually runs on each and every machine out there.
Which is a good scheme because the classic light bulb is very energy inefficient. The new LED devices are great, also for streets or traffic lights. The lamb industry will come up with new devices. And then there is haitz law. The only thing that speaks for classic light bulbs is sentimentality. And be sure, the lamb industry will find a way to meet consumer demands.
That is targeted to provide economic incentives. You can trade waste permissions, so pollution gets more efficiently allocated, the idea is to use a market mechanism.
Increase the efficiency of course.
Energy efficiency means for me it should be possible to reduce household energy demand without a loss of life style. On the other edge you can reduce the efficiency of power plants and energy transport. So you even with constant energy supply you have to burn less coal. And as we know coal resources are limited.
As an example consider waste. We had these government programs to reduce waste which were quite successful. As a result today we import waste from Italy to burn it in our waste plants while Italy undergoes a waste deposit crisis.
Come on, I really don't get why Adobe does not finance Wine support for its products. Shouldn't be too expensive. The advantage of Linux is that it runs on super-computers.
I am speaking about energy consumption/demand, not supply. Ideally I want to live energy autark, not depend on oil or other power supply I have to buy each months. The less electricity my computer consumes the cheaper for me. When you look at the progress with cell phones I expect laptops to be zero energy in 10 years. Like my calculator.
Look, I expect a computer to adhere to Moore's law. Why shouldn't there be a Moore's law for lesser energy.
Today it is possible to have houses which consume almost no oil for heating at all. Austria is leading here.
My cell phone keeps up for 72 hours thanks to new electronics which consumes less. Seven years ago I was lucky to get 7h uptime.
Probably my computer monitor consumes a whole lot of energy and it is possible to reduce that.
In Germany our household consumption is
11% for TV/Radio, 11% Lights, 12% PC/telco, 8,5% Cooking. That shows the potential when you aggregate the national consumption. Adopt tiny improvements in technology and get rid off 2 or 3 nuclear power plants.
For me effiency is about achieving the same with less. And ideally I want to be energy autark, farm my own energy without any dependency on crazy sheiks and rising oil prices. My dream would be zero energy costs.
And there is a lot done by the authority, in particular energy efficiency is seen as a competitive advantage for our exports. And the Energy efficiency label was so successful that you basically can just buy A+ or A++ machines.
Take your computer, we get a new generation every three years. I just don't know what energy operating my computer consume. For larger companies it may be worth to look at these figures.
For cell phones I noticed that battery time increases or the cell phone electronic consumes less. The government would for instance get the monitor manufacturers to display their energy effiency class, like they did with Swedish radiation standards. So within three years there are no other monitors but AAA.
I mean, just expect the next generation of TV sets and computer monitors to consume 60%. Can it be achieved? I guess so. What would that imply to national power consumption?
Or take the new LED lamps for street light and compare that with power consumption of the old light bulbs.