OSNews

Or should I put it, "the emperor is naked!"?
Running WINE is more or less equal to double-booting into Windows, only in a technologically more refined way. It's just like my mate who runs FreeBSD and then VMware in order to run Windows and his favourite pirate copying client. You've achieved nothing, save perhaps stifling further development on that new OS of yours.
Compare this to Apple. They don't have any Windows compatibility layer. Apple is Apple, and content being Apple. They're not dependent on any other OS and related emulators. And they stand out as an alternative. Much more so than Linux, no matter how many programs you WINE.
What a revolution indeed.

This really made smil great article.
Hope for more like it.

This really made smile great article.
Hope for more like it.

Actually, I have always been a bit off about WINE, but recently I bought SuSE 8.1 personal and downloaded the latest RPM of WINE for it and I was very suprised indeed, (since I haven't used it since the beginning of 92), of how much it has improved. Installing stuff is still a pain, but I can run most of my main programs (except MS-Excel's macro editor).

Now I am really impressed with the whole project. I don't think it will kill off native Linux programs as such, but I think more developers will do a Corel on us and use it to help port their existing products. Hopefully, the same will happen with games.

92 I mean '02.

1.0 was released, and this is the revolution of 2002.
Web services might take over the desktop in a few years, so having great browsers is important.

--
http://homepage.mac.com/softkid

"Stunningly fast machines that run OSX" or the like! Wow. I'm about ready for one of those for sure! When do you predict that OSX-running machines will become stunningly fast, then, O great scribe? I'm still waiting for the day when OSX responds within a reasonable time to my commands. Apple took back my Powerbook, thankfully, and even paid for shipping too - I guess that's because I got robbed with a stinking G4. Plus Office Romance.. what a joke! You know, when a company advertises that "This 867MHz PowerBook G4 delivers blazing-fast performance" then it's completely reasonable to expect that very thing, hey?

And, uh... you haven't bothered running any of those games under WineX. I can tell, because you failed to mention how horribly slow and buggy they become in comparison with a native Win2K installation on the same machine - in this case a Compaq Armada M300, p3-600.. a little old, but still OK for older games (eg. Diablo 2, StarCraft, C&C) unless you plan on WineX-ing it.

considering how microsoft is competing with palm os very fiercely with win ce for mobile, i am would suggest one way palm inc can help deflect microsoft's attention is with palm open sourcing the desktop beos source code and offer it free.

for example, walmart decided to preload linux instead of linux. there are a lot of whitebox pc cloners out there.

if be os were open sourced and free, walmart could preload beos rather than windows, stealing away some of windows market share, while deliving a superior user experience on less than state- of - the -art and expensive hardware. microsoft would have to shift sources and programmers away from win ce to and towards desktop os.

aol did it with netscape, and sun did it with open office. linux is currently doing it.

Not really. You don't need to buy a WINE license, and you can still run Windows programs in Linux alongside Linux programs.

What are you smoking?

who has absolutely no idea what he's talking about?

Aaagh, promoted to the exalted rank of a Contributing Editor no less. Still, I understand that promotion is unusually rapid and rarely warranted in the IT field and that is certainly the case in this instance.
As a Contributing Editor (Visiting, methinks?)I was very pleased to see the disclaimer pointing out that the opinions expressed in this obviously scurrilous and pernicious article are not those of the noble, wise and tolerant beings responsible for osnews.com.
Being a loyal and long-term visitor of this excellent site, (I have been around for at least 9 months and thats long-term in the IT world isn't it?) I would be most shocked to even think that such obviously jaded and cynical views could in any way emanate from this harbour of optimism and fair mindedness.

I WineX StarCraft and Warcraft on a 400, your 600 would run them just fine.

I couldn't even be bothered reading part two, having had enough trouble barely struggling throyugh the first section of this twaddle. Find a journalist who:

1. Can spell
2. Doesn't repeat himself endlessly
3. Has something to actually report

Rating: Crap.

but it's still got a long way to go before it can run most apps perfectly. It works well for a select few apps that it has been optimized for, but outside of those apps it's still very hit-and-miss. It's getting better in leaps and bounds though, and by the end of 2003 I'd be surprised if it doesn't at least make a creditable attempt at most things.

Probably the most important app that Wine runs - MS Office - now has a very good native alternative in the shape of OpenOffice.org/StarOffice though, and Linux's other desktop applications are beginning to get there too - Scribus is a passable DTP package now, the Linux audio scene is beginning to gel around a couple of decent sequencers and a single plugin/audio exchange system, GnuCash is a decent Quicken alternative, and I'm really excited about the potential of KOffice's Karbon14 as an Illustrator-killer. The move towards UI standardisation is nice too, even if Red Hat made a bit of a PR disaster out of their effort by tweaking other things at the same time unnecessarily.

Of course there's going to be a place for Wine for more obscure software but if development efforts keep up as they have been, the Linux desktop won't have any need for Wine for mainstream things (perhaps apart from games) by the end of 2003.

I agree that 2002 saw a revolution for non-Windows desktops, but I think that's more due to the two main Linux desktop systems growing up - and also MacOS X going from promising-but-ponderous to genuinely great.

I couldn't say it better:


Find a journalist who:

1. Can spell
2. Doesn't repeat himself endlessly
3. Has something to actually report

Rating: Crap.


Thank you.

1. Can spell
2. Doesn't repeat himself endlessly
3. Has something to actually report

Rating: Crap.
That's funny. I don't see you writing any articles. You want to argue about his ideas, discuss his opinions, fine. That’s what this medium of communication is all about. But don't just trash the guy. He obviously put effort into writing this article, and at least deserves respect for that. Let me repeat myself just so I’m sure you understand: “I don't see you writing any articles.”

There are way too many comic book guys on this site... Get a life...

Thanks a lot, Ian :-)

Fred and marm, if you're too mentally handicaped to get a (good!) joke, just shut up, please.

monty

To haiqu: I couldn't agree more. Obviously the author of this article has been inhaling the vapours arising from a ridiculously overclocked CPU which have affected his underclocked brain that was already more than a few transistors short of a full load, if you get my drift.

To Bryan: thats OK as long as it was a small, wry smile, which I'm sure it was.

To montanus: What joke?? I can't find a single example of humour in the whole thing, and judging by their comments, the overwhelming majority of readers of this article agree with me 100%. :-)

Really good article, Ian. Well thought out and polished. But I have to agree with montanus, some of your descriptive phrasing was very witty, intentional or not. It's funny because it's insightful. Good work.

And coincidentally, I run Wine on my P400 running RedHat 7.1, and it runs my main Windows app perfectly - after a little tweaking. The Wine-HOWTO (google it) was excellent. I no longer need to boot into Windows for anything, and I'm really happy about it. Gnome is great.

While the ideal situation for the Linux community would be to have a complete selection of native apps, it looks to me like that's a long ways off. Given the financial state of the typical commercial software company, are they going to devote scarce resources to Linux ports? As for open source alternatives, progress has ranged from excellent to non-existent. Mozilla and Openoffice are at the high end, but what about basic Joe user-level applications like CD burning,banking-checking,and tax preparation. If alternatives exist installation could very well be more trouble than it's worth. And there are thousands of useful programs out there that will never be ported to Linux (until it's the dominant OS), Home Depot gives a CD to its commercial accounts with its entire inventory and software to generate invoices, estimates, and order from your local store. For my business, it's invaluable, but will there ever be a Linux version? If I could run it on Linux I'd be truly MS free. So I think the Wine project is a vital part of Linux' growth, I wish it had the resources to make faster progress. I also wish there were better user tutorials available on using and updating it. If anybody knows where I could find one, please post it. Thanx.

When I came across the following sentence:

As all good nerds are aware, we truly blessed and upstanding folk who so wisely and courageously use any one of the many wonderful and varied incarnations ( or should that be incantations) of LINUX on our desktop computers may now run programs written for another OS.

I had to ask, why on earth did it have to be that long?

I guess nobody has figured out how to do a grammar and style check in Linux or WINE.

It's too bad McKenzie's writing has to get in the way of his ideas. His lugubrious articles need to be edited down to about 1/3 their length, then maybe we could get past all the too-smart posing and unfunny parenthetical remarks to what he wants to talk about.

For writing a serious reply to such a wonderfully humorous article.

You see, I only understand the lowest form of wit.

>While the ideal situation for the Linux community would be to have a complete selection of native apps,

That would be IDEAL! :-)

> it looks to me like that's a long ways off. Given the financial state of the typical commercial software company,

Depending on the application, I agree. Software companies have only themselves to blame for market conditions. If they charged reasonable prices, and listened to consumers they wouldn't hurt right now.

> are they going to devote scarce resources to Linux ports?

Had they adopted Linux as a supported OS when people started asking for it perhaps their resources would not be scarce. I know
that I alone spent over $200 on Linux software last year, and *I KNOW* tons of people that have also paid for Linux *DESKTOP* software.

> As for open source alternatives, progress has ranged from excellent to non-existent.

True.

> what about basic Joe user-level applications like

>CD burning

cdrecord (for the CLI types)
xcdroast
Nero (w/ Wine)
ksoncd
gtoaster

and more that I've missed.

> banking-checking

kapitol
gnucash
Quicken (I've been using it for some time now w/ Wine.)

> tax preparation.

We just finished our taxes with TurboTax on the Web using Linux and Mozilla. We didn't run into any of the headaches that people using the installed version did either.

> If alternatives exist installation could very well be more trouble than it's worth.

Sometimes, yes. There needs to be a unified installer that works with all major packaging methods. (IE Installshield like interface to rpm and deb)

> And there are thousands of useful programs out there that will never be ported to Linux

That can be said for Windows too.

> (until it's the dominant OS), Home Depot gives a CD to its commercial accounts with its entire inventory and software to generate invoices, estimates, and order from your local store.

Hmm, that may run in crossover office. If not, well bug Home Depot, tell them you would like to use Linux, and their application is keeping you from it. If enough people show demand, it will happen. This is the fault of people, not Linux.

> For my business, it's invaluable, but will there ever be a Linux version? If I could run it on Linux I'd be truly MS free. So I think the Wine project is a vital part of Linux' growth, I wish it had the resources to make faster progress.

Try crossover office, or plain dailywine.

> I also wish there were better user tutorials available on using and updating it.

http://www.learninglinux.com/

Well what weäve seen the last year or two makes it obvious that Apple today is nothing but BSD...

And the Lord spake unto Ian McKenzie, and he didst tell him to use improbably long and rambling sentences filled with greatly excessive numbers of syllables and containing the merest smidgeon of actual information deviously concealed amidst the verbiage.

And Ian McKenzie didst obey the Lord, and filled his writings with syllables in the hopes of obfuscating the issues he purported to discuss. And to further this malevolent cause the McKenzie didst ocassionally impregnate his sentences with vaguely correct sounding but actually quite inappropriate words, such as the word "impregnate" earlier in this sentence.

Sometimes brevity is a blessing. Mr McKenzie's entire article could be summarized in three sentences: It is a good thing to have a bridge to permit Windows users to transfer existing work to Linux or other alternative operating systems. Wine has jump-started the Linux on the desktop push. The combination of OpenOffice.org, Mozilla/Phoenix/Galeon, and Crossover Office has made it possible for corporate users to migrate from their existing Windows systems to desktop Linux, as Xandros Linux is so clearly demonstrating.

All editorials bear the editorial notice.
You were not "promoted" to anything as such, it is just that our database doesn't have a field for "visiting editor".

blah, blah, blah...you're not a native aussie are you? you're an imported brit! LOL

i would have preferred an aussie english translation.....

After all, you can play Quake or another ID game under linux. You can even get pretty damn good framerates (probably better than WineX). If people use the Sims or Civ III or about a zillion other games as examples of games that can only be played on Windows then that is cool.

However, I boot into Windows or use Transgaming to play Quake3 comment is just silly. Why in the hell would you do that? Play it under linux. I do for Quake3 and Castle Wolfenstein.

There are plenty of games that cannot under any circumstance be played under linux. Why do people consistently get their examples all screwed up?

<blockquote>At this point I should point out that anyone who may somehow be sensing that a little smoke can be seen wafting from the previous sentence...</blockquote>

I must've missed the smoke due to all of the needlessly wordy run on sentences and missed punctuation.

I read the first paragraph, and had no idea what the article was about. This guy needs to learn how to write before comming up with such a bold article title.

The author seems to be under the impression that writing long convoluted sentences is a mark of wit. It is NOT.

The opposite is true. There's a saying: BREVITY IS THE SOUL OF WIT.

When you emphasize style in your writing, you must make sure that the style supports your message. In this case, it did the opposite - it got in the way. Total failure.

Why do I discuss the style rather than the substance of that article? See the above. It is because the author emphasizes style at the COST of substance.

And speaking of style, it was juvenile, overwitten, witless, and terribly, terribly unfunny.

Actually, this could be used at school as a classic example of BAD WRITING.

Despite the flaming, and the individuals slamming the article, I found the read to be quite envigorating. Not to mention it helped me kill an hour at work. Yes, that's right. Thank you Ian, I've just been paid quite heaftily to read your gloriously wordy, and often amazing editorial. Amazing you say? I never knew so many big words could be strung together so flawlessly.

It was like a frolic through the dictionary.

There are no technical resons to don't believe that linux will run almost all WIN32 applications like Windows XP. When NT was created, compatibility with existent WIN32 applications was poor. XP have a WIN32 API running on a totally diferent kernel (compared to Win9x).

The only difference is that Wine was made by reverse engineering, like Samba was ... NT is only a VMS technology stolen from Digital running a "super wine" on top of it.

If M$ wants, they could put a full Win32 layer on top of linux kernel and name it as "M$ linux"...

// Quicken (I've been using it for some time now w/ Wine.) //

You're not using it to connect to online banking features w/ Wine. I guarantee it.

Online banking features are 90% of the reason many folks use Quicken.

i've never read such a wordy article on a technical website, i agree with the sentiment, linux is lacking the feel needed by a desktop os, it is improving, but the average distro as the end experience of the kernal+applications has been flaky, it is a holy platform vs. MS on the x86 platform at least in the the eyes of its advocates, but full of holes to those that criticize its consistent api, look, feel, etc.

but it's so free, ebullient like the article here, things are changing, man. in an open environment everything can happen.

Ian really should consult a dictionary before posting.
procrastinators: noun, plural: those who put off until tomorrow what should be done today.

probable intent: prognosticators --- those making predictions.

I'll leave it to other readers to find the other malapropisms... (i see no-one's spotted them yet :-)

Uhh yes I am.

To Lycoris User: Greetings fellow Lycoris devotee. Let me put it this way. AUSTRALIA 3 ENGLAND 1. Anyone for tiddlywinks! ROFL.

To eponymous unanimous: Spot on! I could try and argue that talking about tomorrow rather than actually doing something today is very much at the heart of punditry but that would merely be a rationalization for a stuff up on my part. And procrastinations is spelt incorrectly as well! Damn spellcheckers, if we can't trust machines who can we trust?
And it is exingencies, not extingencies.
Oh the shame of it all!

is either disturbing, funny, or disturbingly funny: you decide.

The only difference is that Wine was made by reverse engineering, like Samba was ... NT is only a VMS technology stolen from Digital running a "super wine" on top of it.

Spin another yarn, please. Microsoft never stole anything from Digital. They hired the architect of VMS and had him put together a team to develop a new OS from the ground up.


If M$ wants, they could put a full Win32 layer on top of linux kernel and name it as "M$ linux"...

Your comment quoted at the top of this post and the one quoted directly above are not mutually inclusive. WINE proves that a Win32API translation layer can be implemented on top of Linux without any knowledge of Microsoft code. Experience creating Microsoft operatining systems is not a requirement to accomplish such a task. Microsoft could easily write a better WINE than WINE if and when the mood ever struck them. There's no revelation in that, though. It's been discussed ad naseum on various web forums, newsgroups, and mailing lists.

As for your immature use of "M$" to denote Microsoft, please read the following:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2002-07-22&res=l

So few people understand the concept of "good writing;" the new media and the Internet is slowly pounding down those of us who do.

I couldn't read the whole article. My reply to it is: Meh. The revolution seems to have slipped by unnoticed. WINE is cool, but it is not yet the answer to all needs and due to the shifting nature of that which it seeks to replicate... it may never be.

perchance you remeber OS/2 ?

apparently the best thing since sliced bread according to nearly everyone who had a chance to touch it (except those people who also got to touch NeXT stuff). And it could run windows and dos programs better than windows and dos.

Literaly.

and as you can see, OS/2 is the biggest, most successful OS around today. That windows API *really* helps it, So much that you dont need to use any OS/2 calls and still have a full functional program - and it can run on windows to!

Bonus!

or not.

are we really gaining anything by being able to run windows Apps? The short term looks great - we linux users get to run major windows software without even a recompile. means linux becomes more accessible to the main stream, and more useful in the corperate / home sectors.

The long term isnt so nice; Like OS/2 developers wont want to develop native Linux apps if they can develop for windows and know that because of Wine they can be happy in the knowledge that linux users might possibly be able to run it too. Secondly, it cuts down inovation - eg, if we can all run Office nicely, the only real code going into a linux office app is into wine, and no decent office app will be developed for linux (i dont consider OO.org or staroffice to bve 'for linux' until it uses a native widget set). Compare that situation with IE. Linux users needed a web browser, NS was failing and IE was the dominate (and at the time very best) browser. Now, as a result of needing to have our own browser, we have the two best engines (Gecko and KHTML) one of which is the most standards compliant and the other is the fastest (and almost as good standards wise).

They hired the architect of VMS and had him put together a team to develop a new OS from the ground up.
That was Dave Cutler, notorious inventor of the "Fork Queue" (reads Fu*k You :-)
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler

If M$ wants, they could put a full Win32 layer on top of linux kernel and name it as "M$ linux"...
Actually it woul be easier to put linux (or os/2) on top of the nt kernel because it suports subsystems

As Andy pointed out, API compatibility hasn't turned out to help OS/2 or any other semi-alternative OS on the PC architecture. And it isn't helping Linux either. In the short term, certainly, just as Andy states, since you gain access to software to fill all those unsightly holes in your environment, but API compatibility with even Linux's father UNIX is eventually detrimental to its development as a challenger to non-UNIX OSes (most notably Windows). Someone here stated that he didn't count Star/OpenOffice as a Linux program due to lack of standard gadgets. Exactly. All those running Solaris, BSD, IRIX or HPUX will complain whenever the programmer succumbs to GNUisms or Linuxisms, breaking cross-UNIX portability.
Certainly, this UNIX compatibility gave Linux a quick start due to a broad availability of tools such as TAr, Ls and even Netscape (It's pronounced Mozilla ;-). A disparate look and behaviour amongst X11 programs was as a result inherited. Workarounds, and most probably limitations, in most source codes in order to ensure compatibility with any system around claiming a modicum of POSIX compatibility. Even now, even though programmers are not as often rolling their own GUI classes, there is a civil war going on between the different widget sets. And out of solidarity, they can't stray from portability, extend APIs and so on. Linux could have been at least something like ROX OS, but opted for the safe path, in the process sacrificing the option of initiative of its own and inheriting the mistakes and limitations of its ancestors.

As for WINE, I think it's counter-productive. While it might in the short term strengthen Linux's position as a Windows alternative, it also makes Linux into less of an alternative and more an alternative implementation of the same. Any aims at compatibility with your stronger competitor equals to actually certifying his position, even strengthening it. It goes to prove that you can't really decide your own faith, set your own standard and paradigms. Apple and others have always followed their own path, without paying attention to M$, and that is a far more plaudible option. Because they turn out to be an option. Linux, when factors such as WINE and Windows mimickery in window managers/desktop environments come into play, stands out as a smaller brother who hasn't yet grown out of the shadow of his elder, always relying on him to stand out as an individual, and thus failing in his endeavour.
IOW, the ability to read and write M$ Word documents amounts to recognising Word as the maker and breaker of your application, despite the fact that it isn't Word and should be content not being Word. Actually implementing Windows APIs and binary compatibility means that you're admitting its vitality to your success, and is in fact the opposite of establishing yourself as an alternative, and in particular the opposite of establishing public acceptance of one's alternative OS. Even the word alternative is one of these factors. It's like alternative music. It shouldn't be alternative, just music. And alternative OSes should be just OSes. Then we may choose between all those alternatives. Just as we choose between alternatives when shopping around for a car. They're alternatives, but not alternative cars. Alternative cars run of solar energy and are since alternative, since they're no real alternative if you're looking for a car to drive to work.
Apple (no, I'm no evangelist) don't define themselves as a Windows alternative, or an alternative OS. This is what I mean when I say that Apple is Apple. The change which the users and producers of alternative OSes and platforms should bring about is to make the Wintel hegemony stand out as a platform amongst others, and not as the Platform with a capital P, as seems to be the public opinion today.
Actually running your counterpart's programs will only strengthen that hegemony. It might serve Linux in the short run when it comes to gaining market share, but ironically, it might not serve acceptance of Linux as Linux, or the broad adoption of Linux APIs, as the OS/2 example illustrated.