Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 13:41 UTC, submitted by twickline
OSNews, Generic OSes "In short, it allows Wine applications to be run just as easily as those native to Linux, meaning that they can be linked to or run from any directory, whether from a terminal or even a file manager like nautilus. It also handles some of the more awkward Wine extensions like .lnk and .msi, allowing them to be run with a double click."
Thread beginning with comment 279933
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
jcinacio
Member since:
2006-03-12

There isn't much chance a Linux system will ever be compromised by windows viruses or worms - the worst case scenario is a user's wine configuration going bad.

Either way, i can't imagine someone using wine so that they can browse the web every day using IE...

Reply Parent Score: 2

deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

>> Either way, i can't imagine someone using wine so
>> that they can browse the web every day using IE...


Actually for web developers, that's one of the things keeping them in XP... and we can't even go to Vista for that matter.

Web developers still test in IE 7 and 6, and occasionally need to test IE 5.x as well. (GOOD developers also test at least three Firefox builds (1.0.x, 1.5, latest 2.x), two Opera builds (8.5 and 9.x), and a version of Safari (in my case 3 beta)

IDEALLY they should also test pages in Safari 2 and IE 5.2, which means having a Mac in the shop.

So running IE every day under *nix is desirable, if for no other reason than to write pages that support 70% or so of the viewing public. (though we ALL hope that number keeps dropping)

Reply Parent Score: 2

B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

deathshadow:Web developers still test in IE 7 and 6, and occasionally need to test IE 5.x as well. (GOOD developers also test at least three Firefox builds (1.0.x, 1.5, latest 2.x), two Opera builds (8.5 and 9.x), and a version of Safari (in my case 3 beta)

IDEALLY they should also test pages in Safari 2 and IE 5.2, which means having a Mac in the shop.

So running IE every day under *nix is desirable, if for no other reason than to write pages that support 70% or so of the viewing public. (though we ALL hope that number keeps dropping)


Running yes, using no. Checking your own markup is hardly "browsing the web".

Besides, under GNU/Linux you can run
* IE5, 5.5, 6, 7 with Wine. The excellent IEs4Linux script makes setup a breeze.
* FF1.0, 1.5 or 2.0 or any one of the many other version nativly
* Opera 6.x, 7.x, 8.x, 9.x nativly
* Konqueror 3.5.x with KHTML
* Epiphany 2.20 with Webkit or Gecko.
* many more

All in one workplace! Great, isn't it?

Reply Parent Score: 2

snozzberry Member since:
2005-11-14

Web developers still test in IE 7 and 6

Yes, we do.

and occasionally need to test IE 5.x as well.

No, we do not. IE6 came out five years ago.

(GOOD developers also test at least three Firefox builds (1.0.x, 1.5, latest 2.x)

2.x is not exactly bleeding edge, its requirements are indistinguishable from 1.5, and a vast number of extensions no longer support 1.x. There are reasons not to upgrade IE that have to do with your version of Windows; there are no equivalent reasons for not following the upgrade path on FF.

two Opera builds (8.5 and 9.x)

I will admit to being unfamiliar with the major changes between these versions, while I continue to test 9.x.

and a version of Safari (in my case 3 beta)

I test 2 on a G4 laptop and 3 on Windows.

IDEALLY they should also test pages in Safari 2 and IE 5.2, which means having a Mac in the shop.

IE5/Mac was a brilliant application in its day. It really was. Steve Jobs was right when he said it was the best browser for any platform. But in the world that passed it by, its CSS model is both incomplete and broken, and its DOM is incompatible with every other browser including IE5/Windows. Supporting IE5/Mac for anything remotely resembling Web 2.0 requires creating your own JavaScript API wrapper code, CSS hacks, and even then it doesn't handle complex CSS gracefully. Worse, IE5/Mac caches JavaScript. I sincerely wish the source code would become public domain so that the OS community could make it something awesome, but until that happens it is as relevant as Netscape 4. I feel like I'm killing my favorite child, but progress is progress.

So running IE every day under *nix is desirable, if for no other reason than to write pages that support 70% or so of the viewing public. (though we ALL hope that number keeps dropping)

I run IE6 on Linux, and sadly I can't get a JVM to work under it (I need this for a website which combines Java with ActiveX).

Ultimately CSS and DOM have changed radically enough that graceful degradation is not always possible with pre-CSS2 browsers and worse, browsers that partially support CSS2. People who continue to use pre-CSS2 browsers have to be made aware of the ramifications of their choices, and I sincerely, sincerely regret what this means to people who genuinely cannot afford to replace computers they bought before 2000. I work for a university and strive mightily to make our layouts platform agnostic, minibrowser compatible, gracefully degrading, fast loading and ADA compliant.

But for a site with over a hundred pages, supporting every browser released since 2002 means maintaining glue code and hacks guaranteed to generate bit rot. IE6 is a reasonable requirement for a site. IE5/Win is not, given the number of missing properties, box-model errors and other problems.

I was an evangelist once, too.

Edited 2007-10-23 16:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Actually an attack on your Wine-installation can wipe out anything everywhere you have write access. Or put differently - an attack on Wine on my system can wipe out all my NTFS-formatted drives effectively removing Win2K3... (perhaps I shouldn't give my normal user write access to my C-drive).

Reply Parent Score: 1

draethus Member since:
2006-08-02

That's why things like AppArmour were invented.

Reply Parent Score: 1