Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th May 2009 22:04 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Many Linux users have experience with Wine, the application compatibility layer which allows some Windows programs to run on UNIX-like machines. During Ubuntu's Open Week event, Mark Shuttleworth was asked about Wine, and how important he believes it is for the success of Ubuntu.
Thread beginning with comment 361994
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by uaxactun
by lemur2 on Wed 6th May 2009 05:27 UTC in reply to "Comment by uaxactun"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

I use wine to run applications that do not have an equivalent in linux -- endnote for example.


Endnote has a few alternatives available in Linux.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_sof...

Some that might be of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pybliographer

... and here is one that is a firefox extension:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zotero

These may or may not suit you ... but nevertheless, they do exist, and they do qualify as an equivalent in Linux of endnote.

I'm getting a bit tired of endless baseless claims that one cannot do this or that natively on Linux. Quite a few people seem to be prepared to claim this without any basis, or with quite outdated information.

Edited 2009-05-06 05:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by uaxactun
by polaris20 on Wed 6th May 2009 14:55 in reply to "RE: Comment by uaxactun"
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06


I'm getting a bit tired of endless baseless claims that one cannot do this or that natively on Linux. Quite a few people seem to be prepared to claim this without any basis, or with quite outdated information.


You can get tired of it all you want, but that doesn't negate the fact that the problem exists. Native equivalents aren't always as good as the Mac or Windows app you're trying to replace. Gimp is not as good as Photoshop. Ardour is not as good as Cubase/Sonar/Pro Tools. Evolution is nowhere near as good as Outlook or even Entourage. Kino is not as good as Premiere, FCP, or even Sony Vegas. The Visio replacements aren't as good as Visio (I've tried every one of them that I could find).

Shall I go on?

Of course this is my opinion, but I bet I can find a few hundred people to agree with me.

I don't think WINE is the answer though. It doesn't encourage native ports to Linux, merely the developer "getting it to work" with WINE, which, IMO, is kind of half-assed.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by uaxactun
by uaxactun on Wed 6th May 2009 17:51 in reply to "RE: Comment by uaxactun"
uaxactun Member since:
2008-04-17

Sorry but the software you mentioned *just does not do the things* that Endnote does. I use endnote to format references in particular journal/manuscript styles. It is possible to do this by manually using the software you mention but that defeats the purpose. (I'd rather use latex and bibtex.)

And I use zotero every day for its wonderful web snapshot/note capability but, for me, it has never worked as a bibliographic tool.

The open office bibliographic project is promising but development has been achingly slow.
_ _ _ _ _ _

I think your failure to respond to the interoperability criticism is telling. I have hundreds of legacy documents that open office either corrupts or cannot open (forms, tables, embedded images, embedded movies, proprietary ttf and ps fonts). If you want to see linux used in a professional environment, the ability to run microsoft office natively in linx is essential.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by uaxactun
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 6th May 2009 21:40 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by uaxactun"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Sorry but the software you mentioned *just does not do the things* that Endnote does.


Lemur2 often advocates applications that he has never used, in fields that he has never used. He just Googles for "EndNote for Linux", and copy/pastes whatever half-assed, barely-updated piece of software it brings up.

He's never used EndNote, so he has no idea what people who DO use EndNote (like you, and I myself use it too) actually look for in such an application.

We actually use EndNote, so we know the alternatives he lists are not even close to EndNote's capabilities. However, someone who hasn't used EndNote will think his arguments and links are convincing, and will so be fooled. And that's his goal.

Edited 2009-05-06 21:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by uaxactun
by lemur2 on Thu 7th May 2009 02:29 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by uaxactun"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Sorry but the software you mentioned *just does not do the things* that Endnote does. I use endnote to format references in particular journal/manuscript styles. It is possible to do this by manually using the software you mention but that defeats the purpose. (I'd rather use latex and bibtex.) And I use zotero every day for its wonderful web snapshot/note capability but, for me, it has never worked as a bibliographic tool.


It would seem that Endnote has actually sued Zotero for "reverse engineering". Now in order for that to make sense, then (a) Zotero would have to do what Endnote does, and (b) it would have to be a patent, not just a trade secret.

If Endnote actually has a valid (in the US) patent, then that would be a reason why open source software is not as functional. But if open source software truly is not as functional, then Endnote don't have a case.

I think your failure to respond to the interoperability criticism is telling. I have hundreds of legacy documents that open office either corrupts or cannot open (forms, tables, embedded images, embedded movies, proprietary ttf and ps fonts).


I have encountered hundreds of legacy documents that (later versions of) MS office either corrupts or cannot open (forms, tables, embedded images, embedded movies, proprietary ttf and ps fonts).

So? Your point?

If you want to see linux used in a professional environment, the ability to run microsoft office natively in linx is essential.


If you want to use an Office application in a professional environment, and legacy documents are a concern to you both now and further down the track, then microsoft office is the very last thing you should be running.

http://homembit.com/2009/05/microsoft-now-attempt-to-fragment-odf.h...

Edited 2009-05-07 02:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by uaxactun
by lemur2 on Thu 7th May 2009 04:08 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by uaxactun"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I think your failure to respond to the interoperability criticism is telling. I have hundreds of legacy documents that open office either corrupts or cannot open (forms, tables, embedded images, embedded movies, proprietary ttf and ps fonts). If you want to see linux used in a professional environment, the ability to run microsoft office natively in linx is essential.


I have encountered something which has resulted in further thoughts on this topic of interoperability.

It is a comment in the latest news picks on Groklaw front page, which includes an extract from a new EU directive. If legacy documents produced by older versions Microsoft Office do not open correctly in other programs, and it can be shown that this is due to information about the formats being obscured and kept by Microsoft as trade secrets, then Microsoft could well be (as of quite recently) now in violation of international business law, according to new EU directive 2009/24/EC.

http://groklaw.net/

DIRECTIVE 2009/24/EC on the legal protection of computer programs
[PJ: Signed by EP and Council April 23, 2009. From the PDF:]
(9) The Community is fully committed to the promotion of international standardisation.

(10) The function of a computer program is to communicate and work together with other components of a computer system and with users and, for this purpose, a logical and, where appropriate, physical interconnection and interaction is required to permit all elements of software and hardware to work with other software and hardware and with users in all the ways in which they are intended to function. The parts of the program which provide for such interconnection and interaction between elements of software and hardware are generally known as ‘interfaces’. This functional interconnection and interaction is generally known as ‘interoperability’; such interoperability can be defined as the ability to exchange information and mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.

...

(17) The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the application of the competition rules under Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty if a dominant supplier refuses to make information available which is necessary for inter operability as defined in this Directive. - Official Journal of the European Union


So there you go. Interesting, is it not? It certainly is directly against Microsoft's apparent past buisness strategies.

Reply Parent Score: 2