Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 22nd Oct 2005 03:07 UTC, submitted by carbon-12
Windows After roughly 12 years of work, the Wine Project is about to take its widely used Windows translation layer to a place it has not been in all that time: beta. Wine Project leader Alexandre Julliard, who has worked on the software nearly since its beginning in 1993 and maintained it since 1994, said in an interview yesterday that the beta release is "a matter of days away." He has since updated that forecast and said it would be released on Tuesday, October 25th.
Thread beginning with comment 49607
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

New computers bought are in more number than the computers existing then.

What exactly is this sentence supposed to mean? If anything, the total inertia of Win32 is greater than the inertia of Win16/DOS, because the installed base is even larger!

So the transition is very easy.

Transitions are never easy.

Do you think someone will buy a brand new PC and Vista just to test Vista?

That's irrelevent. The question is, once Vista is out, will people immediately upgrade? The whole NT thing suggests that it'll take years before the majority of people have ugpraded. The Vista transition will likely take even longer, since XP -> Vista brings far less user-tangible benfits than 9x -> NT/XP did. There will be many apps to run on WINE for years to come.

You know this. Compared to WINE(Alpha after 12 years), MONO(reaching 1.2) is complete in many respects. When MONO(1.2 with WinForms) is out it will run all the 100% .NET apps even before Vista is out.

And how many .NET apps does the average person use every day? Zero! Nada. Zilch. You're assuming that app developers will suddenly all start coding for .NET (and also never use native Win32 services). This is a ridiculous assumption. Indeed, the big apps, like Photoshop and the like, precisely the ones that people generally want to emulate, are exactly the ones who won't rewrite in .NET!

Reply Parent Score: 3

japail Member since:

He's a troll. With or without a SWF implementation, Mono is still incomplete when not even considering all of the platform bindings people would actually use if anyone developed desktop software with .NET. When considering them, you have to wonder where exactly a Managed DirectX is going to spring forth from. Which cavity is that going to magically fly out of nowhere to go into Mono? Because that's what the world will look like if Microsoft is ever successful in pushing managed development onto its ISVs.

Reply Parent Score: 1

jayson.knight Member since:

And how many .NET apps does the average person use every day? Zero! Nada. Zilch.

Rayiner, I've always respected what you've had to say on this board, but this time I thoroughly disagree.

The average home user? Probably not many. That being said, .Net has an enormous presence in IT dept's though...I'd say 90%+ of the folks working in a fortune 500 company use a .Net app of some sort (more than likely an app) on a daily basis.

I see this recurring theme around here all the time...people think if there isn't a "killer" desktop app written in (fill in the blank) language, that it's not important. VB/Java/.Net are very well entrenched in business scenarios...just b/c there isn't some sort of desktop application written in said languages doesn't mean they aren't viable.

Reply Parent Score: 1

japail Member since:

Yes, when discussing Mono vis-a-vis Wine as it pertains to Vista, what you should really be discussing are webapps. Not only webapps, but webapps constrained to Fortune 500 companies. If you were being any less topical I'd think you were starting a new discussion.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Member since:

New computers bought are in more number than the computers existing then. This clarifies the sentence
Microsoft grew up during the 1980s and 1990s, when the growth in personal computers was so dramatic that every year there were more new computers sold than the entire installed base. That meant that if you made a product that only worked on new computers, within a year or two it could take over the world even if nobody switched to your product. That was one of the reasons Word and Excel displaced WordPerfect and Lotus so thoroughly: Microsoft just waited for the next big wave of hardware upgrades and sold Windows, Word and Excel to corporations buying their next round of desktop computers (in some cases their first round). So in many ways Microsoft never needed to learn how to get an installed base to switch from product N to product N+1. When people get new computers, they're happy to get all the latest Microsoft stuff on the new computer, but they're far less likely to upgrade. This didn't matter when the PC industry was growing like wildfire, but now that the world is saturated with PCs most of which are Just Fine, Thank You, Microsoft is suddenly realizing that it takes much longer for the latest thing to get out there. When they tried to "End Of Life" Windows 98, it turned out there were still so many people using it they had to promise to support that old creaking grandma for a few more year

I agree with you with the .NET apps thing. Majar apps are never rewritten because you have a brand new technology. But newer apps have a chance. I have already seen few **SMALL** apps all over the net who say that the apps run on .NET1.1 or Mono(I dont remember the sites)

Reply Parent Score: 2