- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
You Want Linux to Run What?
|
|
|
Comments (7)
Wine is a option for people to run apps and games. For you to tell people to use Windows if they want to run Windows apps is insane! You should promote LINUX and ALL it's benefits not direct people away from Linux.
@twickline
You know?!? I do agree with you on not short-selling Linux features. However, I see the point of emulation and emulation-like tools slowing the rate of ports to Linux by lazy or uninterested developers, and consequently slowing Linux adoption, or reducing incentive for Linux developers to work on competing applications.
Take games,... since productivity apps are slightly different story. If a games developer knows that Wine will run his game just fine on a Linux box, what incentive does he ever have to port it??? Porting takes time, effort, marketing, etc. Even if you do not accept Linux market share figures of between 1-2% there is a diminished return for the investment in time in porting an app (and I don't believe teh 1-2% Linux adoption rate, I believe Linux adoption to be closer to 5-7%, even more if you count people who are Linux users with multiple machine environments, such as me, with 12 computers running Linux in and out of my home, 4 to 5 running constantly, the others running as needed). Those closed source developers, looking to make a buck, are going to balk at doing a port. Games developers are looking for a quick hit. Conventional wisdom is going to keep them from open-sourcing their programs, even if it means that they could count on 5-6% more sales. This is because they do not believe they can control the revenue stream (expansions, add-ons, etc.). What these developers don't understand (or don't believe/trust) is that (for games at least), the driving force is not just the engine that powers the game, but also to a greater extent, the artistic content of the game (hot properties like comic book characters, sci-fi and action movie characters, etc.). They also don't understand that the more technically literate users will be happy to help fix and tweak the software, if they get to peak inside and be an active part of the development process.
For applications, it's a similar, but slightly different story. For businesses, applications are tools, and if they need to retrain staff to use the tools, they will lose profitability (temporarily). In a bad economy, you cannot suffer a reduction in work-flow, even if it reduces IT costs and budgets, because work flow reduction will have a bigger impact on future business, reputation, etc. That is why companies run Windoze worstations & usually 2-3 generations of the OS behind what is current,... Until they just can't get away with it anymore. For all their evils, M$ was the first in the door, and that's important to consider. Even if you give the employees their M$ apps, through Codeweavers or whatever, the slight change in the way the OS works is going to create adoption problems. Plus, vendor lock in is a business model for many proprietary software companies. My first experience with it was with Quickbooks in the late 1990s and the early 2000s. It is what helped me decide to drop proprietary software, for the most part. These companies don't want to change their busness model,... They would rather just collect revenue for every bug fix or improvement, and hammer the occasional license violator for fine $$$ with the BSA...
Take games,... since productivity apps are slightly different story. If a games developer knows that Wine will run his game just fine on a Linux box, what incentive does he ever have to port it??? Porting takes time, effort, marketing, etc. Even if you do not accept Linux market share figures of between 1-2% there is a diminished return for the investment in time in porting an app (and I don't believe teh 1-2% Linux adoption rate, I believe Linux adoption to be closer to 5-7%, even more if you count people who are Linux users with multiple machine environments, such as me, with 12 computers running Linux in and out of my home, 4 to 5 running constantly, the others running as needed). Those closed source developers, looking to make a buck, are going to balk at doing a port. Games developers are looking for a quick hit. Conventional wisdom is going to keep them from open-sourcing their programs, even if it means that they could count on 5-6% more sales. This is because they do not believe they can control the revenue stream (expansions, add-ons, etc.). What these developers don't understand (or don't believe/trust) is that (for games at least), the driving force is not just the engine that powers the game, but also to a greater extent, the artistic content of the game (hot properties like comic book characters, sci-fi and action movie characters, etc.). They also don't understand that the more technically literate users will be happy to help fix and tweak the software, if they get to peak inside and be an active part of the development process.
For applications, it's a similar, but slightly different story. For businesses, applications are tools, and if they need to retrain staff to use the tools, they will lose profitability (temporarily). In a bad economy, you cannot suffer a reduction in work-flow, even if it reduces IT costs and budgets, because work flow reduction will have a bigger impact on future business, reputation, etc. That is why companies run Windoze worstations & usually 2-3 generations of the OS behind what is current,... Until they just can't get away with it anymore. For all their evils, M$ was the first in the door, and that's important to consider. Even if you give the employees their M$ apps, through Codeweavers or whatever, the slight change in the way the OS works is going to create adoption problems. Plus, vendor lock in is a business model for many proprietary software companies. My first experience with it was with Quickbooks in the late 1990s and the early 2000s. It is what helped me decide to drop proprietary software, for the most part. These companies don't want to change their busness model,... They would rather just collect revenue for every bug fix or improvement, and hammer the occasional license violator for fine $$$ with the BSA...
I think Linux advocates who want to ignore Wine do the cause of promoting free, open-source operating systems a disservice.
Most users don't have an unnatural, symbiotic connection to every app they use in Windows. So if they come over to Linux, chances are they'll find Linux/Unix equivalents that are often better for most of their tasks.
But most users have one Windows app that they seemingly need to live, and being able to run it via Wine is a great way to get them away from Windows and onto Linux.
I'm a big fan and advocate of those with proprietary OSes running FOSS applications in their current environment. I'm also very much in favor of people running proprietary applications in a FOSS OS environment if that's what they want to do.
Freedom of choice is still part of overall freedom.
Most users don't have an unnatural, symbiotic connection to every app they use in Windows. So if they come over to Linux, chances are they'll find Linux/Unix equivalents that are often better for most of their tasks.
But most users have one Windows app that they seemingly need to live, and being able to run it via Wine is a great way to get them away from Windows and onto Linux.
I'm a big fan and advocate of those with proprietary OSes running FOSS applications in their current environment. I'm also very much in favor of people running proprietary applications in a FOSS OS environment if that's what they want to do.
Freedom of choice is still part of overall freedom.
Tom: It depends.
If you or I want to play COD4 or SSSE (or something alike), and ask the manufacturer to port it to Windows, it's not going to happen (soon). Unless we're "organized" in some kind of organization or be part of some organized "crowd-storm" / mob, not going to happen either.
However, say you administer 90.000 desktops and want SAP. Then you can try running it with WINE, or simply -refuse- running SAP unless it doesn't have a web-interface.
The last option is how the Gendarmerie made SAP available on Linux via a web interface in Firefox.
I think if all the people who run wine running the same Windows app were able to connect and organize in some kind of 'lobby' organization, they could also make the same thing happen. However, because there's no organization at all, all some publisher sees is some 'angry mob asking for Linux-support', but they don't have a clue how big it is.
It would be interesting if there was some way for 'wine' to count / gather statistics how many Linux-users are running Windows application X using Wine.
Nonetheless, I'd like to thank all wine developers for the splendid job they did making a great product and helping many of us out. But I think if its users were more organized, much of wine would be unnecessary.
If you or I want to play COD4 or SSSE (or something alike), and ask the manufacturer to port it to Windows, it's not going to happen (soon). Unless we're "organized" in some kind of organization or be part of some organized "crowd-storm" / mob, not going to happen either.
However, say you administer 90.000 desktops and want SAP. Then you can try running it with WINE, or simply -refuse- running SAP unless it doesn't have a web-interface.
The last option is how the Gendarmerie made SAP available on Linux via a web interface in Firefox.
I think if all the people who run wine running the same Windows app were able to connect and organize in some kind of 'lobby' organization, they could also make the same thing happen. However, because there's no organization at all, all some publisher sees is some 'angry mob asking for Linux-support', but they don't have a clue how big it is.
It would be interesting if there was some way for 'wine' to count / gather statistics how many Linux-users are running Windows application X using Wine.
Nonetheless, I'd like to thank all wine developers for the splendid job they did making a great product and helping many of us out. But I think if its users were more organized, much of wine would be unnecessary.
WINE is a useful bridge to FOSS and away from Windows. Linux is the most cross-platform OS there is, and Linux/FOSS have a long history of reaching out to accomodate cross-platform users in all kinds of ways, while Microsoft continues to build higher walls. Bridges always win.
You can run Linux within Windows (Cygwin), so why not the other way around?
Run Wine within Cygwin.
For extra protection.
For extra protection.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post