Quote:> It is my opinion that this project is of fundamental strategic
> importance for Linux and I wonder why so little effort is invested
> into it.
You're allowing yourself to absorb FUD. Enough effort is invested into it,
but more an that later...
Quote:> Imagine if WINE worked 100%. That would mean, ANY windows program
> could run on a Linux box.
I don't understand why this is so important? I have more software than I can
shake a stick at on my Linux boxen. I don't need any more software, much
less the windows[tm] variants, from which I have tried to escape.
Quote:> This would definitively be the end for the Microsoft Monopoly.
What is your reasoning behind this? This would be damaging to Linux, since
it would perpetuate dependence on MS application software, and also ensure
that further generations of programmers are trapped into knowing only
windows'[tm] alien API.
Quote:> Nobody would need to buy a Windows OS anymore.
No... It would just delay Linux' overtaking of the desktop market,
especially considering the current state of affairs. MS OSes are installed
by default on every new PC, why would any one volutarily switch from
windows[tm] to something that looks exactly like Windows[tm] and runs the
same applications? Salesfolk could argue technical points, but the catatonic
buyers would simply make a choice based on 1) convenience, and 2)
Quote:> Finally the argument "Linux has only a limited number of software"
> would no longer be true.
It hasn't been true for half-a-decade. You just bought a one-way bus ticket
to Trollville. Planning on using it?
Quote:> You could run all your favorite windows programs on Linux.
Doubtful. If you haven't noticed: MS has been releasing, and will release
new versions of Windows[tm] every two years. MS always tacks on some new
APIs with the releases. 100% compatibility is a lose-lose situation for the
WINE developers, since the environment is constantly changing, and the only
possible outcome is a windows[tm] clone.
Quote:> On the long run this would also benefit Linux native software.
Linux' application base would be better served by developers who develop for
Linux first, and every other platform afterword. Most Linux software
developers have portability in mind when they create something, and this
benefits other platforms beside Linux. Windows developers become familiar
only with MS's evil and twisted API, and eventually end up being held
captive by it, because they are unable to apply their specialized knowledge
to other programming environments. Encouraging further Windows[tm] software
development is *bad*.
Quote:> Because once Wine is running, more and more people would use Linux,
> increasing the market share for Linux native software also!
So you are saying that giving users the option of running Windows
applications (with which they are already familiar) on a Linux system will
make users more apt to use native Linux applications. I don't understand the
logical behind that one.
Quote:> So in fact, working on WINE is more important than working on any
> other Linux software, except the Kernel itself of course.
> So I wonder, why is there so little being done to promote WINE? This
> should be marked as one big strategic corner piece of Linux and open
WINE definitely has its place, but it is not a way to make Linux into a
Windows[tm] clone. I would say that a proper use would be to help
Windows[tm] users more easily migrate away from an MS computing environment.
Quote:> Instead people are wasting time on endless discussions in
> Newsgroups or useless projects...All the big open source advocates
> should be promoting WINE, why aren't they doing it?
You are now on the FUD bus to Trollville, you'd better get off before the
Quote:> I think there is a war going on, and if we want to win we have to
> build up a strategy and focus on important goals. Just building
> superior technologie doesn't guarantee a win.
No, but when you do it cheaper than the competition, it sure helps out a
lot. As a matter of fact, about the only way to stop the competitor with the
more reliable, cheaper product is to illegally prevent him from reaching
Quote:> Lets face it: Linux has less than 1% marketshare.
BAM! The FUD bus slams into the side of Trollville Town Hall, thelifter
rolls out, bruised but otherwise OK.
Who is this, the poster formerly known as 'Anonymous'? Yep, the old
'pretend-to-be-a-linux-advocate-and-adopt-a defeatist-attitude' trolling
technique. There are no studies which show that Linux has less than 1%
marketshare. There is evidence that Linux has 50% marketshare in the server
I believe you are referring to Web Side Story's determination of Linux usage
by counting browser ID strings. Not only is this technique inaccurate, it
was done over a small portion of the Internet (representing only commercial
sites), and neither Web Side Story or StatMarket will produce actual figures
or detail data-gathering methods. Translation: It is unsupportable bunk.
Quote:> Peoples decision are based on practical issues: does the operating system
> run software X?
A practical concern would be: Can the software do X? The other 'practical
issue' which you suggested is of concern only to Microsoft.
Quote:> If not, I cannot use it...no matter how superior it is.
Translation: I cannot learn anything new. If you take a beating from other
people in this newsgroup for that statement, you have no one to blame but
The opinions stated here are
my own, and do not necessarily
reflect those of my employer.