Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

First Release Candidate of Wine 1.0 Released

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the come-a-long-ways dept.

Wine 284

moronikos writes to mention that the first release candidate of Wine 1.0 was announced and released into the wild today. This new version includes only bug fixes as the team is in a code freeze while pushing for the full 1.0 release.

cancel ×

284 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

but... (5, Funny)

squidinkcalligraphy (558677) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359056)

does it run linux?

Re:but... (5, Funny)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359082)

does it run linux?
No only windows executables, but you can run cygwin to get a linux-like environment ;)

Re:but... (2, Funny)

kaos07 (1113443) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359086)

I guess it could emulate Wubi?

Re:but... (5, Funny)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359122)

Wine is not an emulator.

Re:but... (1)

kaos07 (1113443) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359284)

I never said it was. "Emulate" was the closest term I could come up with.

Re:but... (2, Funny)

croddy (659025) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359306)

True, for certain extremely narrow values of "emulate".

Re:but... (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359402)

Heck, you could say that Dosemu, QEMU, MAME etc. are not emulators. They are merely providing a compatibility layer, so that you can run non-native software. I guess the Winos are arguing that their layer is particularly thin, and decide to draw the line there.

Re:but... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359432)

I am not familiar with MAME, but the other you mention are emulators, in that they perform byte-code interpreting of the program code (I guess MAME does too). Wine does not, it only provides an ABI-compatible implementation of (most of) the WIN32 API.

If Wine would be an emulator, it would run equally well on PowerPC or SPARC hardware. It does not, you need the exact same hardware that the original program was intended for.

Finally, for the semantically pedantic: yes, recent versions of Dosbox also have a "dynamic" execution mode which tries to do the same that wine does. Naturally, it only works when running Dosbox on x86-compatible hardware.

Re:but... (3, Interesting)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359498)

Finally, for the semantically pedantic: yes, recent versions of Dosbox also have a "dynamic" execution mode which tries to do the same that wine does. Naturally, it only works when running Dosbox on x86-compatible hardware.

QEMU does this too, as does any decent virtualization system. So emulation means translation between different kinds of hardware?

Re:but... (5, Insightful)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359664)

I don't know the answer to your question, but I can tell you this: Anybody with a strong opinion on the matter is full of shit.

Re:but... (4, Informative)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359680)

An emulator manually interprets the original system's machine code, solving a hardware incompatibility, a compatibility layer only implements an API (in Wine's case the Windows API), solving an OS incompatibility. Technically an emulator doesn't have to be on different hardware to the original, but it's fairly pointless to do.
Dosbox is technically both an emulator and compatibility layer, because it covers both hardware and OS changes, most emulators run the original hardware's OS (if it has one).
The Java Runtime would be an emulator if it wasn't for the fact that there is no hardware that runs Java bytecode natively (or at least, it came after the Java Runtime).

Re:but... (1)

theeddie55 (982783) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359908)

Heck, you could say that Dosemu, QEMU, MAME etc. are not emulators. They are merely providing a compatibility layer, so that you can run non-native software. I guess the Winos are arguing that their layer is particularly thin, and decide to draw the line there.

QEMU and Dosemu have emu in the name, short for emulator, MAME stands for "Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator" therefore these are emulators.
WINE on the other hand, recursively stands for "Wine Is Not an Emulator".

Re:but... (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359914)

Wine executes the bytecode natively, only providing the APIs that the programs are expecting.
The others actually emulate a CPU.

Wine is not a emulator.

Re:but... (1)

slyn (1111419) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359440)

You could use wine to VM a windows environment and then install wubi + linux to run wine on, ad infinitum until your head asplodes.

Re:but... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359626)

Wine is not an emulator.
I thought you drink it!?

Re:but... (5, Funny)

mo^ (150717) | more than 6 years ago | (#23360020)

And then, instead of emulating wit, charm, charisma and irresistible sexual magnetism, it just makes you believe that's what it's doing.

It's really just placing a layer between reality and perception.

So definitely not an emulator.

Re:but... (2, Interesting)

1336 (898588) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359198)

I've actually tested to see if Wubi can start in Wine (the answer is yes, though it depends on the version; rev 507 from http://wubi-installer.org/devel/minefield/ [wubi-installer.org] starts) I didn't push the install button though...

Re:but... (3, Interesting)

ardor (673957) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359252)

It would be SO ironic if one had to use Wine in Cygwin to play older games in Vista without crashes...

Re:but... (4, Informative)

Nullav (1053766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359262)

If I recall correctly, there's a native Windows version of WINE just for that sort of thing.

Obligatory... (3, Funny)

Raineer (1002750) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359058)

I'll drink to that!!!

(seriously though...hooray WINE!)

Israel BOMB Iran (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359064)

It had begun

serious question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359080)

Why would I want to use Wine when I can just run windows in a virtual machine?

Bug-for-bug compatibility works best when it's the real thing.

Re:serious question (4, Informative)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359102)

Because Wine is not an emulator, it is faster and uses less memory than emulators.

How well do 3d games work with emulators?

If you run Windows on a virtual machine, you will still need Windows for that. With wine you don't.

But obviously you are free to use what ever you like and what works best for you. As wine is not ready, it is not a perfect solution, even it does have some advantages for the applications that work with it.

Re:serious question (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359146)

A virtual machine is not an emulator either and 3D works in VMWare.

Re:serious question (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359398)

doesn't wine still require windows files to run things like d3d? so to run it legally you still need to purchase windows anyway?

Re:serious question (2, Informative)

James_Duncan8181 (588316) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359472)

"doesn't wine still require windows files to run things like d3d? so to run it legally you still need to purchase windows anyway?"

No.

Re:serious question (0)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359748)

http://www.winehq.org/site/status_directx [winehq.org] wrong. if you want anything better than dx8 support from 5 years ago you need the native DLL's.

Re:serious question (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359864)

Really? I'm looking at that page and don't you know, it seems that Direct3D v9 is 95% supported...

Re:serious question (1)

Mattsson (105422) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359476)

Well... Lots of people have at one point or another in their life bought a computer that came bundled with a windows license. If you have and that computer currently isn't running windows or maybe isn't running at all, you can use the windows files legally.

Re:serious question (1)

Chatterton (228704) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359666)

Unfortunately NO. If you read the license, the OEM kind, you see that this particular instance of Windows is only authorized to run on the hardware it was sold on. technically nothing block you to run it on another computer, but Legally, you can't (Especially if you can't get the little sticker sticked on the back of the computer).

Only where appliccable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23360002)

And in any case, since installing is required to use, the copy created there is not a copyright controlled action and so not covered by the license.

If you were to give the CD away, THEN you'd have a copyright issue. If you keep the CD, none.

Re:serious question (5, Informative)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359700)

doesn't wine still require windows files to run things like d3d? so to run it legally you still need to purchase windows anyway?
The short answer is, as another poster wrote: No.

The long answer is that not all of the DirectX features are quite there, I don't know if it's current but there's an overview here [winehq.org] . The result is that some games won't play without native DLLs. Doing that requires the Windows files and adding an override in winecfg. This was a much larger issue before than it is now and it keeps getting fewer that need these overrides.

Re:serious question (2, Insightful)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359752)

But you can download the direct3d runtime from microsoft without having to buy windows...

Re:serious question (1)

theeddie55 (982783) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359928)

You can also download Windows from The Pirate Bay without having to buy windows.

Re:serious question (1)

Tweenk (1274968) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359706)

Wine doesn't need any Windows DLLs to run Half-Life 2 and other d3d games, so no.

Re:serious question (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359134)

Because WINE can run "Lander on the moon" from Windows 3.11 and Windows XP/later cannot.

Re:serious question (5, Insightful)

1336 (898588) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359156)

"Why would I want to use Wine when I can just run windows in a virtual machine?"

You don't have a lot of spare RAM? (e.g. using VirtualBox requires enough RAM for the host OS + the RAM for the virtualized OS + the RAM for the app running in it; with Wine you eliminate the need for the virtualized OS)

You don't want to buy a Windows license/pirate Windows for a single app? (or more generally, you don't want Microsoft code on your system if you can help it? :)

Re:serious question (3, Informative)

iamacat (583406) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359228)

Because you do not want to support Microsoft by purchasing Windows? Besides, these days MS will not even sell you a version of Windows that runs best under a VM (XP for newest x86 computers, 98 for the rest).

I see a business model of developing programs for the dominant desktop platform but also certifying them to run properly under Wine for Linux users. If the application is explicitly Wine-aware, it shouldn't be that hard to get it Gtk+/Qt themed, use UNIX-styled file dialogs or call native libraries for Linux-specific functionality. Of course .Net/Mono may be a better solution for a lot of developers.

Wait, What?! (5, Interesting)

aitikin (909209) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359088)

I was always under the impression that WINE, based on how it is designed, would never be finished, or even close to a finished release point. I mean, yeah, I know 1.0 doesn't mean it's done, just that it hit a specific milestone, but even so, WINE, being considered a ⥠1.0 version seems to me like it shouldn't happen until it can at least come close to running most everything thrown at it.

Just my non-developer, non-programer, former WINE-user $.02.

Re:Wait, What?! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359120)

Hey, it wouldn't have to be done to work better than windows...

Re:Wait, What?! (4, Insightful)

TekPolitik (147802) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359226)

being considered a 1.0 version seems to me like it shouldn't happen until it can at least come close to running most everything thrown at it.

Nah, it just has to run more old Windows apps than the latest version of Vista. I think Wine as it was 10 years ago met that requirement.

Re:Wait, What?! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359324)

It is however better then Windows 1.0 and by the time it gets past the release candidate stage it will no doubt be ready for monthly bug fixes and occaisonal service packs. I seem to recall that a while back someone even managed to get some virus and malware running on it. Am sure that there has even been some headway made on DRM functioning in WINE as well though maybe in the same fashion as many get their Windows convinced the game dvd/cd is in the dvd/cdrom and other requests normally sent to Microsoft or some other corporation probably get routed to 127.0.0.1 though that is purely humorous supposition on my part. Windows XP computers rebooting instead of displaying BSOD eliminated the need to properly display BSOD on failure.

We could probably go on about this more but honestly, how caught up do you want it to be? With most it is just enough to adequately run that Windows only piece of software they still want or need and yeah, there is work to do. But, no doubt, Service Packs will be on the way eventually. :P

Personally, I would prefer just to see more true Linux versions of software, particularly among the popular games.

Re:Wait, What?! (1)

Secrity (742221) | more than 6 years ago | (#23360064)

I suspect that rather than service packs they will just release a new point version, just like most other major Linux applications do when there is a security patch.

Re:Wait, What?! (1)

slyn (1111419) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359454)

The 1.0 milestone means almost nothing towards how actually feature-complete it is, but rather how stable it is at running a small number of extremely common Windows apps, like Word and Excel.

Re:Wait, What?! (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359484)

Wine is nowhere near finished. I was recently pointed to Wine's API stats [winehq.org] , where the current state of the API implementation is stated. They are currently at 63% of the targeted Windows APIs.

That said, quite a few apps are already working without problems in Wine. In order to be able to do a 1.0-release, they have selected a few (major) apps that have to be running flawlessly. I can't find a link for it now, but it's somewhat like:

- Adobe Photoshop CS2 (or CS4?)
- MS Office 2007 document viewers
- Google Picasa

That's a somewhat arbitrary list, and doesn't say anything about the 9765 [winehq.org] application that are listed in the AppDB, many of which work without problems. I think the 1.0 release does not constitute a milestone in and of itself, but it may help to expand its userbase, and hopefully we'll start to see a more dependable release cycle than just the bi-weekly "snapshot" release they have been doing.

Re:Wait, What?! (5, Informative)

Daengbo (523424) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359598)

The Wine 1.0 Release Criteria are that the following work:
  1. Photoshop CS2 tryout
  2. Microsoft Powerpoint Viewer 97 and 2003
  3. Microsoft Word Viewer 97 and 2003
  4. Microsoft Excel Viewer 97 and 2003
That's all they're targeting. I think it's a great idea to get to that level first, then expand without regression.

Re:Wait, What?! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359840)

Exactly. Unfortunately, the project does not have this goal.

I just gave wine a shot (again...), and again most of the games
I have do not work (Jade Empire SE f.e.), or only work with
heavy configuration changes or/and incur in terrible
performance penalties (nwn2 f.e.).

Wine is useless for me until it is able to run most of the
stuff thrown at it, without having to install different versions
to work around regressions.

But of course, for those people who want to run Microsoft Office,
it should work great. But given the availability of OpenOffice,
its usefulness seems limited to the corporate env.

Twofo Gay Niggers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359094)

Eating my goatse'd penis! [twofo.co.uk]

That's right, you shit eating goat fuckers.

Re:Twofo Gay Niggers (-1, Offtopic)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359496)

That's right, you shit eating goat fuckers.


Some of my best friends are shit-eating goat fuckers, you insensitive clod!

Re:Twofo Gay Niggers (1)

Panoptes (1041206) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359716)

I can tolerate infantile tantrums, but I really hate sloppy use of language. Is our esteemed correspondent referring to people who copulate with coprophiliac goats, or coprophiliac individuals who enjoy the carnal pleasures afforded by goats?

Re:Twofo Gay Niggers (1)

rumli (1066212) | more than 6 years ago | (#23360074)

Unfortunately, neither. He is simply stating that the subject shits while eating goat fuckers.

Infinite Loop (1)

Reasonable Radical (1283390) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359138)

What happens if I run Cedega from Wubi from wine from a virtual machine of Linux run from wine within linux?

Re:Infinite Loop (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359268)

On a pc or mac?

Re:Infinite Loop (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359302)

It willy be very very very slow. btw, not an infinite loop. Don't see how you could make a loop. I know, yes, you were going for funny.

Re:Infinite Loop (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359492)

Remote desktop perhaps?... but that would require two NIC's... but, it would probably be the closest to a closed loop...

Re:Infinite Loop (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359326)

Well, first off, operating systems do not run using WINE (including Linux). Secondly, Wubi isn't an emulator, virtual environment, etc. Wubi is a Windows application that installs Linux (from within Windows).

What happens if I run Wubi from WINE from Linux installed in Win32 VMWare using WINE in Linux?

I imagine it would install Linux.

Captcha: Products. Ha!

Re:Infinite Loop (4, Insightful)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359330)

You will be eaten by a grue.

So what's the definition? (4, Insightful)

Zarhan (415465) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359140)

I mean, I've been running Windows software under WINE for *years*. What's their definition of "1.0"? Does it really mean anything, or will we be getting 1.0.1, 1.0.2, etc monthly afterwards anyway just like before? Or is 1.0 some "complete feature set" release, suggesting that I can now run any windows software (I doubt that's true, considering that even MS Office is still a bit shaky).

http://www.winehq.org/?announce=1.0-rc1 [winehq.org] pretty much has a list of bugfixes&features, just like any other release. Where's the beef in "1.0"?

Re:So what's the definition? (1)

iamacat (583406) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359292)

Would you hold Wine responsible for bugs or use of undocumented internals in the programs that do not run? Plenty of software breaks just by being run on a new version of Windows, new service pack or a new video driver.

1.0 release can be just defined by some milestones set ahead of time. For example, implementation of all published APIs in a set of DLLs, minus a few documented exceptions.

Re:So what's the definition? (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359620)

Pretty much arbitrary, but it marks a point of fairly good stability & usability.

I've got your definition right here (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359926)

The beef is described at
http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria
In essence, 1.0 is just another release,
but with more stability (e.g. a month's
codefreeze and only very careful bugfixes)
and a few longstanding bugs
(e.g. serial I/O, dos apps) fixed not because
lots of people need them, but because it just
seemed wrong to reach 1.0 without fixing them.

Dan Kegel
Wine 1.0 Release Manager

Re:So what's the definition? (2, Interesting)

theeddie55 (982783) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359948)

is 1.0 some "complete feature set" release, suggesting that I can now run any windows software

Not even windows can run any windows software.

Do we still need to wait for SP1 ... (5, Funny)

Marbleless (640965) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359160)

.. before it is usable? :)

Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (4, Insightful)

linebackn (131821) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359176)

I think this is great Wine is finally reaching "1.0". I am hoping this version will be treated as a longer lived, stable, supported branch. This way developers might seriously target Wine as a platform or at least consider it a real "Microsoft Windows Compatible" target (Yea, it would be better if ports of apps were targeted to be Linux or Mac OS X native)

Sure it won't run all Windows apps perfectly - but then again, neither does Windows! There are lots of apps out there that have various bad code that often shouldn't even run at all but somehow gets away with working under a generic Windows XP install. Then they crash under Wine, Windows Vista, or even XP under odd configurations. And then there are the ones that do things different under different versions of Windows to get around bugs or varying behavior in Windows.

Also having a longer lived "1.0" branch would mean tips and tricks to getting individual programs to run would not become obsolete quite as quickly, and a Wine "1.0" users would not have to worry as much about apps breaking every few weeks.

At any rate, Wine has come a very long way - I remember when it was just trying to be a Windows 3.1 clone!

Re:Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (3, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359430)

I am hoping this version will be treated as a longer lived, stable, supported branch.
WINE will never become quite like other software, which define their own features. Think of it like a web browser with lousy standards support (not that the Windows API is anything like a standard), there's really no point in creating a very long-lifed branch that scores 58%. You do some development and you're at 61% and the new version is just better and should replace the old one everywhere. The only real reason to keep a stable branch is to keep people from getting hit with regressions. Because all kinds of software runs on top of WINE, it can have some really bad regressions as applications can go from platinum (runs flawlessly) to garbage (not at all) because it does something in the initialization that failed. So yes, a more stable branch than the biweekly development snapshots is good. Any older branch than say 3-6 months I think will be pretty useless.

Re:Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359632)

(not that the Windows API is anything like a standard)

You're wrong. There are two types of standards: De jure (ISO and alike) and de facto standards. Win32 API is THE de facto standard for desktop applications. If you want your software to run on 95% of desktop computers you either adhere to that standard or be obscure. Wine is a chance for Linux to be less obscure on the desktop (it is more or less a successful server OS now, on desktop it has been around 0.5% and not growing).

Re:Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359898)

Wine is a chance for Linux to be less obscure on the desktop (it is more or less a successful server OS now, on desktop it has been around 0.5% and not growing).

Nice troll, but...

Linux went from 1.25 percent in May of 2007 to 2.02 percent in March of 2008. That is 61.6 percent increase in market share in nine months. [Put another way,] that is 82 percent annual growth in installed computers.
http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9910263-16.html [cnet.com]

Re:Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359812)

WINE could be stabilized into a fairly complete API, even if it's a subset of the more obscure win32 world. Developers would then be in a position to target it in a similar fashion to Carbon on OSX, which allowed apps to run on both OS9 and OSX in a fairly consistent way. Oddball corporate apps could be migrated with less expense than a full rewrite.

Re:Hooray! Long live Wine 1.0! (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359986)

I believe the wine developers have already stated that they are not creating a long-lived 1.0.x branch, and instead continue their new versions every 2 weeks.

I think it's reasonable at this point, given how many bugs they fix every two weeks.

 

Y'know (3, Interesting)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359178)

When I switched from Windows to Linux, it turned out that I was able to function without specific applications, there are Linux equivalents for pretty much everything.
 

Re:Y'know (1)

thealsir (927362) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359232)

Seems like you don't have much experience in that department or your needs are really generic.

Re:Y'know (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359274)

Wine is often used for games. It is also used to run in-house Windows software that would be expensive to port, and Windows-only programs that don't have a Linux equivalent, such as Photoshop.

That being said, I had pretty much the same experience as you, at first at least. When I switched to Linux, I didn't really need any Windows apps, and didn't even bother installing wine. Since then, I've used wine a few times, mostly for games, and while I hardly use it, I keep it around in case I need it.

Re:Y'know (5, Insightful)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359280)

Well, yeah, it depends on what you need, doesn't it? What you say is true for many, maybe even most people, but that doesn't mean nobody needs Wine.

If you have to interoperate with Windows users who use specific software, and the Linux equivalents can't read/write files from that software sufficiently well for your purposes, then you may still find yourself looking for a way to run the Windows programs. This used to be the case a lot with MS Office; modern Linux office apps are pretty good at interoperating, so it's not an issue so much, though there are still a few rare cases where the Linux software won't be able to duplicate what MS Office does quite well enough. (Complex VBA macros that automate other Windows applications, for example. Though I don't know offhand whether Wine can handle those either, and frankly anyone who uses them deserves the pain they cause :)

Then there are the cases where the Linux programs are genuinely inferior. Again it's a question of whether that actually matters. For example, GIMP is good enough for most casual users and even many professionals, but still a lot of people are inevitably going to find there are things they need that it doesn't do, and then they're going to want a way to run Photoshop.

And finally we have the fundamental matter of freedom of choice. Some people just prefer various proprietary Windows applications, and it's good that they can have the freedom to choose to retain those, even if the Linux equivalent would work just as well. Linux is all about the freedom to use your computer how you like, after all!

Re:Y'know (1)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359400)

for me the only windows application I want is iTunes (with USb support). Not being able to put music on my mp3 player without burning it to CD and then using my girlfriends crappy ancient dell w/ celeron processor is a tad annoying... because of what Apple has done with the Touch in terms of how you get music on it* I'm not sure there will be another viable solution for getting it to work with linux anytime soon

Interesting you used to be able to do it wirelessly from linux using ssh but they have effectively disabled that in 1.1.4 by changing how its done again

Re:Y'know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359782)

lol. or its called using a non-fail app that isn't itunes.

y'know, itunes isn't the only thing to upload to your ipod or moto krapr or whatever

Re:Y'know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359378)

When I switched from Windows to Linux, it turned out that I was able to function without specific applications, there are Linux equivalents for pretty much everything.
...and therefore, the same must be true for everyone else as well, since everyone is exactly the same, all the time!

Re:Y'know (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359442)

I occasionally use Wine to access some e-books in a proprietary format, and I've once successfully used it to extract a Pocket PC-installable .cab from a .exe installer (snip rant about publishers who assume that everyone with a Pocket PC has a Windows desktop). It's not something I use more than once every few months, but it's nice to have it around.

Re:Y'know (1)

mac1235 (962716) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359524)

I play games, you insentitive clod!

Re:Y'know (2, Insightful)

uglyduckling (103926) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359780)

I've been using various flavours of Linux as my primary OS for seven years now, switched from Windows 98SE / Windows 2000 back in the day. Seven years later there's still nothing that compares with Dreamweaver for fast standards-compliant web development and Indesign for printed media.

Now I've got a bit more money and don't want to spend my weekends battling with substandard software to do the bits and pieces of pro bono web and print design I do in my spare time I've convinced my wife to let me buy a Mac Mini and a copy of Adobe Design Premium CS3.

I'll miss Ubuntu but I really need to be able to sit down at my computer and just get the job done. I know there's software that can do the job, but I'm constantly having to work-around the limitations of the software. I'm perfectly capable of hand-editing HTML/CSS but I'd much rather concentrate on the design in Dreamweaver and the tidy up the code by hand at the end if there's anything I'm not happy with.

I had hoped that Linux would have decent commercial software available by now, or that Wine would run 99% of Windows software, but it's just not the case. In the meantime OS X has become a stable, well-supported and above all Unix-based OS that does everything I need without getting in the way. I still love Linux, will probably still run Ubuntu on my laptop (had Vista Ultimate on it for the past 4 months -- aweful, really really aweful...) and have a 3-head MythTV (mythbuntu) setup that keeps me happy. (When I plead for that Mac Pro in a year's time the Mac Mini will make a great MythTV head).

Re:Y'know (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359964)

Emphasis mine:

there are Linux equivalents for pretty much everything
And that's the killer. If 95% of what you need runs on one platform but 100% runs on another, which will you choose? I know businesses that are still running Windows 9x, out of support, because it still works and it runs their in-house VB4 application. If Linux (or FreeBSD or Solaris or whatever) can also run this VB4 application - for which there is no non-Windows equivalent because it was developed in house for a specific purpose relevant only to that company - then they can consider these platforms for their upgrade when they do finally get around to it. If not then they're locked in.

The point of WINE is that, for a lot of people, there is one important app keeping them on Windows that has no open alternative. Without WINE, they have to keep a windows [virtual] machine around. With it, they can switch.

Candidate version number (5, Funny)

Cothol (460219) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359204)

So, this would be Release Candidate version 0.01 right? ;-)

What does 1.0 mean? (1, Interesting)

wrook (134116) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359240)

I tried to find this from the Wine website, but couldn't seem to find it.

What does it mean to be 1.0 (if anything)? Is there any set of functionality that they were trying to hit for 1.0? Or is it just that "Many, many things work great, so let's just call this 1.0"?

Just curious...

Re:What does 1.0 mean? (5, Informative)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359350)

Version number schemes vary between different software, and you'll have to ask WineHQ specifically what they mean to be at 1.0.

In the FOSS world, though, usually version 1.0 is a pretty big milestone showing that the software is complete, with few bugs known and little or no features missing. Some projects gone on for years in the 0.x numbers before ever getting to 1.0 (if ever). Wine itself started just naming it on the date (eg, Wine 20020314), but a couple years ago or so they started calling it 0.9.0 and so on.

Usually the big number in a version number represents important steps, though this can of course vary. For example, OpenBSD doesn't bother with making a fuss about what the number on the left means and they just increment by 0.1 always (after 3.9 came 4.0, and so on). GNU Emacs decided a long time ago that no complete rewrite would ever happen, and so they constantly increment the big number for large changes (they're at version 22.0 now). Hell, Netscape even decided to skip an entire number (4.7 -> 6.0) after the original company died and the new versions were based on the Mozilla project.

Re:What does 1.0 mean? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359354)

Actually they do say, what's their target for wine 1.0:
http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria [winehq.org]

Re:What does 1.0 mean? (1)

wrook (134116) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359424)

Thank you! That's what I was looking for!!

Re:What does 1.0 mean? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359420)

Wine 1.0 means it can flawlessly run the following programs:
Photoshop CS2, Powerpoint Viewer 97 and 2003, Word Viewer 97 and 2003 and Excel Viewer 97 and 2003.

Lets rock! (1)

that_itch_kid (1155313) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359346)

Finally, I can test out Duke's new high-powered rocket launcher on my Hurd system!

Holy cow! (1)

statemachine (840641) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359418)

Just 2 more years until the actual 1.0 release?

Seriously now, this is good news. What bottle of wine should I open on the release day? Cab, merlot, syrah, late harvest... yup, late harvest cabernet it is!

Microsoft DMCA-takedown notice (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23359480)

..in 3 ..2 ...1 ....

2004 (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359554)

I remember using it some time in 2004. It's been in development for quite a while...

Wine - an unmitigated SUCCESS! (4, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359558)

Just look at the list of applications supported by Wine [winehq.org] and you'll understand why I say that. Basically, if I can run Civ IV, Heroes IV and other strategy games on Linux, and with Matlab having a Linux version, there's very little to justify my using Windows. OK, there's Fruityloops, but that's it!

Re:Wine - an unmitigated SUCCESS! (1)

enHatt (1283014) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359910)

Of course, you could switch to Renoise [renoise.com] , which recently got an amazing linux port.

You'll still be without the vsts, though. Or try to use fst [joebutton.co.uk] . Sadly, it seems Wine 0.9.9 is the latest version that doesn't crash when tweaking synths and effects.

what? (4, Funny)

sproketboy (608031) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359742)

Before Duke Nukem?

ReactOS (2)

enemorales (1172133) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359894)

Nice to see Wine going 1.0. Does anyone know how much this impacts ReactOS?

Mac Binaries? (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#23359976)

Does this mean they'll start releasing binaries for OS X soon? I've compiled it a couple of times, but it's a lot of effort (you need to check out things from two separate svn repositories, run a script, hunt bugs, then compile for every version), and since they claim in the first paragraph of the front page to support OS X I'd really expect them to have regular binary builds.

World Domination getting closer... (2, Interesting)

hungrigerhaifisch (938532) | more than 6 years ago | (#23360036)

If you read http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-domination-201.html#id247954 [catb.org] you will much better understand why they are pushing for a 'clean' 1.0 release. Its 'now or never' ...

Personally I 'need' support for Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, not for myself, but for my girlfriend. It is the single showstopper for her linux experience, and until it is fixed, I'll never hear the end of it :(

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>