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!

A Virtualized Linux System For Windows

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the bill-in-the-middle dept.

Operating Systems 280

getupstandup1 writes "Ulteo today unveiled their Virtual Desktop (screenshots, download) which is a free, full Linux desktop that runs seamlessly on Windows. It's interesting because it's not running under Xen or VMWare, but instead uses the coLinux patch, which they claim allows the system to achieve 'great performance, close to a native installation on the PC.' No need to reboot the system anymore to switch from Windows to Linux." We discussed Ulteo when the Ubuntu-derived distro was announced a year back.

cancel ×

280 comments

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

As opposed to... andLinux? (5, Informative)

Briareos (21163) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468528)

Is it just me, or did this already exist [andlinux.org] ? Doesn't sound that new to me...

np: Saul Williams - Grippo (Saul Williams)

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468596)

No one cares about what you're listening to.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468946)

Parent may be Offtopic, but also Insightful.

Grandparent: If you want to share your opinion with others, then do so. But no one gives a fuck about what music you are listening to. If you want to promote your favorite band, go buy Google ads. If you want to comment, thats also fine, but leave out stuff that nobody cares about.
Reading what your taste of music is, is a waste of time.[1]

[1] Insert joke "you are reading slashdot and talk about 'waste of time'?" here

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (4, Informative)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468740)

Yep - and for a very long time, too [phatlinux.com] .

Don't criticize the Holy Trinity of the Internet (0, Offtopic)

fistfullast33l (819270) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469436)

Ubuntu, Apple, and Barack Obama.

Honorable Mention: Ron Paul

Special Slashdot Addition: Nintendo

I don't know... (5, Informative)

tehBoris (1120961) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469536)

But isn't that project you linked more like Wubi?

Instead of being a Windows port of the Linux kernel (yeah... weird) like and/coLinux is, it is a Windows based Linux installer, which stuffs the whole distro's file system into a single file in your Windows' partition.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468766)

Yeah, Ulteo is kde, andLinux is gnome. Otherwise identical.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (4, Informative)

redxxx (1194349) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469222)

I believe you may have that backwards. I run andLinux, cause it is useful for certain stuff and I can't just run linux, and it is KDE. There is another xcf or something version.

KDE in windows is going to be the better bet down the road for a lot of stuff, because you have to leap through fewer hoops with the filesystem, at least as far as most applications are concerned.

It's kinda amazing being able to get an awful lot of stuff just running apt-get from a terminal, while inside XP. A real VM is far secure of course. Security decent hardware firewalls and no small amount of obscurity doesn't bother me too horible.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (4, Informative)

PhotoGuy (189467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468832)

I'll vouch for the underpinnings of andLinux and Ulteo, which is coLinux. I've been using it for years (an Ubuntu distro) and it's extremely solid, reliable, and efficient. It's a great way to have your Linux dev world near at hand, while needing a Windows box for other reasons. (In fact, I run my home PBX smoothly in a coLinux service on an XP PVR box.)

I hear so little about coLinux, I feel like it's one of Linux's best kept secrets. It's cool that we're starting to see meta-distributions based upon it.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (1)

rdradar (1110795) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468898)

anyone finds the default password for Ulteo? It didnt ask any on setup.

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (2, Insightful)

kesuki (321456) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468926)

"Is it just me, or did this already exist [andlinux.org]? Doesn't sound that new to me.."

What worries me, is this runs in 'system managment mode' sounds like colinux is a perfect system to design a 'stealth' rootkit around...

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/11/2044216&from=rss [slashdot.org]

great just great, as if paid hackers needed any help designing and deploying system managment mode rootkits, with colinux they can put a full LAMP server on somone's windows box and they'd never notice, except that their bandwidth and memory keep getting used up...

Re:As opposed to... andLinux? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469008)

great just great, as if paid hackers needed any help designing and deploying system managment mode rootkits, with colinux they can put a full LAMP server on somone's windows box and they'd never notice, except that their bandwidth and memory keep getting used up...


It might be better though. With a LAMP server it is traceable, which would make it much easier to take down then say Storm which uses P2P for communication.

Just wondering (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468562)

One linux is a linux
What if you have two? Is it "linuxes", or "linii", or what???

I ask because a friend of mine... ah never mind.

Re:Just wondering (4, Funny)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468672)

Linuces. The 'x' is only the nominative singular form, for everything else you use c + ending.

Re:Just wondering (4, Funny)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469126)

So Tux becomes Tuces? :D

Re:Just wondering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469262)

So Tux becomes Tuces? :D

If:
Box -> Boxen
Then:
Tux -> Tuxen

Re:Just wondering (5, Funny)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469448)

You're right, so your post is like fex, and when you post a second time you have feces.

Re:Just wondering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469544)

well, *I* thought this was clever!

Re:Just wondering (1)

sveard (1076275) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468750)

index => indices
linux => linuces
I think

Re:Just wondering (2, Insightful)

ZerMongo (1129583) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468852)

Except Linux is a name, and thus not subject to normal endings. E.G. Phil Falux's family is not the Faluces. It's the Faluxs. Thus, Linuxs is probably the most correct form, though Linuxes wouldn't be in very bad taste.

Re:Just wondering (1)

sveard (1076275) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468862)

I see. But I've got an excuse: english is my third language ;)

Re:Just wondering (1)

ChameleonDave (1041178) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469416)

Thus, Linuxs is probably the most correct form

I can't believe that got modded Insightful. What sort of illiterate moderators do we have on here?

English words ending in x add es to make a plural. Do you say "boxs"??

It is a proper noun anyway, so if you need a plural, you should say "distributions of".

I also hope there was no seriousness in the suggestions that plurals in -ces and -ii would be appropriate.

Re:Just wondering (4, Funny)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468906)

index => indices
linux => linuces
I think
I prefer the incorrect Linuxen, if only because I can then imagine giant penguins being used as cattle.

I would include a sound effect (i.e., Mooooo~) here, but I have no idea what kinda sound effect Penguins do. Perhaps...

SEGFAUUUUUUUUT~~~~

Re:Just wondering (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469022)

I would include a sound effect (i.e., Mooooo~) here, but I have no idea what kinda sound effect Penguins do.


The correct sound is Quork! [hackles.org] , it seems.

Re:Just wondering (1)

secolactico (519805) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469328)

but I have no idea what kinda sound effect Penguins do. Perhaps...

Last penguin I heard was singing Boogie Wonderland, so who knows...

Re:Just wondering (2, Informative)

mdfst13 (664665) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469018)

index => indices
According to Merriam-Webster, indexes is also a valid spelling [merriam-webster.com] . In fact, indexes is listed prior to indices, which suggests that it is the preferred spelling.

Cecil Adams has an interesting discussion of Latin/English pluralizations hidden in a discussion of the proper plural of penis [straightdope.com] .

Re:Just wondering (5, Funny)

Achromatic1978 (916097) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469092)

In fact, indexes is listed prior to indices, which suggests that it is the preferred spelling.

Either that, or that the dictionary is in alphabetic order, as is the norm for dictionaries...

Re:Just wondering (1)

EvilIdler (21087) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469522)

Some list words in decreasing order of popularity, though.
At least my Oxford's does that.

Re:Just wondering (2, Funny)

Plaid Phantom (818438) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469096)

Linuxoj?

Re:Just wondering (1)

Pec (127751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469306)

Linuxoj?
Esperanto Plural? long time not seeing it.

Re:Just wondering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468778)

Names don't get pluralised.

No 3d acceleration (4, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468568)

Yeah, unfortunately the video output is as snappy as VNC or VMWare. Virtualize the 3d graphics driver already.

Yet another QuantumG troll (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469320)

WTF? You troll almost every discussion in one manner or another. Get a life already. Who runs 3D accellerated stuff in a VM anyways? Not to mention that it isn't nearly as slow as you suggest in your troll. Were you beaten as a child or molested or something? You post trolls to almost all articles. What is your problem? Seriously, I really want to know.

Yet another Slashdot stalker (-1, Troll)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469334)

Fuck off and die already.

Re:Yet another QuantumG troll (1)

FLEB (312391) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469564)

Who runs 3D accellerated stuff in a VM anyways?

Perhaps if 3D-accelerated VMs were more widespread...

I Spend Three Weeks.. (0)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468570)

Getting Ubuntu to work with Virtual PC 2007 and NOW they tell me?! Geez. Although it IS typical with Slashdot.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468644)

Took me 30 minutes with VirtualBox, sounds like an issue with your choice of virtualisation software not linux.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468730)

Ya, I spent a week trying to compile Virtual Box too. If I was at home I would use the non-free version which is compiled already but this is at work so I needed the GNU version. Eventually I gave up on VirtualBox.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469058)

Don't give up. VirtualBox is DEFINITELY worth it. I run Windows on it and everything works except videogames (that's what Wine is for ;-) )

Here's an installation guide for Ubuntu, they tell you how to compile from sources.

http://www.howtoforge.com/virtualbox_ubuntu [howtoforge.com]

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469068)

Oops, you meant compiling on windows? ^^; I understand you man.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (5, Funny)

mwolfe38 (1286498) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468658)

I'm not sure which is worse, trying to get ubuntu installed through virtual pc or relying on slashdot for all of your technology advice.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (5, Funny)

secolactico (519805) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468744)

Indeed. Everybody knows that we come to slashdot for legal and romantic advice.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469186)

Since you brought it up.
There is this girl. She is hot.

I like her, she doesn't know I exist.
I want her, but I am an anonymous coward. How should I proceed to subpoena her for a date?

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469228)

go to doctor and have your subpoena replaced by a normal sized poena.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

play_in_traffic (946193) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469518)

Just boot up another virtual girl friend and go on a virtual date. -P-i-T

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469288)

Though, not necessarily in that order...

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469342)

Shut up! Restraint orders are just another way to say "I love you".

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468746)

Well it works now. Plus I didn't reply on Slashdot. I researched this well enough. I WAS going to use VirtualBox but I couldn't get it to compile. Dependency hell consumed me.

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

mwolfe38 (1286498) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468792)

Hint, try wikiepdia [wikipedia.org] . To narrow that list down a bit, try virtualbox, qemu, vmware server (or workstation if you are willing to pay) Currently I'm using virtualbox, but I had used vmware server for a year or two and liked it a lot. However, Virtualbox is easier to install/update on my ubuntu host since it has premade deb packages for ubuntu. Also, virtualbox seems to be about as fast as vmware and it has seemeless mode (check youtube if you don't know what that is)

Re:I Spend Three Weeks.. (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469024)

Three weeks? It took me three seconds to find this article [wordpress.com] using Google... three weeks ago!

! Awesome (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468590)

This is exactly what I want if I didn't want this at all. This is about as exciting as Microsoft's announcement of XP SP3, subsequent recall, then re-release. Talk about misguided allocation of skill.

-evilghost

Now, more masculine! (4, Funny)

Champ (91601) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468624)

I'm going to have to look into their "application balls" [ulteo.com] -- the applications I have now are all effete and neutered.

Re:Now, more masculine! (4, Funny)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468800)

Their application balls just don't appeal to me. Personally, their system tray vagina sounds like something I'd prefer, even if it's not all that pretty.

Re:Now, more masculine! (4, Funny)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468890)

That sir, is the most disturbing thing I've heard today. My hat is off to you.

Re:Now, more masculine! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469338)

I'm going to have to look into their "application balls" [ulteo.com] -- the applications I have now are all effete and neutered.

Their application balls just don't appeal to me. Personally, their system tray vagina sounds like something I'd prefer, even if it's not all that pretty.
That sir, is the most disturbing thing I've heard today. My hat is off to you.

Tough act to follow, but my first thought (after I'd recovered the errant coffee all over my moneitor) was:

"But it's virtualized, so isn't it more like a system tray fleshlight than a system tray vagina?"

I'm not sure what's more disturbing. The thought itself, or the fact that I actually thought that. Oh well. Might as well share my pain with the rest of y'all.

Re:Now, more masculine! (1)

EXMSFT (935404) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469366)

Your reply is perfectly cromulent

Sweet (2)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468628)

What games does this let me play?

Re:Sweet (1)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468652)

nevermind.. I see it's a desktop and not an os running under vmware. I should learn to read.

Re:Sweet (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468732)

I thought you were making a joke about all the great linux games that could be run on Windows using this software.

(there is OS virtualization going on though http://www.ulteo.com/home/en/virtualdesktop?autolang=en [ulteo.com] )

Re:Sweet (1)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468798)

I was making a joke about the lack of games on linux. That's the one main thing that keeps me from switching to linux. I'm afraid that one day I'll just have to buy a console and give up PC gaming so I don't have to deal with Microsoft anymore.

Re:Sweet (2, Funny)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468908)

Irony would dictate that you consider the options and elect to buy an Xbox 360.

Re:Sweet (3, Informative)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469156)

As a primarily Linux user, I'm more than happy to help people getting to grips with it if they choose to give Linux a try - but likewise I respect anyone who gives good reasons why Linux is not for them.

But can we please stop with the "I won't run Linux because of lack of games" statements because they are meaningless.

Firstly, nothing stops you dual-booting both Linux and Windows in order to understand some of the benefits Linux could potentially bring to you.

Secondly, the fact that there are so few modern games on Linux is not a fault of Linux itself. Yep, maybe it's because the Linux user base is much smaller than Windows and/or maybe it's because we Linux users are spoilt by getting so much software for free that we've forgotten how to pay for games, both are acceptable reasons to justify the fact that games companies won't port games to it. After all, games companies are businesses and if they see a way to make money, then they will do it.

Thirdly, if you're into modern graphics intensive games then, yes, it's probably a bad idea to use Linux. But software like DOSBox, Wine, countless platform emulators & Open Source games means that there is actually a *HUGE* catalogue of games you can play perfectly on Linux. Yes, that catalogue probably won't include Call Of Duty 4 but as you start going through the back catalogue of games, the further you go back the more ways you will find to play them on Linux.

Re:Sweet (2, Interesting)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469270)

I have two boxes. One runs XP which I use for gaming and web surfing, the other runs Gentoo which I use for development as well as a media box/file server. Right now both machines are in the same room so I sometimes use the GUI on the linux box but no KVM and one monitor/keyboard/mouse is a pain. That wouldn't be such an issue if DVI KVM's weren't so insanely expensive.

Firstly, nothing stops you dual-booting both Linux and Windows in order to understand some of the benefits Linux could potentially bring to you.
Yes there is, I have no desire to dual boot. I don't want to do and thus I choose not to, just like I choose not to give up my XP box because I choose to be able to play games.

But can we please stop with the "I won't run Linux because of lack of games" statements because they are meaningless."
I'll stop with that statement just as soon as I can load up Crysis, TF2, HL2, etc and get the same if not better performance as running them under XP (but not vista because that's just too easy). =D Believe me if NVidia opened up their drivers and game developers started releasing linux binaries for major games I'd have no problem switching over to linux only.

Re:Sweet (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469434)

Yes there is, I have no desire to dual boot. I don't want to do and thus I choose not to, just like I choose not to give up my XP box because I choose to be able to play games.

To be honest, it's precisely what I do - I'm also a Gentoo person with an XP box for gaming and a few "must have" applications. So it doesn't bother me too much that I can't run modern games on Linux because I have an XP installation.

Yep, it's a bind having to keep two OSes up to date, I agree but to me it's no biggie.

Believe me if NVidia opened up their drivers and game developers started releasing linux binaries for major games I'd have no problem switching over to linux only.

Well, I have four PCs at home, all of them running XP, Gentoo or dual-booting both and I am paying for my stupidity now in having put ATI Radeon cards in three of those machines about a year ago and now deciding I want to game on Linux a lot more. None of the machines are high spec particularly but I've just ordered two of the three nVidia 7600GT cards I intend to buy as replacements for the ATIs because of the ultra-crap drivers ATI keeps churning out for Linux. So whilst neither nVidia or ATI has open sourced their drivers, nVidia has done a whole lot more for Linux gaming already by keeping their Windows and Linux drivers pretty much in sync.

Anyway, it's not just about open source drivers - what about DirectX? To me, that's a bigger factor in restricting gaming on Linux.

Re:Sweet (2, Insightful)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469472)

If those knuckleheads ever finalized the OpenGL3 spec it might get more love from game developers and thus make it easier for games to be ported to linux.

Re:Sweet (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469560)

Yes, it would make it easier - but would the game companies actually do it?

After all, most of them have been creating games in DirectX for 95% of the world's PCs for years - would they really go to the trouble of changing to OpenGL just to get a few more PCs and piss Microsoft off?

I don't like it any more than you do - but I'm being the pragmatist here! :-)

Near native performance (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468640)

It's interesting because it's not running under Xen or VMWare, but instead uses the coLinux patch, which they claim allows the system to achieve 'great performance, close to a native installation on the PC.'
Doesn't VMWare (and most modern virtualization programs for that matter) run near native already? All the new major processors have the virtualization extensions built in. (I didn't mention Xen because it doesn't run on Windows)

In fact, wiki has a list. Look under the "Guest OS speed relative to Host OS" column: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_virtual_machines#More_Details [wikipedia.org]

Most are native or near native.

Re:Near native performance (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468700)

Doesn't VMWare (and most modern virtualization programs for that matter) run near native already?


Yes, But I think that this doesn't virtualize the entire OS just a part of it which would make it run faster.

But... (3, Funny)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468666)

Does it have native support for wine?

Re:But... (4, Funny)

HappySmileMan (1088123) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468710)

I hope so, Firefox now works great in Wine, so I can run Firefox in Wine, on Linux, on Windows, and if I have that copy of windows running in a virtual machine on my MacBook I'll be a god.

Re:But... (3, Funny)

mwolfe38 (1286498) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468846)

Thats not bad, but I prefer doing all of my work on the command line in a cygwin instance of windows xp guest on an ubuntu host running windows hyper v through wine.

Re:But... (1)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469348)

A god...with no dates. What good is that?

Re:But... (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469356)

At least untill your battery dies 5 minutes later.

Other way around, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468682)

I'm all in favor of any projects like this that ease the transition from Windows to Linux. But I do wish it was the other way around: I want to run Windows safely inside a sandbox inside Linux.

If you are surfing the web from inside your virtual Linux, you are using the Windows networking stack. This will be more secure than using IE under Windows, but it's still using the Windows networking stack. I'd feel better if it was the Linux networking stack trying to fend off the various attacks your system can suffer from the Internet.

Re:Other way around, please (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468758)

I don't think this will happen in as much depth as you are hoping. While Linux is 100% free and open source, it makes porting it to a proprietary OS easier then doing the reverse. WGA and other things don't help.

Re:Other way around, please (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469076)

This is why there's a ReactOS project. In a month or so they'll have version 0.3.5 running.

Can it use your 3d card? stuff on the usb ports? (5, Insightful)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468696)

Can it use your 3d card? stuff on the usb ports? firewire? other add in cards?

Re:Can it use your 3d card? stuff on the usb ports (4, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469132)

In order: no, no, no, no.

I've run colinux, it provides you a console and a virtual network interface and that's about it. The console has some slow graphics.

The only one of those I know how to actually get you is to run Cygwin's OpenGL-equipped X server, and then use XDMCP to connect to your colinux VM.

hmm... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23468698)

I run Linux because I hate the shitpile that is windows...and they expect me to run a streamlined system within a shitpile? What are they thinking? seriously...

Worst of both worlds (5, Funny)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468824)

Why on earth would anyone want to run Linux on a Windows box? That's like building your house on a dung hill.

Though I suppose it comes in handy for accessing those Linux only web sites. ;)

Re:Worst of both worlds (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#23468986)

Though I suppose it comes in handy for accessing those Linux only web sites. ;)


Or linux-only apps (And here I thought Linux meant freedom).

Re:Worst of both worlds (4, Insightful)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469002)

But... isnt a house on a dung hill, better than just standing on a dung hill by itself?

Especially since, you can make the air seem a little more fresh with freshners, take a shower, get out of the sun, etc.

Re:Worst of both worlds (2, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469148)

But... isnt a house on a dung hill, better than just standing on a dung hill by itself?

Actually, in this case putting the dung hill on top of the house [wikipedia.org] makes the most sense. You get the benefits of living in a house that's not built on a dung pile, and you still get the benefits of the dung pile!

Re:Worst of both worlds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469420)

Why on earth would anyone want to run Linux on a Windows box? That's like building your house on a dung hill.


Wait, wait, wait. Not to disparage your linky Drinkpoo but, if running Linux on Windows is like building your house on a dung hill, wouldn't this [winehq.org] be more like building a dung hill on your house?

Re:Worst of both worlds (1)

Grakun (706100) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469212)

But... isnt a house on a dung hill, better than just standing on a dung hill by itself? Especially since, you can make the air seem a little more fresh with freshners, take a shower, get out of the sun, etc.
Or you could save all of that time and money you'd waste trying to get rid of the smell, and simply build your house elsewhere. Think of all the productive things you could do with that time, if you didn't have to spend it trying to wash off that shitty odor.

Re:Worst of both worlds (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469248)

But... isnt a house on a dung hill, better than just standing on a dung hill by itself?

Only untill you realize it's a piece of crap & try to sell it.

Re:Worst of both worlds (1)

Nimloth (704789) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469354)

Add to that the fact that the applications currently supported almost all run natively for Windows (Firefox, Thunderbird, Gimp, Skype, OO.o, etc).
Why would I want to run the Linux version of these on Windows, when the Windows version works just fine natively without the overhead?

Re:Worst of both worlds (1)

rastoboy29 (807168) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469360)

Actually, I would find it nice when I want to use one of the many free applications on Linux that are not available on winblows.  k3b comes to mind...

Konami unavailable for comment (4, Funny)

Dwedit (232252) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469098)

The Ulteo Logo looks like a dead ringer for Konami's old logo.
I guess this means you need to press Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A to get the thing to boot properly?

sweet (3, Funny)

RJBeery (956252) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469136)

I can't wait to run WINE on it..

Re:sweet (0, Redundant)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469290)

I cant wait for WINE to support it.

ssa backwards? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469140)

Why would you want linux running in windoze? Isnt this backwards?

Re:ssa backwards? (0, Flamebait)

xs650 (741277) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469230)

Yes it's backwards, it's like making a shit sandwich with the shit on the outside of the bread.

Linux on Windows (5, Funny)

typhoonius (611834) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469172)

Finally, the stability and security of Windows with the application availability of Linux.

Is it possible... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23469226)

to install Wine on Ulteo, and run Unteo within Wine, and run Wine within that instance of Ulteo... Etc?

Erm, isn't this backwards? (1, Insightful)

Keck (7446) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469240)

I tend to prefer having the MORE stable OS be the one with direct hardware access, and the flakier OS standing on the other's shoulders. Vmware is the only way I've run windows at home at all in many years, and it works out just fine for me.

is this just anti-wine? (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469278)

Does it translate linux api/abi calls to windows ones or is it doing something else to avoid being an emulator?

Some usable things are there... (1)

Dri (16940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469380)

One of these will someday appeal to PC gamers who only care about their FPS in various obscure games. If we could provide them with a one-click Linux native in Windows we will have loads of new Linux users. This will of course need 3D ACCELERATION (caps) as Compiz is what they usually want. :)

VMware is doing 3d acceleration the other way around in one of their products which are in beta. Accelerated Windows in a VM in Linux. But, doh! Won't win any gamers over with that one. -1 FPS and it gets the boot!

You're DOING IT WRONG! (1)

EXMSFT (935404) | more than 6 years ago | (#23469390)

Oy vey. Talk about a solution in search of a problem. WINE exists because there is a huge amount of Windows applications that would be ideal to run on Linux. What on earth is the point of this? Am I just missing something completely obvious?
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>