On 24/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/24 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On 23/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> 2) I must be interoperable with the other engineers running Solidworks.
> >
> > Your definition of interoperable
Hi DC,
Am 2008-06-22 21:31:41, schrieb Dotan Cohen:
> Yes, they require the opening of an account to write to them. I
> suppose that it is similar in that many FOSS mailing lists one must
> subscribe to post: they are weeding out the spammers. End to end it
> took me about five minutes to open the
2008/6/24 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 23/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 2) I must be interoperable with the other engineers running Solidworks.
>
> Your definition of interoperable seems a little weird. It sounds too
> much like the definition of vendor lo
2008/6/24 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Solidworks <=2005 runs in codeweavers, but nothing in wine.
>
> Which version? Anything below 1.0.0 underwent (and will in the future
> under the 1.1 tree) development at a significant rate of change.
> Frequently, prior to 1.0, things that didn't wor
On 23/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) I must be interoperable with the other engineers running Solidworks.
Your definition of interoperable seems a little weird. It sounds too
much like the definition of vendor lock-in.
- Jordi G. H.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PRO
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 01:24 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> 2008/6/24 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Is it possible to wine your way out of this one? Forgive me if this has
> > already been brought up; I appear to only have the thread after the
> > subject change.
> >
>
> Solidworks <=2005 run
2008/6/24 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Is it possible to wine your way out of this one? Forgive me if this has
> already been brought up; I appear to only have the thread after the
> subject change.
>
Solidworks <=2005 runs in codeweavers, but nothing in wine. I need a
later version anyway
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 01:03 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> 2008/6/24 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 21:31 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> >> If anyone has any proprietary Windows apps that they'd like to see
> >> ported to Linux, then mention them and I will write to the devel
2008/6/24 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 21:31 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> If anyone has any proprietary Windows apps that they'd like to see
>> ported to Linux, then mention them and I will write to the developers
>> as well.
>
> Wouldn't it be a better thing in the lon
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 21:31 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> If anyone has any proprietary Windows apps that they'd like to see
> ported to Linux, then mention them and I will write to the developers
> as well.
Wouldn't it be a better thing in the long term to encourage vendors to
take a far more user-
2008/6/22 Hugo Vanwoerkom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Writing to them at the address you provided means creating an account.
> I think they already have made up their minds insofar as price/benefits of a
> Linux port.
>
Yes, they require the opening of an account to write to them. I
suppose that it is
Dotan Cohen wrote:
2008/6/22 Nate Bargmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Proprietary binary formats.
Which makes your whole proposition very dicey. As a practical matter,
trying to implement not publicly documented formats leads to a "chasing
of the taillights" scenario where every time the FOSS develo
2008/6/22 Nate Bargmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Proprietary binary formats.
>
> Which makes your whole proposition very dicey. As a practical matter,
> trying to implement not publicly documented formats leads to a "chasing
> of the taillights" scenario where every time the FOSS developers get
> c
* Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008 Jun 22 01:45 -0500]:
> 2008/6/22 Nate Bargmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > * Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008 Jun 21 10:05 -0500]:
> >
> >> When someone develops and maintains a FOSS solution that runs on Linux
> >> that lets me interoperate with my Solidwo
2008/6/22 Nate Bargmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008 Jun 21 10:05 -0500]:
>
>> When someone develops and maintains a FOSS solution that runs on Linux
>> that lets me interoperate with my Solidworks-using colleagues
>> flawlessly I will happily donate to the project
> I understand what you're asking for and where you're coming from. Are
> the CAD document file formats open or are they proprietary like .doc
> and .xls, etc.?
Autocad claims to own the DWG format. Your FOSS group would probably need
to line up legal support to defend against the lawsuits.
--
* Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008 Jun 21 10:05 -0500]:
> When someone develops and maintains a FOSS solution that runs on Linux
> that lets me interoperate with my Solidworks-using colleagues
> flawlessly I will happily donate to the project twice what I would be
> paying to Solid. That's a
17 matches
Mail list logo
