Dmitry Timoshkov schrieb:
"Peter Beutner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why? Wine is effectively just a different toolkit, like QT or GTK
(albeit much larger) that give applications a Windows, KDE and Gnome
look respectively. Take Notepad for example - with some slight
modifications you could even modify the File Open dialog to only show
the Unix namespace. Is there any reason that this application can't
be a fully fledged part of the desktop?
Wine is _not_ just a different toolkit. Just look at all the "nasty"
stuff wine has to do to emulate the windows process environment. This
is not exactly what I would prefer as an ideal environment when I had
to develop an application.
Since Wine is not a trivial thing written in 3 lines of code and it has
huge compatibility requirements it must to do all kinds of things to make you
(a developer) not to do that kind of things in your own code. Think about that.
hm if you somehow manage to build your project in a platform independent way so that you
can build a native windows executable as well as a native linux one, then you don't need
the whole compatibility code at all ;)
Said that, nothing makes it a different from another toolkit, no matter
what Wine haters think about it.
hmm you don't mean this for real, don't you?
Sure. While you're at it give them some docs about globalization
practices and efficient CPU usage. These are all nice to have things,
but you have to face it that if you're a developer at a software
company with a deadline then these are the first things to be
ignored. You also have to bear in mind that it is incredibly
difficult to do platform idependent GUI programming, whilst still
maintaining the Windows look.
Nobody said it's easy or that it will happen over night. But it
can/should be the long term goal. Besides gtk+/qt are imho quite
mature to use as cross-plattform gui toolkits.
I don't understand why you can't include Wine in that list. Is that an
ignorance or a result of hate to all which goes from windows world?
No, it's because I think wine is not a just a gui toolkit.
It is the cheapest way for companies and it gives good results for
the users. What's wrong with that?
See above. Wine does a lot of "tricks" to emulate windows behaviour.
And the more you use some complex window api the more is the chance
that wine just can't implement it the way it works in windows but has
to use all sorts of workarounds to get it to work under linux.
Sounds like a popular Wine myth. Anyone who ever seen a working MS
Office 97/2000/XP/2003 or any other not trivial application working under Wine wouldn't tell
anything like that,especially if he is a knowledgeable developer and not another member ./
crowd.
Haven't said that it doesn't work.
I just said sometimes you can't easily map stuff 1:1 from the windows world to
linux.
Just look at the things like the memory layout, parts of the gdi stuff, the whole ntoskrnl
idea, ...
Wine is a very good way of testing the waters with a Linux market. If
a significant part of the market share starts coming from Linux or
other Unix operating systems then the company can start offering
winelib extensions that integrate better with the environment in
which they are running.
I doubt that this will happen. If the windows version works with wine
the company will more likely continue to work on that. See your money
argument.
Another myth about Wine.
Glad to hear that. So there are already companies shipping winelib extensions for their
products?
