Subject: Re: Full screen capable? [OT]
From: Derrik Pates (dpates@dsdk12.net)
Date: Wed Jun 27 2001 - 11:01:12 MDT
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Quentin Mason wrote:
> I never said that it was easy -- the things that you mention make it
> extremely difficult indeed, but nonetheless a worthy project -- but the
> guy wants stability and WINE definitely is not that. It is not production
> reliable + will not run MSWord for any signifigant period of time with an
> interesting document. VMware on the other hand is far more stable and
> certainly a cheaper upgrade path than a new machine, however nice a
> titanium is. [and you can get cracked versions]
Agreed. Win4Lin would also be an acceptable route, methinks.
> I would not compare the production reliabilty of WINE and MOL -- MOL is in
> a different league and runs (almost) everything.
> AFAIK MOL does not: talk to xtra hardware, or run windows emulators very
> well.
Well, Wine and MoL take a totally different approach - Wine incorporates a
native-format binary loader and an (ever more complete) ABI, running the
individual programs directly. MoL just implements a few emulated devices,
loads a ROM image, and manages to trick MacOS into thinking it's running
on a complete machine unto itself, making it happy.
The former approach (binary loader + ABI) is necessarily more complicated.
> To rephrase: WINE is an excellent and useful OSS project that has not yet
> matured into a production stable reliable open-source runtime Win-on-Lin
> environment. It would be "crap" for the use that the questionner had.
I'd agree that it's not well-suited for running full-blown Windows apps
yet, but I don't think "crap" is a term I'd use.
Derrik Pates | Sysadmin, Douglas School | #linuxOS on EFnet
dpates@dsdk12.net | District (dsdk12.net) | #linuxOS on OPN
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Wed Jun 27 2001 - 10:06:52 MDT