OS X and Linux on x86

[Anthony Lanni]

    Just FYI, the photoshop deal was a combination of Disney, Pixar, and 
Dreamworks, and maybe others.  Codeweavers is, as you may know, 
developing support for apps based upon demand.  They judge demand in the 
form of dollar amounts; a donation from each company put Photoshop at 
the top of the list.

thx
    anthony

Ryan Nix wrote:

> Wine would already work on OS X for x86 because of its FreeBSD 
> underpinnings:
>
> From their website:  http://winehq.org/
>
> Wine is an Open Source implementation of the Windows 
> <http://www.microsoft.com/windows/> API on top of X 
> <http://www.xfree86.org/> and Unix.
>
> Think of Wine as a Windows compatibility layer. Wine does not require 
> Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely alternative implementation 
> consisting of 100% Microsoft-free code, but it can optionally use 
> native system DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a 
> development toolkit (Winelib) for porting Windows sources to Unix and 
> a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows binaries to run on 
> x86-based Unixes, including Linux <http://www.linux.org/>, FreeBSD 
> <http://www.freebsd.org/>, and Solaris 
> <http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/>.
>
> I urge anyone with a Linux x86 box to try Codeweavers version.  Its 
> awesome.  Disney paid Codeweavers to make Photoshop 7 run.  Imagine 
> what Apple could do.  ;)
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
>
> Walt Pawley wrote:
>
>> On 7/13/04 10:27 PM -0500, Ryan Nix wrote on OS X and Linux on x86
>>
>>  
>>
>>> On the contrary, J.T.  If you build it, and there is demand, which 
>>> there
>>> is, people will buy it.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> A simplistic view of commerce, but true enough.
>>
>>  
>>
>>> ...  If Apple put some
>>> resources behind Wine, they could have HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of  
>>> Windows
>>> applications running on OS X right out of the box.
>>> ...
>>> J.T.Blaylock wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> Programs in running WINE aren't really running natively. Sure, the CPU
>>>> instructions are the same, but its an OS inside an OS, like the OS X
>>>> Classic environment or MOL. People won't go for that, I think. If OS X
>>>> was released for x86 tomorrow, there would be no programs to run on
>>>> it. Yeah, they run on Windows and Linux, but not OS X. People would
>>>> not want to recompile Linux apps for OS X, even in the cases where it
>>>> is possible.
>>>>     
>>>
>>
>> As I understand WINE, it works primarily because it's running on x86
>> hardware (ie. the same instructions executed as those in a Windoze 
>> box) and
>> primarily is concerned with mapping APIs, not with basic execution. 
>> This is
>> highly analogous to running Classic in OS X (except that I believe 
>> classic
>> includes a 68K emulator as well as API mapping - after all, that's 
>> how the
>> early Mac OS came up).
>>
>> Assuming that WINE does not provide an x86 emulator, porting it to 
>> the Mac
>> would not have much use. I've seen posts of people combining WINE 
>> with such
>> an emulator and having some success.
>>
>>  
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yellowdog-general mailing list
> yellowdog-general@lists.terrasoftsolutions.com
> http://lists.terrasoftsolutions.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general
> HINT: to Google archives, try  '<keywords> site:terrasoftsolutions.com'
>