tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8295741357281587791.post6368825837992588693..comments2019-07-17T03:41:15.620-07:00Comments on Linux Hater's Redux: Wine WhinesAnti-Tuxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14184665169206392084noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8295741357281587791.post-54928299535101960812008-11-04T11:24:00.000-08:002008-11-04T11:24:00.000-08:00We Hate Linux, and you should too.the title says i...We Hate Linux, and you should too.<BR/><BR/>the title says it all. wow. you think people would have better things to do in life than hate. too bad you're wasting your energies on this. your blog will do nothing to sway linux users or people that will be using linux. get a life. really.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8295741357281587791.post-89969370699481713612008-10-29T22:28:00.000-07:002008-10-29T22:28:00.000-07:00Citadel approaches? What the hell are you talking ...Citadel approaches? What the hell are you talking about?<BR/><BR/>"Issue is nothing more than resources. You may list a long list of companies. Few companies do help out."<BR/><BR/>What, so the joint efforts of IBM, Novell, and Red Hat still isn't enough? And yet Novell is vilified! (See: Mono controversy; the entire patent validation controversy)<BR/><BR/>Guess how many companies are helping out with Apple and Microsoft? One. And that is themselves. With all the supposed volunteer cooperation of OSS, you'd think they wouldn't need much outside assistance. <BR/><BR/>"There are distributions that are pure evil to projects like wine. Ubuntu is one of them. Better for them to provide nothing than fragment the user base we need for testing so appdb stays up to date."<BR/><BR/>Yet another 'Not our fault!' post. <BR/><BR/>"Lot of the soft points to stick a knife in will disappear."<BR/><BR/>Lusers have been saying that for years. It hasn't materialized.<BR/><BR/>Deciphering your posts is like trying to understand Middle English prose.thepldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11971753016514739806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8295741357281587791.post-22133663359417232992008-10-29T19:22:00.000-07:002008-10-29T19:22:00.000-07:00Call to companies for support yes code weavers has...Call to companies for support yes code weavers has all ready done what you have said. There is basically nothing more they can do from the software compatibility side themselves. You can only do so much without third party interest.<BR/><BR/>Loki is different they bought the right to produce. Same issue lack of funds particularly when wine goal is not to have you rebuy your applications. If you have a good idea that we have not tried to get them it will be put forward and attempted. This is just the current stat of affairs at codeweavers and the wine project we are out of ideas and we have tried the ideas you have suggested. Had small gains with like google but not enough broad coverage.<BR/><BR/>Issue is nothing more than resources. You may list a long list of companies. Few companies do help out. But we also have a citadel approaches as well undermining wine work. Ubuntu for one started there own wiki to support so called support wine. Major issue instructions wrong sent users in the IRC without checking appdb or other places first. 2 locations for documentations also equaled ubuntu version of instructions ended up out of date a lot.<BR/><BR/>That is one of many examples. Simple issue we are sick of it. There is not enough resources to go round on wine in the first place then have distrobutions fragmenting it even more and running there own record keeping that does not endup mainline. Or worse users going to ubuntu forums and giving invalid instructions only to come to winehq support and we have to fix it.<BR/><BR/>There are distributions that are pure evil to projects like wine. Ubuntu is one of them. Better for them to provide nothing than fragment the user base we need for testing so appdb stays up to date.<BR/><BR/>You forgot what I told you don't dig up history you need to go and read LSB 4.0 Linux Haters two old comments about it are invalid when compared to what is in LSB 4.0. Embedded own dynamic linker so no dependence at on what the distribution provides other than kernel that has been standard for ages.<BR/><BR/>Pulseaudio is blocked from the Linux Standard Base including. Alsa layour compatibility is as far as Pulseaudio consideration is going until at least Pulseaudio gets its stability sorted out. Sorry you have picked on one of the people who just happens to work in the multimedia section of LSB the vote landed that way. Only reason Pulseaudio even gets a look in at the ALSA layour is the Promise LSB gives to application makers using LSB tools. That is what you call barely considered. So far to the case that if Pulseaudio improves to the point that you don't hit pulseaudio bugs using ALSA there will be no references at all in the LSB documentation to pulseaudio. gstreamer and other more stable non trouble making systems will get into the LSB mainline first.<BR/><BR/>This is the problem with commenting on something that you are not in the front lines your information is way out of date.<BR/><BR/>Ok 1.0 release is stable for a particular list of applications. Exactly the same as crossover games and crossover. They are basically particular points taken from the Wine development tree.<BR/><BR/>You are missing something coded into wine is the means to run more than 1 version of wine side by side. Yet package managers of distrobutions do not support this. Wine recommendation always has been run critical applications with a version of wine it is marked as working with.<BR/><BR/>Call it a design issue in distrobutions. Wine used as per developers of wine instructions works quite well. Problem distrobutions deployment systems are not compatible with the recommendations.<BR/><BR/>Issue that chroot is a pain in the ass is the issue. Linux kernel ABI has been stable for over 15 years. So yes current day kernel works no issues with most applications only major exception are firewall configuring applications. The issue what you are failing to notice is Windows XP compatibility layor what is basically automatic form of chroot. Linux distrobutions have not made this process painless. Reason if it was painless why would you get locked into them. Call it the citadel strikes again.<BR/><BR/>Groups like openvz.org did make it painless to install other distrobutions if you had a custom kernel that supported containers. It is more neglect that means to do it.<BR/><BR/>Basically Linux is setup to discourage using of old applications so people do look at the new ones before jumping threw the hoops to get the old ones working. Simple fact if you are prepared to jump thew hoops of Linux chooting you do have more backwards compatibility than what XP and Vista provides. I give that interface sux to hell. Out of all of them deb based distrobutions are the simplest to setup chroot environments even including a command based program to help. cdebootstrap yep particularly for setting up chroots. Never had a nice little graphical tool made for it. But tools exist to do it.<BR/><BR/>MS bottom line is getting hit by the simple fact netbooks are basically outselling most other things and they only get a max of 30 USD a machine for it compared to there old of at least 100 USD. In countries where MS can take people to court for illegal copies of windows. In location were MS cannot do that there is basically nothing they can do. Even worse for MS they don't have the full netbook market alone.<BR/><BR/>Ubuntu maintainers hold the winehq record for the most numbers of broken wine builds in a row. This is not bad performing ones but simply ones that don't run at all.<BR/><BR/>You think source distrobutions are bad. Compare to Ubuntu's quality control you would have a better chance with the source based distrobutions. Only thing worse is Fedora from Redhat ok that is Redhat testing ground what is a minefield with almost anything traped.<BR/><BR/>Issue with Ubuntu maintainers is a lot of them backport patches without the skills or resources to quality check what they did. Side effects include sections of code running at half the speed they should.<BR/><BR/>Redhat has higher quality controls than Ubuntu. Only reason why they get away with doing the stunt so often. Same with Debian. Both use a active development version with a fairly large user base to bug squash. Ubuntu lacks this. Result is predictable more errors sneak threw. If you don't have the resources or the skill don't backport stuff you only hurt users.<BR/><BR/>Funny part more usable is Ubuntu argument for Including Pulseaudio leading to slower speeds. Pulseaudio provides per application volume controls to match Vistas per application volume controls. I of course call what ubuntu does with these slow down things mistreating users.<BR/><BR/>Then to top it off backporting patches is pushed as a way of avoiding possible future bugs in the new released packages from the developers of that part. Many times you want to grab a base ball bat and kill some of these distribution maintainers. Try the god darn new version if it has a regression then back port patches. Don't just backport stuff as status normal.<BR/><BR/>Pays to know who talking about. Usable means that you line would have just got laugh at from the Ubuntu developers. Ruining users enjoyment of ubuntu would have been a better line. <BR/><BR/>I do embeded work from time to time so I have seen first few generation prototypes. Tuxphone started the idea of a open source phone off openmoto like is final form. This is normal good business you get prototype work people see it you call it 1 name when you put good quality case on it you change the name so people don't link up bad past image.<BR/><BR/>The list to sell Linux on Desktop include.<BR/><BR/>A true unified central server control for business use.<BR/>A true unified theme system for all commonly used toolkits.<BR/>Unified configuration system.<BR/>Means to effectively install third party binaries.<BR/><BR/>It was good being at a conference to hear the list. Please note the list was made in 1996. Yes it has reduced a lot since there it started off at over 200 items. We are under 20 of them left with most of them clear able in the next 12 months. Simple issue you think current Linux's have issues. They numbers of issues have dropped every year most of them are in background with a desktop user does not see.<BR/><BR/>First project to start clearing the list is the freedesktop.org project second project is the Linux Standard Base. In the last 3 years another 4 project have jumped up taking out different sections.<BR/><BR/>I can rip linux apart perfectly when I wish. Because I know exactly where to stick the knife in. As I know that its going to get a lot harder over the next 12 months. Lot of the soft points to stick a knife in will disappear.oiaohmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04718208244445470383noreply@blogger.com