Wine is getting better
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| bigg Oct 29, 2007 8:36 AM EDT |
Not directly related to the story, but I wanted to share my recent surprise at how fast the quality of Wine is improving. I received a CD from my employer, the use of which was mandatory (at least if I want to keep getting a paycheck). It was a multimedia presentation containing a bunch of important information, with just one small problem: it was Windows-only. Not even support for Mac. I put the CD in the drive, the contents opened in a browser window, I double clicked the .exe file. Everything worked perfectly, including the videos and audio. It would not have been possible for someone else to even have known I was running Linux, because it was a fullscreen presentation. This really is a big help to those of us who want to choose our OS. |
| herzeleid Oct 29, 2007 10:32 AM EDT |
That's encouraging. I had played solitaire under wine back in the mid 1990s, but alas, the project seemed to have languished with little progress since then. I'm glad to hear that it's become capable of the sort of seamless presentation that you've reported. |
| thenixedreport Oct 29, 2007 2:11 PM EDT |
It can also run Warcraft III Reign of Chaos and the expansion Frozen Throne. They're trying to get more apps working, and that's great. What they need to work on is improved MIDI out support (perhaps through Wingroove?). That way, I can play Final Fantasy 7 again. ;) |
| hkwint Oct 29, 2007 3:40 PM EDT |
Dear Wine users above, just out of curiosity; May I ask what Wine-versions you are using? |
| azerthoth Oct 29, 2007 3:56 PM EDT |
0.9.48 and it gets upgraded as soon as it hits the Gentoo repo. As well as wine-doors 0.1 |
| jezuch Oct 29, 2007 4:05 PM EDT |
Wine languishing? News to me :) http://www.ohloh.net/projects/74/analyses/latest |
| herzeleid Oct 29, 2007 4:30 PM EDT |
Quoting: Wine languishing? News to me :)Yes languishing in the sense that I could play solitaire back in 1995, and yet in 2000 I still couldn't properly do much more than that. Glad to hear of the more recent progress though. |
| bigg Oct 29, 2007 4:49 PM EDT |
> May I ask what Wine-versions you are using? 0.9.47 Forgot to add above that it installs and runs Quicktime perfectly as well. Six months ago, at least, it didn't even install. |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2007 6:15 PM EDT |
>and yet in 2000 I still couldn't properly do much more than that. Don't know how to tell you this, but 2008 is right around the corner. Eight years is an eternity in software years. |
| herzeleid Oct 29, 2007 7:31 PM EDT |
Quoting: Don't know how to tell you this, but 2008 is right around the corner. Eight years is an eternity in software years.No need, I knew it already. I think I see what confused you. Let's put our arithmetic hats on for a sec - Let's consider the 5 year span from 1995 to 2000 the x axis, and the meager increase in wine functionality between those 2 years as the y axis. Here, dy/dx was disappointingly low, and judging by that observed rate of progress, one might not have expected any significant functionality before the 2010-2015 time frame. Here it is only 2007, and we have encouraging reports which indicate progress has sped up considerably. |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2007 11:37 PM EDT |
>Here it is only 2007, and we have encouraging reports which indicate progress has sped up considerably. On a lark, I just tried something in the hope of solving a problem we have. You will note that the software involved is far more complex than Solitaire: My Myth box in internet-connected. We can use it to watch full episodes of NBC shows. Not hi-def, but definitely handy. Problem: other providers (like the Discovery Channel) also make full episodes available, but they need players that don't run under linux. We would like to use more of those as we do not subscribe to cable or satellite TV. Experiment: Install Firefox for Windows on my machine, then see if I can run the Discovery Channel player (Movies in Motion or something like that). a. Firefox installs without a hitch. Download the "Firefox Setup blahblahblah.exe" file and run wine Firefox*exe b. Go to Discovery channel site and install full episode viewer. It installs without a hitch, but, when we go to watch an episode, it says we need flash. Fine. c. Install Flash for Windows. It goes without a hitch. d. Restart firefox, go back to Discovery channel. Watch episode of Mythbusters. it works. YippeeKiYay!! PS -- winecfg desktop integration tab is your friend, especially if you don't want a bunch of ugly, tiny little fonts. **update** Full-screen mode can be SLOOW, depending on how source is encoded. Will investigate further... |
| jacog Oct 29, 2007 11:55 PM EDT |
Yep. I use Wine for Warcraft III and World of Warcraft. A lot of games work really well under Wine these days. Usually any problems with getting stuff to work is directly related to copy protection schemes. In those cases you can fix the problem by installing a noCD crack of some sort. (but 'gads, do scan those for windows germs) |
| tracyanne Oct 30, 2007 12:17 AM EDT |
I recently set up a customer's computer with Mandriva 2008 + Wine + Crossover, and installed Quickbooks, everything works perfectly and my customer is now the proud owner of a computer running Linux on which she can do her accounts using the same accounting package she used on her defunct Windows computer. I also installed a bunch of PopCap games, which my partner likes, and they too run perfectly. |
| jacog Oct 30, 2007 2:01 AM EDT |
Oddly, I find that Wine actually works better for games than the comercial fork, Cedega. I used to be a Cedega subscriber, but since they give no support at all, I find it hard to justify giving them any money. |
| herzeleid Oct 30, 2007 9:45 AM EDT |
Quoting: d. Restart firefox, go back to Discovery channel. Watch episode of Mythbusters. it works.Wow, that's very cool, and gives me hope of OS migrations for interested parties who are stuck with some legacy ms app which thus far has made them feel as though they were joined at the hip to the chair tossing monkey boy. On the other hand, it creeps me out to be perpetuating the illusion that "everybody runs windoze" and inflating the ms hit counts in the server logs. Rather than simply play along and pretend to be a happy windoze user, I'd also contact the folks at discovery channel and ask why they are trying to lock out users of alternative OSes... |
| dinotrac Oct 30, 2007 9:52 AM EDT |
>Rather than simply play along and pretend to be a happy windoze user, I'd also contact the folks at discovery channel and ask why they are trying to lock out users of alternative OSes... I do that rather routinely. I don't know if it has any effect, but maybe the combined complaints have a little bit to do with the proliferation of flash sites. One aside -- I sent such a letter to my local talk radio station, WLS-AM in Chicago. Got no response, and they still use Windows Media player, but... They suggest that Linux users use VLC. Hey! An actual mention of Linux with an approach that works. I do, in fact, listen to them via the VLC plugin. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 30, 2007 11:08 AM EDT |
> WLS-AM in Chicago.... suggest[s] that Linux users use VLC. Hey! An actual mention of Linux with an approach that works. I like the way http://www.wcpe.org/ WCPE out of Raleigh does it. They stream several different protocols, including Ogg as #2 as you can see. Even using IPv6. |
| bigg Oct 30, 2007 11:41 AM EDT |
> the proliferation of flash sites I don't actually access any multimedia anymore for which Linux players are not available. The talk radio I access (Ed Schultz) is available for Real Player, other stations I listen to can be accessed with streamtuner or Real Player, and any video is available in Flash. (Most sites streaming the Ed Schultz show also have instructions for Linux users.) I would, however, like to watch ABC shows at some point. They use Flash but have a Windows player that installs but doesn't work properly with Linux. Idiots. It used to work perfectly. |
| dinotrac Oct 30, 2007 12:25 PM EDT |
Bob - That's how I got miffed at WLS-AM in the first place. They used to stream multiple protocols, then switch to WMP. I thought they had forgotten about Linux users altogether. Would prefer something open, but, hey, remembered and considered is better than ignored. |
| bigg Nov 07, 2007 3:56 AM EDT |
A story on Digg pointed out that NPR has a new media player, so I checked it out. It's all Flash and works perfectly with Linux. I checked the requirements for the player and they state The NPR Media Player is designed for and has been tested with the following platforms and browsers (as of November 2007): Windows 2000/XP/Vista: * Internet Explorer 6.x or 7.x * Mozilla Firefox 2.x MacOS X * Safari (MacOS 10.3 -10.5) * Mozilla Firefox 2.x Linux/Unix * Mozilla Firefox 1.x or 2. Then further down they write Why don’t you support other file formats such as Quicktime or OGG Vorbis? Currently, the infrastructure and delivery costs associated with maintaining multiple file formats require that we limit the number of file formats that we support. Good to see a major site recognize and support Linux, and at least acknowledge the existence of OGG. |
| dinotrac Nov 07, 2007 4:28 AM EDT |
>Currently, the infrastructure and delivery costs associated with maintaining multiple file formats require that we limit the number of file formats that we support. This is a fact of organizational life. I can't think of any organization for which software is the dominating cost. OTOH, organizations spend a fortune on labor -- everything they do costs money because they have to pay somebody to do it. So...I agree. Good to see that somebody has thought about us and has provided the means for us to enjoy their work. Free is better, but not everybody can afford free. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 07, 2007 4:58 AM EDT |
> Currently, the infrastructure and delivery costs associated with maintaining multiple file formats require that we limit the number of file formats that we support. Bureaucrat-speak translation: The committee are a bunch of luddites, they think that streaming multiple formats will cost more because they can't understand that if someone is pulling OGG they're not pulling WMV. They think it will have to stream both at once to each user. |
| Abe Nov 07, 2007 5:12 AM EDT |
Quoting:they think that streaming multiple formats will cost more because they can't understand that if someone is pulling OGG they're not pulling WMV. I believe they are referring to the cost of creating material in other formats and the additional storage cost. Give them a break Bob, this is NPR we are taking about, they can't be Luddites. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 07, 2007 9:10 AM EDT |
> this is NPR we are taking about, they can't be Luddites.
Of course they can be. They are tax leaches who do not have to compete in a free market, which means they get to be inefficient and remain on the air. My example above, WCPE, is a community supported radio/internet station which does not take a penny of government money, so they have to be as efficient as possible at all times. Yet they can stream half a dozen different media formats. Each of the "costs" you mention are insolvable only to people who are already predisposed to their preconceptions of technology. Luddites. |
| Abe Nov 07, 2007 9:59 AM EDT |
Quoting:They are tax leaches who do not have to compete in a free market, which means they get to be inefficient and remain on the air.I don't think we are talking about the same NPR. The NPR I am talking about is mostly supported by public donations and a little from government funding. Compete they have to. Due to the reduction of government funding, now they are running ads for some commercial companies and almost never during the shows. It is always before or after the show. Unfortunately, MS is one of the companies that donate handsomely to them. Mind you, that doesn't make them biased in any way, or at least I haven't noticed. |
| dinotrac Nov 07, 2007 10:25 AM EDT |
>Mind you, that doesn't make them biased in any way, or at least I haven't noticed. Perhaps not towards Microsoft, but...seriously, you haven't? |
| nalf38 Nov 07, 2007 11:07 AM EDT |
Jesus, Bob. Enough with the mises.org stuff, already. NPR gets a pittance of taxpayers' money, much much less than you think they do. It's mostly listener supported. Inefficient? Do you actually listen to NPR? |
| dinotrac Nov 07, 2007 11:38 AM EDT |
>NPR gets a pittance of taxpayers' money, much much less than you think they do You presume to know something that you have no evidence to support. How reliable does that make you? The question isn't how much federal money they get. The question is why they get any at all. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 07, 2007 11:48 AM EDT |
> Perhaps not towards Microsoft, but...seriously, you haven't? Chortle! Ever listen to "Marketplace"? It's a litany of everything that can be twisted to sound like a "market failure". > Jesus, Bob. As an atheist, I'm offended. By Cromm, have you no respect for diversity? :^) Just kidding. Really. > Enough with the mises.org stuff, already. You are welcome to ignore me at any time. It's called "voluntary interaction", something very efficient indeed. You might have heard about it. > NPR gets a pittance of taxpayers' money, much much less than you think they do. Oh really? Then the fact that they still get any is even more repulsive, since they obviously don't need it. > Inefficient? Yes. You say not, that's fine. Too bad I am forced at gunpoint to subsidize what I consider to be inefficient. See? It's not just opinion. If it were just opinion, I wouldn't be upset. No one makes me pay for rap music, for instance, so my opinion of rap music is merely academic rather than a basis for conflict. Sadly, that conflict follows all coercive regulation, and since that regulation ever increases, the sphere of action at the discretion of the individual grows ever smaller and conflict grows, and grows, and grows. > Do you actually listen to NPR? Occasionally. I drop in on Marketplace every few months to find out what segments of the free market are presently being targetted by the socialists, but other than that it's just hit and miss when there isn't anything good on the music stations or I want to hear voices instead of noise on the FM dial. Sadly, "my" local NPR affiliate doesn't play Thistle and Shamrock, which because of the NPR structure no other station in "my" area can therefore play, so I'm SOL. So much for listener "service", even though I am forced to subsidize it the one show I want they don't play. Yes, it's a very small quantity of money. It's called "concentrated benefits with dispersed costs" and it's how all the little special interests justify taking their little slice of the government tax pie to live at the expense of everyone else. Dying the death of a thousand little cuts is no better than dying from one big cut. I prefer not being cut at all. |
| Abe Nov 07, 2007 11:51 AM EDT |
Quoting:The question is why they get any at allShall we just say for the enjoyment many listeners/viewers get out of their programs that you don't get to listen to or see any where else! Before you complain about peanuts may be you should complain about the money wasted on huge pork barrels projects, unnecessary wars, wasted spending etc. etc. etc...! Quoting: Perhaps not towards Microsoft, but...seriously, you haven't?Just because some people don't agree with them doesn't mean they are biased. I find them very objective and fair in their analysis and the material they present. Well, at least much better than any other organizations or reports. |
| jdixon Nov 07, 2007 12:34 PM EDT |
> Shall we just say for the enjoyment many listeners/viewers get out of their programs that you don't get to listen to or see any where else! If the programs are that good, why do they have to force people who don't want them to pay for them? > Before you complain about peanuts may be you should complain about the money wasted on huge pork barrels projects, unnecessary wars, wasted spending etc. etc. etc...! We complain about all of it, Abe. Not that anyone ever listens. IMO, the federal government should be shrunk to 1/3 of its current size or less. That's not just peanuts. > Just because some people don't agree with them doesn't mean they are biased. No, it doesn't. But that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Only some people don't agree with Rush. Does that mean that he's not biased either? |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 07, 2007 12:44 PM EDT |
> Shall we just say for the enjoyment many listeners/viewers get out of their programs that you don't get to listen to or see any where else! Then let them pay for it. I'm not asking anyone to pay for a bevy of nubile Japanese women for my enjoyment, but by your definition of "why is it right for them to rob me at gun point" it would be just as reasonable for me to demand subsidies from you for my enjoyment. I'm sure that I can find someone who enjoys pushing clams up someone else's nose. Shall we have taxpayers subsidize that too? Clams are cheap, it won't cost very much. I recall where Federal art money was used to pay for crucifixes in cans of human poop. Oh well, if someone enjoyed it, by your definition, there's no room to complain. And please don't bring up the straw-man of the endless waste of government expenditure. It's a straw-man because I've never said not to cut anything, so you can't catch me in a hypocrisy. I'll gladly assert that it should all, every last penny, be cut. All of it. Now. Right now. Shut it down and walk away. Amen. |
| Abe Nov 07, 2007 5:39 PM EDT |
Quoting:If the programs are that good, why do they have to force people who don't want them to pay for them? Quoting:Then let them pay for it.They aren't forcing any one, on the contrary, people are donating to keep NPR flourishing after the massive cuts by the government. If you are talking about the little money they get from government, complain to the government and don't accuse NPR of forcing any one. I believe you know better on how the government functions. Besides, there are many citizens who like to keep NPR partially funded by public money also available to many other organizations that some of the people believe in keeping them funded by the government. Quoting:'m not asking anyone to pay for a bevy ...I can see you are not, but many others are. Vote and change the system if you can. Quoting:I recall where Federal art money was used to pay for...If it doesn't interest you, it is of interest to many others. If you don't like the system, vote against it. Quoting:And please don't bring up the straw-man of the endless waste of government expenditure.... Quoting:We complain about all of it, Abe. Not that anyone ever listensAnd why not? I would rather complain about the much bigger waste than the little funding which some consider very important educational and intellectual material. You know, there is a big difference between what is being wasted on useless pork barrels and on enlightening analysis. Quoting:the federal government should be shrunk to 1/3 of its current size or less. That's not just peanuts.I agree with that, but it is what it is. If the money is going to be wasted any way, I would rather see it go to the beneficial programs the NPR has. Quoting:No, it doesn't. But that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Only some people don't agree with Rush. Does that mean that he's not biased either?Come on now, you are not serious comparing NPR people with Rush, are you? Could you explain how is NPR is biased? They always show both sides of a story, they always have supporters of all views and perspectives, so where is the bias? |
| dinotrac Nov 07, 2007 5:39 PM EDT |
> I find them very objective and fair in their analysis and the material they present. I'll bet you do. >Shall we just say for the enjoyment many listeners/viewers get out of their programs that you don't get to listen to or see any where else! If they are getting so much enjoyment, why don't THEY pay for it? I used to write copy and do on-air work during fund-raising drives for the PBS station down in Dallas. I am a great believer in public television and public radio. Note, however, that I said "public", not government. Too many people use them as if they are interchangeable. They're not. |
| dinotrac Nov 07, 2007 5:41 PM EDT |
>Come on now, you are not serious comparing NPR people with Rush, are you? Of course not. Rush is very up-front about his bias, whereas NPR folks are in denial. Besides, Rush doesn't take my money to put his bias on the air. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 08, 2007 7:01 AM EDT |
> If you don't like the system, vote against it. I do, I always have, and it makes no difference. The reason it makes no difference is because there are a whole bunch of people who think the ends justify the means. It's interesting to me that "The ends do not justify the means" is treated like a virtue, up to the point where someone's favorite tax subsidized program comes up. Then suddenly robbing your neighbors at gun-point, robbery as a means, becomes virtuous because the ends justify it. > I would rather complain about the much bigger waste than the little funding which some consider very important educational and intellectual material. Because you're not thinking it through. Those huge, wasteful things you are upset about are made up of innumerable little things, each one just as hard to argue against as you believe NPR to be hard to argue against. "Oh, it's so little, and it benefits some people so much, how can you say it's wrong?" I don't see how you say it's ok to take my money for NPR when I disapprove, and then say it's not ok to take your money for something else when you disapprove. Those two positions are, to me, mutually contradictory. |
| Abe Nov 08, 2007 7:46 AM EDT |
Quoting:Then suddenly robbing your neighbors at gun-point, robbery as a means, becomes virtuous because the ends justify it. What is it with you and robbing at gun-point? who is robbing who here? NPR & PBS are getting money from a pool of funds allotted by the government, that is who is taking our money and should be complaining about and to. Quoting:Because you're not thinking it through. Those huge, wasteful things you are upset about are made up of innumerable little things, each one just as hard to argue against as you believe NPR to be hard to argue against. Oh yes I am thinking it through. The little money they are getting is like an itch compared to other funds that are bleeding the country to death. Don't you think you shouldn't be wasting your time on little ones when there are much bigger fish to fry! Quoting:If YOU get to say billing me for NPR against my will is ok, then YOU have no room to complain about _ANYTHING_.No that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is NPR is not holding a gun to your head forcing you to give them money. As a matter of fact, they plead to their listeners and viewers to donate. No forcing, coercion, or obligation, just simply asking for voluntary donations. And I as a citizen happen to believe that they deserve public funding just like schools and everything else that deserve to be funded. You happen to disagree, that is your prerogative and just as mine to agree. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 08, 2007 8:11 AM EDT |
> What is it with you and robbing at gun-point? who is robbing who here? Do you have some other definition of taxation? > What I am saying is NPR is not holding a gun to your head forcing you to give them money. Yes, they are. You said it yourself, they are tax funded. Even if it is one _penny_, that penny had to be stolen from someone before the government could hand it out. > Don't you think you shouldn't be wasting your time on little ones when there are much bigger fish to fry! If I cannot even point out the hypocrisy of funding NPR by taxes while complaining about other things being funded by taxes, how do you expect me to be able to successfully argue against anything that is big? I can say all day that "I don't like..." this or that, but if I don't object to everything I'm just being a hypocrite. My objection is not based upon the size of the budget. My objection is to the budget. I'm still wondering how I can be any more clear since you still seem to not get it. |
| jdixon Nov 08, 2007 9:17 AM EDT |
> They aren't forcing any one, What happens if I calculate the portion of my taxes going to NPR and refuse to pay it? Would you call the resulting arrest and seizure of property force or not? > If you don't like the system, vote against it... Vote and change the system if you can.... If you don't like the system, vote against it. I do. All the time. > You know, there is a big difference between what is being wasted on useless pork barrels and on enlightening analysis. a) No, there isn't. It's a matter of degree, not kind. b) I've never heard enlightening analysis from NPR (well, with the possible exception of Car Talk, and that's only possible). I've heard lots of "analysis", but none of it has been enlightening, except to the extent it exposes the biases of those giving the analysis. I have to admit that the degree of that bias is sometimes "enlightening". > Come on now, you are not serious comparing NPR people with Rush, are you? Dino already answered that as well as I could. > Could you explain how is NPR is biased? Yes, but not in the time I have now. > They always show both sides of a story, No, they don't. And when they do, one side is often favored by their "analysis" > they always have supporters of all views and perspectives Again, no they don't. And when they do, one side is often carefully chosen so as not present a valid opposing view. Many times, neither side presents a valid view, but that's mere incompetence, not bias. The very stories they choose to cover shows their bias, much less the way they choose to cover them. > What I am saying is NPR is not holding a gun to your head forcing you to give them money. The government is. If NPR doesn't want to be considered an accomplice in the act, it should stop accepting government funding. |
| Bob_Robertson Nov 08, 2007 9:23 AM EDT |
> I've never heard enlightening analysis from NPR (well, with the possible exception of Car Talk, and that's only possible). Car Talk is where I heard about "Male Answer Syndrome". That syndrome has been of immeasurable assistance in understanding politicians, used car salesmen, and other professional liars. |
| jdixon Nov 08, 2007 9:59 AM EDT |
Oh, Abe, if you want an excellent example of NPR's biases: Try to find any NPR coverage of the current Espiscopalian fiasco which isn't either ignorant about, bewildered by, or disdainful of the traditional Anglican position. You may find the occasional guest who can express the traditional position clearly and well, though I doubt it. However, if you do, compare how that guest is treated to the treatment of the other guest(s). I know NPR's biases, so I know better than to listen to NPR for coverage of such issues. Thus, I can't provide any examples. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!