When you need to run a program, that's presumably the case because you don't have alternatives. In that case, you will care and agonize even more about bad UI, since you will have to deal with it.
You can care all you want - but if you don't have alternatives, you're stuck with it. You may not like AutoCad's interface, but your work requires it, so you'll have to use it anyway.
That's what WINE is for. To use the odd program that doesn't run on your platform of choice. Whining about 'bad' Windows UI is just childish. VirtualPC doesn't provide Mac-like UI either, but a lot of people use it.
You can care all you want - but if you don't have alternatives, you're stuck with it. You may not like AutoCad's interface, but your work requires it, so you'll have to use it anyway.[/URL]
I realize that. That doesn't change the fact that people are hating that situation.
Quote:
That's what WINE is for. To use the odd program that doesn't run on your platform of choice. Whining about 'bad' Windows UI is just childish. VirtualPC doesn't provide Mac-like UI either, but a lot of people use it.
And I doubt there's anyone who *likes* relying on Wine. (Then again, when you use Linux on a desktop, you usually have slightly masochistic tendencies anyway.)
You've missed a lot of development, that's for sure. Many major apps do run under WINE and Crossover. Office being one of the most important. Photoshop is one that runs that is also of interest here.
Could very well be the case. In a sense though that is part of the point, once a platform supports alternative applications (to replace MS ones) things like WINE end up of little use. The less mainstream applications end up being needed on the machine, yet due to being less mainstream actual support under WINE is often an unknown.
Back to the Apple hardware the problem thus becomes an issue on how are vertical or special putpose applications supported on OS/X. If emulation is an unknown then alternatve technologies become more important.
Quote:
Crossover and Darwine will simply give more alternatives to the Mac user. Some alternatives will be better than others for some people. The fact that they will be available at all is important.
This is very true. Just because an alternative exists though does not mean that it will become a well accepted solution. Back to the Linux example, native applications are where the focus is. I just don't see WINE as being a big draw, that is something that pull people in and makes them feel warm and fuzzy about Linux. For OS/X I see much the same sort of attitude developing - that is I don't see something like WINE being on a check list that has to be there for purchase apporval.
In fact I see just the opposite happening in the OS/X world where if the only way to deliver a solution is to use something like WINE it will end up being seen as a purchase negative.
Quote:
.net hasn't done nearly as well as MS has hoped. It isn't ubiquitous. Java has more development at this time.
.NET is an interesting beast, it certainly has its good points. The big issue with .NET is that it is not wide spread the way SUN made Java available. That doesn't mean that it won't get there just that it doesn't have the mother corporation building and distributing software for every platform on earth.
Instead with .NET we have implementers working on different platforms. Mono from NOVELL beign the one big example. Since that is effort is only a few months away from being finished it will provide a platform that is independent yet compatible with MS offerings. Once we see alternative implementations available we will be able to determine if .NET will be successful. I see open minded developers realizing that there is much in the way of positive ideas with .NET that does make it a nice cross platform way of doing things.
It is interesting that many of the places that haven't adopted .NET these days, haven't adopted JAVA either. I'm not convinced that .NETs slow accptance has anything at all to do with JAVA's small corner of the market. Both platforms seem to have small vocal mind shares yet main stream reluctance towards adoption. One neat thing with Java though is the GCC seris of tools and gjc. Being able to get rid of the JAVA VM if you want to is a very intresting twist to the JAVA story .
And I doubt there's anyone who *likes* relying on Wine. (Then again, when you use Linux on a desktop, you usually have slightly masochistic tendencies anyway.)
'Relying on WINE' - wtf? WINE is a stop-gap measure; it's not supposed to be your full-time working environment. For graphic work, you have GIMP. For Office work, you have OpenOffice.org. WINE is there to accomodate those that have special needs, not people that need to browse and type a 300 word school paper.
GIMP and OOo are sufficient for that. And if you're a serious Photoshop guy you either buy an x86 PC and install XP, or you buy a Mac. It's as simple as that. But some people use WINE to play games as well, and it works quite good. A lot of games work under Linux, but some don't, so WINE comes to rescue. And it works. Just fine.
And before making out of line comments about Linux and people using it, consider that you boast a signature that contains two apps that are open-source and have a great following in Linux: AdiumX (built on top of libgaim, the core of GAIM) and Mozilla/Firefox.
'Relying on WINE' - wtf? WINE is a stop-gap measure; it's not supposed to be your full-time working environment.
I never claimed otherwise.
Quote:
For graphic work, you have GIMP.
For some playing around, yes. For work? No.
Quote:
For Office work, you have OpenOffice.org. WINE is there to accomodate those that have special needs, not people that need to browse and type a 300 word school paper.
When you need to run a program, that's presumably the case because you don't have alternatives. In that case, you will care and agonize even more about bad UI, since you will have to deal with it.
I'm not sure if that's true. Windows isn't like Linux, it's pretty similar to OS X. If we have to occasionally run a program under it or Crossover, we don't have to bite our knuckles. As long as I'm not stuck in that enviornment all of the time (or a lot of the time), I'm fine.
What I mean is that there's no point in letting something you don't like get under your skin if you don't have to use it much.
If you hate it, you can always buy the Mac version, or find a Mac program that will subsitute. Most people won't have a problem either way.
And as most people who will run Windows or Crossover on their new Mac will be coming from the Windows world anyway, it shouldn't bother them that much.
GIMP has some really powerful underlying technologies. It's very advanceg under the hood. Its problems stem from not enough focus on UI and workflow. That's beeing addressed now.
GIMP is very useful. It's certainly not a Photoshop killer, but it doesn't need to be one either. It's not just for play. It's for real, actual work. I know this. I work with it.
People moving over from Windows might have these programs already.Get it?
This conversation has entered the surreal.
Sure. People who own Office and Photoshop are going to use WINE to run their production apps on their Macintels...
NOT!
If you want that kind of frustration, why are you using a Mac to begin with?
I'll echo everything Gene said, plus Chuckler's comments about masochists using desktop Linux. Masochists, and people who like to hack for their own enjoyment. You can pretty much say the same for WINE users (not quite sure which one I am).
The only reasons I got involved with WINE were:
a) It's an interesting project.
b) I'd like to play Windows games in WINE. This objective is achievable, although I don't see myself working on it much until I get a Macintel. I started working on OpenGL and D3D support, but I got distracted. Ultimately I would also like to add HID support (to whatever the Win32 equivalent is, which I think is Direct Input or something).
c) Perhaps SCSI/SAM support could be added so I could run Alcohol 120%. Not a high priority.
d) VfW codec support for MPlayer. May not even require WINE actually.
But lets not fool ourselves that WINE can be used by non-machochist/hackers, or that this solution should ever be pursued. I can provide many reasons why it should not.
And I'm saying the same thing about WINE or Crossover. Some people will find them useful. I neither expect nor hope that a LOT of people will want to use them.
I'm a firm believer, and have been criticized here over it, that Windows, Linux, WINE, and Crossover, pose a danger to the Mac OS.
Hopefully, they will allow people who have wanted to get a Mac an excuse to do so. Also, hopefully, after having used the Mac, and its programs, they will want to discard their PC versions.
The danger is that they won't, thus not buying Mac apps.
What I mean is that there's no point in letting something you don't like get under your skin if you don't have to use it much.
I think AutoCAD was brought up as an example, however; something you *do* have to use much if you use it professionally, and something where you *won't* have an alternative. Ergo, you will suffer.
Anyways, we're getting way off track here.
I certainly welcome, without a doubt, Darwine becoming mature and usable.
Listen, WINE is just the technology. In order to see what melgross is saying, you need to familiarize with CrossOver Office. It's a GUI front-end to WINE, and it's pretty reliable.
It lets you install and run many important apps that are either Windows only, or you need to test your files on to ensure compatibility. You can install IE 6 on Linux (and as a proxy, when it's released, on OS X) to test your site with IE6. You can install Word:Windows to test your document for compatibility. You can probably install AutoCad and software that's not present in the Mac and you can do so comfortably and for a small price.
You don't need to run an emulator such as VirtualPC and see it eating your CPU cycles and your RAM, you don't need a copy of Windows (apps install in a virtual Windows folder structure created by WINE), and you don't need to suffer performance-wise because you need a Windows-only app. They run at almost native speed. So yes, I welcome CrossOver/WINE on OS X and think it's a good thing.
I think AutoCAD was brought up as an example, however; something you *do* have to use much if you use it professionally, and something where you *won't* have an alternative. Ergo, you will suffer.
Anyways, we're getting way off track here.
I certainly welcome, without a doubt, Darwine becoming mature and usable.
Someone who needs AutoCad is someone who is doing the kind of work that they shouldn't be doing on a Mac. If they want to work on a Mac then they should be doing something that makes sense for them to buy a Mac for.
There are other CAD programs that are equal to AutoCad. I use them myself. But IF they NEED AutoCad...
Someone who needs AutoCad is someone who is doing the kind of work that they shouldn't be doing on a Mac. If they want to work on a Mac then they should be doing something that makes sense for them to buy a Mac for.
What if they want the excellence of Mac OS X but still need to use AutoCAD for work reasons? Dual-boot is (well, will be) an option, sure. But why not use WINE?
Sure. People who own Office and Photoshop are going to use WINE to run their production apps on their Macintels...
NOT!
If you want that kind of frustration, why are you using a Mac to begin with?
I'll echo everything Gene said, plus Chuckler's comments about masochists using desktop Linux. Masochists, and people who like to hack for their own enjoyment. You can pretty much say the same for WINE users (not quite sure which one I am).
The only reasons I got involved with WINE were:
a) It's an interesting project.
b) I'd like to play Windows games in WINE. This objective is achievable, although I don't see myself working on it much until I get a Macintel. I started working on OpenGL and D3D support, but I got distracted. Ultimately I would also like to add HID support (to whatever the Win32 equivalent is, which I think is Direct Input or something).
c) Perhaps SCSI/SAM support could be added so I could run Alcohol 120%. Not a high priority.
d) VfW codec support for MPlayer. May not even require WINE actually.
But lets not fool ourselves that WINE can be used by non-machochist/hackers, or that this solution should ever be pursued. I can provide many reasons why it should not.
The surreal? This was the point to the thread in the beginning. Windows people moving to the Mac.
You say NOT as though you know all of these people.
I recommend that you get to some other sites and read the threads about this issue over there. Try ArsTechnica and Anand, for a start.
What I've been saying is from what PC people over at these, and other sites, are saying about a switch.
Many, if not most, are looking at TRYING a Mac. Not moving to one. Just Trying one.
They are interested because they might be able to dual boot, or run WINE or Crossover.
You dismiss this as though it doesn't exist. Maybe you just don't know that it does.
I've had friends who, for years, kidded me (sometimes, not such kidding) about owning a Mac. Now several are satisfied that THEY might get one, if they can dual boot or run WINE or Crossover.
Don't be so smug about OS X. We think it's better, some of them even think it's better. But they are NOT ready to leave Windows.
They want a taste of the Mac, they don't want a seven course meal.
You obviously don't know anything about Crossover, as you refuse to even discuss it. WINE is a pain. Installing it is a pain. Installing programs to run under it is a pain. But Crossover is not. It is very easy. Anyone can do it. Installing programs under it is also very easy.
Apparently few bothered to go to the link I provided earlier.
What if they want the excellence of Mac OS X but still need to use AutoCAD for work reasons? Dual-boot is (well, will be) an option, sure. But why not use WINE?
Truthfully, I'm not much of a Linux user. I don't know if AutoCad runs under WINE or Crossover.
But I've been told that whatever programs run under them in Linux should run under them (when they are going) in OS X.
Comments
Originally posted by Chucker
When you need to run a program, that's presumably the case because you don't have alternatives. In that case, you will care and agonize even more about bad UI, since you will have to deal with it.
You can care all you want - but if you don't have alternatives, you're stuck with it. You may not like AutoCad's interface, but your work requires it, so you'll have to use it anyway.
That's what WINE is for. To use the odd program that doesn't run on your platform of choice. Whining about 'bad' Windows UI is just childish. VirtualPC doesn't provide Mac-like UI either, but a lot of people use it.
You can care all you want - but if you don't have alternatives, you're stuck with it. You may not like AutoCad's interface, but your work requires it, so you'll have to use it anyway.[/URL]
I realize that. That doesn't change the fact that people are hating that situation.
That's what WINE is for. To use the odd program that doesn't run on your platform of choice. Whining about 'bad' Windows UI is just childish. VirtualPC doesn't provide Mac-like UI either, but a lot of people use it.
And I doubt there's anyone who *likes* relying on Wine. (Then again, when you use Linux on a desktop, you usually have slightly masochistic tendencies anyway.)
Originally posted by melgross
You've missed a lot of development, that's for sure. Many major apps do run under WINE and Crossover. Office being one of the most important. Photoshop is one that runs that is also of interest here.
Could very well be the case. In a sense though that is part of the point, once a platform supports alternative applications (to replace MS ones) things like WINE end up of little use. The less mainstream applications end up being needed on the machine, yet due to being less mainstream actual support under WINE is often an unknown.
Back to the Apple hardware the problem thus becomes an issue on how are vertical or special putpose applications supported on OS/X. If emulation is an unknown then alternatve technologies become more important.
Crossover and Darwine will simply give more alternatives to the Mac user. Some alternatives will be better than others for some people. The fact that they will be available at all is important.
This is very true. Just because an alternative exists though does not mean that it will become a well accepted solution. Back to the Linux example, native applications are where the focus is. I just don't see WINE as being a big draw, that is something that pull people in and makes them feel warm and fuzzy about Linux. For OS/X I see much the same sort of attitude developing - that is I don't see something like WINE being on a check list that has to be there for purchase apporval.
In fact I see just the opposite happening in the OS/X world where if the only way to deliver a solution is to use something like WINE it will end up being seen as a purchase negative.
.net hasn't done nearly as well as MS has hoped. It isn't ubiquitous. Java has more development at this time.
.NET is an interesting beast, it certainly has its good points. The big issue with .NET is that it is not wide spread the way SUN made Java available. That doesn't mean that it won't get there just that it doesn't have the mother corporation building and distributing software for every platform on earth.
Instead with .NET we have implementers working on different platforms. Mono from NOVELL beign the one big example. Since that is effort is only a few months away from being finished it will provide a platform that is independent yet compatible with MS offerings. Once we see alternative implementations available we will be able to determine if .NET will be successful. I see open minded developers realizing that there is much in the way of positive ideas with .NET that does make it a nice cross platform way of doing things.
It is interesting that many of the places that haven't adopted .NET these days, haven't adopted JAVA either. I'm not convinced that .NETs slow accptance has anything at all to do with JAVA's small corner of the market. Both platforms seem to have small vocal mind shares yet main stream reluctance towards adoption. One neat thing with Java though is the GCC seris of tools and gjc. Being able to get rid of the JAVA VM if you want to is a very intresting twist to the JAVA story .
Dave
Originally posted by Chucker
And I doubt there's anyone who *likes* relying on Wine. (Then again, when you use Linux on a desktop, you usually have slightly masochistic tendencies anyway.)
'Relying on WINE' - wtf? WINE is a stop-gap measure; it's not supposed to be your full-time working environment. For graphic work, you have GIMP. For Office work, you have OpenOffice.org. WINE is there to accomodate those that have special needs, not people that need to browse and type a 300 word school paper.
GIMP and OOo are sufficient for that. And if you're a serious Photoshop guy you either buy an x86 PC and install XP, or you buy a Mac. It's as simple as that. But some people use WINE to play games as well, and it works quite good. A lot of games work under Linux, but some don't, so WINE comes to rescue. And it works. Just fine.
And before making out of line comments about Linux and people using it, consider that you boast a signature that contains two apps that are open-source and have a great following in Linux: AdiumX (built on top of libgaim, the core of GAIM) and Mozilla/Firefox.
Originally posted by strobe
Yea, because Office and Photoshop aren't available on Mac OS X
That's not the point.
People moving over from Windows might have these programs already.Get it?
Originally posted by Gene Clean
'Relying on WINE' - wtf? WINE is a stop-gap measure; it's not supposed to be your full-time working environment.
I never claimed otherwise.
For graphic work, you have GIMP.
For some playing around, yes. For work? No.
For Office work, you have OpenOffice.org. WINE is there to accomodate those that have special needs, not people that need to browse and type a 300 word school paper.
I never claimed otherwise.
Originally posted by melgross
That's not the point.
People moving over from Windows might have these programs already.Get it?
Originally posted by Chucker
When you need to run a program, that's presumably the case because you don't have alternatives. In that case, you will care and agonize even more about bad UI, since you will have to deal with it.
I'm not sure if that's true. Windows isn't like Linux, it's pretty similar to OS X. If we have to occasionally run a program under it or Crossover, we don't have to bite our knuckles. As long as I'm not stuck in that enviornment all of the time (or a lot of the time), I'm fine.
What I mean is that there's no point in letting something you don't like get under your skin if you don't have to use it much.
If you hate it, you can always buy the Mac version, or find a Mac program that will subsitute. Most people won't have a problem either way.
And as most people who will run Windows or Crossover on their new Mac will be coming from the Windows world anyway, it shouldn't bother them that much.
Originally posted by Chucker
[B]I never claimed otherwise.
So WINE's reliability is not an issue then.
For some playing around, yes. For work? No.
GIMP has some really powerful underlying technologies. It's very advanceg under the hood. Its problems stem from not enough focus on UI and workflow. That's beeing addressed now.
GIMP is very useful. It's certainly not a Photoshop killer, but it doesn't need to be one either. It's not just for play. It's for real, actual work. I know this. I work with it.
I never claimed otherwise.
Then it's settled.
Originally posted by melgross
That's not the point.
People moving over from Windows might have these programs already.Get it?
This conversation has entered the surreal.
Sure. People who own Office and Photoshop are going to use WINE to run their production apps on their Macintels...
NOT!
If you want that kind of frustration, why are you using a Mac to begin with?
I'll echo everything Gene said, plus Chuckler's comments about masochists using desktop Linux. Masochists, and people who like to hack for their own enjoyment. You can pretty much say the same for WINE users (not quite sure which one I am).
The only reasons I got involved with WINE were:
a) It's an interesting project.
b) I'd like to play Windows games in WINE. This objective is achievable, although I don't see myself working on it much until I get a Macintel. I started working on OpenGL and D3D support, but I got distracted. Ultimately I would also like to add HID support (to whatever the Win32 equivalent is, which I think is Direct Input or something).
c) Perhaps SCSI/SAM support could be added so I could run Alcohol 120%. Not a high priority.
d) VfW codec support for MPlayer. May not even require WINE actually.
But lets not fool ourselves that WINE can be used by non-machochist/hackers, or that this solution should ever be pursued. I can provide many reasons why it should not.
Originally posted by melgross
Windows isn't like Linux, it's pretty similar to OS X.
Groan...
Originally posted by Chucker
I never claimed otherwise.
For some playing around, yes. For work? No.
I never claimed otherwise.
And I'm saying the same thing about WINE or Crossover. Some people will find them useful. I neither expect nor hope that a LOT of people will want to use them.
I'm a firm believer, and have been criticized here over it, that Windows, Linux, WINE, and Crossover, pose a danger to the Mac OS.
Hopefully, they will allow people who have wanted to get a Mac an excuse to do so. Also, hopefully, after having used the Mac, and its programs, they will want to discard their PC versions.
The danger is that they won't, thus not buying Mac apps.
But I'm optimistic.
Originally posted by melgross
What I mean is that there's no point in letting something you don't like get under your skin if you don't have to use it much.
I think AutoCAD was brought up as an example, however; something you *do* have to use much if you use it professionally, and something where you *won't* have an alternative. Ergo, you will suffer.
Anyways, we're getting way off track here.
I certainly welcome, without a doubt, Darwine becoming mature and usable.
It lets you install and run many important apps that are either Windows only, or you need to test your files on to ensure compatibility. You can install IE 6 on Linux (and as a proxy, when it's released, on OS X) to test your site with IE6. You can install Word:Windows to test your document for compatibility. You can probably install AutoCad and software that's not present in the Mac and you can do so comfortably and for a small price.
You don't need to run an emulator such as VirtualPC and see it eating your CPU cycles and your RAM, you don't need a copy of Windows (apps install in a virtual Windows folder structure created by WINE), and you don't need to suffer performance-wise because you need a Windows-only app. They run at almost native speed. So yes, I welcome CrossOver/WINE on OS X and think it's a good thing.
Originally posted by Chucker
I think AutoCAD was brought up as an example, however; something you *do* have to use much if you use it professionally, and something where you *won't* have an alternative. Ergo, you will suffer.
Anyways, we're getting way off track here.
I certainly welcome, without a doubt, Darwine becoming mature and usable.
Someone who needs AutoCad is someone who is doing the kind of work that they shouldn't be doing on a Mac. If they want to work on a Mac then they should be doing something that makes sense for them to buy a Mac for.
There are other CAD programs that are equal to AutoCad. I use them myself. But IF they NEED AutoCad...
Originally posted by melgross
Someone who needs AutoCad is someone who is doing the kind of work that they shouldn't be doing on a Mac. If they want to work on a Mac then they should be doing something that makes sense for them to buy a Mac for.
What if they want the excellence of Mac OS X but still need to use AutoCAD for work reasons? Dual-boot is (well, will be) an option, sure. But why not use WINE?
Originally posted by strobe
This conversation has entered the surreal.
Sure. People who own Office and Photoshop are going to use WINE to run their production apps on their Macintels...
NOT!
If you want that kind of frustration, why are you using a Mac to begin with?
I'll echo everything Gene said, plus Chuckler's comments about masochists using desktop Linux. Masochists, and people who like to hack for their own enjoyment. You can pretty much say the same for WINE users (not quite sure which one I am).
The only reasons I got involved with WINE were:
a) It's an interesting project.
b) I'd like to play Windows games in WINE. This objective is achievable, although I don't see myself working on it much until I get a Macintel. I started working on OpenGL and D3D support, but I got distracted. Ultimately I would also like to add HID support (to whatever the Win32 equivalent is, which I think is Direct Input or something).
c) Perhaps SCSI/SAM support could be added so I could run Alcohol 120%. Not a high priority.
d) VfW codec support for MPlayer. May not even require WINE actually.
But lets not fool ourselves that WINE can be used by non-machochist/hackers, or that this solution should ever be pursued. I can provide many reasons why it should not.
The surreal? This was the point to the thread in the beginning. Windows people moving to the Mac.
You say NOT as though you know all of these people.
I recommend that you get to some other sites and read the threads about this issue over there. Try ArsTechnica and Anand, for a start.
What I've been saying is from what PC people over at these, and other sites, are saying about a switch.
Many, if not most, are looking at TRYING a Mac. Not moving to one. Just Trying one.
They are interested because they might be able to dual boot, or run WINE or Crossover.
You dismiss this as though it doesn't exist. Maybe you just don't know that it does.
I've had friends who, for years, kidded me (sometimes, not such kidding) about owning a Mac. Now several are satisfied that THEY might get one, if they can dual boot or run WINE or Crossover.
Don't be so smug about OS X. We think it's better, some of them even think it's better. But they are NOT ready to leave Windows.
They want a taste of the Mac, they don't want a seven course meal.
You obviously don't know anything about Crossover, as you refuse to even discuss it. WINE is a pain. Installing it is a pain. Installing programs to run under it is a pain. But Crossover is not. It is very easy. Anyone can do it. Installing programs under it is also very easy.
Apparently few bothered to go to the link I provided earlier.
Originally posted by Chucker
What if they want the excellence of Mac OS X but still need to use AutoCAD for work reasons? Dual-boot is (well, will be) an option, sure. But why not use WINE?
Truthfully, I'm not much of a Linux user. I don't know if AutoCad runs under WINE or Crossover.
But I've been told that whatever programs run under them in Linux should run under them (when they are going) in OS X.
If you direct people to use WINE you're just going to frustrate them.
Originally posted by melgross
Truthfully, I'm not much of a Linux user. I don't know if AutoCad runs under WINE or Crossover.
Then how do you know installing, running, an using WINE is a pain?