Wine intergration

[Norm 2782]

Wine is stabalizing for 0.9 beta as we speak. There may be a chance that 1.0 will be released within the Dapper timeframe. It might be cool to intergrate Wine, so people can run MS Office or stuff like Photoshop. This will make the transition for new users much easier and attractive.

[idn]

Hmmm, maybe this is more for business, most home users have good open source alternatives available to them

open office
evince
gaim
rhythmbox
epiphany

just some of the apps I prefer to their propietry counterparts

[andrego]

It's helpful for home users too. Wine has lately become pretty compatible with DirectX9, and hence is capable of running many games. And, lets face it...games are a HUGE part of computing for many home users out there.

There are many companies out there (Electronics Boutique, for example) that sell nothing but console and computer games. Transgaming is a company that lets users run win32 games on Linux. Clearly, there is demand - it's usually the #1 question I get from friends who have considered switching..."Does Linux run (game x)?" Not to mention, programs which have no (usable/user friendly) linux equal like DVD Shrink, for example.

[Ryujin]

I agree, implimenting Wine would be very beneficial for gaming and the like, but on the same token most of what linux is about is lost if someone loads it up with propritary software. Any way about it a Wine integation is good, (though I don't think it should be presented as a first line of defense for new users)

[poofyhairguy]

Wine is stabalizing for 0.9 beta as we speak. There may be a chance that 1.0 will be released within the Dapper timeframe. It might be cool to intergrate Wine, so people can run MS Office or stuff like Photoshop. This will make the transition for new users much easier and attractive.

The biggest problem is that WINE is far from being "ready." It can't run many popular programs and no games without paying for cedega.

Its almost worse for this to be there and Ubuntu to be considered "Windows compatible" when really WINE is years away from that feat. Most programs require some WINE hacking to work tolerably, the average user won't put up with it.

[jsimmons]

At the same time, it removes just one more barrier for me to move completely to Linux. I'm a Windows programmer (Visual Studio 6) by day, and a sim-racer by night. My development IDE runs fine under Wine (not to mention the apps that I write), which means I only have to boot into Windows for my games. I sorely wish I could play my games under Wine, but I can't.

One last point - why is Wine regarded any different than any other "not ready" Linux app that gets included in distros? I can understand waiting for version 1.0, but that's the only aspect that presents a nearly viable argument against including it and integrating it with a distro.

[MadMan2k]

if you want to run windows apps, run windows - that easy it is.
WINE is making the situation just worse - programmers, might not regard a native linux port necessary, if everything works fine with WINE.

But exactly that native support is necessary to be a real alternative to Windows.

[MadMan2k]

I'm a Windows programmer (Visual Studio 6) by day, and a sim-racer by night. My development IDE runs fine under Wine (not to mention the apps that I write), which means I only have to boot into Windows for my games. I sorely wish I could play my games under Wine, but I can't.
If you are writing for Windows, WINE is not a real alternative since it is not the native envoirment the program has to run in.

If you are coding just for fun - consider writing for linux and contributing to it this way - there are enough free and mature IDEs out there.
Eclipse is the one I would suggest...

[BoyOfDestiny]

if you want to run windows apps, run windows - that easy it is.
WINE is making the situation just worse - programmers, might not regard a native linux port necessary, if everything works fine with WINE.

But exactly that native support is necessary to be a real alternative to Windows.

Let's not steer off course. There are some programs that will never be ported (especially if the company is gone!). As for running a program made for one OS on another, is nothing out of the oridinary I hope.

Anyway I think the top poster's suggestion is a good idea, but I think we'd need to provide a whitelist of applications that work and have been fully tested in dapper with wine. If this list is too big, at least for the ones I hear people whine (pun intended) about:

Adobe Photoshop
MS Office
Visual Studio
etc.

I know there are open alternatives, and I do use them. Some people however don't want to or can't.

[m87]

wine is nice software, the effort was tough.

but it has to be an option because most programs have open alternatives and you should use them unless you HAVE to treat with them in depth (encoding?)

e.g.: you may need some program to IMPORT .doc files (sometimes i do) but then i save them in .abw format or maybe pdf. when i encode audio tracks from cd's i use ogg but i MAY have some mp3's, given or stuff.

in my opinion wine HAS to be kept as an option.

I know there are open alternatives, and I do use them. Some people however don't want to or can't.

i use the nvidia 3d drivers and i don't want them to be included in the kernel tree, so no-one should whine about openoffice/gimp because they're not msoffice/photoshop... in my opinion of course.

[poofyhairguy]

One last point - why is Wine regarded any different than any other "not ready" Linux app that gets included in distros? I can understand waiting for version 1.0, but that's the only aspect that presents a nearly viable argument against including it and integrating it with a distro.

Because WINE brings more with it than just a Windows wrapper, it brings expectations. You ship a Linux with Wine adverstised as a feature, people are going to expect that Windows software works. When they find out the truth- at the current point most things only work with WINE if you will hack obscure things and most programs that do run do so poorly- it damages the image of the distro.

When I first migrated to Linux, I thought "why don't the distros make a bigger deal about WINE?" Its because its a dead end kind of. Its not the way to help mirgration. Maybe a pay for Wine (crossover) can work to get the most important things to be comaptible, but WINE is jsut not there. Most programs won't work. It would take WINE years to develop to the point thats its an out of the box solution. Years.

When its other software that isn't ready, there is no expectations. Maybe a few people expect Openoffice to live up to Office 2003, but most people just want something that is good enough. If a project is not good enough than another one can be plugged it (I went through 10 music players in Linux till I found one that I considered to be decent enough to use). There is only one WINE, and it is not a long term solution. Using Linux programs is the long term solution. If you need a band aid to help you migrate, thats what Crossover office is all about. WINE is pretty hard to use, and is so hit or miss that it creates more problems than its worth.

[xequence]

This would be a good idea but I really havnt gotten many things working in wine. It is good, with GREAT potential, but not really ready.

Now on the other hand, I LOVE cedega ;) I wrote about it in my blog in my signature.

[dolson]

Argh. If you want Windows, use Windows. If you want Photoshop, use Windows. If you want Microsoft Anything, use Windows. That's what it was designed to run on, and it will run best there.

Let people install Wine separately if they want it. Making it a part of ubuntu-desktop and therefore the default in Ubuntu will just annoy a lot of people. I'd probably switch back to Debian if this happens.

Wine is counter-productive. Hell, I've seen people running games that had native ports in WineX/Cedega(ooo, we changed the name, now you can forget we ripped off Wine!) because they didn't bother even getting informed about what little actually was available for Linux, and/or they didn't want to buy the Linux version, and/or they warezed the Windows version.

Now on the other hand, I LOVE cedega ;) I wrote about it in my blog in my signature.
It is not apparent from your blog entry that you are not one of the people that I just wrote about... You do realize that every UT game was released natively, right?

Anyhow, if someone wants to screw around with Wine and configuring it, then they should at least know enough to know how to install it. That is not too much to ask. Putting my hatred aside for a minute, it really does not run very much well enough to be worthy of becoming a default part of Ubuntu.

[Sector]

I, personally, feel that WINE is a wonderful project and more good coders should be working on it, although most people that live by the linux FOSS philosophy will disagree.

It would be really wonderful if I atleast had the OPTION to play my Windows games on Linux, I would've switched completely already! That doesn't mean I would actually play the games, but having options rocks. Then you people will probably bring WineX/Cedega to my attention, but I don't wanna pay because:

1) They stole the WINE codebase and attempted to make money of it, they don't deserve the money.
2) I still can't pay with a credit card because I'm not 18 yet.

There is still the issue that lots of 3D-cards have rather bad support under linux, which will cause emulation to look even slower, but that's an other problem altogether.

Let the flaming begin.

[Norm 2782]

1) They stole the WINE codebase and attempted to make money of it, they don't deserve the money.


Actually, Codeweavers (CrossoverOffice) hosts the Wine project and helps developing a great deal of Wine. The thing you're paying for is an optimized Wine that's specialized in office applications and such ;)

But back on topic. The only reason for my dad to not choose Linux is because he is dependand on RoboHelp X5, which will never ever be native Linux. This is just an example, but there are countless more of these situations. Offcourse the better solution over Wine would be Crossover Office in this case, but I can imagine that not everyone's willing to pay for that. If Wine would be in the supported repos, but not installed by default (this is a bit like the way Samba is available I think... correct me if I'm wrong), it would be a nice chance for people to try Linux while running their applications.

Taken from the latest Wine newsletteer :
"The beta release will still have boatloads of bugs, but the significance will be the core architecture is complete and configuration works out of the box."

I found the part about the configuration quite interesting. I can remember digging in configuration files to get Wine working. That boatloads of bugs will be squashed before 1.0 I guess... this would make Wine a great optional product, again.. a bit like Samba.

[imagine]

I'm not familiar with the Wine development, but in many cases a software stays ages at version 0.9, 0.99, 0.99.1 beta, 0.99.2 beta, etc. So I seriously doubt version 1.0 will be released until February.

And concerning the "readiness" of Wine: I tried once to run mIRC under Wine. Although this was one or two years ago, mIRC was already reported "100% compatible" at this point. mIRC worked, but it looked terrible, I couldn't use some dialogs properly and when dragging around stuff it crashed. THe same is true for many games: Often they run, but then the sound isn't working or isn't synchronous with the pictures, the fonts are borked and so on. Of course you can sometimes fix this by configuring different textfiles, but this isn't what I expect from a "ready application".

And to take mIRC as another example (http://www.mirc.co.uk/help/linux.html): Wine just gives some developers an excuse not to port their software to Linux, because it runs with Wine... somehow and if you fiddle enough with the config-files.


Offtopic:
MadMan2k from 3DCenter?

[Teroedni]

Wine would be ok as an option in ubuntu repo , but not integrated in the standard.

It should be a choice for you wheter you want wine or not.
Many people dont need wine and shouldnt be forced to have it installed as standard.

[macewan]

Being able to run Google Earth via Wine would be nice.

[lithorus]

Being able to run Google Earth via Wine would be nice.
No, Google Earth released for linux would be MUCH better. Instead of focussing on how to get X app to work in linux, people should start asking for cross-platform support of the app. It's really not that hard to do.

[tommie-lie]

Even though I am not a very active poster in this board, I feel like having to say something about that.
I need Wine to run some very specialised programs that don't have a Linux counterpart that is as powerful as the programs I use (or simply have no counterpart, as is the case with Römpp's chemical encyclopedia). Wine is also nice to play some Windows games that I liked very much.
Anyway, I don't want to see Wine in the standard repositories of Ubuntu for more than one reason.
The first was introduced by Ryujin (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=409355&postcount=4): A significant part of Linux, and espacially Ubuntu, would be lost if people start using Windows applications where they could use Linux applications, just because they are too lazy to learn a new software. This is one of the things I will never understand. Why do people replace their entire Windows environment (for which they paid) with Linux and say "Linux is waaay better than Windows, because it does not crash", just to run Windows applications under Linux, while the applications are the part that cause the crash in 99.99999% of the cases? If they depend some specific Windows applications, like I do, they can use Wine, but if it is included in Ubuntu, the temptation to use Wine for every application that I was used to use on Windows is much stronger. Except for the very specific (scientific) applications, I found a free, native Linux alternative for virtually everything.
Another reason is, that the release cycle of Wine was about a month in the past. Before I was aware of the official Wine repository, I used Debian's packages, which were heavily outdated. I hope the release cycle will not slow down, once the Wine guys reached 0.9 or 1.0, respectively, because they still have a long way ahead of them. I noticed that "games" is a very frequently used argument in this thread. Wine does not support that much games if you look close at it. The support for copy protection systems is poor, DirectX 8 and 9 capabilities likewise. I did not even got Blobby Volley to work properly, and I would not call me a total noob concerning wine. To play even older games with copy protection, you need to apply No-CD-patches that are illegal in some parts of the world (at least in Germany). I don't think that this is the kind of freedom Ubuntu should support.
Then, Wine is not usable in the sense that everybody can use it. If an applications works out of the box (which happened rarely for me, but as I said, I use very specific applications), okay. But what if an applications fails to work with the standard config? The search for the correct library or window setting is nothing that can be called easy.
you may need some program to IMPORT .doc files (sometimes i do) but then i save them in .abw format or maybe pdf. when i encode audio tracks from cd's i use ogg but i MAY have some mp3's, given or stuff.Yepp, but who prevents you to do so? To create MP3 files, you can use LAME, free software. To save a file as .doc, you can use OpenOffice.org. Sure, OO.o's export filter for MS Office is not perfect, but if you don't use fancy layouts, it is usable.

I think it is more than enough if the Wine "repository" (wine.sf.net/apt/) would be added to the default sources.list. This would ensure that the users always have the newest version, if they want to, but would not cause more work for Ubuntu's package maintainers. To include Wine in the official Ubuntu repository is not sensible at all to me, not to mention to include Wine in ubuntu-base/-desktop.

[m87]

Yepp, but who prevents you to do so? To create MP3 files, you can use LAME, free software. To save a file as .doc, you can use OpenOffice.org. Sure, OO.o's export filter for MS Office is not perfect, but if you don't use fancy layouts, it is usable.

my brain. .doc sucks and microsoft f* knows that. they're switching to opendocument, wonder why?

no one with a working brain should accept/use .doc formats. i can export in pdf, if you want to edit my document, download my word processor. it's free and TRULY cross platform.

Actually, Codeweavers (CrossoverOffice) hosts the Wine project and helps developing a great deal of Wine. The thing you're paying for is an optimized Wine that's specialized in office applications and such

that's not the point. if wine had been released under GPL it would have been a violation, high contribution or not. wine is released under the LGPL.

anyway. why instead of asking for wine don't you look for NATIVE versions? and of course the thingy *I can't give up windows because* is ultra-hyper-exxxxtra-old, according to my ears. crossover office license doesn't cost ANYTHING, compared to the mswindows one, then if you CAN'T give up windows, you have THAT alternative. but if you keep whining, why give up windows? :)

[stoffe]

my brain. .doc sucks and microsoft f* knows that. they're switching to opendocument, wonder why?

They most definitely aren't. They have their own XML format on the way and they do not want to support Opendoc. This was one of the things constantly reiterated under the recent Massachusetts debacle. They also (officially at least) think it is a limited format with lots of features missing - of course, this is stuff like video in text documents. :rolleyes:

no one with a working brain should accept/use .doc formats. i can export in pdf, if you want to edit my document, download my word processor. it's free and TRULY cross platform.
For a lot of people it's a lot easier to use the well-working program that is already installed on their computer rather than make a big download. Cross-wha? You have to realize that just because people use .doc this doesn't mean they have a fault in their brain. They just want to get their job done.

Of course I want people to switch too, but that attitude isn't helping one bit. And I also want to get my job done, so I frequently use .doc. In OpenOffice, on Ubuntu, but still.

anyway. why instead of asking for wine don't you look for NATIVE versions? and of course the thingy *I can't give up windows because* is ultra-hyper-exxxxtra-old, according to my ears. crossover office license doesn't cost ANYTHING, compared to the mswindows one, then if you CAN'T give up windows, you have THAT alternative. but if you keep whining, why give up windows? :)

Again with the attitude. Some things still needs Windows. Not any that I personally use daily, but that's mainly because I'm currently mostly doing administration, teaching and planning. I use Openoffice and Gmail to get almost all my stuff done. There's plenty of people who need more though, like all the students and teachers that I have here at my school. Believe me, if there was a way that they could use Linux instead, I'd jump right at it. But there just isn't. Not even with Crossover Office, although I think they will get there.

So I work on Ubuntu, they on Windows. They do, however work in OOo, Firefix and Thunderbird, to mention a few examples. They view video in VLC and they use TortoiseSVN for storing their projects. Many of their tools are free, and the same as they would be on another platform. But some are still irreplacable.

If you really want people to use Linux, help Linux get there instead of spending your time saying things that aren't true.

[tommie-lie]

my brain. .doc sucksThen I must have misunderstood your post...

For a lot of people it's a lot easier to use the well-working program that is already installed on their computer rather than make a big download.MS Office was not automatically installed when I last setup a Windows machine. To create a .doc, I need to go to a software store, buy a license of MS Office, and install it. To use OpenOffice.org, I simply download it and install it, without even leaving my home (and internet is one of the things that work out of the box with Windows, even if the rest of the system is completely useless after the installation). If a company wants to migrate to Ubuntu, or any other Linux distribution, they can as well migrate to OpenOffice. The employees have to be trained anyway, as the whole system differs too much from Windows (ranging from a different rights management to other possibilities to customize the user interface), and the difference between OpenOffice and MS Office is not that big.

[m87]

They most definitely aren't. They have their own XML format on the way and they do not want to support Opendoc. This was one of the things constantly reiterated under the recent Massachusetts debacle. They also (officially at least) think it is a limited format with lots of features missing - of course, this is stuff like video in text documents. :rolleyes:

microsoft had a BAD reaction about OASIS rejecting their XML document format, and even if they are not officially switching [maybe because no new msoffice versions have been realised?] there were a lot of thoughts of doing it, as some *not so random* guy at microsoft has told once or twice that the opendocument format should have been adopted. if you want some links i'll show you some.

For a lot of people it's a lot easier to use the well-working program that is already installed on their computer rather than make a big download. Cross-wha? You have to realize that just because people use .doc this doesn't mean they have a fault in their brain. They just want to get their job done.

Of course I want people to switch too, but that attitude isn't helping one bit. And I also want to get my job done, so I frequently use .doc. In OpenOffice, on Ubuntu, but still.

which is not only not rejecting anything I said, but you aren't replying to anything :)

Again with the attitude. Some things still needs Windows. Not any that I personally use daily, but that's mainly because I'm currently mostly doing administration, teaching and planning. I use Openoffice and Gmail to get almost all my stuff done.

who cares? i don't need windows and some people don't but they don't know they don't because they DON'T KNOW the alternatives because people keep suggesting wine and such. i've got a friend which uses photoshop because he doesn't like gimp. who cares? :)

it's not a shame to use windows, if you CAN'T give up, smartass speeches explaining TONS of reasons are not useful for the OSS community, in my opinion... anyway, we're QUITE off topic now.

[andrego]

We could all sit here debating the morals/principles/ideals of WINE, but again..."if you build it, they will come".

Example: Joe is an architect. He uses AutoCAD to draw his plans. And, of course he does - there is nothing else comparible in the opensource world. It's the industry standard. Everyone uses it (at least where he lives/works), and he needs it to be compatible with his peers.

So the solution isn't as easy as "use a native linux version", because quite frankly, this magical "Linux native version" isn't always there. Why? Because not many people that use AutoCAD use Linux. And why don't they? Because they can't (at least not easily, and not without wine). So why doesn't autodesk just port AutoCAD to linux? Because "nobody uses it (linux)" (at least in their eyes - they care about customers, not geeks like me and you ;). Now you see, it's a catch 22.

Now, envision a situation in which draftsmen/architects could use this program under Linux, using WINE. They'd enjoy the same program, with familiar win32-like widgets and all. And, as an added benifit, they wouldn't have to worry about all those little spyware/malware/viri/etc you deal with in Windows (or, insert any other benifit of using Linux here).

If people liked Linux, and could run the program they needed, maybe they'd run Linux full-time, and ditch Windows (not that there's anything particulary wrong with windows...but, isn't Linux all about freedom...like freedowm of choice?). And, then those people might start asking AutoDESK - hey, I run Linux, where's the Linux version of AutoCAD?

And THAT, is where Linux native ports come from. People who are running linux now, and will buy the Linux native port of the next version of your software. Not people who "might use linux, maybe, and will possibly consider running that port for Linux after you spend millions making it. maybe, because I havn't really tried linux before but my friend says its 1337"

[dolson]

We could all sit here debating the morals/principles/ideals of WINE, but again..."if you build it, they will come".

Why aren't people using Corel Linux? It has Wine built in. And it was, dare I say, slicker than Ubuntu (and came well before it).

Oh wait, Corel ditched Linux. Right.

Well then, why aren't people using Xandros? It has Wine integration. Or how about ELX? Or ________ (insert other distro who already did this and failed)?

AutoCAD is a lame example. No real corporation would resort to running something as mission-critical to their business on a Windows "compatability layer." Wine is way too unstable for them to even consider, and if you don't think so, then maybe you should actually TRY it. And Autodesk won't listen to a couple of home users who copied AutoCAD from work and cracked it. It takes real demand, and that won't happen until corporations switch and demand it.

And really, what percentage of Ubuntu users do you reckon are architects and are just waiting with baited breath for that Linux version to come down the pipe?

The solution is not in Wine, and no one has presented any reasonable argument as to why it SHOULD be forced on all current Ubuntu users as a default part of the install (and removing it forces us to remove ubuntu-desktop...). No one can debate that it is not so hard to install it. A good compromise would be to have it listed in that Windows-esque Add Applications dialog. If a Linux user can't even figure out how to install it when it's under the Add Applications dialog, they sure won't figure out how to use Wine - or why 95% of their warez won't work on it.

And for the record, your beloved Wine can't even run Hover, the most basic of games. Pity, that was the one thing I really missed from Windows. Perhaps I should reinstall Windows and ditch Linux now.

[matid]

I don't think including Wine by default is a good idea... However, it'd be nice if after I install cedega, wine, etc., I'll be able to run Windows apps just by clicking the exe file in Nautilus. IMO this kind of integration should be implemented.

[pardasaniman]

It's not that hard.. I believe there used to be a kernel module, (Or some kind of service) that would discover if you ran ./winprogram.exe , and automatically call wine...

BTW, it is worth noting that very few editions of wine are totally usable, if you look at the page for winetools (Awesome tool I might at), it mentions certain wine versions that work well. I never had wine work so well. These days I have IE, MSWordViewer, and WMP kicking around, just so I never have to reboot. I use 'em rarely, (perhaps once every 2 months).

My personal opinion is that wine is awesome for times where I'm writing an OO.org document or programming, and viewing a .doc in MS Word viewer, or needing an IE-only page. When wine works, it works really really well.

[tim1]

I don't think including Wine by default is a good idea... However, it'd be nice if after I install cedega, wine, etc., I'll be able to run Windows apps just by clicking the exe file in Nautilus. IMO this kind of integration should be implemented.

This is already what happens if you have wine installed and click on an .exe

greets, tim

[BoyOfDestiny]

http://www.winehq.org/?issue=295

Seems wine will go beta next week!

Pretty neat I guess, I wonder if they will make configuring it easier...

(Anyone else run winetools, then remove it to install wine?)

I may give lsl7 a try on linux, been a while since I've played it...

[apps4apps]

And THAT, is where Linux native ports come from. People who are running linux now, and will buy the Linux native port of the next version of your software. Not people who "might use linux, maybe, and will possibly consider running that port for Linux after you spend millions making it. maybe, because I havn't really tried linux before but my friend says its 1337"
A very good point that I agree with :) .

I'm not sure I fully understand where the resistance is coming from for adding WINE. I would agree that WINE is not quite ready to run many, many Windows applications and probably shouldn't be added to a default UBUNTU installation. It might tend to give many users certain expectations. Avoiding making it easier for a user to add it in later as an option does not seem right though. There ARE many applications that run very well under WINE and many, many more that will in the future.

Besides... how is WINE going to continue to evolve and work better if Linux users put it down and advise people not to use it. I don't want to stray off topic here but many Linux supporters tend to put M$ down for creating propriatary stuff but then in the same breath say stuff like don't use Windows software. Replace it with Linux software. Who cares if you like the original software you were using. Find an alternative or keep using Windows. ...or demand that the software be released on Linux as well. That doesn't sound like freedom to me. The freedom to run specialized Windows apps on Linux under Wine even if the software wasn't released for Linux by the developer though. Now we're talkin'... :) . If you haven't tried WINE in a while it might be worth giving it a try. It does still have quite a way to go IMO but does keep getting better and better...

[dolson]

A very good point that I agree with :) .

I'm not sure I fully understand where the resistance is coming from for adding WINE. I would agree that WINE is not quite ready to run many, many Windows applications and probably shouldn't be added to a default UBUNTU installation. It might tend to give many users certain expectations. Avoiding making it easier for a user to add it in later as an option does not seem right though. There ARE many applications that run very well under WINE and many, many more that will in the future.

Besides... how is WINE going to continue to evolve and work better if Linux users put it down and advise people not to use it. I don't want to stray off topic here but many Linux supporters tend to put M$ down for creating propriatary stuff but then in the same breath say stuff like don't use Windows software. Replace it with Linux software. Who cares if you like the original software you were using. Find an alternative or keep using Windows. ...or demand that the software be released on Linux as well. That doesn't sound like freedom to me. The freedom to run specialized Windows apps on Linux under Wine even if the software wasn't released for Linux by the developer though. Now we're talkin'... :) . If you haven't tried WINE in a while it might be worth giving it a try. It does still have quite a way to go IMO but does keep getting better and better...

That is not a good argument for having Wine installed as part of ubuntu-desktop. THAT is what this discussion is about, not if Wine is good or if having Wine available is good or whatever. How it is now, anyone can install Wine, and if it doesn't auto-associate with .exe files, then it's only a couple clicks away with Nautilus. There are clearly many people who don't want Wine as default and no good reasons to have it as default, so why should it be? Regardless of what Wine wants you think, it is against the spirit of free software, and certainly doesn't help get native apps ported to Linux. How many companies have you written to yourself, asking for a Linux version? Probably none. I have emailed many, and the ones who don't support Linux occasionally say to use Wine and good luck. What?? Use Wine and good luck? No thanks. Support my OS or I don't support you. I stopped buying Windows applications when I switched full-time to Linux years ago. Buying Windows software only supports Windows, and only hurts Linux. Yes, there are a few utilities that are free that are worth running in Wine because there is no alternative (CxBox and DVD Shrink come to mind), but the true freedom comes when I am able to install my OS, Ubuntu, without being forced to have "Windows compatability" installed, but can freely choose to install it IF I so desire.

[poofyhairguy]

I'm not sure I fully understand where the resistance is coming from for adding WINE.

It creates an expectation of Windows software compatibility that WINE itself cannot hold up to. Its so hit or miss.

[Anthem]

AutoCAD is a lame example. No real corporation would resort to running something as mission-critical to their business on a Windows "compatability layer."

Disney... Photoshop... Bueller...

[apps4apps]

My main point (without getting into the debate of whether WINE is good or bad for Linux) was that it could be made a lot easier to install IF a user decided to install it. Have you tried to add WINE to UBUNTU? It's rather painful compared to installing many other OPTIONAL components... I don't think it should be installed by default either.

[tommie-lie]

Have you tried to add WINE to UBUNTU?Yep, works fine.

It's rather painful compared to installing many other OPTIONAL components...No big difference compared to Marillat's Repository or even backports. Add "deb http://wine.sourceforge.net/apt" to the sources.list, update and install wine.
Everything that comes after the basic installation (i.e. what is done by winetools) can't be done by Ubuntu for legal reasons. IE can only be used by licensees of Windows (98, I think), DCOM98 can only be used by licensees of Windows. As for the different fonts that were recommended in earlier versions of Wine (dont know exactly for the current version), I don't even know if they are legal at all, even if I have a Windows license. Many programs are still unusable without native IE and native DCOM, so what would be the benefit of an integration of Wine into Ubuntu? There would still be the need for a manual preparation to work with Wine in a sensible way.

The only thing that really could be made easier is the editing of sources.list file, but, honestly, there are many howtos out here and scattered over the internet and those who can't put a single line in a file and run two commands (or click 5 buttons in synaptic) definitely will not be able to configure Wine to work with their applications.

[dolson]

My main point (without getting into the debate of whether WINE is good or bad for Linux) was that it could be made a lot easier to install IF a user decided to install it. Have you tried to add WINE to UBUNTU? It's rather painful compared to installing many other OPTIONAL components... I don't think it should be installed by default either.

It isn't that hard... You only need to enable the Universe/Multiverse repositories (can't recall which one it's in, but it's one of the two) in Synaptic and then type in "wine" in the search and install it. It's really no different than installing anything else that isn't in Main. I don't know

But yes, they really should list it in the Add Applications feature that they have (even though half the things I tried installing with it didn't work, claiming I needed "Advanced" mode, forcing me to just use Synaptic anyhow).

I wouldn't be opposed to having Wine installed as default, but ONLY if it's not part of ubuntu-desktop, because then I could uninstall it without losing ubuntu-desktop metapackage. Either way, I think it should not be forced on anyone, and should not be held back from anyone.

But really, after a dozen years of development, I should at least be able to play Hover. That game came on my Windows CD, it should be running smooth as silk by now...

The only thing that really could be made easier is the editing of sources.list file

You could just use Synaptic to do that. Settings > Repositories. But I don't see why you need to edit it anyhow, since Wine is part of Universe/Multiverse. Unless you want the official debs that are updated more than every 6 months, in which case, ok. I just happen to trust what is part of Ubuntu more.

[apps4apps]

It isn't that hard... You only need to enable the Universe/Multiverse repositories (can't recall which one it's in, but it's one of the two) in Synaptic and then type in "wine" in the search and install it. It's really no different than installing anything else that isn't in Main. I don't know
Well yes but that will add to confusion for some (unless I added the wrong ones) as many hits tend to come up that are incompatible with each other. The packages available are usually quite outdated also. Synaptic isn't really organized very well for packages unfortunately. Then configuration... the configuration tools listed usually require installing an even older version than the current one available so a user then has to go manually searching for a newer configuration tool and/or manually set things up or get stuck running a really old version. I guess I was just hoping for more of a "Linux for human beings" type answer ;) .

[poofyhairguy]

Well yes but that will add to confusion for some (unless I added the wrong ones) as many hits tend to come up that are incompatible with each other. The packages available are usually quite outdated also.

So you can't install WINE with synaptic? I never tried. Is it an old version only? Many packages are like that (even a fav of mine- Zsnes) but with WINE sometimes that is a good thing as some programs won't work with newer versions of WINE that work fine with old ones.


Synaptic isn't really organized very well for packages unfortunately.

Thats all it does. I don't get what you mean by this. Please explain.


Then configuration... the configuration tools listed usually require installing an even older version than the current one available so a user then has to go manually searching for a newer configuration tool and/or manually set things up or get stuck running a really old version.

Since most windows apps require a bunch of hacking to work in WINE anyway, this could be seen as easy training for the hard task of hacking WINE to work for you! (I kid, that sort of thing sucks)


I guess I was just hoping for more of a "Linux for human beings" type answer ;) .

I don't know what you mean by that. But it case I infer it correctly, I have said it once and I will say it again: "Ubuntu is for human beings, not Windows refugees."

That distro is called Linspire.

[tommie-lie]

I wouldn't be opposed to having Wine installed as default, but ONLY if it's not part of ubuntu-desktopThe only advantage I see in that is that users without a fast/cheap internet connection don't have to wait for Wine to download if it is on the CD.
As I explained in my previous post, there is nothing that can be done by the package maintainer to take the work of properly setting up Wine from the user.

You could just use Synaptic to do that. Settings > Repositories.sources.list is edited anyway ;-)

But I don't see why you need to edit it anyhow, since Wine is part of Universe/Multiverse. Unless you want the official debs that are updated more than every 6 months, in which case, ok. I just happen to trust what is part of Ubuntu more.Wine is a piece of software where it may be essential to try the latest version, at least if a Windows application fails to run with the release that Ubuntu came with. Wine the only application that I keep up to date, no matter if the previous version worked fine or not. While I used Hoary, I noticed that Wine is not updated frequently (just started with Ubuntu and was not aware of the update policy) and switched to using the official packages from wine.sf.net. For me it's just a kind of habit, but I also recommend to use the official packages if the ones from the distribution are not kept up to date.

Is it an old version only?Not in Breezy. Both, the universe/multiverse version and the official one (available as deb, it's older than the official main release) are 20050725.

Since most windows apps require a bunch of hacking to work in WINE anyway, this could be seen as easy training for the hard task of hacking WINE to work for you! (I kid, that sort of thing sucks)Even if you were just kidding, what you are saying is true. There is no way to get around this bunch of work without waiting for another 10 years when Wine will finally implement things that were introduced in Windows back in the end of the 90s. But then, there will be other things from newer versions of Windows that will be missing. Wine will be always on the hunt and will never catch up completely. If someone wants to use Wine, he better gets comfortable with the thought that he has to do more debugging on the console than actually working with his desired application.

[apps4apps]

So you can't install WINE with synaptic? I never tried. Is it an old version only? Many packages are like that (even a fav of mine- Zsnes) but with WINE sometimes that is a good thing as some programs won't work with newer versions of WINE that work fine with old ones.I think you can but I found it a bit confusing after selecting wine for install then having Synaptic tell me that WINE would need to be deselected to install a configuration utility for it. At that point I started compiling from source (which led to searching for more packages but that's another story...)...

Thats all it does. I don't get what you mean by this. Please explain.Although it can be a real time saver if you know what you're looking for and/or what you're doing, it doesn't seem as organized as it could be. An option to sort by categories instead of just by name would be much better. The names of some packages aren't that great. Maybe I'm just not used to it yet...

I don't know what you mean by that. But it case I infer it correctly, I have said it once and I will say it again: "Ubuntu is for human beings, not Windows refugees."

That distro is called Linspire.I was thinking more along the lines of making things so that they don't require a computer geek to install. Configuration details for specialized use afterwards are expected in some cases but there's really no reason why it can't be as easy as selecting something from a list and clicking install. Something that Grandma could install... ;)

[tommie-lie]

Although it can be a real time saver if you know what you're looking for and/or what you're doing, it doesn't seem as organized as it could be. An option to sort by categories instead of just by name would be much better. There is a button "Sections" (or similar, it's "Sektionen" in German) on the bottom left corner of the Synaptic window. If I click on it, I get a list of categories in the list above.

[apps4apps]

The only advantage I see in that is that users without a fast/cheap internet connection don't have to wait for Wine to download if it is on the CD.
As I explained in my previous post, there is nothing that can be done by the package maintainer to take the work of properly setting up Wine from the user.
I wouldn't agree with that. Most configuration tools for WINE just automate the process of setting things up based on your current configuration and allow options for automating the process of downloading and installing some of the extras that make things run a bit smoother. Here's (http://sidenet.ddo.jp/winetips/config.html) one example. Realisticly, the entire process of checking for a newer version, downloading, extracting, compiling from source, doing some basic configuration, allowing optional components to be downloaded/installed automatically, etc... could be automated. I'm not necessarily saying that it should be automated to that extent but it certainly could be...

Wine is a piece of software where it may be essential to try the latest version, at least if a Windows application fails to run with the release that Ubuntu came with. Wine the only application that I keep up to date, no matter if the previous version worked fine or not. While I used Hoary, I noticed that Wine is not updated frequently (just started with Ubuntu and was not aware of the update policy) and switched to using the official packages from wine.sf.net. For me it's just a kind of habit, but I also recommend to use the official packages if the ones from the distribution are not kept up to date.

Not in Breezy. Both, the universe/multiverse version and the official one (available as deb, it's older than the official main release) are 20050725.
I update as often as possible for many of the same reasons. The latest version according to WineHQ (http://www.winehq.org/site/download) is 20050930

[apps4apps]

There is a button "Sections" (or similar, it's "Sektionen" in German) on the bottom left corner of the Synaptic window. If I click on it, I get a list of categories in the list above.
Wow :shock: . I can't believe I missed that one :oops: . ...now I just need a button to pull my foot out of my mouth with... :lol: . Thanks :) .

[poofyhairguy]

I was thinking more along the lines of making things so that they don't require a computer geek to install. Configuration details for specialized use afterwards are expected in some cases but there's really no reason why it can't be as easy as selecting something from a list and clicking install. Something that Grandma could install... ;)

Ah...but you see..this is a reason not to include WINE. Its almost never easy to install apps with WINE and its not Ubuntu's fault. Its the fact that WINE is hard to use. It is, really.

[dolson]

I don't understand what tool you tried to install in Synaptic that requires uninstalling Wine... Doesn't Wine come with winecfg or wineconf, the tool to configure Wine? I checked the link you posted, but I don't think that I've heard of it before, and it likely is not packaged for Ubuntu, so it wouldn't be the culprit you speak of...

There used to be a config utility I used for Wine, called winesetuptk, but back in July when Wine changed the entire configuration scheme, they broke that utility so it only works with older versions. If this is what you refer to, you have only the Wine developers to blame, and the winesetuptk developers to blame for not fixing their app to work with the new configuration setup. And also, I am surprised that Synaptic knew that it conflicted with the current Wine... Someone out there would be doing their homework. (Maybe someone has fixed it by now... I don't know.)

If that isn't it, then I don't know what it is because you didn't say. ;)

Synaptic is a great tool, and yes, it could be made easier, or have some kind of Tips or Tutorial pop up the first time someone launches it (with a checkbox to disable in the future) so that it gives people a quick howto.

I use Wine for DVD Shrink because they won't port it to Linux due to selling it to Nero, and there are no alternatives that I can find, and believe me, I've looked. Sure, there are utilites to shink the main movie, but I want to copy my entire disc, not just the film.

When the Wine developers made the change in July, my config just *broke* and I couldn't get winesetuptk to work. No warning or anything. After searching on their site, I discovered that I now had to use their stupid config program, and then I finally got DVD Shrink to work again. What a pain in the *** though, to have to reconfigure all my "drives" how I want them just because the Wine devs decided to change something.

In the end, I do consider myself a "Wine user" even though I use it for only two applications (the other being CxBox) and don't agree with its use for major applications (Disney's use of Wine puzzles me, but they did have to do a bunch of development on it in-house to get it to be stable enough to run Photoshop without crashing - and I still think that they SHOULD have put those Wine-hacking resources to better use improving the Gimp to bring it up to par... But they're only in it for themselves).

I'm still voting against making it part of ubuntu-desktop though. I think Wine can never possibly match Windows for compatability, and so it shouldn't be installed to give users, especially newbies to Linux, false hopes.

[tommie-lie]

I wouldn't agree with that. Most configuration tools for WINE just automate the process of setting things up based on your current configuration and allow options for automating the process of downloading and installing some of the extras that make things run a bit smoother.If that's the default behaviour, I don't know how Microsoft's lawyer would react (or will react in the future, when Ubuntu has gained more significance in the market). Both, IE and DCOM may only be used with a proper license of Windows and by automating the process of installing these components, Microsoft could argue that Ubuntu in some way propagates this illegal use of Microsoft's property. Sure, technically, it's possible, but I would not take the risk.

Doesn't Wine come with winecfg or wineconf, the tool to configure Wine?winecfg is something very different from what apps4apps was talking about. winecfg does not install anything, tools like Winetools (this is maybe better known to you than sidenet's) install certain native programs in order to bring native DLLs into the system that are poorly implemented in Wine.

just because the Wine devs decided to change something.Though I don't agree with the idea of a "registry" (especially not in plaintext format, hell, how inefficient), I think it is a rather good idea to send away the old method of configuration and bring up the new one. The new winecfg is more user friendly than the previous config file and once it is more elaborate, it will be a very comfortable way to configure Wine and tune it.
And by the way, winesetuptk only needs to adapt the new configuration scheme. Insted of inserting lines in some bogus config file, it now has to insert similar lines in another plaintext file.

[dolson]

I just had a look at the list of supported programs for Winetools, and I have to ask, why are things like Acrobat Reader, Xpdf, Skype and RealPlayer on there? They're all native already... And why even bother with things like WinRAR and WinZip and 7-Zip and all that crap? File Roller supports almost anything you throw at it, so long as you have the corresponding support installed (rar, arj, etc).

There is a similar list of native Linux games to be found on Transgaming's list of supported games, and it's things like this that boggle my mind.

--

By the way, I just opened up Synaptic, and I did a search for "wine" and the only tools I see are xwine and winesetuptk. I selected xwine with no issues, but winesetuptk indeed DOES ask to remove Wine. Winesetuptk is outdated at this point, see my previous post. If you want them to fix it, write to them, but I think it's not needed at this point given that the Wine developers have their own tool that works ok, once you realize what it is.

[poofyhairguy]

I think Wine can never possibly match Windows for compatability, and so it shouldn't be installed to give users, especially newbies to Linux, false hopes.

Thats what I wanted to say, but I could not find a way!

[apps4apps]

There used to be a config utility I used for Wine, called winesetuptk, but back in July when Wine changed the entire configuration scheme, they broke that utility so it only works with older versions.
Yes. I believe that was the one I tried and had used in the past. The one I posted has the same idea but not as user friendly or with as many options yet. Functional though...

I'm still voting against making it part of ubuntu-desktop though. I think Wine can never possibly match Windows for compatability, and so it shouldn't be installed to give users, especially newbies to Linux, false hopes.
Ah...but you see..this is a reason not to include WINE. Its almost never easy to install apps with WINE and its not Ubuntu's fault. Its the fact that WINE is hard to use. It is, really.
I still think it's a bit of a catch 22. One of the first things most people tend to do is try and install WINE to see if any of the apps that they have come to rely on on Windows and/or need to use for work, etc... that don't have Linux equivalents will work in Linux. Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but most people will try. Why not make it easier for them? Yes, many of these people are likely Windows users/ex-users but most PC users are...

A couple strategically placed disclaimers stating that Ubuntu is not responsible for WINE's development and that it may or may not work with a specific Windows application should be more than enough to prevent users from looking down on Ubuntu when/if something doesn't work as hoped. On the other hand... a bad experience with trying to set up a faily popular piece of software will likely give a bad impression.

[pardasaniman]

like Acrobat Reader, Xpdf, Skype and RealPlayer on there? They're all native already.

Actually, once I ran into a situation where the linux Adobe Acrobat was unable to view some documents, and I had to WINE the latest version.

I keep wine around, because on somedays, it comes to the rescue.

With the thing on WINE being hard to use, yes it is. It seems the devs have not yet made it a priority... However, a seasoned linuxer should have no problem with assistance from wine-tools.