PDA

View Full Version : Ubuntu users get easy access to Windows apps



newbie2
February 7th, 2008, 01:26 PM
Canonical, the commercial sponsor of the popular Ubuntu Linux distribution, will on Thursday begin making commercial applications available to Ubuntu users directly through the desktop, in a step designed to simplify software installation.

The company is making Parallels Workstation for Linux available to users via the operating system's built-in software update tool, using a feature called the Ubuntu Partner Repository. Parallels Workstation allows users to run Windows and Linux simultaneously on a single system.

The deal marks the first time Canonical has distributed commercial software through the repository, which has in the past only distributed free and open-source software.
http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/software/0,39044164,62037500,00.htm
:guitar:

jaytek13
February 7th, 2008, 01:30 PM
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about that. Including "trial" versions of software in an OS, well, I can only think of those days when I used windows from a prebuilt HP or something and it came bloated with trial software that would take me an hour to get rid of... is this where Ubuntu is headed? What's next, free AOL trials included?

I know it's not quite the same thing, but still...

k2t0f12d
February 7th, 2008, 01:34 PM
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about that. Including "trial" versions of software in an OS, well, I can only think of those days when I used windows from a prebuilt HP or something and it came bloated with trial software that would take me an hour to get rid of... is this where Ubuntu is headed? What's next, free AOL trials included?

I know it's not quite the same thing, but still...

Sure, non-free software aka bloatware, adware, trialware, is like the Giger Alien. It goes where the meat is.

newbie2
February 7th, 2008, 02:10 PM
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about that. Including "trial" versions of software in an OS, well, I can only think of those days when I used windows from a prebuilt HP or something and it came bloated with trial software that would take me an hour to get rid of... is this where Ubuntu is headed? What's next, free AOL trials included?

I know it's not quite the same thing, but still...
anyway .....there is 'the choice' :mrgreen: :

According the Canonical press statement, "The Ubuntu Partner Repository and associated services from Canonical allow software providers to make their software readily available to Ubuntu users. The repository supplements the thousands of free and open-source applications available through other Ubuntu repositories, and contains both proprietary and open-source applications provided by Ubuntu partners."

Ubuntu users must add the Ubuntu Partner Repository to their software channel by Navigating to "System" > "Administration" > "Software Properties." Then, once they have added the 'Multiverse' channel, they can launch the Package Manager and click the "Preferences" button. Next, by clicking on the "Third-Party Software" tab, users can check on the Ubuntu Partner Repository software libraries. That done, the Ubuntu user can then add Parallels Workstation for Linux (www.parallels.com/products/workstation), or any other software officially approved for Ubuntu use, to their PC.
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9105885588.html

original_jamingrit
February 7th, 2008, 03:03 PM
Bah, humbug.

I won't be needing it.

I'm mostly disappointed because I thought Canonical was trying to get Ubuntu away from proprietary software.

quinnten83
February 7th, 2008, 03:14 PM
Bah, humbug.

I won't be needing it.

I'm mostly disappointed because I thought Canonical was trying to get Ubuntu away from proprietary software.

Yeah me too.
Although i do understand the need for enough support to be able to make it to the desktop.
Still, I don't want to come near windows (even though I dual boot) and I don't want to come near propietary stuff.

picpak
February 7th, 2008, 03:29 PM
And what's wrong with VirtualBox? I'm playing with it right now.

DigitalDuality
February 7th, 2008, 04:10 PM
d

Keith Hedger
February 7th, 2008, 04:22 PM
But how long will it be before Canonical give way to financial pressure and not only enable this by default but also add demos etc to the standard installation?
This seems to me to be the top of the slippery slope, I have been using ubuntu for 3 years and I don't want to change but if they start to go down this road I'm sure I won't be the only one to switch distros.

SomeGuyDude
February 7th, 2008, 04:33 PM
But how long will it be before Canonical give way to financial pressure and not only enable this by default but also add demos etc to the standard installation?
This seems to me to be the top of the slippery slope, I have been using ubuntu for 3 years and I don't want to change but if they start to go down this road I'm sure I won't be the only one to switch distros.

I'm optimistic that Canonical won't do something that monumentally dumb. I'd also be willing to bet that if any Linux distro EVER went the way of Windows in that matter, it would get swiftly obliterated from the Linux pool.

Lem
February 7th, 2008, 04:52 PM
Given the balanced approach that they seem to have adopted so far, I can only see this as a good thing for continued adoption of new Ubuntu users.
Companies can now supply a fully supported virtualisation package with a Ubuntu install. Whilst virtualbox is a good free alternative, Parallels makes more sense for a commercial vendor.
A lot of people have gone over to Mac because they can continue to run the odd windows app without much fuss.

Keith Hedger
February 7th, 2008, 05:01 PM
I'm optimistic that Canonical won't do something that monumentally dumb. I'd also be willing to bet that if any Linux distro EVER went the way of Windows in that matter, it would get swiftly obliterated from the Linux pool.
You'd be amazed at how dumb money can make people!

aysiu
February 7th, 2008, 05:08 PM
You'd be amazed at how dumb money can make people!
Mark Shuttleworth has plenty of money already.

DigitalDuality
February 7th, 2008, 05:20 PM
d

MetalMusicAddict
February 7th, 2008, 05:24 PM
***MetalMusicAddict sits back and watches all the ridiculous conspiracy theories and baseless opinions fly.

Remember, the "partner" repo is not open by default. You have to "freedom" not to use it just like you have the "freedom" to turn off the TV/radio when there's something on you don't like. ;)

Access to more software if you want it is a good thing. Hell, if you don't like this ask Mark about. He's often on IRC. (sabdfl on Freenode)


I'm mostly disappointed because I thought Canonical was trying to get Ubuntu away from proprietary software.

It's about working together. Get out to a UDS. They are open to all and are eye-opening.

macogw
February 7th, 2008, 05:27 PM
And what's wrong with VirtualBox? I'm playing with it right now.

Yeah, seriously. The only thing Parallels ever had going for it was letting the apps run wild on the screen instead of being restricted to a box. Virtualbox can definitely do that now, though, so who needs Parallels?

Given the balanced approach that they seem to have adopted so far, I can only see this as a good thing for continued adoption of new Ubuntu users.
Companies can now supply a fully supported virtualisation package with a Ubuntu install. Whilst virtualbox is a good free alternative, Parallels makes more sense for a commercial vendor.
A lot of people have gone over to Mac because they can continue to run the odd windows app without much fuss.
Why? If you're going to argue about paying for tech support, there are 2 versions of Virtualbox. There's the open source one with no [commercial] support, and there's the one with a little bit of closed source stuff for USB that's free for home users and for-pay for companies. When a company buys a license, they end up with tech support.

2. Can I buy a commercial license for VirtualBox?

If you are an individual end user, there is generally no need to purchase a commercial license, provided that you respect, in the case of VirtualBox OSE, the terms and conditions of the GPL, or, in the case of the full VirtualBox package, those of the Personal Use and Evaluation License.

As an enterprise customer, we encourage you to purchase a commercial license from InnoTek and receive benefits such as access to enterprise features and support for mission-critical use of VirtualBox. We also encourage ISVs and IHVs to incorporate VirtualBox into their offerings, either based on the GPL or preferably through a custom license deal with innotek. Please contact innotek for additional information.

SomeGuyDude
February 7th, 2008, 05:30 PM
And even if he does give in, so what?

Any distro i install, my first order of business is generally uninstalling things i don't need and installing the things i do. Unlike Windows, you can fully remove applications with ease. No messy registry that gets all clogged up with because of all the crapware installed.

It's canonical's software to do with as they wish, and if they wish to foster linux adoption, it's sad to say, but corporate america is going to have to be appeased and attracted.

I can always opt for gobuntu, or another distro. If it helps linux succeed then more power to them.

Yes, but the nice thing about Ubuntu is that whatever is installed is there because the devs thought it was something you could use, not something the software companies paid them to put on there. That's a big threshhold to cross.

I like to think of Linux as more than an operating system, a separate kernel with its own file structure. It's an IDEA. The idea that people should get an OS that is focused solely on a positive user experience. Each distro does its best to give the user experience that those developers think is optimal.

Windows is burdened by its desire to appeal to everyone, Linux is liberated by the variety, and that Gentoo doesn't need to worry about being too difficult nor does Mandriva have to cater to advanced users who want a stripped-down system.

They all have their own philosophies and attempt to maximize them. I'm all for any distro working to make it more accessible, but as soon as they cross into being more concerned about "market share" and "profit" than their initial ideals then that distro has, as far as I'm concerned, signalled its own demise.

Keith Hedger
February 7th, 2008, 05:34 PM
yeah what he said!

Krydahl
February 7th, 2008, 05:39 PM
If Ubuntu starts installing commercial bloatware trials by default then I'm sure lots of people will switch distro. Personally, I'll worry about that when it happens not when a bit of commercial software is made optionally available to me through the repositories.

Dark Hornet
February 7th, 2008, 10:55 PM
Ok...here is a dumb question....as I am not that familiar with Parallels. Is Parallels the same thing as running a Virtual Machine? In other words would this be a good alternative to dual booting for high end gaming?

toupeiro
February 7th, 2008, 11:08 PM
My understanding (which is admittedly unclear) is that parallels is not virtualization but a parallel dual-boot (thus no virtualization layer with the hardware.) I'm sorry, but I can see the usefulness of this, especially since from a support standpoint, my workstations lean toward lean toward the bleeding edge of what you can configure hardware wise (dual Opteron 2220's, 32GB of RAM QuadroFS 4600 w/ 768MB video ram, dual raptor 10K disks) The hardware is there to pump both OSes and if they have found some way to harness the hardware directly at the same time without sharing violations, i think thats a wonderful thing. Virtualization can do you nothing if you need to do anything high GFX oriented.

As far as the ethics behind putting it in a free OS, I am torn a bit too, but unlike Microsoft / Dell etc doing this, it doesn't sound like its installed.. merely, its available. Is that such a bad thing? After all, do we not have Googleearth in the repos which has a pro version that costs money?

the_darkside_986
February 7th, 2008, 11:43 PM
If it becomes a problem, couldn't we just publish forks of the standard Ubuntu distro that doesn't have this junk?

I've always respected Ubuntu for including the restricted drivers I need for my system to work while free drivers are developed or while i search for better hardware, but if Canonical starts placing proprietary garbage on the default desktop install, I will no choice but to switch to another distro. One of my reasons for using GNU/Linux is to escape from the pile of so-called "freeware" that plagues most Windows systems.

frup
February 7th, 2008, 11:53 PM
So one moment everyone complains "oh we need Photoshop, we need AutoCAD, we need this, that". Then when Canonical enables a system where in the future the likes of Adobe and Autodesk could potentially make their software available on Ubuntu everyone goes up and arms.

Personally I will always use free software. Personally I can't see me using Parallels, but someone might and it's a start for something that could become a great tool for many people. Remember it's only a repo you can turn on not some junk filled installation bs.

SunnyRabbiera
February 7th, 2008, 11:55 PM
So one moment everyone complains "oh we need Photoshop, we need AutoCAD, we need this, that". Then when Canonical enables a system where in the future the likes of Adobe and Autodesk could potentially make their software available on Ubuntu everyone goes up and arms.

Personally I will always use free software. Personally I can't see me using Parallels, but someone might and it's a start for something that could become a great tool for many people. Remember it's only a repo you can turn on not some junk filled installation bs.

I agree, this is a good move if you ask me...
hey any way to bring linux into the spotlight is a good thing.
Me I can see how this may benefit us.

Krydahl
February 8th, 2008, 12:02 AM
If it encourages people to develop commercial software for linux it's definitely a good thing. Those who feel a moral objection to such products shouldn't have them thrust upon them, obviously, but everyone else will benefit.

k2t0f12d
February 8th, 2008, 12:14 AM
If it encourages people to develop commercial software for linux it's definitely a good thing. Those who feel a moral objection to such products shouldn't have them thrust upon them, obviously, but everyone else will benefit.

Commerical != proprietary. There is no reason whatsoever to think that the development of non-free software for any operating system is ever a good thing under any circumstances. If a developer doesn't offer the four freedoms; i.e. run the program how you wish, study and/or modify if you wish, redistribute exact copies when you wish, and distribute modified version when you wish...it is not a benefit to any user of any computer anywhere. If you are comfortable with using software that requires you to surrender those rights, they have two other operating systems for that, MacOS and Windows.

mooha
February 8th, 2008, 12:24 AM
this is what OSS (open source software) philosophy drive you to, FSF (free software foundation) is the best choice for freedom.

macogw
February 8th, 2008, 12:58 AM
My understanding (which is admittedly unclear) is that parallels is not virtualization but a parallel dual-boot (thus no virtualization layer with the hardware.) I'm sorry, but I can see the usefulness of this, especially since from a support standpoint, my workstations lean toward lean toward the bleeding edge of what you can configure hardware wise (dual Opteron 2220's, 32GB of RAM QuadroFS 4600 w/ 768MB video ram, dual raptor 10K disks) The hardware is there to pump both OSes and if they have found some way to harness the hardware directly at the same time without sharing violations, i think thats a wonderful thing. Virtualization can do you nothing if you need to do anything high GFX oriented.

As far as the ethics behind putting it in a free OS, I am torn a bit too, but unlike Microsoft / Dell etc doing this, it doesn't sound like its installed.. merely, its available. Is that such a bad thing? After all, do we not have Googleearth in the repos which has a pro version that costs money?

According to the Wikipedia article on Parallels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Workstation), it's still a VM, just with a hypervisor so it can get closer to the hardware. I'm pretty sure VMWare and VirtualBox (basically anything not old) use a hypervisor too though.

toupeiro
February 8th, 2008, 01:02 AM
According to the Wikipedia article on Parallels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Workstation), it's still a VM, just with a hypervisor so it can get closer to the hardware. I'm pretty sure VMWare and VirtualBox (basically anything not old) use a hypervisor too though.

True, but vmware (workstation, server, or ESX) does not allow (to my knowledge as of Workstation v5.5) direct access or control over host OS hardware peripherals. Peripherals are created based on hardware and instructions are passed through via virtual devices. Maybe I am reading too much into the verbage, but if there is indeed direct hardware control of say, an NVIDIA GPU, it opens the floodgates to the kind of applications which can be virtualized. It wouldn't be virtualization in the same approach vmware's or virtualboxes virtualization is. Its like a virtual machine ... with real hardware if you will. At least, this is my interpretation of their product.

Ebuntor
February 8th, 2008, 01:42 AM
True, but vmware (workstation, server, or ESX) does not allow (to my knowledge as of Workstation v5.5) direct access or control over host OS hardware peripherals. Peripherals are created based on hardware and instructions are passed through via virtual devices. Maybe I am reading too much into the verbage, but if there is indeed direct hardware control of say, an NVIDIA GPU, it opens the floodgates to the kind of applications which can be virtualized. It wouldn't be virtualization in the same approach vmware's or virtualboxes virtualization is. Its like a virtual machine ... with real hardware if you will. At least, this is my interpretation of their product.

If that is the case that sure is unique. Assuming I understand your explanation correctly that would mean that programs like DirectX would be able to work flawlessly. That would solve a lot of gamers' problems with the lack of support for games on Linux systems. Of course Parallels Workstation wouldn't have to use up much memory if you wanted to do that. Perhaps a minimal Windows install like TinyXP would be best in that case.

toupeiro
February 8th, 2008, 08:17 AM
accidental duplicate entry

toupeiro
February 8th, 2008, 08:20 AM
Just to share a little more information on this topic, I called the company to research their product to see how applicable it could be for my environment and learned a few things.

1. 64-bit is in development (beta) and not commercially or pubically available, but you can sign up as a beta tester.

2) as a beta tester, you also get to take advantage of the beta hypervisor which will allow you to take direct control (relative to instruction) of CPU and memory resources as well as controllers such as disk and USB. For video, I learned that with the use of a second video card, you can take direct control of the secondary GPU. From what I was told, there is still a limitation of exclusive control of the GPU used by the Host OS, but that a second GPU can be leveraged to enable full video driver instruction compatibility in a virtual machine.

Now that, my friends, will be a first in virtualization offerings!

psypher
February 8th, 2008, 08:31 AM
I don't get what the fuss is about. It's a personal choice to activate the partner repo and install parallels. I DESPERATELY need something like parallels as VMWARE and virtualbox does not cut it. If Parallels lets me play 3d games like Unreal and BFME2 without dualbooting then I can completely remove the 2nd partition on my PC save 10GB on diskspace and save 2 minutes every time I have to reboot. It's exactly the same as Crossover Office, free to trail pay for it if it does what you want. I'm all for free, as in freedom, software but if there is a great proprietary app that I cannot do without then by all means I will have to just buy it. It's the software and gaming dev's and publishers fault we need stuff like this, rather go complain on the Unreal 3 forum for them not releasing a linux binary yet. I am stuck with windows as the company I work for has IE only apps that don't want to work with Wine or crossover, so I have to boot a vmware windows JUST for IE. And that even isn't seamless, I still have to have a whole windows desktop open in RDP which crashes everytime I just want to cut and paste between linux and windows. And I know you can do all the nifty seamlessrdp stuff but you know what I've been trying for ages to get that working properly and it just terribly buggy. And it's not just me, a colleague of mine who also uses ubuntu the way I do has the same problems. It's just not stable. If parallels gets past all these annoyances AND I can't play games (as they claim) then WOOOOHOOOO!!!!! BRING IT ON!!!! My only problem right now is I tried installing Parallels and it just crashes my PC completely when I try boot the windows install. But I will talk bout that on a different thread dedicated to that. I love ubuntu and linux with all my heart, it just blows ANYTHING windows can out of the water, except games and IE only apps.

Sockerdrickan
February 8th, 2008, 03:12 PM
I don't like this idea at all.

SunnyRabbiera
February 8th, 2008, 03:36 PM
But I doubt this will be forced, I mean come on this is not like a microsoft deal

maniac_X
February 12th, 2008, 10:00 PM
I find it rather funny that Canonical is selling Parallels almost $10 more(by US $) in thier shop than you can buy from Parallels themselves. How is that exactly a benefit to the Ubuntu users? :lolflag:

Ebuntor
February 13th, 2008, 11:46 AM
I find it rather funny that Canonical is selling Parallels almost $10 more(by US $) in thier shop than you can buy from Parallels themselves. How is that exactly a benefit to the Ubuntu users? :lolflag:

Perhaps those $10 are for support from Canonical? That is the only way they make money as far as I know.
Just a guess of course.

mdsmedia
February 13th, 2008, 12:06 PM
Yes, but the nice thing about Ubuntu is that whatever is installed is there because the devs thought it was something you could use, not something the software companies paid them to put on there. That's a big threshhold to cross.

I like to think of Linux as more than an operating system, a separate kernel with its own file structure. It's an IDEA. The idea that people should get an OS that is focused solely on a positive user experience. Each distro does its best to give the user experience that those developers think is optimal.

Windows is burdened by its desire to appeal to everyone, Linux is liberated by the variety, and that Gentoo doesn't need to worry about being too difficult nor does Mandriva have to cater to advanced users who want a stripped-down system.

They all have their own philosophies and attempt to maximize them. I'm all for any distro working to make it more accessible, but as soon as they cross into being more concerned about "market share" and "profit" than their initial ideals then that distro has, as far as I'm concerned, signalled its own demise.I'm not totally sure how I feel about this, but I think this sums up how I think atm. Basically, I don't want to be locked in, so Windows only software is gone, but if Ubuntu/Canonical provides a commercial alternative I'll look at it. I prefer OSS but I'm stuck with Windows only software. The more my preferred platform is used the less I'm stuck with Windows, so commercial software on Linux can only be good.

quinnten83
February 13th, 2008, 12:29 PM
I don't get what the fuss is about. It's a personal choice to activate the partner repo and install parallels. I DESPERATELY need something like parallels as VMWARE and virtualbox does not cut it. If Parallels lets me play 3d games like Unreal and BFME2 without dualbooting then I can completely remove the 2nd partition on my PC save 10GB on diskspace and save 2 minutes every time I have to reboot. It's exactly the same as Crossover Office, free to trail pay for it if it does what you want. I'm all for free, as in freedom, software but if there is a great proprietary app that I cannot do without then by all means I will have to just buy it. It's the software and gaming dev's and publishers fault we need stuff like this, rather go complain on the Unreal 3 forum for them not releasing a linux binary yet. I am stuck with windows as the company I work for has IE only apps that don't want to work with Wine or crossover, so I have to boot a vmware windows JUST for IE. And that even isn't seamless, I still have to have a whole windows desktop open in RDP which crashes everytime I just want to cut and paste between linux and windows. And I know you can do all the nifty seamlessrdp stuff but you know what I've been trying for ages to get that working properly and it just terribly buggy. And it's not just me, a colleague of mine who also uses ubuntu the way I do has the same problems. It's just not stable. If parallels gets past all these annoyances AND I can't play games (as they claim) then WOOOOHOOOO!!!!! BRING IT ON!!!! My only problem right now is I tried installing Parallels and it just crashes my PC completely when I try boot the windows install. But I will talk bout that on a different thread dedicated to that. I love ubuntu and linux with all my heart, it just blows ANYTHING windows can out of the water, except games and IE only apps.

I see what you say, and I agree.
It' s just that it sounds kinda commercial the way it get offered.
I think i would be ok with it, if I read on some forum where you could download and install the .deb rather than hearing that is now offered in the repos.
granted it is a commercial repo, but still felt like having a company encroach themselves on me. You must understand this reaction if you are trying to get away from EULA's and WGA' s and governement tracking.... It just didn't feel free @ first. But it is a good idea.
Maybe if there was an free open source equivalent of parallels.
(why isn' t there one yet????).

notwen
February 13th, 2008, 03:31 PM
I'm all for it, will save me from rebooting into my XP install on that once a month occasion I might actually need to do something in Windows. If you use it, you use it, if not, it's not bothering you. Linux is all about choice this just gives the user more choice. Step in the right direction if you ask me. OS zealots will always be around to shove their opinion down your throat. Cheers. =]