> > > this scheme the Linux distribution would be shrinkwrap and totally
> > > portable. In other words, an application vendor could develop for
> > > Linux (very desirable of course) and deploy on a CDROM with a
> > > mini-distribution of WLinux that runs transparently under Win95/NT.
> > That can be done by writing a portable code and compiling it natively for both
> > platforms - much easier than writing WLinux...
>
> WLinux is something you write once. I don't WANT to write Win32 apps...
You don't have to. You can use a C++ library that is portable between the two
OSes (there are some) or, if your app is console-centered, simply compile it
with the gcc-Win32. Even DJGPP can produce Win32 apps without the need for
Win32 knowledge (using EasyWin, or whatever it is called)
> In anycase, that's only one use of WLinux, there's also the learning,
> 'trying it out' situations, and a number of others where having a true
> Linux environment would be very useful.
Hmm... now that I think of it, you might be right. But the important matter is
the policy - how to make the Wusers know that they are actually using Linux,
not Win32?
> > > supplying the backwards route has some very interesting consequences
> > > that are only helpful.
> > I think that the only consequence would be winning more market for Micro$oft -
> > the wouldn't announce that the non-crashing and better applications aren't
> > their own, but created by independent vendor(s).
>
> You can look at it either way. In fact, you could just as easily
> argue that it's increasing Linux's market share. As I mentioned
> earlier, you could get to the point where Linux was running on more
> desktops than Win95. (If you got most of the Win95 desktops to run
> WLinux for any reason, this would be true.)
Running itself isn't enough. People must know what they're running - and I
still don't think that the average Joe Winuser will care what is under the
hood as long as it looks like "those cute and easy to use Windows".
> This would be a very forceful and influencing statement to make.
Yes - if there's enough power to make it through the M$ money.
> > > Believe me, when I have an emulator of any kind that can run Win95 and
> > > Win32 apps under native Linux, I'll be running it everyday.
> > WINE's pretty good already.
>
> Last I looked (about a month ago on the official websites) it wouldn't
> even come close to running Corel Draw/Paint, AOL Client, MS
> Word/Excel, WordPerfect, etc.
I run M$ Word 6 on the latest snapshot. Didn't use it for anything serious,
just started it. Also the Opera browser works just fine for me.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu