Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

Does WineX have a future?

<< < (3/3)

preacher:

quote:Originally posted by Calum:
mswindows lacks in at least as many ways. linux can play shitloads of games, but i agree not enough for a "hardcore" gamer (ie one with a specific standard of gameage and particular requirements for certain titles) it's enough for me but my favourite games are all megadrive and snes ones, i can easily use emulators. it's a whole different world.

anyway, you choose to use windows, your choice. i don't see how you can realistically say wineX isn't up to scratch when it is at least partially emulating this part of the OS which you were just saying is really difficult to port to linux.

anyway, i'm not up for an argument i just get a little tired of the "linux software is not perfect so it's not good enough, now i am going back to windows" stuff that i often hear.
--- End quote ---


I never said anything about linux software not being good enough. You assumed thats what I meant. What Im saying is that I want games. They dont make too many new games with ports for linux. What do i do? Go back to playing dig dug and pac man and laugh at the windows users because all they have is programable vertex shaders? I dont think so. Im going to find some way to get half life 2 running on linux.

I did not say once I was going back to windows. My point was that I want them to improve wineX. I thought I made that clear by the subject title. You know what really pisses me off. You say that I choose to use windows. Where? WineX is not windows. Sim City 4 and Battlefield 1942 are not windows. Mandrake Linux 9.1 is not windows either. In fact absolutely nothing on my hard drive comes from microsoft and is microsoft windows. I choose to use linux.

insomnia:
Their's only one future for Wine(X).
To become completely unnesessary.

PS: Wine isn't even an emulater.

Windows_SuX_@$$:
How does wine work  ?

insomnia:

quote:Originally posted by Windows_SuX_@$$:
How does wine work  ?
--- End quote ---


An emulater makes an app. believe that it's running natively. Wine creates an own enviroment that accepts different dll structures.

Documentation:
http://www.winehq.com/site/documentation

solo:
Wow does no one think forwards any more or are we taking a lesson from Windows on stupidity? Please people, if DX is such a huge thing with games these days... maybe we should seperate Wine[X]'s DX implementation from Wine[X] and complete it at a Linux native system. Perhaps that would encourage DX game developers to start Linux ports...

I don't know how good or even usable Wine[X]'s DX implementation is but if it sucks I don't think it's a problem, look at some of these companies who want Linux to be big and are helping it out with Wine (transgaming, disney, etc). If they were to help create a Linux DX implementation, they would be laying the foundation for attracting the largest computer user categorization: gamers.

Just because DX isn't as good as OpenGL in our high and mighty minds doesn't mean that we shouldn't support it... however I think we should remember OS/2 with it's Windows compatibility... companies didn't bother to make OS/2 native apps because it ran Windows ones anyway.

Which brings me to an off topic idea: why doesn't IBM clean (legally) the Windows compatibility code in OS/2 and open source it...  

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page