[Wine] Re: Difference Between WINE and an Emulator

[David Dawson]

Mantar, Feyelno nek dusa wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:40:51 -0400, Draco18s wrote:
> 
>> I've got someone who doesn't understand that WINE Is Not an Emulator and
>> apparently doesn't get the FAQ on the site.  I personally don't use WINE
>> (still being on Windows kinda avoids the need), so I don't really have
>> the
>> knowledge to argue this much farther.  Here's his latest point (formating
>> in clasic usenet style below), I need something simple that says, "no."
> 
>  An emulator is a specific type of program that mimics hardware. Windows
> is not a piece of hardware, ergo Wine Is Not an Emulator. It's merely a
> clone of the Windows API.
>  It's sort of like the difference between a program that performs
> mathematical calculations on numbers, and a program that models the
> internal structures of a Texas Instruments calculator -- a hardware device
> which also performs mathematical calculations on numbers. The programs may
> look similar, but inside, they are two entirely different beasts. The
> gap between wine and an x86 emulator is a BIT less wide than that, but not
> nearly enough to require a name-change on wine's part.
> 
>  OTOH, if he insists on making up his own definitions for words,
> he's free to do so. He'll just have to put up with the fact that the rest
> of the planet is talking past him.
> 
In the technical sense, an emulator is just what you have said, but I quote
from Webster's Dictionary part of the definition of 'emulate'
<<1. Try to equal or excel; imitate with effort to equal or surpass; 'to
emulate one's father.'>>

In that sense, Wine's behaviour 'emulates' the behaviour of Windows in that
it can run (a bunch of) software that Windows can. So, in the non-technical
sense, it does emulate Windows. If 'emulator' were not a technical term,
there would be no argument.

-- 
If you wrestle in the mud with a pig.
you both get dirty, and the pig likes it.

-- Dave Dawson