Countering arguments against Wine
motub at planet.nl
Mon Nov 1 20:47:40 CST 2004
Ryan Underwood wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 04:32:02PM +0200, Holly Bostick wrote:
>>find that it doesn't necessarily "feel strange" or at least as strange
>>as I might have imagined. What mostly feels strange is the complications
>>of getting the program started in the first place (having to cd to the
>>application folder to run wine <program_name> from a terminal, or having
>>to write a little start script in order to make a panel shortcut to it).
> You might look into the kernel's miscellaneous binary format support.
> On my Debian system, with binfmt-support package installed, I can
> directly execute a PE executable (WINE is invoked automatically by the
Yes, I've just installed that for the first time during my recent kernel
upgrade. Haven't really tested it out, though.
However, I think that the presence of this ability is not necessarily a
strong counter-argument since 1) it requires the user to either be quite
familiar with their system, or know such a person, in order to set it up
in the first place, and 2) is not necessarily useful if you have more
than one Wine variant (or version) on the system (haven't checked this
out either, but I expect problems).
It is not necessarily unreasonable for a home, multi-user computer to
"need", let us say, Crossover Office (or regular Wine) for Dad's work,
and Cedega (or regular Wine, possibly a different version) for the kids'
What binary is going to be invoked when the user double-clicks, if
different applications need to be run with different versions/types of
OK, I'll grant you that if a user knows how to install multiple versions
of Wine on a system without conflict, they probably won't care about
this double-clicking business in the first place, and I'll also grant
that Wine is not CX is not Cedega-- but... we're talking about often
inexperienced people who are likely relying on Windows programs as a
crutch to avoid the "confusingness" of Linux in the first place (the
issue in question is easing migration woes, after all).
Such a user, when informed that CX is good for apps, and Cedega is good
for games, might well install both, which is possible to do without
problems, afaik (as they install in different places, and the wine or cx
binaries and the cedega binaries do not have the same name).
So what's going to happen with the file associations on which the
double-click strategy relies? Games are not distinguished from MSOffice
in terms of being some other mime-type than "DOS/Windows executable".
Is CX going to try to open FarCry? Or is Cedega going to try to open
I really don't know (not having tried this), but I wonder, and suspect
that it would bite me in the butt if I did try.
So while I do appreciate this functionality, I'm not sure it's flexible
enough to cover the vast range of strange things that former Windows
users might do (given that they're under the general impression that
they can just click once and accomplish anything, no matter how complex
or technically difficult-- through no fault of their own, I might add;
they've just been sold a bill of goods, no pun intended).
More information about the wine-devel