Talk:Wine (software)/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

On Portal:Free software, Wine is currently the selected article

(2006-10-01) Just to let you know. The purpose of selecting an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors. It will remain on the portal for a week or so. The previous selected article was ReactOS. Gronky 22:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The selected article has rotated again and is now openMosix. Gronky 17:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Clarification

Another small comment: ((I noticed someone here was speaking of running Wine on Linux, so I thought of this:)) This article starts out by saying that << "The Wine project aims to allow a PC running a Unix-like operating system and the X Window System to execute programs originally written for Microsoft Windows." >> IMHO, instead of saying "a Unix-like operating system" it should say something like "a POSIX compatible operating system such as Gnu/Linux". I say this partly because, at http://winehq.org/site/about it says (that Wine is capable of running Windows applications on) [quote:] "Linux and other POSIX compatible operating systems". Just my 0.02, from Mike Schwartz 17:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't do anything except make the section harder to read. Nitpicking for nitpicking's sake is endemic to free software articles, but that doesn't mean it should be encouraged. Chris Cunningham 17:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge with winecfg

There is not very much in the winecfg article but the screen shot and the small bit of text could become a sub section in the wine article. So Yes the article could be merged. --Benjaminevans82 16:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Just go ahead and merge it. I don't think anyone would mind. Memmke 10:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merging of WineTools, Wine-Doors, and WineXS into Wine (software)

Stub articles (on directly related tools) with little potential of expansion. What do you think? Memmke 09:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Disagree: The pieces of software work with Wine but they are separate pieces of software so they should have separate articles. --Benjaminevans82 14:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Agree: Yes, but their directly related to Wine and their notability is, IMO, not high enough for them to stand on their own. Memmke 15:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
What is IMO? --Benjaminevans82 21:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
It's an acronym for "in my opinion". Memmke 08:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Disagree: They are separate subjects and should therefore have separate articles. While I believe these pieces of software should be mentioned in the Wine article, perhaps in a broad 'frontend' section, it makes more sense to have separate articles in any case. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Agree: The three related articles are in themselves too small to own article space. If they were larger, then perhaps they should stand as they are. Or maybe one article related to Wine-apps? But until this happens, they should be merged here. Why is this even being debated? It should just be 'done'. --Joe Christl 18:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree --nkayesmith 00:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree Fowl2 14:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree - if the subject gets big enough to be articles in their own right then they can be split up alla the usual way with a brief and a link being left in their place.... Shrewd.user 05:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree Chris Pickett 04:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Done. Chris Cunningham 19:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

There's no distinction made between winecfg (which is an official Wine tool), and the other third party hacks. It should be made clear that these other tools are neither developed nor endorsed by the Wine team. WineTools is explicitly and particularly hated by Wine developers. 129.128.210.68 19:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

what can wine do?

i dont understand if wine can run games, music or video editing applications such as warcraft, pro tools, acid pro, sony vegas et cetera...can someone explain, in detail, which windows apps run good and which dont? --AlexOvShaolin 04:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I've found that Starcraft and all half-life mods run exceptionally well with Wine. You can use Internet Explorer with it, but its hard to install. Wine's goal is to run MS Windows binary files, for a list of apps that are known to work, and how to get around issues, check appdb.winehq.org —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dustin gayler (talkcontribs) 15:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC).
thanx for the link, but i really dont see why anyone using linux would want to use i.e., strange world isnt it? --AlexOvShaolin 00:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
There are two real reasons I can think of. Web development (testing compatibility issues) and if you wanted to view sites that use Shockwave. Dustin 14:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
My wife and I run World of Warcraft pretty much perfectly on Wine. As a result, there's nothing keeping us on Windows and we've moved wholesale to running Linux. Dustin's link to the wine AppDB will help you out lots. -Tjkiesel 19:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Allan Registos: I have Intel PC 2.8Ghz HT processor, 1.2GbRAM and 128MB Nvidia video card. Dual boot Ubuntu and Windows. I've run World of Warcraft in Windows with this resolution 1024x768 all other options at their highest level, it works perfectly but a little sluggish. I've run WoW in Wine with Ubuntu with the same resolution and the same level of tweaking, I have found that WoW runs faster on wine than in Windows.

Wine a acronym?

Hi. I noticed Wine was listed under four letter acronyms but is it really a acronym? I thought it was just the full name of the software? Ad0500 11:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Chris Cunningham 12:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes what? The article states that it is indeed an acronym, for "Wine Is Not an Emulator". -- Smjg 17:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes it is a recursive acronym for the phrase "Wine is Not an Emulator". -Tjkiesel 02:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Funny thing about that is that in Fedora Core when you right click on a windows aplictaion, it gives you the following opening options:
  • open with wine (windows emulator)
Clearly going against "Wine Is Not an Emulator". --Lwarf 09:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
In ubuntu i does that too, it calls it an emulator, but what's funny is that it doesnt start, you need to start it from the terminal... RealG187 16:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
See GNU or LAME amongst others. The "not" is generally pithy or outdated in these acronyms. Chris Cunningham 11:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If this makes any sense, it's not an emulator in the sense of virtual machinery. It does not show a desktop from windows, there is no program to start up, it is simply integrated into the Linux system as a service (sorry if I'm using wrong terms, I'm just explaining how I understand it). It does emulate windows in the sense that it emulates its libraries, but it is not an actual windows emulator. Also, besides the acronym for Wine, I was under the impression that it was a merge of Windows & Emulator. Since a windows-based application is labeled by a "win", I figured it was a bit like WinE, or Windows Emulator. Whatever, though. --DEMONIIIK 22:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

@The "not" is generally pithy or outdated: It may be outdated in LAME, but there's a very good reason it's there in GNU and Wine. Wine is indeed not an emulator, it is a reimplementation of the Win32 API. Similarly GNU is indeed not Unix, it is a reimplementation of the tools and API's provided by Unix, and that it's not Unix, more specifically that it's free softwaer, is one of its strong points. Shinobu 12:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Being Unix doesn't preclude something being free software. There are in fact Unixes that are free software Nil Einne (talk) 12:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

DirectX

What about Direct X compatibility. How campatible is WINE with DirectX? Kc4 20:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Work in progress, but many (older) games works. (See [1]) Rc3784 15:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

64bit support

The article does not mention the lack of support for 64bit OS, and that wine must (AFAIK) run in a 32bit userspace. It could be really interesting to know the reason of this limitation and if that will change in future version of wine. Freevox 07:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

i suspect the above comments are out of date because graphically oblivion (a directX9 game) looks fantastic, pictures available at winehq 203.214.5.138 09:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Security and Shareware

This article is missing an important way to use WINE. When I was on windows, I was extremely cautious about which executables, I downloaded off the internet and ran. Consequently, trying out new programs was a time consuming process because I had to read reviews, google and other websites to be sure what I was downloading was actually safe and virus free. Then I ran a virus scan on it. Now, it's like Wine has opened up a whole new world of WINDOWS software too me. I've configured wine to only allow access to certain folders on the hard drive, so I know that I can run any questionable executable with impunity. It's really made discovering new applications so much faster. Add to that, I can run shareware applications indefinitely. At the very worst, all I have to do is delete the .wine directory and, just like that: It's like a whole new Windows installation.

Well... first off, sign next time. Second off, it could be mentioned, but an article doesn't seem necessary (if there is one, whatever. Shows I didn't read it.). Sure, testimonials are ok on talk page (so long as they are more or less backing a point like you did just now) but obviously a section on testimonial or based off of testimony wouldn't work out. --DEMONIIIK 22:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
That shouldn't be mentioned in the article because it would lead people to a false sense of security. Wine isn't a virtual machine. It would be quite trivial to make a windows application that was aware of wine and simply hosed the host *nix system, or did whatever it felt like (as compared to running the program in something like Qemu, VMware, or Xen). Wine is mostly security through obscurity for your usage. --71.175.7.129 18:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually more likely security through incompatibility, which its aiming to improve. The only protection you get is that by default wine runs as a user not a root, but that can be done in windows aswell. You could of course lock wine into only being able to modify /.wine , but that's not done by default.

About wine and Genuine windows

In ubuntuforums somebody were able to validate Defender in Ubuntu:: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=475709 --208.104.151.215 20:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

That shouldn't be possible; although it's rather easy to bypass Windows Validation sometimes. --76.204.101.143 (talk) 03:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
That is a very old news, that bug has been fixed by microsoft and as of now wine softwares are now checked and denied authentication.anantshri (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Speculation in article

"The project probably originated in discussions on Usenet ..." IMHO a sentence including the word "probably" doesn't belong in a encyclopedia like Wikipedia. Either the project originated on Usenet or it didn't. If it's uncertain it shouldn't be included at all especially since there's no source. Why is it more likely that it originated on Usenet as opposed to some other place? Has someone asked the original authors about the projects origins? Pafcu 19:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

regedit?

I know Wine has a registry editor. Shouldn't we give that a mention?
- Lasse Havelund (p) (t) 12:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I have added a mention of it under functionality - Shne (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

(Probably bogus) illegal number concern

Someone over here: Talk:Globally Unique Identifier#List_of_common_GUID.27s.3F argues that some of the GUID's Wine contains are, or could be, illegal numbers under U.S. law. I don't know anything about U.S. law, so I'm dropping this here, because I thought this was a likely place to get an answer. And yes, I know that the GUID's are just as part of the API as the various function names are, none of which are, AFAIK illegal to quote or cause licensing restrictions to be enforced upon use. But someone else says that doesn't matter. Anyway, I'd like your opinion on this, especially if you have experience in the field of intellectual property law as it relates to application programming interfaces. Shinobu 21:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Extlinks: benchmark

Someone removed a link to http://wiki.winehq.org/BenchMarks. Is it really inappropriate? Roman V. Odaisky 18:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It's fairly out of date by now. Scott Ritchie 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Updating articles for software supported by Wine?

I think it may be a good idea to update the articles of software that works on wine, so that instead of stating that it requires Windows, Mac or Linux etc... It should also mention Wine if it works well in it, possibly with version numbers or "(with some problems)" if necessary?

What do you guys think of this -- Happysmileman (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Not really relevant to the articles about that software unless Wine is expressly a platform supported by the developers (e.g. VirtualDub), would only seem like propaganda for Wine - David Gerard (talk) 21:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

On usage

Might be interesting to add this: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2007-November/060538.html

"WINE" redirects here?

Not any more it doesn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.175.250.218 (talk) 16:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Screenshots

Hello! All of copyrighted screenshots can be replaced by other free ones. Can someone who uses Wine take some free screenshots? --OsamaK 16:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Please don't overdo this and eliminate screen shots of proprietary software. There is real encyclopedic value in showing that Wine can run programs intended for Windows which have no free equivalents. There are almost no popular, recognizable Windows-only programs that are free software. Scott Ritchie (talk) 00:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

"graphical programs under X11"

I phrased it this way because (1) graphical programs do require X11, which should be in the intro (as Unix-like is) (2) console programs don't require X11 (try it yourself and see - we use it this way at work). Suitable rephrasings are of course welcome, but it needs noting somewhere, and correctly - David Gerard (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't even know what you're trying to say with this edit. Do you mean: "Wine is a software application which aims to allow Unix-like computer operating systems on the x86 architecture to execute, under the X Window System, graphical programs originally written for Microsoft." WalterGR (talk) 22:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I really don't see your point. You're saying that Wine can run graphical programs in X11, and non-graphical programs in console. So why are you adding "X Window System" everywhere? Anyone who's using a unix-like os does not expect a graphical program to run in the console. There are very few of them, and most people don't have the framebuffer console configured. Also, there are ports of Wine that don't require X11 for graphical programs (Darwine, for example). So, the point is, there is really no good reason to mention X11 everywhere. And, as you said, Wine can run without it. You're saying the opposite, though, by making it seem that it requires it.---AM088 (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd also like to point out that your edit about Parallels is wrong. Parallels also has virtual machines for Windows and Linux.---AM088 (talk) 23:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough, I've been told! I'll try to work out a not-unspeakably-awful way of saying what I mean and float it here on the talk page first - David Gerard (talk) 00:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

jscript begins

Is this notable enough to stick in the history or somewhere on the article? (See winehq.org for version 0.9.58) --76.204.101.143 (talk) 03:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Citation Needed

While the name sometimes appears in the forms "WINE" and "wine", the project developers have agreed to standardize on the form "Wine".[citation needed]

A citation can be found in the FAQ: http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#head-8b4fbbe473bd0d51d936bcf298f5b7f0e8d25f2e

213.126.97.225 (talk) 13:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Functionality section

Talks about wine back around mid-2007 can some one from wine provide a progress update for this section. Gioto (talk) 12:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing is said about...

I find it strange that nothing is said about Google... Havent they contributed some fixes to Wine so they could run their Picasa (with Wine (software)) on Linux? And.. didn't they help get Photoshop CS2 to run (or run better) on Wine (software)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.191.9.22 (talk) 12:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

This might shed some light on the matter: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.wine.devel/56872 124.168.183.134 (talk) 05:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I've started a new "corporate sponsors" section. Over what time period did Corel sponsor the project, and over what time period did Transgaming send improvements back to Wine? - David Gerard (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Microsoft Word screenshot

MS Word 2003 does not work with the current wine version. It requires using old wine version, which is rather inconvenient for most users. Putting screenshot of Word running under wine could be disinformation. I propose to remove the screenshot. See the link: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=2735 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.178.116 (talk) 17:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

This is due to a regression bug, and I'd be very surprised if Word 2003 wasn't working again by the release of Wine 1.0 Scott Ritchie (talk) 13:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Official Translations

In re-writing, updating and correcting the data held within the infobox, I had to start looking at: "In how many languages does Wine get released?" (This article deals with official Wine, not private/secret/non-LGPL compilations made from the source code, not shared with the Wine team, and their leader:"Alexandre Julliard has led the project since 1994.") At first sight, looking at wiki.winehq.org I concluded that Wine is written exclusively in English (not counting the coding in C), and then translated only into 3 languages Português, Deutsch & Spanish. Then Google returned Some Japanese translations implying more than one version of Japanese, then Bugs fixed in 1.0-rc4 which said they were adding, updating and fixing translations for (18 languages total):

  • English (native)
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • French
  • German
  • Hungarian
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Montenegrin
  • Polish
  • Portugese
  • Russian
  • Serbian
  • Slovene
  • Spanish
  • Swedish
  • Turkish

My question, posed so that the article and it's infobox may be complete, is:"In how many languages does Wine get released?" .... or would that question truly take too long to investigate for such a large project and should we just put multi-lingual in the article and never talk, nor think, of creating more work for ourselves ever again (attempted to be written while only sounding serious and never sarcastic, you try doing that these days). --202.168.102.96 (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wine uses the system's locale setting to attempt to display appropriate language dialog boxes. Basically, if you are running in Spanish (locale es), and Wine wants to show you the file open dialog box, it will check if there's an es version of it available. If yes, it will show it, if not it will fall back on English. Translations for Wine come in the form of patches that add (or fix) these various dialog boxes. Some languages have very few translations available, and some, like French, have translations for just about everything Wine displays. Each new version of Wine often brings in a few of these new translation patches, and they're all included with every version of Wine. So, yes, Wine is "multi-lingual" Scott Ritchie (talk) 08:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

WGA

This article says that Windows Genuine Advantage does not recognise Wine as genuine windows, what might be of interest to some is that WGA doesn't recognise Windows 98 as genuine Windows either. Jeffz1 (talk) 10:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably not really relevant to Wine as such but certainly interesting. I guess most "deprecated" versions of Windows are no longer recognised as genuine. ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:39, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The irony in this is in order to download DirectX 9.0c redistributable for Windows 98 (still supported by DirectX 9.0c) you need to run WGA. Jeffz1 (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, this isn't notable enough in relation to Wine to warrant inclusion. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Usage statistics

I was able to find my own usage statistics. I published them in this email to the mailing list, and they seem good, making it to the Wine Weekly News: http://winehq.org/?issue=348#Wine%27s%20popularity

In the interest of not posting my own original research, however, it'd be best if someone else integrated them into the article. Thank you! Scott Ritchie (talk) 12:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Compatibility ratings

I was directed here by another wiki page which claimed a game had a "silver rating" for Wine compatibility. But the Wine page doesn't describe what that means. Should it?--Per Abrahamsen (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably, yes. You can find explanations for Wine's AppDB ratings here: [2] -- unfortunately, there's a large amount of variance in what "silver" itself means - better than bronze ("starts and can make an attempt at using"), but worse than gold ("can work flawlessly"). Scott Ritchie (talk) 00:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.130.14 (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Supported software

Was taken from wihehq app dbase (Platinum, gold and silver) - I think it is good to name few applications so the user can see it supports some cutting edge software. Maybe a better name for the section would be suitable.--Kozuch (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we probably need a source that names the most "notable" software that is supported, rather than choosing our own. I agree that it is useful to show readers a selection of "cutting edge" software, but it is POV to just list some of "our" favourite software, if you know what I mean. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 16:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Anyone is welcome to add his/her wine supported software, as long as reference is provided. As soon as the list will become too large, we can move it to a new article called List of Wine supported software. That is just my two cents.--Kozuch (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Surely that is the point of the Application Database, not Wikipedia. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 18:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The difference is Wikipedia only includes notable pieces from the WineAppDB. I see nothing wrong here, everyone can access the winedb if they want.--Kozuch (talk) 18:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
True, but we currently have no criteria for saying what is notable or not. If we want to do this list, we have to establish some notability criteria, or anyone can put whatever software they want here. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 18:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Add in history of the name "Wine"?

It might be nice to have a history of how the name "Wine" went from meaning "Windows Emulator" to "Wine is Not an Emulator". I did some poking around on this a long time ago. Here are the results, with references, if someone would like to clean them up and add them to the article.

I believe the first suggestion of the "not an emulator" name was in this usenet post. This was in 1993, prompted by concern over trademark issues with the name "Windows Emulator".

In this post, Bob Amstadt responds to the above post with more interesting history:

My orignal line of thinking was "winemu", but I didn't like that. Then I thought of shortening it to "wine". This led me to think of "whine" and "whinny". I liked "whine", but felt that it was too long.

By 1997, the "not an emulator" interpretation was in use, but as an alternative, according to the Wine FAQ from late 1997:

The word Wine stands for one of two things: WINdows Emulator, or Wine Is Not an Emulator. Both are right. Use whichever one you like best.

The dropping of calling Wine an emulator happened between releases 981108 and 981211. The 981108 release notes said:

This is release 981108 of Wine, the MS Windows emulator.

The 981211 release notes said:

This is release 981211 of Wine, a free implementation of Windows on Unix.

The dropping of "Windows Emulator" seems to have been for two reasons. One was that Wine could be used for more than just taking a Windows binary and running it on Unix. It could also be linked with code compiled on Unix, to give a native Unix binary port of a Windows program. The other was that most users were only familiar with emulators that emulated hardware, which tended to be slow. Wine might get an undeserved reputation of slowness because of that, so they stopped calling it an emulator. I have been unable to locate the references I had to support this paragraph. I think they were posts in comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine from around 1997 or 1998, if someone better at Googling than I wants to try to track them down. Tim.the.bastard (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)