在 2006-08-24四的 12:17 -0400，Marc Collin写道：

Le jeudi 24 août 2006 12:16, Zhang Weiwu a écrit :

...

No offensive, I love linux, I am a hardcore linux user for 4 years. I also love Coral Draw, so much love it that almost as much as I love Linux. Why cannot I have both? (I already got the advice of inkscape, thank you. Inkscape is cool, but not that cool.)

I tried wine, which is a great success but still fail for a lot of Windows applications (including Coral Draw). I also tried emulate software like VM ware, it's not as convienent as wine because all windows applications run in a emulated desktop, managed by Windows' own window manager (god damn stupid wm) rather then Linux's beautifully designed wm.

What if I want both? I want to run Windows application based on real Windows so that I can run it bug-free, I want it run on a Linux desktop, rather then on a Windows desktop that sits in a window in a Linux desktop. I love both Coral Draw and Linux so much that I don't even mind paying a Windows license to be able to run Coral Draw.

Is there a solution for my case?

buy cedega

I hope you were not joking... I don't mind paying to reach my goal, but as far as I know cedega is used to play Windows games on Linux. I don't play games, I am no longer 15 years old, I use the products to work.

On Thursday 24 August 2006 18:30, Zhang Weiwu wrote:

I hope you were not joking... I don't mind paying to reach my goal, but as far as I know cedega is used to play Windows games on Linux. I don't play games, I am no longer 15 years old,

if you want people to treat you with respect, you should stop insulting them like this. Calling people who like to play games "15 years old" is not only insulting, it is ignorant

I use the products to work.

A game uses far more resources out of a machine then just about any "serious" program you can think of. If cedega is good enough to handle windows games, it can handle "productive software" as well The main difference between cedega and crossover is which products they actively support. they are both based on wine

buy cedega

Yes. "Cedega" and "Cross Over Office" can solve your issues in some specific cases. But generally there is *no* way to work on both at the same time. I recommend dual-boot. You must choose. No other good way exists.

How M$ managed to have done this? to let good products run on their cripple products?

There is fundamental problem with Linux's compatibility - that is it is almost impossible (very hard) to run Debian Software on SUSE Linux and vice versa. Not only that but within same Linux there is compatibility problems. - Try to run TuxRacer rpm from Mandrake 9.2 on Mandrake 10.1 to see what I mean - the software installs but doesn't works. LSB tries to solve that - and while I agree that LSB is nice, it is very incomplete. For example it lacks the requirements of symlinks - when I tried to install software optimized for SUSE on Fedora - there were enough basic packages - but few symlinks on Fedora were missing that prevented from software being run ... of course I have added that manually and it solved the specific problem. How many noobs will do so? Answer: *none* - because, by definition, if noob adds symlinks and manually configures system he stops being noob anymore. But in general Linuxes stay *very* incompatible with each other, and until that is resolved - so I can freely install *any* binary x86 RPM on *any* Linux distro - companies will NOT provide Linux software. Maybe future versions of LSB - Linux Standards can solve the issue, but current one, v3.1 still has a lot of lacking, non-standardized components. ---------- On Windows you have basically about 90% of backwards compatibility. That is 9 out of 10 programs will run on newer versions of Windows unmodified. If there was a requirement to rewrite *all* Windows 98 software to be able to run on XP, I would never install XP - by the time the OS was out many programs were already compatible with it. By the time new version of Linux is out - only what the distro members/developers decided to include exists. A few third-party repositories helps, but not solves the problem as like with Windows. And here I were just saying about desktop-software compatibility, not about driver compatibility.

Here is the klik site: http://klik.atekon.de And I am one of the beta-testers: http://klik.atekon.de/docs/?page=Contributors

Alexey Eremenko wrote:

...

How M$ managed to have done this? to let good products run on their cripple products?

There is fundamental problem with Linux's compatibility - that is it is almost impossible (very hard) to run Debian Software on SUSE Linux and vice versa.

But what software is "Debian Software" and what is "SUSE Software"? Virtually everything is available packaged for your distro, assuming you use a wide use distro. Moreover, everything GPL is available via source...

Not only that but within same Linux there is compatibility problems. - Try to run TuxRacer rpm from Mandrake 9.2 on Mandrake 10.1 to see what I mean - the software installs but doesn't works.

But why would you do that? Why not use the Tuxracer RPM designed for SUSE?

But in general Linuxes stay *very* incompatible with each other, and until that is resolved - so I can freely install *any* binary x86 RPM on *any* Linux distro - companies will NOT provide Linux software.

Why? Why is that so important? One of Linux's fabulous advantages is diversity. You see, different distro's get to try out different ways of doing things. They then learn from each other, making the whole better.

On Windows you have basically about 90% of backwards compatibility. That is 9 out of 10 programs will run on newer versions of Windows unmodified. If there was a requirement to rewrite *all* Windows 98 software to be able to run on XP, I would never install XP - by the time the OS was out many programs were already compatible with it.

And every version of every modern distro has a massive library already available at release.

By the time new version of Linux is out - only what the distro members/developers decided to include exists. A few third-party repositories helps, but not solves the problem as like with Windows.

Because the individual software makers take the extra effort to make sure their software is compatible. Quite often, it isn't. I remember reading about plenty of major software makers whose current version had Windows XP issues when that was first released.

...

Alexey Eremenko wrote: But what software is "Debian Software" and what is "SUSE Software"? Virtually everything is available packaged for your distro, assuming you use a wide use distro. Moreover, everything GPL is available via source...

Alexey is talking about noobs, or novice users, I guess. I like to serve noobs and I like them to use Linux, actually I have been serving noobs for years in my business. Many noobs know much more then me, especially in areas other then IT.

At a certain level, if someone is really a noob, then why are they trying to install something so obscure? On the other hand, I would really like to see a nice gui for dealing with source rpm's. While a package might not have a suse specific rpm, it's likely to have a source rpm.

...

But why would you do that? Why not use the Tuxracer RPM designed for SUSE?

There are ALWAYS some software packaged not for SuSE (and missing on both Guru and packman) and finally a day you want to use it on SuSE. You will meet one of them if you use SuSE long enough, I met a lot. I guess you already met some. Tuxracer is just an example of Alexey on getting to the point I guess. I would give a real example: diskmon (a windowmaker applet used to monitor disk usage).

That's true. But ref above, if someone is that new to linux, why are they looking for obscure dock apps? (Ah, sometimes I miss dock apps. I wrote a really sweet cpu/mem/etc monitor for AfterStep so many years ago...)

...

Why? Why is that so important? One of Linux's fabulous advantages is diversity. You see, different distro's get to try out different ways of doing things. They then learn from each other, making the whole better.

You have good reasoning, in this case 3 distros is enough. Now we end up with 30,000 distros.

That is both true and misleading. Let's face it, while there are dozens of distro's, there are only a few big ones. SuSE, RedHat/Fedora/CentOS, and Debian/Ubuntu are, as I understand, the really big ones. Gentoo is common, but doesn't really have the install base. RedHat is losing users left and right to Ubuntu. There really aren't as many as people suggest.

...

And every version of every modern distro has a massive library already available at release.

Yes. This is a special benefit of Linux, you get tons of libraries in each distro, e.g. at least 5 set of UI widgets are widely available.

And those libraries are usually pretty nicely standardized, so you're not downloading special versions every time you install a package. Windows programs have the horribly evil tendency to throw their own libraries into the mess that is system32, leading to competing versions of similar libraries and other such nonsense.

...

Because the individual software makers take the extra effort to make sure their software is compatible. Quite often, it isn't. I remember reading about plenty of major software makers whose current version had Windows XP issues when that was first released.

There need to be a standard so that you can write an application and expect the future Linux still support it. Linus himself said he want it this way (I forgot in which article, you can ask him), me too.

This is true, but I worry that such a system might be too restrictive. Given the current climate, I'd much rather have either a "standard rpm and standard deb package" that is agreed upon by the respective distro's, rather than imposed. Or, perhaps, a better system, if someone were really clever, a "meta-package" system. Normal packages in repo's would be their respective distro's system, but there would be a less efficient but more compatible "super packaging" system for vendors to use. You'd have to filter it through something like alien to convert it into your distro's package management system, but that could be automated. You wouldn't want that kind of thing with normal packages, since it would have to filter each and every package, and the dependencies wouldn't be known until it had been filtered, so it'd be inefficient, but designed for wide compatibility.

Zhang Weiwu wrote:

在 2006-08-24四的 09:37 -0700，PerfectReign写道：

...

Zhang Weiwu wrote: <snip>

...

Is there a solution for my case?

If I understand correctly...

1. You want to run Windows (3.1? 95? NT? XP?) natively in a system.

Depends, if I have to. I don't really mind OS, I want the app.

Understood. I don't believe (as mentioned on this list) Corel has a version for Linux these days. I'm not sure what it offers over GIMP or other drawing apps for Linux, as I haven't used Corel since the late '90s.

...

2. You want to run Linux (SUSE?) natively in the same system.

YES!! SUSE 10.1.

...

3. You do not want to run any emulators with their own VM.

Actually I want to run emulator if possible because emulator have less bugs then wine, especially if they support running Windows application directly on Linux desktop, which is my original question.

Though not specific with Corel, you can potentially write an emulator to run the app in a virtualized environment. That said, many here have mentioned Crossover office. I run MS Office 2000 and MS Project in Crossover office, with pretty good success. I tried using AutoCAD 2004 and failed miserably. Though listed as "untested" you could easily download an evaluation version of Crossover and try installing your version of CorelDraw. At least you won't be out any funds. If you like Crossover, it is a mere $50, which is far less than Coreldraw, which I saw was $1200. Yikes!

...

4. You want to run windows apps bug free.

More preciously, based on original Windows so that we get less bugs. A real bug-free app doesn't really exist.

LOL! I was being sarcastic, as usual. I'm stuck working this weekend on a '90s-era Visual Basic application somebody wrote at my company. I'm now revising the whole thing because our mainframe accounting system from which this app pulls files has since changed and the app doesn't work. Of course, the app not only hooks into the mainframe it utilizes two MSSQL servers, and generates a ton of Excel spreadsheets. What a mess!!! -- kai www.perfectreign.com

在 2006-08-25五的 14:50 +1000，Basil Chupin写道：

Zhang Weiwu wrote:

...

在 2006-08-24四的 09:37 -0700，PerfectReign写道：

...

Zhang Weiwu wrote: <snip>

...

Is there a solution for my case? If I understand correctly...

1. You want to run Windows (3.1? 95? NT? XP?) natively in a system.

Depends, if I have to. I don't really mind OS, I want the app.

...

2. You want to run Linux (SUSE?) natively in the same system.

YES!! SUSE 10.1.

...

3. You do not want to run any emulators with their own VM.

Actually I want to run emulator if possible because emulator have less bugs then wine, especially if they support running Windows application directly on Linux desktop, which is my original question.

...

4. You want to run windows apps bug free.

More preciously, based on original Windows so that we get less bugs. A real bug-free app doesn't really exist.

You need the latest version of VMware.

Go to their site and have a look at the specs. Supports SUSE 10.1 (as host).

Do you mean the latest version of VMware support running single Windows application on Linux desktop (rather then on Windows Desktop which in turn run on Linux desktop)?

On Thursday 24 August 2006 12:55 pm, Zhang Weiwu wrote:

Actually I want to run emulator if possible because emulator have less bugs then wine, especially if they support running Windows application directly on Linux desktop, which is my original question. Someone else mentioned VMWare. Another option is Win4Lin (http://www.win4lin.com/)

BTW: VMWare and Win4Lin are virtual machines, not emulators. Both allow you to run a fully licensed version of Windows. The advantage of Win4Lin is that it runs Windows as a Linux process, and the Windows directory is (by default) a subdirectory of your home directory. Win4Lin does support Windows XP. VMWare on the other hand is a virtual machine that allows you to run a number of different operating systems including Linux and Windows. WINE and CrossoverOffice run as native Linux processes that effectively emulate the Windows libraries. Many Windows applications are tested by CodeWeavers, but in the case of CorelDraw, they have not tested it. The bottom line is that applications generally will have better performance under WINE and CXOffice (which is essentially WINE enhanced) because they run as native Linux processes. Win4Lin has a bit of a performace edge over VMWare because it is very specific. In the case of both Win4Lin, VMWare and other virtual machines, you are running the Windows OS, and your application is running under Windows. -- Jerry Feldman Linux Expertise Center (PTAC-MA/TX) Hewlett-Packard Co. 200 Forest Street MRO1-3/K12 Marlborough, MA 01752-3081 508-467-4315 (http://www.testdrive.hp.com)

Zhang Weiwu wrote:

...

If you want TWM/MWM/OLWM/icewm "focus window under mouse pointer" behavior, there is a setting in the windows registry you can flip to enable that.

Really???? Where??? Okay, I go google around for it. Amazing!!! And this is one of the feature I like most!

Download TweakUI from microsoft's website. You don't need to go into the registry and manually change it. However, focus follows pointer is... buggy... in Windows. Every single windows app is written with the assumption of click-to-focus, so it sometimes breaks things.

...

You can go to the Dark Side (StarWars slang) and use either of Xming or Cygwin.

why it's so much easier to run Linux app just using Windows' window manager then the other way round...

One thing I've found fascinating: Why is it always Linux's fault that some windows program doesn't work in Linux? Shouldn't the fault be in that program or in windows for not being more compatible? Linux apps are often written to be quite cross-platform. I've got a windows box that I use for a few things (mostly compatibility testing), and just last night I got annoyed at Windows Media Play, so I installed MPlayer. Works great.

Carl Hartung wrote:

On Thursday 24 August 2006 14:07, suse@rio.vg wrote:

...

Download TweakUI from microsoft's website. You don't need to go into the registry and manually change it. However, focus follows pointer is... buggy... in Windows. Every single windows app is written with the assumption of click-to-focus, so it sometimes breaks things.

I haven't had a problem with it. There's also a 'non-supported' power-tweak for XP Pro that gets you four virtual desktops... indispensable if you absolutely *have* to run Windows sometimes.

I remember running into a problem with nvidia's driver control panel, which had a popout side menu type of thing that only popped out when the window was in focus, but it had a slight space between the window and the side-menu, so moving the mouse over to the side-menu would lose focus on the panel, making the side-menu disappear... If you REALLY have to use windows, I've found Litestep makes me feel much more comfortable.

Carl Hartung wrote:

On Thursday 24 August 2006 14:25, suse@rio.vg wrote:

...

Carl Hartung wrote: I remember running into a problem with nvidia's driver control panel, which had a popout side menu type of thing that only popped out when the window was in focus, but it had a slight space between the window and the side-menu, so moving the mouse over to the side-menu would lose focus on the panel, making the side-menu disappear...

If you REALLY have to use windows, I've found Litestep makes me feel much more comfortable.

I installed LiteStep out of curiosity a few years ago (on 98SE?) and it *looked* fantastic... was fun, I think, for a week or two... but it was still ultimately just Windows with new 'lipstick' :-)

Certainly no replacement for Linux. :) It may be lipstick on a pig, but it's better than a plain old pig... Out of sheer amusement, the Litestep theme I installed last night makes windows look like Mac OSX... I've never used Mac OSX, so I don't know how accurate it was, but it was amusing, at the very least. :)

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

From: suse@rio.vg

You might want to fix something. I always get a mail back from postmaster when writing to you.

That's odd... I've gotten mail from others on this account... what is the error?

...

are often written to be quite cross-platform. I've got a windows box that I use for a few things (mostly compatibility testing), and just last night I got annoyed at Windows Media Play, so I installed MPlayer. Works great.

Call it benefit of open source -- though a word most Windowsians probably never figured out yet.

Indeed. I was really surprised to find MPlayer for windows. I've begun to wonder how hard would it really be for commercial companies to port their apps to Linux?

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

That's odd... I've gotten mail from others on this account... what is the error?

suse@rio.vg SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:: host rio.vg [199.224.12.24]: 554 : Client host rejected: Go away

Thanks... looks like I got spam from your server at some point. A long while back, in my mail logs, I noticed I was getting an extraordinary number of people sending mail to non-existent accounts on my system, so I wrote a script to add any IP that does that to the block list. I get some of the weirdest ones. Not just the common "sales@", but just random words, apparently assuming the domain is set up with a catchall/default account. I stopped doing it a couple years ago and switched to dspam, but the old entries for blocking are still there.

...

Indeed. I was really surprised to find MPlayer for windows. I've begun to wonder how hard would it really be for commercial companies to port their apps to Linux?

Ask Google. If they did a two-track development for both Win32 and POSIX, it's easy. Too bad many apps are MFC-only - which creates a big burden on everyone when porting.

I don't think they did it in two tracks, but I could be wrong. The windows version seemed more an afterthought...

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

Thanks... looks like I got spam from your server at some point. A long while back, in my mail logs, I noticed I was getting an extraordinary number of people sending mail to non-existent accounts on my system, so

Note that the From: line is almost never real, and neither is the Envelope-From one. If you want spam filtering, don't simply use a regex on the From:.

The system was entirely based on the sending server's IP address and the account being sent to. The theory was based on the spammer's tendency to send mail TO non-existent accounts on my server.