[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: WLinux -> Subverting Windows by making Linux available to MS users
> On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> > > about it, it's because Linux actually WORKS whereas CrapOS DOESN'T. Now,
> > > can you please tell me how to make a stable, well performing operating
> > > system on an unstable, badly performing one? You're predestined to fail.
> >
> > I also pointed out and agreed that it would be no stabler than
> > Win95/NT (the latter is purportedly stable, although I think there's a
> > coverup involved). That is explicitly NOT the point.
> >
> > For some of the perceived use, the end-user wouldn't even necessarily
> > know that Linux was involved. Notice that I pointed out that with
> > this scheme the Linux distribution would be shrinkwrap and totally
> > portable. In other words, an application vendor could develop for
> > Linux (very desirable of course) and deploy on a CDROM with a
> > mini-distribution of WLinux that runs transparently under Win95/NT.
> That can be done by writing a portable code and compiling it natively for both
> platforms - much easier than writing WLinux...

WLinux is something you write once. I don't WANT to write Win32 apps...

In anycase, that's only one use of WLinux, there's also the learning,
'trying it out' situations, and a number of others where having a true
Linux environment would be very useful.

> > > Economics, economics, economics: I don't want Wintendo to have all my
> > > Unix apps but I do want to have all the Wintendo apps on my Unix because
> > > that gives me a comparative advantage.
> >
> > Yes, that would be great. Let me know when you have it working. I'm
> > ALL for it. The problem is that as soon as you have a
> > Win32/etc. emulation working on Linux, MS puts N*1000 programmers to
> > work on the next mostly incompatible 'standard' and you have to try to
> > keep up.
> Well, that's probably true... But that way we'll keep the competition ;-))
> > If you provide Linux binary support under Win95/NT, they can't stop
> > you and suddenly Linux apps are viable for the other 90% of the PC pie.
> No. As you yourself said above, the average user wouldn't even know s/he's
> running (W)Linux. Even if s/he realized that the application has some
> different format than the others, he'd probably think that this is some "new
> and excellent Micro$oft invention! Wow, these guys are great - that software
> RUNS!!" - would it be Linux or Winblows advocacy?

Yes, I've thought of this, and it is a possibility. That's why being
the virtualizer not the virtualizee is so important. In this case
however, Linux would only virtualize device drivers and be native otherwise.

> > > My Linux runs everything - from Nintendo to Wintendo. Can your Wintendo
> > > run Linux? No? Well, I guess that means I can use all your tools to
> > > produce $$$ yet you can't use any of mine. I Lin - you Woose (get
> > > this;]).
> >
> > I'm not advocating that we don't want it, only that we should tackle
> > the problem from both sides. Although it's non-intuitive, I feel that
> > supplying the backwards route has some very interesting consequences
> > that are only helpful.
> I think that the only consequence would be winning more market for Micro$oft -
> the wouldn't announce that the non-crashing and better applications aren't
> their own, but created by independent vendor(s).

You can look at it either way. In fact, you could just as easily
argue that it's increasing Linux's market share. As I mentioned
earlier, you could get to the point where Linux was running on more
desktops than Win95. (If you got most of the Win95 desktops to run
WLinux for any reason, this would be true.)

This would be a very forceful and influencing statement to make.

> > Believe me, when I have an emulator of any kind that can run Win95 and
> > Win32 apps under native Linux, I'll be running it everyday.
> WINE's pretty good already.

Last I looked (about a month ago on the official websites) it wouldn't
even come close to running Corel Draw/Paint, AOL Client, MS
Word/Excel, WordPerfect, etc.


> TTYL(r), marek
> ---
> "Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit that the
> laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes."
> Friedrich Nietzsche

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:0.084 / U:0.944 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site