1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<html>
<head>
<META NAME="generator" CONTENT="lgazmail v1.1G.e">
<TITLE>The Answer Guy 36:
MS Applications Support For Linux
</TITLE>
</HEAD><BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000"
LINK="#3366FF" VLINK="#A000A0">
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
<H4>"The Linux Gazette...<I>making Linux just a little more fun!</I>"</H4>
<P> <hr> <P>
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
<center>
<H1><A NAME="answer">
<img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" alt="(?)" border="0" align="middle">
<font color="#B03060">The Answer Guy</font>
<img src="../../gx/dennis/bbubble.gif" alt="(!)" border="0" align="middle">
</A></H1>
<BR>
<H4>By James T. Dennis,
<a href="mailto:answerguy@ssc.com">answerguy@ssc.com</a><BR>
Starshine Technical Services,
<A HREF="http://www.starshine.org/">http://www.starshine.org/</A>
</H4>
</center>
<p><hr><p>
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
<!-- begin 77 -->
<H3 align="left"><img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" height="50" width="60"
alt="(?) " border="0">
MS Applications Support For Linux
</H3>
<p><strong>From Marty Bluestein on Fri, 25 Dec 1998
</strong></p>
<!-- ::
MS Applications Support For Linux
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:: -->
<P><STRONG><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/qbub.gif" ALT="(?)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
Is there a mechanism that enables MS apps to run under Linux? Is anyone
working on an autoloader for Linux?
</STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>
</STRONG></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/bbub.gif" alt="(!)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
There are a few projects. The most prominent is
WINE (<A HREF="http://www.winehq.com">http://www.winehq.com</A>).
The goal of WINE is a complete re-implementation of the Windows API's
to achieve full binary compatibility under any x86 Unix with X Windows
(Linux is the predominant platform but any other modern x86 Unix
should be a reasonable platform for WINE).
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Another is Bochs (which has recently moved it's web pages
to <A HREF="http://www.bochs.com">http://www.bochs.com</A>). Bochs
is a package which emulates an x86 CPU and PC chipset (similar to
<a href="http://www.connectix.com/">Connectix</a>' "Virtual PC").
It runs on any platform that can compile its C sources. I've heard
that it works reasonably well but is to slow for production use
(for running Win 95 or 98 on a PC). Considering that you're using a
PC to emulate a full PC CPU and chipset this is not a surprising
limitation.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
For older MS Windows applications (3.1 and earlier) you
might try WABI --- a commercial Windows Applications Binary
Interface which is available for Linux from
<A HREF="http://www.caldera.com/">Caldera</A>
(<A HREF="http://www.caldera.com">http://www.caldera.com</A>).
This is not be updated and is unlikely to ever support Windows '95
or later applications.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
For DOS (non-Windows) you can run a copy of MS-DOS, DR-DOS
FreeDOS or just about any other "real mode" x86 OS under
the Linux '<tt>dosemu</tt>'. (Just search for it in Yahoo!
using "<tt>+linux +dosemu</tt>").
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><em>
[ Its home page is hosted by SuSE ...
<a href="http://www.suse.com/dosemu/"
>http://www.suse.com/dosemu/</a> ...
I use it to run dBase stuff and it works pretty well
at this point. -- Heather ]
</em></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
The DOS support is pretty good these days, though I don't
use any MS-DOS applications any more so I don't have much
first hand experience with it. The WABI support was pretty
fast (it felt faster running typical Windows 3.x programs
under Linux than it did under native MS-DOS on similar
hardware --- probably do to Linux more efficient filesystem
and memory management).
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
When thinking about the limitations of Linux support Win '9x
and NT applications support (Win 32S) it is helpful to keep
in mind that these limitations are almost certainly a key
design goal at Microsoft. Although Linux was not on thier
"radar" during the design of Windows '95 and NT --- OS/2
certainly was.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Enmeshing the interfaces at various levels to make
applications difficult or impossible to support under
competing operating systems is one of the key strategies
that Microsoft employs. The current DoJ case against them
is only a tip of the backlash that consumers are now
directing to this monopoly. The fact that Linux
installation tripled in the last year --- and that many
organizations are now considering Linux for their desktop
applications platform is ample evidence of that.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
* (personally I think it's still a bit premature
to be touting Linux as typical workers desktop
system --- though the introduction of Corel's
WordPerfect for Linux, and the release of an
updated Wingz Professional for the platform
do certainly bode well for the coming year.
I've heard that Applixware 4.4.1 is also
greatly improved and the next version of
StarOffice 5.x should stabilize and mature that
suite. Meanwhile <A HREF="http://www.gnome.org/">GNOME</A>,
<A HREF="http://www.kde.org/">KDE</A>, LyX, and GNUStep
are plodding along towards "prime time"
availability).
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
So that fact that there is only limited support for MS apps
under Linux is a testimony to the skills of Microsoft's
programmers. We can surmise that preventing these
applications from running on non-Microsoft operating systems
was given higher priority than robustness, security,
stability, integrity, or performance.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Probably the only features that were given priority over
"trap the user" were those that would enable magazine
writers, and corporate purchasing agents to "review" the
products and feel that they had evaluated them with about 15
minutes to an hour of actual work time exposure. This
forces the application programmer to put all sorts of
"features" onto menus, button bars, toolbars, icon ribbons,
and otherwise clutter the screens and windows. This is an
endemic problem in commercial software --- it's written to
get reviews and make sales, not to satisfy long term users.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Of course an alternative to direct MS Applications support
is support for their document formats. However this is
another of those key "customer trapping" opportunities.
They do everything short of strong (non-exportable)
encryption to lock your data into .DOC, .XLS, and .PPT
formats. The latest Linux applications suites and word
processors are making some headway in this --- and I can
often extract contents from Word '97 files without too
much fuss. Earlier versions of Word are pretty well
supported at this point.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
You can bet that the next version of Office will egregiously
break format compatability. MS can't allow its customers
any freedom of choice or portability of documents to
"other" platforms. That's much too dangerous to their
upgrade revenue scheme.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
I've talked about MS Windows support and the evils of
proprietary document formats before. I personally think
that the only rational remedy for Microsoft's monopolistic
practices would be for the DoJ to impose a rule that MS
produce freely available (open source) "reference
implementations" of standards C source code to peform a
reasonable suite of conversions and manipulations on all
"documents" produces by their applications (including .EXE
and .DLL "documents" produced by their programming
"applications"). Under this plan any upgrade to any MS
product that failed compatibility test suites with there
freely available reference implementation (converters, tools
and filters) would result in an immediate injunction on
distribution until the reference implementation as updated
and vetted as compatible.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
(Note that I didn't say that MS has to release any of the
sources to any of their products. Only that they must
release some reference implementation that is compatible
with the file formats, and freely usable in competing
products --- free and commercial. Their contention is that
their products enjoy superior market share as a result of
superior interface and integration with one another --- this
would give them a unique opportunity to prove that).
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
I have no idea what you mean by an "autoloader for Linux."
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><STRONG><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/qbub.gif" ALT="(?)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
Thanks.
<br>Marty Bluestein
</STRONG></P>
<!-- sig -->
<!-- end 77 -->
<hr width="40%" align="center">
<!-- begin 74 -->
<H3 align="left"><img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" height="50" width="60"
alt="(?) " border="0">
Automount/autoloader
</H3>
<p><strong>From Marty Bluestein on Fri, 25 Dec 1998
</strong></p>
<!-- ::
Automount/autoloader
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:: -->
<P><STRONG><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/qbub.gif" ALT="(?)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
OK. Guess I should have fully read your message before I
responded. By the term "autoloader" I mean a self installing
function - you stick in the CD and Linux (or some other OS) sets
itself up. I wasn't aware that MS was already loading their user's
work (.DOC,. XLS, etc.) with gotchas. I wonder if the DoJ is aware
of and pursuing this?
</STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>
Marty
</STRONG></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/bbub.gif" alt="(!)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
There are several packages that will automatically
mount CD's (and floppies, NFS directories etc) for
Linux. This is referred to generically (under Unix)
as "volume management" or "automounting" (the latter
term is more often used with regards to network file
systems while the former is exclusively used for
local media).
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Under Solaris there is a daemon called '<tt>vold</tt>' that
manages CD's.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Under Linux you can use the '<tt>amd</tt>' (automount daemon)
or an old program called "<tt>Supermount</tt>" (Stephen Tweedie,
if I recall correctly). Under newer Linux kernels you
can look for a module called "<tt>autofs</tt>".
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
I haven't played with these much so I can't give real
advice on using them. However, you now have some key
words to search on. If you get one of them working
in a way that seems like it would meet a typical
requirements scenario --- write it up as a mini-HOWTO
and solicit people to contribute sample configurations
and descripts for other common usage scenarios (or
at least write up an "unmaintained" mini-HOWTO and
encourage the readers to adopt and maintain it.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<!-- sig -->
<!-- end 74 -->
<hr width="40%" align="center">
<!-- begin 73 -->
<H3 align="left"><img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" height="50" width="60"
alt="(?) " border="0">
More on: MS Apps Support
</H3>
<p><strong>From Marty Bluestein on Fri, 25 Dec 1998
</strong></p>
<!-- ::
More on: MS Apps Support
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:: -->
<P><STRONG><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/qbub.gif" ALT="(?)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
Although my ire against Gates, et al would like to see a good
platform running his apps that will probably be a moving target.
Better, I think, to develop a good set of apps that can work on
the docs that MS apps produce. MSs response would have to be to
encumber a user's work with junk to make it incompatible with any
other apps. The result of that could very well be disaster for
MS. Could you imagine having your work suddenly become
incomprehensible because of the cute little things your app put in
it?
</STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>
Marty
</STRONG></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/bbub.gif" alt="(!)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
I don't have to imagine this scenario. I've seen it
happen many times.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<!-- sig -->
<!-- end 73 -->
<hr width="40%" align="center">
<!-- begin 75 -->
<H3 align="left"><img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" height="50" width="60"
alt="(?) " border="0">
MS Applications Support For Linux
</H3>
<p><strong>From Marty Bluestein on Fri, 25 Dec 1998
</strong></p>
<P><STRONG>
You are right on. My appreciation of MS coincides with yours. I wish I had
the time and the money to pursue that emulation of 95 and NT. Even better
would be a good, competitive set of apps. Corel's latest release for Linux
may indicate some movement in that direction. TNX for your response. Happy
Xmas.
<br>Marty Bluestein
</STRONG></P>
<!-- end 75 -->
<hr width="40%" align="center">
<!-- begin 88 -->
<H3 align="left"><img src="../../gx/dennis/qbubble.gif" height="50" width="60"
alt="(?) " border="0">
More on: MS Apps Support
</H3>
<p><strong>From Marty Bluestein on Sat, 26 Dec 1998
</strong></p>
<!-- ::
More on: MS Apps Support
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:: -->
<P><STRONG><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/qbub.gif" ALT="(?)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
I've just installed Redhat. It is "auto loading". I now have a problem
which Redhat and I must resolve. I'll write it up and post it when it's
corrected. To whit.. WIN95 now crawls along as if it had a bigger bag of
sand on it's back. Re MS: I'd rather see MS broken up into two separate
companies. One doing APPS and the other doing OS.
TNX for responses. HAPPY XMAS, MERRY CHANUKAH, SWINGING KWANZA
and JOYFUL RAMADAN.
</STRONG></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><IMG SRC="../../gx/dennis/bbub.gif" alt="(!)"
HEIGHT="28" WIDTH="50" BORDER="0"
>
I can't help with the Win '95 problem. It's probably
confused about WINS (Windows Naming System) or some other
networking issue.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Re: Breaking up MS. Historically this has done <EM>NO GOOD</EM>
with other monopolies. Go read a decent historical account
and business analysis on JP Morgan (and wash that down
with some Noam Chomsky). I'd recommend a book for you
--- but I'd have to refer to my father to find one. My
knowlege is definitely second-hand on this --- but I've
discussed it with a couple people whose background in
the fields of finance and history I respect.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Breaking them up is a fundamentally flawed approach. The
controlling interests -- the OWNERS will still be the same.
The resulting companies would clearly have mutual interests,
complementary product lines, and interlocking boards of
directors.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Unfortunately this approach would "appease" the masses
and actually work in Bill G's favor (as it did with
JP Morgan). It will allow the DoJ to appear competent
and be touted as a "tough on (corporate) crime" victory.
So, it's the most likely outcome.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
It's also just about the worst way to deal with the problem.
(It's even worse than sitting back and doing <em>nothing</em>)
since it sets another bad precedent.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<!-- sig -->
<!-- end 88 -->
<!--startcut ======================================================= -->
<P> <hr> <P>
<H5 align="center"><a href="http://www.linuxgazette.com/ssc.copying.html"
>Copyright ©</a> 1999, James T. Dennis
<BR>Published in <I>The Linux Gazette</I> Issue 36 January 1999</H5>
<P> <hr> <P>
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
<P align="center">
<table width="98%"><tr valign="center" align="center">
<td rowspan="3" colspan="6"><A HREF="../lg_answer36.html"><IMG
SRC="../../gx/dennis/answernew.gif"
ALT="[ Answer Guy Index ]"></A></td>
<TD><A HREF="./a.html">a</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./b.html">b</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./c.html">c</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./1.html">1</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./2.html">2</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./3.html">3</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./4.html">4</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./5.html">5</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./6.html">6</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./7.html">7</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./9.html">9</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./10.html">10</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./11.html">11</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./12.html">12</A></TD>
</tr><tr valign="center" align="center">
<TD><A HREF="./15.html">15</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./16.html">16</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./18.html">18</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./19.html">19</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./20.html">20</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./21.html">21</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./22.html">22</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./23.html">23</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./24.html">24</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./25.html">25</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./26.html">26</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./27.html">27</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./28.html">28</A></TD>
</tr><tr valign="center" align="center">
<TD><A HREF="./29.html">29</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./31.html">31</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./32.html">32</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./33.html">33</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./34.html">34</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./35.html">35</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./36.html">36</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./37.html">37</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./38.html">38</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./39.html">39</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./40.html">40</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./41.html">41</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./42.html">42</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./44.html">44</A></TD>
</tr><tr valign="center" align="center">
<TD><A HREF="./45.html">45</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./46.html">46</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./47.html">47</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./48.html">48</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./49.html">49</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./50.html">50</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./51.html">51</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./52.html">52</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./53.html">53</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./54.html">54</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./55.html">55</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./56.html">56</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./57.html">57</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./60.html">60</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./61.html">61</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./62.html">62</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./63.html">63</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./64.html">64</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./65.html">65</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./66.html">66</A></TD>
</tr><tr valign="center" align="center">
<TD><A HREF="./67.html">67</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./69.html">69</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./72.html">72</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./76.html">76</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./77.html">77</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./78.html">78</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./79.html">79</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./80.html">80</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./81.html">81</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./82.html">82</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./84.html">84</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./85.html">85</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./86.html">86</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./87.html">87</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./91.html">91</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./94.html">94</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./95.html">95</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./96.html">96</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./97.html">97</A></TD>
<TD><A HREF="./98.html">98</A></TD>
</tr></table>
</P>
<P> <hr> <P>
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
<A HREF="../lg_toc36.html"
><IMG SRC="../../gx/indexnew.gif" ALT="[ Table Of Contents ]"></A>
<A HREF="../../index.html"
><IMG SRC="../../gx/homenew.gif" ALT="[ Front Page ]"></A>
<A HREF="../lg_bytes36.html"
><IMG SRC="../../gx/back2.gif" ALT="[ Previous Section ]"></A>
<A HREF="../larriera.html"
><IMG SRC="../../gx/fwd.gif" ALT="[ Next Section ]"></A>
<!-- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -->
</BODY></HTML>
<!--endcut ========================================================= -->
|
