I think POSIX was introduced for a reason. Of course GNU/Linux, just like any other *NIX system, should be POSIX-compliant. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a *NIX system.

However, we all know the most popular, therefore most-used and most-programmed-for, operating system is not POSIX-compliant. So, if we want to be able to integrate compatability into an operating system for this popular operating system, hence allowing us to use programs only released on said operating system, we have to allow for POSIX-noncompliance, as well.

Wine does do a good job at allowing for this noncompliance, but not seamlessly. I do commend the writers of Wine for their valiant work. I've been using Windows programs (games, internet explorer, others) on my Red Hat system for a while now, and although they run slowly, they do run. I am forever grateful for the hard work these people have done, along with the time and effort spent by EVERYONE in the free software community.

I think I became hung up in the technicalities and the minute details of what I was talking about. Some things that brought about my initial post:

1.) I bought program Z. I should be able to use it, even if I haven't decided to succum to the whim of a specific software-giant (even though I DO own a copy of my previous OS, I'd rather not have to own one).

2.) I want to get away from the clutches of a certain software-giant. However, when I try to switch over to one of the obvious alternatives, I'm finding it exceedingly difficult to do so. Many of my programs no longer work, and none of the stuff I knew about my previous OS is applicable to my new OS. I think if it were easier for me to make the transition, I may more successfully use my new OS, and I may enjoy using it without excessive headaches. I want my new OS experience to be productive, short, sweet, and painless.

I don't know if anyone here has ever seen it, but I was using a Macintosh at my local library to check some e-mail. When I turned on the computer, what appeared to be a "taskbar" appeared on the bottom of the desktop! I clicked on it, and it was layed out pretty similar to the "taskbar" of Windows 95/98. Now, is this a positive thing, because it allows the user (used to Windows' layout) to navigate the Mac system and filestructure, enabling her/him to utilize an operating system not produced by Microsoft, or is this a negative thing, helping Microsoft attain that much more of an influence on society and how its members think of computing methods?

I can see both aspects, but I think it's extremely unfortunate that Microsoft and its Windows family of operating systems have gotten a hold of the majority of society's computers. Yes, the simplicity of Windows does allow the common Joe to use a computer, access the internet, and create Windows-based programs, only to spread non-compliance with INDUSTRY standards (versus Microsoft "standards"), but it also helps to brainwash, even cripple, the average Joe, making it even harder for her/him to learn anything about computers that is not related to the world of Microsoft. I, unfortunately, seem to be one of those "victims". I am struggling to learn the new terminologies, the new (read: different) technologies, and the new interfaces. Of course I'm going to find roadblocks, sources of frustration, because what I'd think of as "natural" is completely wrong/different in my new computing world.

I do not see how my intentions are selfish. When I eventually overcome these difficulties, I want to make it easier for others in my predicament to make the transition--without the aggravation and headaches that come along with it.

I look forward to the day when a person of the "I don't care, just make it work" mentality can turn on any computer, no matter the operating system, and within what seems like no time, start productively using the computer.

I know, I know. Go ahead. Say it:

I think my imaginary, no-biases-held operating system has potential. Even if I'm the only person who thinks it's a good idea, I'm still determined to make it a reality, because I do think it will add value to the computing community.

You must be either (a) greatly underestimating the magnitude of the task, (b) greatly overestimating your own abilities, or (c) anticipating a very large number of people to jump in and work on your project. One coder (or even a few) could not possibly take on a job of this size, no matter how capable.

The fact that you even considered doing it all yourself suggests you are very inexperienced -- otherwise, you would easily see how impossible it would be for one person to do alone. The fact that you didn't even know what POSIX is before you began this topic, and that you had to ask if interoperability standards even existed, show clearly that you lack even the basic relevant knowledge and experience for a project of this type.

Are you joking? Your entire complaint is that *nix-type operating systems should be more like Windows! You may not have used those exact words, but it is clearly your intent. True, you said that you do not (necessarily) want GNU/Linux to look like Windows, but you quite obviously want it to work more like Windows (see your hypothetical "grandmother" scenario for just one example). Seems a bit foolish to sputter and protest that others aren't reading your posts carefully when you yourself do not have a good handle on what you said.

From the maturity level I've seen in your retorts, I doubt you're ready to take any advice from me just now, but I'll give it anyway. Get a copy of the IEEE POSIX standards and study them. Join a couple of Freshmeat projects that aim to do even a small part of what you're suggesting, so you see how involved it really is. Gain some experience actually doing the sort of thing you propose to do, because you are clearly lacking it.

Should you? Did the program advertise itself as cross platform? Does Linux advertise itself as a drop in replacement for Windows? Wine is a hack. It is designed as a last resort, not as a "seamless" system of cross-platform compatability.

I would be wary of saying Windows is the most programmed for operating system. It's probably technically true, but I think the disparity between the number of programs written for Windows and the number wirrten for Linux/UNIX is far less than the disparity between their user bases. Most hackers are not interested in getting Linux to run Windows programs that do cool stuff. They want to write their own programs that do cool(er) stuff. Windows compatibility will just never be a major issue for these people. You have to remember that the fact Linux is now useable by non-beardy-techie-hacker types (myself included) is basically an accident. It was never written for newbies. I'm not suggesting you're a complete newbie, but you say you are not yet comfortable with the command line, etc. Remember that to get the most out of Linux, you have to adapt to it. Linux will only ever adapt to the needs of the programmers who code it.

Alex

No flames, but I had read somewhere years ago that windows NT is POSIX-compliant. When I read your post, I was hoping that someone else would point that out to you but a few replies later, I took the onus on myself and googled. The following document dated June 1993 might be of interest to you. I've a feeling that POSIX is not exactly what you think it is.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/archive/de...msdn_posix.asp

Good luck.

Indeed. It's actually not all that difficult to write apps that run natively on Linux and Windows these days (what with Qt and such). That's why I think too great a concentration of emulating Windows binaries is misplaced effort (although if you need, say, Photoshop on Linux, it's still your only choice).

Alex

You're doing it again mate ... re-shaping the water
to a sofa.

What you *really* should do in this situation is to
organize a bunch of people who also own the product
and rather would have a Linux-app, and keep asking
the software manufacturer for a Linux-version.

It's *not* Linux' liability to cover for your
"wrong choice of software" in the past.

"I bought this train, and I want this cities mayor to
bloody well build rails that lead to my workplace,
the mall and the movies!"

Cheers,
Tink

A nice read, this thread ! Thanks.

Bruno

Hi Bruno,

and how about a somewhat longer contribution, then? ;)

Cheers,
Tink

To Tinkster:

No way !
I just enjoyed reading it, thought it was interesting, and like to follow the thread from a discrete distance.

Bruno

To Bruno:

You wuss ;)

Cheers,
Tink

To Tink:

Listen, there is a young puppy who thinks he knows it all, want to re-invent the wheel. He gets a few old times in full action, telling him the car is already running.
The young lad, the old timers, it was a bit of an uneven battle, but fun to watch.
My input would only be fun if I could defend the agrument of the young one. But I can't, not because of my age, but because I simply do not agree with him.

Cherio
Bruno

shit, do i sound that middle aged, lol.

*is 18*

No worries Alex,
[quote]Quoting llamma_meme
sh*t, do i sound that middle aged, lol.
[quote]
age and maturity don't necessarliy go
hand in hand :) ... I've come across
very reasonable 16 year olds and
over 60 year old half-witts ;)

Cheers,
Tink

I like the idea. But I prefer mine. Have people with initiative take it on themselves to learn Linux (or other OS). Not because Microsoft is evil (which I don't agree with) but because it does expand their repitoir. In my opinion, if something is there in the computing world, it's not decoration and should be tested. The sad thing is this takes time.

I'd like to see more of what happens here, people helping people get a grasp on Linux. Helping them, people with initiative to learn then teach other people with initiative how to learn easily, or fully teach them. Although the existance of a universal standard is utopian, I think having a good, reliable support network is much better.

(and since people are throwing ages, I'm 17).

QUOTE: (from CParker15)
already-existant GNU/Linux systems running wine... but let's face it. Wine isn't stable. And it does have its drawbacks. One major one being it's based on proprietary software components. You need to own a Windows license to use the DLL files...

I just terminated reading this thread and found it very interesting. Now I cannot resist to put some of my points to your estimated consideration:

You don't need a windows license to run wine. Wine is completely independent, does not need windows dll, has it's own.

I can sympatisize with CParker, as I was also one day caught in the Microsoft Matrix, not knowing anything else. Now I am free and I go free the others ;-)

Linux can be hard in the beginning.
The learning curve is very steep, you need to know many many things before you can just use the system (coming from windows, that is)
But once you start grasping it, it grows on you, you start realizing that windows does not let you in, that the OS is laughing about your inability to controll it. It is controlling you, LIKE THE MATRIX. You want to terminate a task in Windows? Click terminate... Wait. .... wait... confirm, yes "I want to send this task to hell where the fire burns hot"... wait wait... wait... wait... Terminate it again... Confirm again... .wait wait wait (waste nerves) and then it is gone...
In linux, this is nice: Either you send a task the SIGTERM (tells the programm: Pack your stuff and getoutahere!) = slow way, or shortcut: SIGKILL (shoots the programm in the head and bang, it is gone!!!) no waiting, no nerve wasting.
Do you know HOW MANY WEEKS, MONTHS I WAITED for windows programms to terminate in my professional life so far? Well, no more with linux.

Yes, I do agree with you CParker, one day all the Computers will be EASY to be used. Don't believe me?
Just wait and see. Watch how everything else has developed into this. Cars? Were initially extremely hard to maintain, find a gas station, start up (turn turn turn, musclepower) and now? Every idiot can drive a car and maintain it (hire a mechanic). TVs? the same...
All these things were in the beginning reserved to the enthusiasts only, now they're for the general public.
Computers will one day speak to you, tell you of a problem (not enough HD space) AND propose a solution, then wait for your answer and after 10 minutes, solve the problem independently.
BUT even though these systems will be so easy to use in the future, the easier they are to use, the more stupid the user can be and the less control does he has.

Computer systems are seemingly getting easier to use (winXP) But let me ask you.... Do they get simpler? Hell no, technology, eventhough it get's easier to use, gets more and more complicated. The ones that UNDERSTAND them, how they work are the ones with absolute power. The less you understand a thing, the more you will be deserted when it fails, and thigs will ALWAYS still fail sometimes. I for myself hate to depend on others to fix problems for me, I hate to point with the finger and I never do (a pathetic gesture in my view of somebody that does not have his life under control)
Fix it yourself. Learn how to.

So for your you linux experience: Take it easy, give it time, let it sink in. You were used to windows. Windows has it's rules C:\ D:\, Linux is the same. You are FAMILIAR with windows, let linux become familiar to you.
I found linux very very complicated in the beginning. Now I don't think so anymore. Many things are more simple than in windows. Others are not.
You got to learn a lot in linux (if you want to handle the beast), but it is well worth the effort.

It's like me getting into fixing my own car, learning how to do that (I am not a car mechanic though, I work as a professional it guy)...So, when my car breaks down, I know why, exactly. Because I know how it works and maintain it myself. It is a liberating experience to handle things. For me this has been the transition from windows to linux in the IT world.

I hope you will find your pleasure in linux, I for myself love it everyday more.