Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 82.243.26.181]
on June 13, 2008 09:32 AM
> it still perpetuates the cycle of software developers writing apps for Windows, only now they can have the excuse of
> " Oh, well because of wine, it'll get used in Linux also."
Wine really does not enter into the picture of that cycle. That cycle is more like:
* I'll switch to Linux when it supports my favorite Windows-only application/game.
* I'll keep coding using the Microsoft-recommended APIs (MFc, .Net, etc) until Linux has a significant market share on the desktop (read, something >>10%).
Don't think that companies like Adobe could do a rewrite of Photoshop for Linux just like that. Developping Photoshop took years. A very optimistic estimation says it would cost millions: 50 developers for 18 months at a minimum of $30000/year average cost per developer is over $2 million already. And what do you do during that time? Release no new Windows version while your competition is moving forward? But if you continue working on the Windows version, then your Linux version is outdated even before it's released. Besides such a port would lose compatibility with all the Photoshop plugins because these do use the Windows APIs. And what good is Photoshop to professionals without its plugins.
People keep grossly underestimating the work and cost of porting a Windows application to Linux without Wine. It just is not going to happen without a very very compelling reason to do it, that is, a two-digit Linux market share. And we will never get the users on board without support for the existing Windows applications. *This* is the cycle you need to break. And the only way to do that is with Wine.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re: Finally, it's time for Wine
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 82.243.26.181] on June 13, 2008 09:32 AM> " Oh, well because of wine, it'll get used in Linux also."
Wine really does not enter into the picture of that cycle. That cycle is more like:
* I'll switch to Linux when it supports my favorite Windows-only application/game.
* I'll keep coding using the Microsoft-recommended APIs (MFc, .Net, etc) until Linux has a significant market share on the desktop (read, something >>10%).
Don't think that companies like Adobe could do a rewrite of Photoshop for Linux just like that. Developping Photoshop took years. A very optimistic estimation says it would cost millions: 50 developers for 18 months at a minimum of $30000/year average cost per developer is over $2 million already. And what do you do during that time? Release no new Windows version while your competition is moving forward? But if you continue working on the Windows version, then your Linux version is outdated even before it's released. Besides such a port would lose compatibility with all the Photoshop plugins because these do use the Windows APIs. And what good is Photoshop to professionals without its plugins.
People keep grossly underestimating the work and cost of porting a Windows application to Linux without Wine. It just is not going to happen without a very very compelling reason to do it, that is, a two-digit Linux market share. And we will never get the users on board without support for the existing Windows applications. *This* is the cycle you need to break. And the only way to do that is with Wine.
#