@ Ohyran (just in case somebody posts before I can finish typing this): there's a funny thing about ethics: it changes depending on who applies it. And, most important to the point I'm trying to make, it changes depending on the profession of whom applies it.
Based on that, and on the fact that I'm not a software developer, I cannot comment.
From a complete layman's point of view (and that of a hardware guy, as I'm an electronics technician), I really don't see the issue. You wouldn't be stealing from Microsoft (like Bill Gates incidentally did from Steve Jobs), nor damaging Windows in any way. You would just be making Windows apps work on your distro (which is really no different from what we do with Wine or VB, in essence). However, like I said, I'm not a developer, so I don't know if you guys have a different ethical code than the rest of us (like we electronics guys have).
As for the legal part, I CAN talk about that (no, I'm not an attorney, but I just consulted a friend of mine, who is). Unless somebody can prove you reverse engineered Windows, or can show without reasonable doubt that part or all of your code is copied from the Windows code, there's no legal issue whatsoever. Compatibility is not a crime.
Then, it comes the "work" part. On that, there's absolutely no argument from me. Even with Sector11's invaluable help, it took me more than 3 months to start understanding Conky, so I can only imagine what a project of this magnitude must be like.
Apple is not Windows compatible - it has the same set-up as linux in that respect. You either install Windows along side Mac OS or use a virtual machine with the drawbacks that come with that.
Sorry, this mistake is all mine. I will peg it to my poor English (so I can save face a little ) thiss time.
When I said "Apple" I was talking about the machine, not Mac OS. As I understand (maybe I'm wrong. Never been a Mac guy), PowerPC based machines and earlier were NOT Windows compatible.
EDITED: sadly though Solidworks will not work that brilliant through Wine so its Virtual Machine for you I'm afraid unless you use the 2010 version.
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.p … on&iId=318
Damn. Thanks Ohyran for the info. I have SW 2012.
@ohryan, well said! :-D
@ Hinto: you have no idea how much I'd LOVE to know what you and MB are talking about... :8
This is sort of a side note- but if you want to know more it's probably a good idea to start a bit of self-study in this area (with virtualization), and I'll give you a visual aid to a couple of the things machinebacon and Hinto are referring to.
(larger image at the link)
The map to this screenshot (sorry about the scaling artifacts, didn't want it to be too huge) is this:
Guest: Windows XP
Monitor setup: Dual
Applications: Gimp (A), Paint.NET (B), Audacious audio player (across the desktop span), Sonique audio player (far left over Conky and Gimp toolboxes) and of course VirtualBox with the current status thumbnail running in "seamless" mode.
Questions (I'm not actually asking, this is just an exercise to get a feel for window handling, applications and current states) :
What applications do the human eye see? What applications do the host see? What applications do the guest see?
Bonus: which application is likely to misbehave (and actually does) when interacted with? (the answer is within Hinto's comment upthread)
Last edited by chillicampari (2013-08-24 22:33:54)
#! forum moderator - Please help us keep your forums manageable.
Thank you Annoyingbeggar for that link.
So it HAS been tried before. Too bad they abandoned the project...
The project was a bit of a pain from the beginning. Back in the day there were a number of modems and ethernet cards that weren't supported in any way on Unix-like OS's. A few of us dedicated a lot of time in energy into either getting those drivers working under linux (using a translator or by reverse-engineering) or getting free drivers to work. Once that started to become too much of a headache the Lindows guys said we might be able to get them working in their setup. Some people went that way and others went to work on ndiswrapper. I'm not 100% what happened here because I left the projects around that time and switched from Debian to FreeBSD. I do know that they struggled to get things to work seamlessly both on the hardware and software side of things. To be honest, I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.
“I don't believe in charity. I believe in solidarity. Charity is so vertical. It goes from the top to the bottom. Solidarity is horizontal. It respects the other person. I have a lot to learn from other people.” - Eduardo Hughes Galeano
@Indiro: with respect, the base issue is still not hardware.
Linux doesn't have native hardware beyond various Android phones and a few small projects. Its not a question of changing something on OUR side of it as that would be... well it would be insane at this point. The only project that is reverse-engineering windows is the one machinebacon talked about and just to let that be clear: they are reverse-engineering another OS. Its not some linux guys who sighs and just flip a switch.
Thats kinda the thing: its not "You would just be making Windows apps work on your distro" (as you phrased it), its not a choice in the way you seem to think it is. Its building a whole new OS and I am so much a layman it hurts but from what I've understand (I may be wrong) chances are bigger that you'll end up with something which is either "just windows" or "just linux" or something that wont work well with either.
You are waaaaaaaaay better off talking to the people who made Solidworks and try to get them to port it, which is in comparison with "build a completely new OS" like the difference between "please get me a cup of coffe" and "please get me a sliver of fresh lime from the peak of Mount Fuji covered with Malay dew and a single ostrich feather on fire sticking out of the top".
And then fix the virtual machine stuff