Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

No Wine for Dell Ubuntu Users, Says Shuttleworth

Posted by Zonk on Fri May 11, 2007 09:25 AM
from the make-sure-to-sip dept.
yuna49 writes "News from last week, but still worth noting: Mark Shuttleworth told eWeek in a May 3rd interview that Dell will not include open-source software such as Wine with the PCs it plans to bundle with Ubuntu Linux. Says Shuttleworth: 'I do not want to position Ubuntu and Linux as a cheap alternative to Windows ... While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows ... Often we see proprietary software companies just completely fail to understand not only the motivations of the Linux community, but also the processes. It's very practical, there's a way to get things done, and it's different. The VMware guys have really engaged with us completely and worked to the agenda set by the Linux community, which is not an ideological agenda but a practical one.' Does that mean Wine won't even be listed in the package manager?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Shuttleworth Tells Linux Users to Stop Being So Fussy For OEMs 386 comments
Anonymous writes "Mark Shuttleworth says Linux users may need to stop being so fussy when putting demands on OEMs for pre-installed Linux PCs. CRN finds a response to Shuttleworth that seems to be both amusing and telling at the same time."
[+] Dell to Sell Machines with Ubuntu Pre-Loaded 562 comments
kotj.mf writes "Cnet is reporting that Dell will shortly announce a partnership with Canonical to offer Ubuntu pre-loaded on certain consumer-oriented desktops and notebooks. The announcement comes after a groundswell of support for pre-installed Linux on Dell's IdeaStorm site. 'The company is starting its business by trying to appeal to users of desktop computers. From there, Canonical Chief Executive Mark Shuttleworth has said, the company plans to head to the server market, where the real Linux bread and butter can be found. [Dell spokesman Kent] Cook wouldn't comment on whether Dell plans to offer Ubuntu on its servers as well.'."
[+] Ubuntu Founder Says Microsoft Not A Big Threat 128 comments
Golygydd Max writes "Who says that Microsoft and open source developers are enemies? It's not Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth. He says that Microsoft is not the patent threat Linux and open source developers should be worried about, and that the software giant will itself be fighting against the software patents system within a few years. 'He said the most dangerous litigants are companies not themselves in the software business, small ventures or holding companies that get their principal revenue from patent licensing. He singled out former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold and his company Intellectual Ventures, which is stockpiling patents at a rate that alarms large companies such as IBM and HP, as an example of such a potentially dangerous company.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 11 2007, @09:26AM (#19081721)
    Linux has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows

    And one of those strengths is that you can still install WINE after you buy the computer despite the decisions made by a large company or single individual.
    • by Robber Baron (112304) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:15AM (#19082413) Homepage
      In fact if it's all the same to you guys, I'd prefer it if Dell DIDN'T bundle their computers with all that useless bloatware that they currently do (not that WINE is useless or bloatware)! It's almost at the point where it's better to wipe the damn thing clean immediately and then re-install the OS from scratch!
    • by Milton Waddams (739213) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:32AM (#19082695)
      You mean Linux lets you install software now?!?! Wow, maybe this really is the year for Linux on the desktop...
    • by sgholt (973993) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:38AM (#19082809)
      I think you and many of the other posters have missed Shuttleworth's point.
      He doesn't want linux to be a platform to run windows software. Wine is a great application, but windows software with a few exceptions is never going to run as well as it would on the Windows OS.
      That can only hinder linux adoption by those still tied to windows applications.
      The key to linux adoption has not changed...we need software companies to make software for linux.

      Shuttleworth has put a lot of money into advertising and promotion of linux...he is doing what needs to be done. The more linux users there are, the more interest software companies will take. Wine is a temporary fix to the bigger problem...it will always just be a temporary fix. These things take time but I think his comments do show a good understanding of the real problems.
    • by bberens (965711) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:42AM (#19082891)
      Imagine average joe user calling Dell because [insert Windows app] doesn't work in wine. Dell doesn't want that.
      • by 0racle (667029) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:19AM (#19082481)
        What in the hell are you talking about? The Ubuntu that will ship not have Wine installed by default. The article does not say it will not have Wine available. You will still be able to launch Aptitude or whatever Ubuntu actually uses and install Wine from the Ubuntu repositories.
          • by mhall119 (1035984) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:52AM (#19083103) Homepage Journal
            Um, WTF? If Windows doesn't include software I want, I download it and install in. For linux, it's probably in the distro's repository, so downloading and installing it is even easier. If it's not, then I'm back to where I am on Windows, download it and install it.

            Now I doubt Ubuntu will setup a different repository for Dell installs, so Wine will likely be only an apt-get away. The announcement is just saying that Wine will not be in the default installation, for the logical reasons given.

            But lets say you're right, and Ubuntu doesn't offer it for Dell installs, you just download [winehq.org] it and install it yourself, it'll even handle downloading and installing any dependencies for you.

            So the absolute worst case scenario here is that installing software in Ubuntu is as easy as installing software on Windows, but chances are it will be much much easier. Basically everything about your post was FUD, and not even intentional FUD, but ignorant FUD. From someone who claims to be a Linux developer (and a Wine developer too?), I can't fathom how you could not know this.
              • by mhall119 (1035984) on Friday May 11 2007, @11:46AM (#19084135) Homepage Journal
                Again, WTF?

                What happens if you are not included in a distribution (or just as badly, included but packaged wrong or out of date)? As there's a lot of confusion around what this means, it means you aren't apt-gettable by end users. Not in the repositories.
                You offer the file for download directly from you. How do you do it in Windows?

                That's OK if it's only one distro, but it quickly becomes annoying if it's several.
                No it's not, there are about 4 packages you can make that will cover 99% of users: RPM, DEB, TGZ and source. Just configure your build script to make each one every time you build, it's a 1-time cost in effort for the author.

                A package for Feisty isn't good enough. You need the last couple of versions as well, because not everybody upgrades at the same time. To do that you need a separate install of each version, and you need to build the package on each install, using multi-boots, or VMware, or chroots, or just relying on volunteers to fill in the gaps for you. So if there are 3 distros you want to support, each with 3 versions in the wild, that's 9 packages you need (therefore 9 independent OS installs).
                Only if your program is written to require the latest and greatest versions of dependent libraries, otherwise if Feisty has a binary compatible version of your dependency, you don't need to create a new package. And your autopackage system will improve on this how? You can create a single package that works with multiple incompatible versions of dependent libraries?

                Then you have to tell your users how to install it. Look at the complexity of the page you linked to. This is a light year away from "just download and install it yourself".
                That is only because WineHQ offers a repository for easy updating. They could just offer the .deb file for you to "just download and install".

                See, this is what I have problems with. It's the general design of the software distribution scheme that's bogus. It can never work reliably. It's like Microsoft announcing that Vista will only install software you got from Microsoft Download Center ... nobody would accept that: it doesn't scale, MS aren't trusted to be impartial, etc. It wouldn't work for Microsoft, so why would it work for anybody else
                Or, you can just download and install the RPM or DEB. Seriously, how can you not know this?
                   
      • by Narcissus (310552) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:35AM (#19082759) Homepage

        If a package isn't included in Ubuntu, your only option is either to compile it from source (good luck with that if you aren't technical) or using something like an autopackage. Neither Windows nor MacOS X practice this kind of software censorship.

        That line intrigued me. This is an honest question: nothing else. Can you explain to me, please, how 'source or autopackage' for Ubuntu (specifically) is different to 'source or installer' for Windows, say? I mean, Windows installers don't magically appear... the developer has to create it, so how is 'requiring' an installer different to 'requiring' an autopackage package (or whatever it's called)?

        Hopefully you understand the question... Following on from that: a Windows installer isn't required as you could just put a built executable in a ZIP file and run it like that. But can you not do that in Ubuntu, too (so long as the app is built for Ubuntu)?

        I mean, as far as I can see, there are a number of options for Windows: download source, provide a ZIP of the built code or provide an installer, which the developer has to create: it's not magically there. For Ubuntu, you could provide source, a ZIP of the built code or an autopackage (which again is not magic: the developer needs to make it). So how is it that Ubuntu is 'censoring' while Windows is not? The way I see it, Ubuntu is ENABLING by providing a way to install many pre-selected packages while Windows does not. For the situations where a package has not been selected for this 'enablement' (which is the case for all packages in Windows), how is the Ubuntu process any worse than the Windows one?

      • by yahooadam (1068736) on Friday May 11 2007, @11:53AM (#19084247)
        sudo apt-get install wine

        seriously - whats so hard about that ?

        TBH i think this is a good idea, why should dell install a boatload of rubbish on your PC, the same goes for windows, you can install it yourself if you want, that's why its a PERSONAL computer

        also - although wine is good, it is no alternative to windows yet, its still not simple and easy to use, and its not 100% there, but if you are moving over its definitely a nice way to keep your favorite windows apps going (if they work)
  • by uncledrax (112438) on Friday May 11 2007, @09:27AM (#19081729) Homepage
    Um.. so it's not included? Big deal..

    apt-get install wine

    done...

    What's the problem?
      • Clearly, the "problem" is that we, the Linux community, should be trying to "convert" the n00bs out there who don't know what apt-get is. Having WINE preinstalled would help them get over the fact that they're not running Windows, yet everything is fine, and they can do pretty much everything today they that they could when they were running Windows yesterday.


        But the problem is, WINE doesn't always work like it supposed to. Sometimes it requires tweaking. In my opinion, I would rather a "n00b" learn about a native Linux application that can do what they want it to than fiddle with WINE just to get their Windows application to work.
  • Way to go, Mark (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KingSkippus (799657) * on Friday May 11 2007, @09:29AM (#19081755) Homepage Journal

    Every time I read something about Mark Shuttleworth, I become just a little bit more of a fan.

    While I have nothing against WINE—indeed, I use it myself for several things—I have to agree that it's just not right for distribution by a company like Dell. There's an art to getting it set up and configured, and while it's good, there are still a lot of applications that either don't work at all or don't quite work right in it.

    This is a massive problem, and could seriously backfire on Ubuntu. If people buy a Dell machine with Ubuntu and WINE installed thinking that it will run Windows software, when something doesn't work right (and there will be things that don't work right), the average consumers will get mad at the wrong people: Ubuntu and WINE, not Microsoft. The focus will be on how Ubuntu sucks at running Windows software, not on how Ubuntu rocks at running Linux software.

    I see here a golden opportunity for desktop Linux to make major inroads with the public and take a significant step towards advancing free open source software. I also see here a golden opportunity to destroy the reputation of desktop Linux as a viable alternative to Windows and give people the impression that free open source software really sucks. Don't you think for a second that Microsoft is going to be trying their damned best to see that Linux on Dell machines gives people a bad taste for open source software.

    I have to give Mark Shuttleworth a pat on the back for seeing the big picture, for sacrificing trying to please everyone for the sake of making sure that this is done right, and that the software that people get is great, not just "it works good enough with a few hours of tweaking."

    • Re:Way to go, Mark (Score:5, Insightful)

      by liquidpele (663430) on Friday May 11 2007, @09:38AM (#19081839) Homepage Journal
      exactly. This is a wise decision based off of psychology.
      You can't let the consumer think they are getting something (ability to run windows software on linux) and then take that away (doesn't really work). They will be 6 times angrier than if they never had those features/expectations to begin with.
  • That's fine by me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cHALiTO (101461) <elchalo@gmai l . c om> on Friday May 11 2007, @09:31AM (#19081777) Homepage
    It's their choice, and I'm ok with it. Other distros also add or remove support for certain packages based on ideological positions (non free software, no binaries, stuff like that), so ubuntu and Dell can very well agree to do this to promote that way of considering GNU/Linux.

    And besides, it's still ubuntu, so nothing prevents those who MUST have wine to add a rep to their sources.list and get it somewhere else.
  • No. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by otacon (445694) on Friday May 11 2007, @09:37AM (#19081835) Homepage
    No, he probably didn't want to include WINE because it will make Ubuntu bad because WINE is too hard for most novice users or a beginner to get working properly...if you make promises that it can run windows software to people, then you have to be able to be able to deliver on that.
  • I agree (Score:5, Funny)

    by UbuntuDupe (970646) * on Friday May 11 2007, @09:40AM (#19081875) Journal
    I think we need a rule: "No Wine for Ubuntu users." That might make them less likely to think up names like "Breezy Badger" and "Dapper Drake". Although perhaps extend the rule to Beer, Liquor, and perhaps Shrooms as well?
  • Good (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tribbin (565963) on Friday May 11 2007, @09:52AM (#19082061) Homepage
    I haven't installed MS software on my computer for about seven years now. People ask me if I got MS Office working on it; it is the first thing they try when they install linux.

    "I haven't tried it."

    People find that awkward.

    Also people often say that 'app X does not work the same as commercial product X'.

    Sure, intercompatability is pushed from the open side because of demand. But ...

    LINUX IS NOT WINDOWS!

    People find that hard to understand.

    I think this step by DELL + Ubuntu is a step in the right direction of bringing that understanding.
  • it's because you haven't faced up to the reality: Wine isn't very good.

    Sure you can make some programs work, sometimes. And sometimes when applications do work under Wine they act horribly, weird, strange, lots of font issues. It's not that the wine developers havent tried, it's just that emulating a Piece of Shit like Windows is nearly fucking impossible.. nobody can emulate the development hysteria that went into building windows. I don't fault the Wine devs, they tried mimic microsofts bullshit, but failed...

    It's a work in progress, I know... but now Vista is out now.. and microsoft will release another POS of OS soon enough... they have no chance to keep up with the Redmond madness.
  • Great idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sootman (158191) on Friday May 11 2007, @09:57AM (#19082129) Journal
    I've seen for a decade in my LUG what people go through when they try to use Linux as a 1:1 replacement for Windows. It's miserable. Linux should not be positioned as "like Windows but cheaper." (Especially since Dell's OEM deal with MS and crapware vendors means that a Linux system from Dell will probably cost exactly as much as a Windows system.) Mark S. is doing exactly the right thing here.

    That said, I have the feeling that these things won't sell well at all. (Not that adding Wine would make much of a difference.) Be honest: what does Linux offer the average user that Windows doesn't? The main one is "won't get infected with crap."* That's great, but that's not enough. People have put up with crappy Windows systems for so long that they think it's normal to reinstall Windows periodically, or pay a neighborhood kid or local shop $50-150 to clean off the spyware every few months (if they even bother at all), and to buy a new computer every couple years when the one the old one gets slow. People are used to Windows. They fear change. "The devil you know is better than the devil you don't." We love Linux, but we know what's involved, and we understand what the million little differences are and why they're there. The rest of the world just thinks "this isn't working right." The result of all this is, Joe User will NOT be buying Ubuntu machines from Dell. Dell will sell a few, but not many, and there's a very good chance this program will be axed within 6-12 months.

    * OS X offers this same benefit, plus it has the great iLife suite, gorgeous hardware, and unbeatable hardware/software integration. Not perfect, but miles ahead of anything else. That is a compelling reason to change, and I've seen a few people go from Windows to Mac, but even so, Windows has 90%+ share and will continue to dominate for quite a while.
  • by Brunellus (875635) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:02AM (#19082203) Homepage

    WINE isn't even in a default Ubuntu install. With or without Dell, Ubuntu does not ship with WINE. It never has. I hope it never does.

    One gripe I have with the community is that we tend to oversell WINE. Even though the WINE team have made a lot of progress lately, I still find WINE to be an imperfect solution, at best. Knowledgeable users know this. But the community insists on preaching WINE to every Windows convert. This is counterproductive.

    Rabid WINE advocacy builds unreasonably high expectations of 100% compatibility. This is not yet possible, and it is debatable whether this will ever be possible. New users don't appreciate the difficulty in the project, though. All they know is that NIFTY.EXE won't run. They resent the fact that they've been given "Broken Windows," rather than a "real OS."

    This is not to say that I'm against the WINE project at all. Quite the contrary: the compatibility layer gives the Linux community an extra tool. But I cringe every time I see people treating WINE as some sort of panacea, rather than using it correctly as a tool of last resort.

  • Perfect decision (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FullCircle (643323) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:11AM (#19082343)
    I completely agree with their decision. If you want Windows, buy Windows.

    Linux needs to stand on its own merits. Running Linux to use your Windows apps would make Dell and Linux look bad by giving a bad user experience.

    Wine as a Windows replacement is hard to set up, largely incompatible and the wrong solution for more than one or two applications.

    Let Linux have a fair chance on the desktop without false expectations of running Windows applications. If that's not enough, then Linux isn't ready for mass market adoption.
  • OS/2 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by thetagger (1057066) on Friday May 11 2007, @10:12AM (#19082359)
    Good. Windows compatibility is one of the things that killed OS/2.
  • by q2k (67077) on Friday May 11 2007, @11:02AM (#19083295) Homepage
    The reason to buy a Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed is not Windows related at all. It's all about hardware. A Dell desktop or notebook PC with Ubuntu pre-installed should work out of the box. The stuff we fight with any Linux distro, wireless drivers (although that's gotten much better with Feisty), suspend / hibernate not working, etc should not be an issue with the Dells.

    My wife's XP box is 6+ years old, so I'm expecting it to die soon. She doesn't do anything on it that requires Windows, so her next computer will have Ubuntu on it. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one of the Dells. The market for these (at least initially) is not newbies looking for their first Linux box, it's people that are already at least a little Linux savvy that want a new box with minimum hassle involved.