Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Windows-On-Linux Emulator Shootout 247

Posted by timothy from the fooling-some-of-the-programs-some-of-the-time dept.
securitas writes: "ZDNet has posted a comparative review of 5 Windows-on-Linux emulators from VMware (2), NeTraverse, WinToNet and Wine." The results encountered varied quite a bit -- none of the products are perfect, but it looks like they hit a particularly disappointing time with Wine.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows-On-Linux Emulator Shootout More

Windows-On-Linux Emulator Shootout

Comments Filter:

  • Moral of this story: (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @06:15PM (#2227384)
    If you have the funds, buy two computers and a switchbox. If you don't have the funds, configure your machine to dual boot.

    Really, what's the point of running the emulation if you lose speed and capabilities?
    • I use VMWare because I write books and it's far more convienient to have a given operating system on which I'm writing in a window than dual booting or even using a switch box.

    • Re:Moral of this story: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Adnans ( 2862 )
      Really, what's the point of running the emulation if you lose speed and capabilities?

      The point is that you get to run another OS while still having access to your regular OS. I can keep my development enviroment and monitoring tools up and running in Linux, while booting Win2000 in VMware and browse that one webpage that requires a plugin that's not available in Linux (yet). And if you fullscreen Vmware you will NOT notice that you're running inside Vmware since it's feels as fast as the real thing (granted: 1.33GHZ + 512MB DDR :). Oh, and if it ever crashes you just double click that vmware icon and Win2000 is up an running again in 20 seconds :-)

      If you need to ask why, it's probably not for you anyway....

      -adnans

    • Or how about buying two computers, two NICs, and a crossover cable and just telnet to the other one? I'll let you guess which OS you'll be telneting to :) This way you don't have to leave your primary OS to access the other one.

    • what's the point of running the emulation if you lose speed and capabilities?

      I use VMWare to emulate Windows NT and 9x under Linux so that I can do web development in Linux, reconfigure Apache and MySQL on the fly, and still test my work in the most common browsing environments without having to own a second machine or worry about losing my 'net connection to an off-site box. Would a second or third machine be better? Sometimes. But not when my desk space and/or budget are limited.

      (Actually, I only do it this way at work; at home I have four boxes for doing the same thing and much prefer that arrangement. But my employer is too cheap to give me a second, let alone third, box for testing purposes.)

      • From the article:


        VMware GSX Server is an enterprise-level product and is priced accordingly. The electronic distribution, which can be downloaded from VMware's Web site, costs $2,499, and a packaged version including documentation costs about $50 more. VMware's Workstation product, designed for individual users, is available for $299 and offers much of the same functionality

        At those prices I think it would be cheaper to buy a second low-end machine.

        • At those prices I think it would be cheaper to buy a second low-end machine.

          I'm using version 2.0.2 from their earlier product line: $99, runs Win9x, NT, or 3.x.

        • The Enterprize level product is just that. It's a VM manager for a (I assume) VERY powerful server. Get an eight or sixteen way box a few 32 gigs of RAM or so, and I bet you could serve many copies of any of several OS's to some low end clients that are basically just dumb terminals. Do all your managment from one place. Upgrade Office once, and everybody has the latest version. I don't know that to many businesses would be interested, but I can see some advantages.

          • I don't understand, how could you upgrade all the users PC's with upgrades for Office? Why not install PC Anywhere or Netmeeting on those PC's?

            • The user PCs would not actually have anything on them. VmWare runs in X, right? So you setup a large sever able to serve say 24 Windows Virtual Machines (from the article that would require a 6 processor machine, but to ensure good performance, we'll say an eight CPU machine with 16 gigabytes of RAM). Then you setup 24 machines of extremely low power, say Pentium 133s with 16 MB pf RAM, and no hard drive (Maybe a really small one for swap space, but I doubt you'd need it) or really anything except a video card (a decent one for good screen resolution), a NIC, and a CDROM. Make a bootable CDROM with nothing but a Linux install that automatically boots into X, and then opens a Windows VM full screen window from the server. Presto, 24 machines that are all "dumb terminals", but all have a nice familiar Windows interface your users are used to. You can manage everything from the server and the underlying OS. Since the server does all the work of running the OS and software, you can use whatever crap you want for the client machines, as long as they are powerful enough to run a Linux kernal, and X in 1024X768 (with no Window Manager, and only a single "window" open.)

              Need to upgrade Office? Do it for each copy of the VM from your desk (or maybe right a script that'll do all of them at once). Same with OS upgrades. User hosed the system? No Problem, copy the data onto some temp space on the underlying server, wipe the VM and make a new one (again this could probably be automated from the underlying OS). Somebody wants to try Linux/BSD/"The latest version of Windows TM", but you don't want to risk your production systems? Install an extra VM for them to play with, and if it doesn't work out, wipe it.

              This would, of course, be somewhat more expensive than buying 24 "normal" machines and a server for data and such, but I don't think it would be ALOT more expensive, and it would have some advantages. Like I said before, I don't know how many bussinesses would intersted in something like this, but it is an interesting idea. (Actually it'd make a great setup for a lab, or Internet cafe, where you can't trust the users not to abuse your OS.)

      • I do roughly the same thing, though it tends to be Oracle rather than MySQL.

        I like to work in local coffee shops on my laptop.
        Carrying around two laptops and the cable to connect them would be a drag. VMWare lets me do it all on one box, though testing MSIE under VMWare while running piggish Oracle under Linux requires a fair amount of memory (256MB works OK).
    • I have a linux box which I use for most of my stuff. I have all my files on ext3fs partitions because it's faster and more reliable than vfat, and more importantly because it has proper Unix semantics. I also have lots of things in crontab because I'm a lazy bum and don't want to do anything manually that I can possibly automate.

      Now, I also like to play Civilization II of which I own a windows copy; I don't know if it's available for Linux and in any case I've already paid for the Windows version. I could reboot into Windows and play my game, but that would mean that I wouldn't have any of my applications available, none of my files would be accessible, and none of my cron jobs would get run.

      Running CivII in a VMWare box is the best of both worlds. Sure, the graphics are a little sluggish, and the sound is choppy (bug in VMWare for Linux), but it's quite playable and quite stable, and it looks like any old window on my desktop, and I can put it away for a minute and the come back to it if I need to do something else.

      And of course VMware offers some cool extras, such as the ability to roll back changes to a virtual hard drive -- this is wonderful for checking out Windows software, as you are guaranteed a quick and easy (1 second, 2 clicks) return path from any installation or upgrade, no matter what it did to your registry and "system" dll's..

    • I used to use a four-way switch and have up to four computers connected. I threw that all out once I got VMWare.

      Using VMWare, I can keep a stable base environment and develop and test code on multiple platforms: various Linux distros, plus multiple Windows flavors in my case.

      In addition to that, I can install stuff that I'm evaluating in a virtual OS - including in a virtual Linux running on top of Linux - and if it causes any problems, I haven't affected my base environment.

      With VMWare, the state of a virtual machine can be suspend in seconds, and you can shut down the physical machine and come back to exactly where you left off, right down to the state of the Caps Lock key and the mouse cursor. In the middle of some complex development and want to take a break to play a game? Just suspend the VM you're working in, play your game, and resume the VM you want.

      I can save multiple configurations of each OS, and keep copies of old configurations to go back to if I need to. It's like having a whole swath of preinstalled partitions, except you don't have to reboot your machine to switch between them, and you can run more than one at the same time.

      The only caveat to all of the above is that it needs a lot of memory and disk space to work well - figure at least 64MB per running VM, ideally more; and at least 1-2GB per VM disk image. Good CPU performance doesn't hurt, either. The upside is that these days, this is all pretty cheap. I currently run with 512MB RAM and 2x30GB disks, on a dual CPU box, and the only performance issue I'm ever aware of is a bit of mouse lag.

    • Well, let's see... The reason I run VMWare (which I've been using since it first beta-tested a couple years ago) is because I need a particular FPGA design package, and I like to be able to use my normal editor for developement with it (using it on a SAMBA share). That, and I can perform all my "normal" activities like surfing the web, email, etc, without having to reboot each time. I could of course use windows for some of these things, but then I'd end up with a situation where mailboxes weren't in sync, and I'd be forced to use some other editor. --Besides the simple fact I hate the windows environment.
    • I'm looking into it .. we have 3 (count 'em three) ver important gotta have it applications that do not support linux, but do work well under Solaris AND NT.

      My boss doesn't want to pay 20k for a solaris box, and he doesn't want to deal with the hassle that windows has become - Linux (or *BSD, I'm agnostic) will do the job.

      From the Linux box, (still in beta in my work shop) they can emulate the windows apps. They *should* be able to X into Solaris and the Solaris apps.

      But it is a kludge.


    • I disagree teh most useful scenerio I think is ina help desk env. whereI used to work you ha dot support win98/nt/macos each time we would have to run to a different station to simulate the client problem. what I ended up using was vnc to view my mac but it still required purchasing other machines.
    • you can reboot the bloody win box with a click of the mouse button! Who cares about minimal performance gains when the system is crashing daily?

      You can also easily back the things up and recover from crashes -- we use VMWare and the entire win system is just a large file. You can have a 'read-only' system, ie no changes are kept between reboots. This gives you a much more stable environment.

      Over the last few years we've had legacy win apps that constantly crash with cc:mail routers the worst. We ran about 25 instances of these on four virtual machines. All we then need do is click on that friendly Power Off / Power On button.

      It also lets you put all those crappy win apps that HR and marketing come up with on one box.

    • Not being a PC person, spending my work day in a SGI/OS X enviroment and having OS X at home, I just don't understand something. On Mac's, Linux ships with Mac-on-Linux. The last I played with it was years ago (3-4?), but it worked. It worked well. I assume today it works near flawlessly. OS X runs OS 9 apps transparently at about 95% of their native speed. Now, what I don't get is why Linux on x86 does NOT have a GPL'ed envrioment that boots Windows inside of LInux at near full speed with no loss of compatibility (I mean even OS 9 apps in OS X "Blue Box" have access to OpenGL and Networking).

  • No wonder (Score:1, Insightful)

    by morbid ( 4258 )
    WINE is an independently developed set of libraries and stuff that attempt to run Windows binaries on Linux and provide libraries to assist in the porting of Windows binaries to Linux. No wonder it's not as good (yet) and running a "proper" copy of windows inside what is essentially a PC emulator (or virtualiser).
    They're not comparing apples with apples as usual.
    Mind you, this is ZD net we're talking about...
    • My thoughts exactly. Although all the products achieve the same aim, they all do it in different ways, and all have their uses. VMWare is useful for testing lots of different windows configurations on one box, running windows and linux etc, but it is fundamentally different to WINE, which is useful if you want to run a single windows app without paying for a windows license, or without having to re-boot. Win2Net sound like some kind of proxy-in-a-browser or X-for-windows-in-a-browser thing, which is yet another sort of beast altogether (and probably not a bad solution in a number of cases - I remeber reading in a recent /. article by roblimo were public servants in some city in florida were using some sort of software like this to access MS-Excel via terminal-emulation). All three approaces are different, with pros and cons for each.
  • WINE: WINE is not an emulator.
  • Strange to include win2net but not VNC and Metaframe which to me seem to do the same. (and do much better job at it)

    And then the left the obvious out. How you can run linux programs on windows with something as sipmle as a terminal emulator or a X server
    • rate that up!

      they review Win2Net and complain about Sticker shock, but don't even look at VNC.

      Win2Net might intercept calls at the win32 API layer instead of doing compressed differential screen shots like VNC (might not, i have no idea), but try it, the performance will not be much different.

      VNC is free. No sticker shock there.
  • I tried both Win4Lin and VMware, wanting to do two things: 1) sync my Windows CE device and install software to it from Linux and 2) run VirtualDub (except capture mode) under Linux.

    I bought both Win4Lin and VMware Workstation and gave them a try. Win4Lin 3.0 was a nightmare to install -- on a stock RedHat 7.1 box -- and the tech support at Netraverse was less than helpful, even perhaps a little rude. I finally gave up on the GUI installer and dug through the RPMs until I cobbled together my own installation using their undocumented command-line tools. Using Windows 98 SE, Win4Lin is fairly fast and seamless, but some of the windows updates didn't install correctly (among them Internet Explorer 5.5) and VirtualDub did not run at all (I guess it uses DirectX).

    VMWare installed easily, though it's a little more clumsy just to use. Once I had Windows running on it, it took VirtualDub and ActiveSync with no problem. Unfortunately, it's slower than Win4Lin in general and the way it "captures" the mouse cursor in X drives me nuts (yes, I have tools installed, but I still have to hit CTRL-ALT-ESC if a dialog box from another app pops up over the VMWare window). In the end, though, VMware seemed like the more solid product with better support, and it ran the apps I needed as well as all Windows updates (including IE 5.5 and DirectX 8).

    Yes, I did try Wine for both things, but Wine is such a poorly documented mess at this point... I mean, there are rumors of people getting many things to run correctly, but just try tracking the knowledge down. When you do find it on something like Google groups, the details and DLL/registry fun needed to get specific apps to work with Wine is insane. I think at this point Wine is just a development platform (ala what Corel did with WordPerfect Office for Linux) because it sure isn't useful for anything else (but solitaire).

  • OK, but which one? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rick the Red ( 307103 ) <Rick.The.Red@nOsPaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @06:34PM (#2227468) Journal
    This is a nice look at five options, but there are no conclusions -- no "Editor's Choice".


    I have a real-world problem and I was hoping this article had a possible solution. I want to move my home PCs to Linux where possible, but my 5 year old has lots of Windows games. I recognize that these reviews are targeted to corporations trying to save bucks by using Linux, and for them the bottom line is Word and Excel, but for the majority of /.ers I'd guess the bottom line is games. This series was thin on games, other than to mention that Win4Lin doesn't do DirectX and VMWare is slow.


    I'm not talking about Monster Truck Madness, I'm talking about Freddie Fish and Winnie the Pooh and Reader Rabbit. How do those fare under these emulators? I'm ready to dig into the configuration settings, create shell scripts, or whatever, so that he never knows he's on Linux -- he logs on and the emulator presents him Windows in full-screen -- but which emulator? Looks like none of them is up to it on our modest (400 MHz Duron) hardware.


    Which leads me to the next question (but since this is the first post I doubt many will see, let alone answer): What's the best free/open X Terminal for Windows? If I have to run Windows then at least give me a reasonable way to reach Linux on another box (VNC is nice but the lag time hurts).


    Another option is to run Windows and use VMWare to run Linux. This seems like the backward approach, but it could work. Has anyone tried it? Is it worth the trouble, or would dual-boot be better? (it's certainly cheaper, but reboots are annoyingly slow).


    The ultimate solution would be to get Linux apps for my boy. Is there any educational/entertainment Linux software for kids? (commercial is OK, I'm not opposed to buying my software).


    Thanks to all who answer

    • Re:OK, but which one? (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Pop for the $600 and get yourself a e-Machine. Put all your kid's software on there and not bother yourself with configurating (that's what a configurator does, right?) an emulator. Stop in at the Home Depot or Ikea to make a small kid-size desk and set them up there. They can work just like Daddy (only less cynical and bitter :-)!
    • Well, try them :) Really, I'd say you'd have the best luck w/ VMWare on Linux, and win98. As long as you have the ram (& it's cheap now) it should be ok. I suspect there will be poorer performance if you run linux on windows, though.

      As for your Xterminal question, let me know :) I just installed cygwin, and it's supposed to be able to run xfree86, but I haven't gotten that far yet. Rocks as a ssh/scp/sftp client, though.
    • > What's the best free/open X Terminal for Windows? If I have to run Windows then at least give me a reasonable way to reach Linux on another box (VNC is nice but the lag time hurts).

      Well, XFree86 runs under Cygwin (see http://www.cygwin.com/xfree/). But if you've got lag problems under VNC, I reckon X might not make things better...

    • Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by batkiwi ( 137781 )
      Considering that vmware is 300$, I doubt they even care about your typical linux enthousiast who wants to play some windows games. You could ALMOST buy a good cheap game playing box for that 300$ nowadays.

      I work doing integrations, and would almost not be able to work without VMWare. We have gigs and gigs of vm's here, already set up. You can use it almost like a quick ghost, only you can have 2, 3, 4 on 1 machine, and don't have to blow away the base machine.

      Plus if one goes down, just do like someone said earlier, doubleclick the .vmx and restart it.

      If I need to do testing with version x of our product and version y of another product with theirs on linux and ours on winnt4 SP4, it's no problem. Just load up the vms, change the configs, and test away.

      Buying copies of VMWare for game playing or to run Office is just rediculous! Talk about wrong tool for the wrong job...
    • I don't dare let my kid TOUCH my "real" machines, much less actually use them. They're not even on the same floor of the house.

      He has his own P133 Windows box that does Reader Rabbit et al just fine, and when (not if) he destroys it, we won't lose anything critical. When it's dead, we'll replace it with another similarly equipped junkpile cast-off.
      • I don't dare let my kid TOUCH my "real" machines, much less actually use them

        Do you leave him in the car when you go shopping too? Or do you carry him around on a leash and tell him to shut up when he's thirsty and wants some water?

        Seriously, embrace his curiousity. This is the only way computers can help children learn, not some bullshit rabbit telling them how to read. If he breaks it, fix it, it's not like it's hard to fix a computer. Who cares if you can't play Half life for an hour out of your day.

        In my experience, the one thing that kids always know is when someone is being condescending towards them. Giving them their own junkpile cast-off computer is condescending.

        • It's illegal to leave a kid unattented in a car in some areas, especially in the summer.. They can die from the heat.

          Anyway, if I had kids, I would give them their own Windows 98 or ME machine which they can learn with. I don't know how old your kids are, but I would have nightmares of them sticking a peanut-butter and jam sandwhich in the CD ROM drive. Sheesh, I barely let my wife use my main computer (the best thing about Windows 2000: Restricted Users!)

        • I don't agree with a lot of what you say, but I agree with your general idea. I think it's important that kids do have usable hardware but as a developer in both home and office I don't want other people on my 3 major development boxes (one server, one workstation, one laptop). Regardless of their age.


          I just dont like to take risks, I think that was his major point and unfortunately most people dont have money to buy bleeding edge computers for the youngsters so they get last weeks hardware.

        • He's TWO. His curiosity right now is limited to how when he moves that white thing with the tail, the little arrow moves too, and how an A on the screen might just be the same thing as the A on his chalkboard. If he was bored with it, we wouldn't have to limit him to an hour a day, because he'd quit before that.

          He doesn't know condescension from condensation, and too bad if he does. I give him his milk in a spill proof plastic cup, and he doesn't touch the Waterford stemware.

          Nobody cares if I can't play Half Life/Quake/Doom/WWF Bitchslap, not even me. But I do care if I have to sit up all night rebuilding and restoring disks full of business-critical data.

          And when he gets old enough that he can go beyond Reader Rabbit and has outgrown his junker machine, I'll get him a new one with capabilities appropriate for him. He's STILL not going to touch my main machines.

          We're the parents, he's the child, and a healthy and happy one at that. We are not peers.

    • Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Informative)

      by greenfly ( 40953 )
      Which leads me to the next question (but since this is the first post I doubt many will see, let alone answer): What's the best free/open X Terminal for Windows? If I have to run Windows then at least give me a reasonable way to reach Linux on another box (VNC is nice but the lag time hurts).

      Have you ever tried the XFree86 Windows port [cygwin.com] from Cygwin [cygwin.com]? I've used it in the past to get a remote X login on windows 9x and 2000 machines I had to use at the time. And, yes, it's free.

    • Re:OK, but which one? (Score:2, Informative)

      by vovin ( 12759 )
      For an X server (I've not tried the cygwin XFree port, the OS/2 one isn't seamless ...) but on OS/2 I prefer HOBlink. They make an Windows version as well, and judging by the OS/2 one I suspect the windows one is also very nice.

      http://www.hobsoft.com/products/x11/x11.html
      http://www.hoblink.de
    • Our school uses X Win 32. This is quite a capable and compact x windows server. It is a commercial product, but by far the best I have found.


      there are several projects to create kid-friendly linux software. a good place to start would be the Debian Jr. project, which aims to create an entire distribution. There are also some simple educational games around, like Tux Typer.

    • The obvious answer for what you need, imo, is to dual-boot your machine. No speed hit in his games, no expensive laggy emulator.

      There are plenty of reasons to do what this article is about, but letting your son play games is more easily solved by dual-booting - AND everything'll run faster.

      - Arete
      • Dual-booting wouldn't help. I didn't get into details, but his PC is on the 2nd floor, and I wanted to use it to host the 802.11b card, which would require Linux on that box, full-time. The only other Linux boxes are in the basement, and my laptop, but the laptop can't act as the 802.11b access point! Don't even think about suggesting Windows is good enough for that application -- I'm not stupid enough to allow anyone in the neighborhood onto our LAN.


        After reading the comments here it looks like I'll need two PCs on the 2nd floor, one with Windows for my son, and one with Linux for the 802.11b card.


        Meanwhile, I've discovered this site [linuxforkids.org], which encourages me to give him Linux as well as Windows. So I'll run one of the several suggested X-terminals on his PC and host his Linux stuff on another box.

        • I suspect you're not still reading this (I make a habit of checking for replies to my posts)

          But I certainly would recommend 2 boxen for that purpose, anyway. In fact, I would recommend giving him a dual-booting fast (all relative, of course) and leave an older computer as just a router. Much more secure than running a bunch of other junk on a router at all - it should JUST be a router.

          For that purpose, I suspect something like a 486dx25 w/ 16 MB of RAM is sufficient. That what I normally end up with in a surplus router...
          (go with more ram if you've got it, but it's not essential.) Of course, I'm only pumping DSL with it, so I'm topped at 1.5 if I'm lucky. But the only real downside is the relatively minor power requirements.

  • From the sounds of the article, wine hasn't progressed much beyond the last time I used it a year ago or so. That's disappointing. When I used it, it definitely needed windows to run anything at all and it sounds like that's still the case.

  • Enterprise Level (Score:3, Insightful)

    by XPulga ( 1242 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @06:36PM (#2227479) Homepage
    From the article: VMware GSX Server is an enterprise-level product and is priced accordingly.The electronic distribution(...)costs $2,499

    Wrong. Apache [apache.org] is an enterprise-level product that is priced accordingly.

    VMware GSX Server is an absolute must for any company looking to maintain multiple centralized development environments.

    Wrong again. Removing MS Windows from all workstations is an absolute must for any company looking to maintain a decent development environment. Note change in wording: if the environment is centralized and multiple, you only have to maitain the "center" (server), and leaf node configuration is straightforward, right ?


  • It appears that they were a bit unfair to
    wine ( but not really on purpose )
    They seemed light hearted enough about it
    that I believe the mistake was accidental.

    What mistake is this, you might ask?
    They tried running Microsoft Applications!
    ( the exception being Paint Shop Pro .. )
    Not only that, but I'm not quite sure what the
    snapshot date was on the wine that they used.
    I have used Photoshop perfectly in wine.
    Photoshop! I can also run Netscape. Just the other day, I got Real to completly work,
    which I believe is an indication that they
    have winsock2 working.

    In the end, what should be added is this:
    running apps in wine isn't what you think it is.
    Just because wine has been in development for a few years, and doesn't work, doesn't mean it will be a few more years before it works! Chances are that it is a single call ( or family of calls, as DDE and COM are still under developement, afaicr .. ) that makes it not work. Thus, having a working app may be as little as a snapshot away.



    --Dante
  • ...only the advertisement on the page keeps freezing Opera.
    • That's Opera for Win 98 - I'll exorcise this PC just as soon as I have convinced myself I know what I'm doing...

  • It seems to me that comparing VMWare (and the like) to Wine is like comparing apples and oranges. VMWare actually creates a virtual machine posting BIOS again and thus starting your target platform by the partition you're in. Wine emulates function calls on linux (and libraries, of course) but still runs as the base operating system. How do these even compare?

  • That lovely Ziff banter. That, we're oh so with it, insouciance. Any surprise that the light tone reflects the complete inability to make its tests mirror the real world?

    Couldn't they at least have included something like QuickBooks in the app mix? QB capability is one of those real-world things that is keeping several small businesses from moving to Linux. As opposed to Word and Excel, for which there are plenty of worthy replacements.
  • For business users, this rocks. I could go on & on about it, but if you need to know about it, you probably already do. I only mention it because they talked about that netthing app that uses a windows host & java in a browser. Citrix can do that & so much more. Beware the printer issues, though...
  • When I have tried these two products myself, I found Wine performed well upto expectations, even if certain programs did require quite a large amount of configuration to get running. VMWare on the other hand run very slow, and was close to unusable on a k6-2-500.

    Theres nothing better than a quick game of sol.exe straight after installing Wine :)
  • The only thing that matters is how well these babies can handle Starcraft.

    I haven't tried any of the others, but I can say that Wine does an excellent job of running Starcraft on Red Hat 7.1. I've played for four hours straight and no crashes!

    Now, if I can just get it to work with Wine on FreeBSD!
    • Yeah wine does starcraft brilliantly! The only problem I have is that occasionally starcraft crashes if lots is going on on screen...if that happens my system pretty much crashes (well...i know the _kernal_ hasn't crashed) because wine's got control of my video card.
  • Now, I wouldn't say I know a great deal about Linux, or the Open Source community; but it seems to me somewhat pointless to go to all this trouble evading Windows and the Microsoft evilness if you are just going to emulate them and their file formats.

    Isn't the whole idea of Linux to invent your own stuff; while it might be convenient to emulate and/or convert MS stuff, it's even more convenient (from that point of view) to actually use MS.


    I'm not intending to promote MS here. I hate them too, I'm just not knowledgeable enough to use Linux (and frankly, it isn't worth my time to learn). Plus, I wish to evade the modstick.


    It seems to me (your average Joe Bloggs) that the way to go is to invent your own (free (and presumably superior)) file formats, and prove them superior through their use! Force goddamn MS to emulate you! And you know it can be done, look at Quicktime... (Or PDF, or MP3, I think...)

    • Isn't the whole idea of Linux to invent your own stuff
      "Linux" isn't about inventing new stuff. It isn't about not inventing your own stuff. It's about doing whatever you want. It's about having choices. Different people want different things and will make different choices. No big deal.

      As a sometimes web developer Apache and PHP on my Linux box are very handy. But it'd be nice to be able to check my pages in various flavours of IE without multiple PCs.
    • Thank you all for educating me in matters Linux. :-) (And for further increasing my respect for you chaps). Who knows, perhaps some weekend I will send my poor 56k modem on the week-long excursion of a download. (About 600Mb, am I wrong?)

      Although I still have this feeling that a lot of my programs (and games) won't work under it, I've heard phrases such as 'programming your own drivers' which frankly give me the screaming heebie-jeebies. What's this about?

      Anyway, since ATM Apache, GNU, and so forth are just words to me I will have to do some private research before I embark on anything.

  • Does anyone have Macromedia Dreamweaver 3 or 4 working with WINE? That app is the only reason I'm still using Windows!
    • not trying to troll, but why on earth is dreamweaver holding you to windows?
      • Probably because it runs on Windows.

        - Arcadio
      • Because it's the best visual layout tool available for designing complex HTML pages with layers, tables, stylesheets, etc. Period.

        It also manages to write decent (not great) code in the process, in contrast to every other GUI tool I've used.

        The currently available HTML editors for Linux, while fine, are NOT the equivalent of Dreamweaver. Sometimes open source is the best tool, sometimes it isn't. In this case, Dreamweaver is easily the best tool.

    • Why dreamweaver? There are HTML editors for Linux as well. And I don't care what anyone says-- No HTML editor on any platform anywhere can substitute clean code written from scratch
  • I read the entire thing, looking to see which one may be fastest. I have vmware now... and it's "livable" in terms of speed (full screen with their vga-fifo driver installed). At least it's ok running windows 95 on a 800 MHz machine, but there is noticable slowness. It's not nearly as fast as running native.


    Saddly, what little mention of speed they had was very vauge statements that certain things were too slow. They did minimal testing on each one, and what they did try wasn't even the same or similar software on the different emulators.


    So I'm no closer to knowing if I win4lin, for example, would be overall faster (as they claim) than vmware which I currently own (well, license, but I paid, damnit). I very well may shell out another $79 if something like win4lin is significantly faster. They say it is... but like all software it comes with no warranty and they won't take it back and refund me if it doesn't live up to their promises.


    Wouldn't it be great if, say, some magazine were to compare these emulators and publish some useful comparisions?


    <rant mode on>

    Well, it'll probably be quite a while until we see any real comparison of these emulators, since these ZDnet bastards just cranked out this lame-ass deadline-driven excuse for a review. ... not that they give a damn ... reporters always use the "tight deadline" excuse for doing a poor job, instead of actually feeling sorry about it.


    This little rant won't solve anything, but at least it makes me feel a bit better. Maybe someone from vmware, netraverse, or menta might read through these comments. The anonymous idiots/authors at zdnet/metagroup certainly aren't, since they seem to care so little about about this topic.



    <rant mode off>

    • The conclusion is pretty simple..

      If you want to run your office apps and have Windows 95/98/98SE/ME (not sure about Win ME - anyone?) - then use Win4Lin 3.0

      If your app requires even a single call to any DirectX stuff (like full-screen with Direct Draw) - then it won't run on Win4Lin.

      Win4Lin run "normal" apps (that doesn't requires DirectX) much faster then VMWare.

      Now - if you want to run Windows NT/2000/XP or Another Operating system (Linux) then the only option you have is VMWare - but you'll need lots of memory (which is cheap), and a strong processor. VMWare however - is slower compared to Win4Lin but it runs much more software.

      Now - I didn't see they mention it - but if you need to run MULTIPLE VMWare sessions at once, with scripting support (VM1 turns on VM2 to do XYZ and then turns of VM2 etc...) - then you'll need VMWare GSX which got a pretty big price tag - $2500

      If you want to run some serious numbers of VM's at once (15,20,30 etc) - then you'll need VMWare ESX - which is an entirly different product (it's bootable VMWare without any hosting OS) - a really strong machine (4 processors minimum), tons of memory (gigabytes), and very fast hard drives and network. You'll get a special console which is Redhat 6.2 + perl scripts to do all the maintaining stuff - and for each user you'll need to install special KVM software (keyboard, video, mouse) - price tag - $11.200 + precentages..
      • Netraverse don't seem to have released any kernel patches since 2.4.5, so if you're running a cutting edge kernel (like I suspect quite a few people here are), then your choices are somewhat diminished.
  • For the very simple reason that "Wine Is Not an Emulator" :) Pesky reporting types that are clueballs for recursive acronyms
  • Wine is not an emulator it doesn't emulate the x86-windows platform on Linux, Wine translates API calls from Windows into X, thus these results are incorrect.
  • I used to be a big VMWare fan, and still am. But mainly for getting a "pure PC", not specifically for running Windows. I used to run Windows in it a lot, but once I tried Win4Lin, I switched over completely. I still use VMWare for trying out FreeBSD and other OS's, but for running Windows apps, Win4Lin clearly wins for me. Here's why:

    Win4Lin (by default) uses the native underlying Linux file system, which is faster than FAT32. It boots Windows faster than a booting Windows on a bare PC on the same hardware. If you've booted windows under Win4Lin recently (so Linux caches the files referenced), and need to restart (say, after installing any damn windows app :-), you can reboot in 10 seconds!

    If Windows does blue-screen (which it does far less in Win4Lin than native), there's no scandisk required, as Linux is the one handling the file system access.

    I use it on top of SGI's XFS on a laptop, which is even better. I haven't had done an fsck or a scandisk in months :-) Life is good.

    There is the odd limitation, and obviously for gaming you'd want to reboot to native Windows. But in general, I don't boot windows natively any more. Oh yeah, it has sound support, too, which I find works quite well. (Seems to me VMWare didn't support sound, although I could be wrong on that point.)

    So if you need a pure PC for testing or QA, or want to try different OS's, I heartily recommend VMWare. But for access to Windows apps, Win4Lin I find much better. Oh yeah, you can map any Unix directory to Win4Lin virtual drives, too. Much easier than VMWare's Samba bridging stuff (which I never could get working consistently). Win4Lin is much cheaper, too ($79 vs. $299, or something like that).

    • Ya .. .Win4Lin is good stuff. I use it too. However, it can actually lock your entire box up nice and tight. Its been a pretty rare occurance so far, but I've experienced Win4Lin crashing the box. Though I should probably mention that the Win4lin kernel patch didn't entirely apply cleanly to my kernel, so I had to hand patch some things. Theres always the chance I screwed that part up.

      But overall, Win4lin is great. Though the VMWare guys also offer a toned-down, Win9x-only, version of VMware that costs about the same as Win4lin. Supposedly this version is more optimized to run Win9x.

      - Arcadio
  • The article didn't mention that VMWare does just allow you to run Windows on top of Linux. I'm currently running Windows 2000, OpenBSD 2.9, Solaris 8 x86, and Slackware 8 under VMWare environments on top of a Slackware 8 install. Everything runs great (graphics are a little slow), and it's a lot easier than having 4 or 5 different machines around.

    I'm developing software that needs to run on all of these platforms and the current setup makes debugging easier.

    One word of advice for anyone thinking about running VMWare: get plently of memory... especially if you intend running multiple VMs concurrently. The 2GB that I have is rapidly depleted when a few VMs are going.
  • Well you really have two approaches in the current crop of programs for "emulating Windows". I'll narrow them down to two applications: VMWare and WINE. VMWare can actually run any x86 OS, not just Windows, but for sake of argument we'll assume we're working with Windows.

    VMWare Pros:
    • Emulates an x86 and much of its hardware
    • Zero software incompatibilities
    VMWare Cons:
    • Slow
    • Some hardware incompatibilities (VMWare doesn't have 3D support, for instance)
    • Runs in a self-contained window
    WINE Pros:
    • Fast
    • Lots of hardware support, including DirectX acceleration and 3D.
    • Applications run as native apps
    WINE Cons:
    • Many software incompatibilities

    So there you have it. Problems in one are generally made up in the other. This isn't to say that these programs will have such "Cons" for all time, but this is how it stands now. Ironically, VMWare does a simpler task (emulating x86 instead of emulating Windows directly) and winds up with more compatibility.

    For me, I use VMWare to run any necessary Windows applications. I don't play games on my PC at all, so this works perfectly. There is absolutely no reason for me to ever dual boot. I can run IE, Media Player, etc. It all works without a hitch. Granted, VMWare is not free, but $100 wasn't much for me considering I haven't spent much on Linux software anyway.

    The only odd-men-out are PC gamers. Damn games! Here's to hoping Loki can pull through.
    • Actually, this is not entirely true. VMWare cannot run OS/2, and specifically states that if you try to install OS/2.
  • So I take it there are *still* no Windoze emulators that support DirectX?

    The only thing I ever use Windows for these days is playing games (Everquest and Jumpgate), so I don't see any point in emulating a non-DX version :)

  • MSEULA (Score:2, Funny)

    by B.B.Wolf ( 42548 )
    The last couple of MS liscentiouses ( Oh my, did I misspell that!) I read forbid running the software on any system that does not have a valid license for a MS OS. I could quote an example but that would mean that I would have to turn on and boot the HP Kayak /w WindumpNT that my employer gave me to try to shut me up from bitching about all the MS BS files on the internal web sites and the labour reporting system that only works on ie and which is inferior to my ancient 125MHz PA-Risk workstation runing a 6 year old version of HP-UX, and that would mean that I would have to undergo a lengthy purification ritual.
  • if ZDNet is going to review WinToNet, they should have reviewed VNC [att.com] - it does essentially the same thing, and doesn't require a high-powered NT server, or Java. I've had a few problems with VNC, but the right-click works fine. I've even daisy-chained VNC sessions. My IT guy here, who's a Microsoft Man through and through, uses VNC on our servers to do remote work.
    • Only difference, from the sound of it, is that WinToNet sounds like it works like Terminal Services or Citrix - each person connects to the server and gets their own virtual desktop and session.

      With VNC, you are seeing just what is on the "console" of the NT machine...as if you were sitting in front of the monitor. You can have multiple VNC connections to a machine, but only one person controlling it.
  • I don't know about the rest of you, but the reason I went over to Linux was to get a stable operating system that was reliable.

    Over the years alot of great apps such as GiMP, StarOffice, etc.. have come along to keep people like me from going back towards using MS Windows.

    I don't understand the point of installing MS Windows to run ontop of linux. Sure - it's fun from a software hacker's point of view - but in all sense it is almost a step in the wrong direction.

    I'm not discounting the MS oper sys's - they have their place in the world - but for me I can't see the point. I run Linux as an ALTERNATIVE to running MS Windows...

    Could someone please intelligently explain the point to this?

    Thanks.
    • You perhaps run Linux as an alternative. I run it as a complement. On Windows, I like the games, I like IE as a browser, I like the unified scripting engine support, I like OLE, I like the easy printer installs, I like explorer extensions like TortoiseCVS.

      I don't like the crappy IRC clients, the crippled commandline (cygwin is nice but not 100% there and it's kind of "weird" sometimes), the lack of mailbox scriptability (but I like the UI of mail clients on windows), and the $#@!$% file locking semantics I run into whenever I try to delete or move things.

      So I like to cvs update files with tortoise, browse around them with one of the quick viewers (like the text file viewer in the resource kit), then do real development work on them with xemacs on the bsd side in vmware. Running bsd under vmware meant not having to worry about whether my cardbus pcmcia ethernet card was supported, or most other hardware for that matter.

      This solution lets me test my server scripts on both IIS and apache (I know IIS is a gaping security hole so I only bind it to a local interface), and their output on ie, netscape, mozilla, and konquerer (if only writing HTML to spec was sufficient, *sigh*). And I don't even have to be connected to the network to do it, I do it all from one laptop wherever I am.

      That's just my story, I'm sure other people have their own reasons.
  • Look at Wine - it's opensource, it's quite small, and it lets me run
    Fallout2 in Linux, without a single file from Microsoft Windows.
    I amazed this is possible, and I don't think Wine is "unready", it's already usefull.

    PS. and who needs graphical instator ?
  • I should first preface by saying that I have actually used Wine (gotten from Mandrake Cooker) to run things like Starcraft and AOL Instant messenger. Believe it or not, Starcraft actually runs flawlessly.

    However, I have a vested interest in the old-skool Sierra games (Quest for Glory, etc.) that ran in DOS. I know that there are DOS emulators out there and I even tried really hard to get one to work way back when - but I was wondering if any of these Windows emulators actually worked for programs that ran in DOS mode. It would be interesting to get QFG2 running again, EGA gfx and all :-)

  • I know I am going to get beaten down by most people on slashdot for this, but this has been itching at me for some time.

    It seems the major concern with the average (note: average) home user has with these emulators is if they can run windows games. Instead of even trying to run windows games under linux with the use of an emulator, why don't you just run linux with VMWare in windows 2000, and have true support for all the games you want to play, while keeping whatever linux "stuff" you need. It seems that there is no reason to go to linux just to run your windows games under an emulator, it strikes me as absolutely pointless.

    Don't get me wrong here, I can see that a windows emulator for linux would be useful if you are working for a corperation, or your a coder, or have some other real business or purpose with linux, but it seems all the people who just go to linux because thats what everyone is talking about, only to run their windows things are just being plain stupid.

  • Apparently if 'Wine is not an emulator it shouldn't need Windows'. What?!? Because we so often want emulators that need the thing they're trying to emulate? There is a reason why Wine shouldn't need Windows - and that's because it's an alternative implementation of the Win32 API, and because that's what it's designed for.

    I think the term 'Emulator' is slightly misleading for VMWare et al - I understand what, say, a Spectrum emulator is - it runs games written for a Speccie on a completely different system. Surely VMWare, which just runs Windows 'inside' other OSes is doing something different - after all you can run Windows on x86 hardware last time I looked.
  • I can run counter-strike at 178fps in wine. I think that's pretty fucking amazing.
  • Wine does what no other program does, it IS an implementation of windows that doesn't even require windows at all.

    Not only that, but wine is currently the only way to run windows games in Linux fast and reliably. You can use it with OpenGL or Glide, and there is a version of wine maintained by Transgaming (I think it's Transgaming) that has some support for Direct3D.

    Currently, I play the following Windows games IN LINUX, which only wine can do.

    1. Star Trek Elite Force
    2. Half Life - all of them, which is really 3 or 4 games..
    3. Big Red Racing
    4. Unreal - *which I just started playing natively in Linux using the UT engine
    5. Solitare ; )
    6. UltraHLE - I beat Wave Racer in Linux running UltraHLE ; ) an emulator running in a reverse implementation of windows, getting 2fsp higher than in windows
    7. Deus Ex (which I am going to buy the Linux port of when it's released)
    8. one or two more games that I no longer play...

    * for anyone else who has done this, the trick to getting saved games working running in the UT engine is very simple, change the path separater in the SavePath to \ instead of /... retarded but it fixes the problem...

  • See my pain @ http://www.dualsky.co.uk/art/aolinux.htm
  • Wine is a set of libraries that allows you to run Windows apps directly in the X-Window environment. This is completely different from emulators like VMWare et al that are basically Windows inside a window. Besides, Wine is also used to port Windows applications to Linux quickly, e.g. Corel WordPerfect.

    In other words, it doesn't make sense comparing emulators to Wine, a development library. This is the same as comparing Allegro, SDL libraries to a SNES emulator.

  • It may only run win 3.1 apps but it was the best for it's time and still runs them well (and fast). There's a page dedicated to it at http://solarflow.dyndns.org/~wabi

Slashdot Top Deals

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Close