Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: CodeWeavers Is Working On A New Web Browser

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aceman View Post
    Would that be legal (running Trident outside of a legitimate Windows installation)?
    Yes. They wrote all the code themselves, or their "partner" did. All 100% legal reverse engineering. Just like samba to smb :P
    Secondly: The reason its legal is also because this is not trident, its something that is compitable with trident.

    The entire "point" of this idea is basically to get a software that can access all those pesky Active X sites, and sell support for Crossover at the same time, and the user running a modern browser at the side of this. If they succed they can sell licenses, companies can install a newer OS, and the fact that the application will most likely be bootstrapped to only access the Active X part of the network will also improve security if well handled.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,110

    Default

    Codeweavers, wine, and all this balmerware compatibility crap really pisses me off. This is a branch of software that needs to be CUT OFF, not worked in at all costs.

    Adding balmershite compatibility to non-balmer OS's does NOTHING to push website/software/whatever_else developers to make cross-platform compatible code. It gives them a LAZY WAY OUT. It needs to END.

    Firefox/Chrome/etc. work on MS. That means that building your websites to work with Firefox/Chrome/etc. DOES NOT CUT OFF CUSTOMERS. Building websites for BSIE (that's BS for BULLSH**) **DOES** cut off potential customers.... but not any more... now lazy retarded devs can make BSIE websites and it will work on Linux. F*** OFF AS**OLES!!!!

    Let balmer feel the pain.
    CUT THEM OFF!!!!
    Wine and BS compatibility HURTS EVERYONE.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    Codeweavers, wine, and all this balmerware compatibility crap really pisses me off. This is a branch of software that needs to be CUT OFF, not worked in at all costs.

    Adding balmershite compatibility to non-balmer OS's does NOTHING to push website/software/whatever_else developers to make cross-platform compatible code. It gives them a LAZY WAY OUT. It needs to END.

    Firefox/Chrome/etc. work on MS. That means that building your websites to work with Firefox/Chrome/etc. DOES NOT CUT OFF CUSTOMERS. Building websites for BSIE (that's BS for BULLSH**) **DOES** cut off potential customers.... but not any more... now lazy retarded devs can make BSIE websites and it will work on Linux. F*** OFF AS**OLES!!!!

    Let balmer feel the pain.
    CUT THEM OFF!!!!
    Wine and BS compatibility HURTS EVERYONE.
    You seem to forget the hugely wide deployment of ActiveX for intranet CMS systems in enterprises, which is what CodeWeavers is aiming at. Very often the Windows -> Linux migration is ruled out by companies because the cost of porting from ActiveX to whatever open standard you choose is higher than just buying new Windows licences and sticking to ActiveX. By trying to eliminate this extra cost that is holding back Linux in enterprise, CodeWeaver is actually helping the adoption of Linux, other than of course seeking for private profit, as any company.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r1348 View Post
    You seem to forget the hugely wide deployment of ActiveX for intranet CMS systems in enterprises, which is what CodeWeavers is aiming at. Very often the Windows -> Linux migration is ruled out by companies because the cost of porting from ActiveX to whatever open standard you choose is higher than just buying new Windows licences and sticking to ActiveX. By trying to eliminate this extra cost that is holding back Linux in enterprise, CodeWeaver is actually helping the adoption of Linux, other than of course seeking for private profit, as any company.
    Yeah, the target market for this isn't Joe User trying to access some malware-ridden pr0n site, it's Joe Corporate trying to access some awful legacy site. Most users here would be appalled at how many government- and quasi-government-sites that are mandatory for businesses are limping along on ASP code dating from 1998 running on Win2K IIS and doing the bulk of their work in crashy ActiveX controls, because they could hire VB programmers cheaply back then. Then there are the apps that use it for a browser-hardware interface (e.g. business-to-business web apps that use a scanner) and other situations that exist because there was no way to do it "right" 10 years ago and now the budget's not there to throw it out and do it over the right way.

    This is another tool to un-entrench Windows, for those looking for something closer to native than VirtualBox or vSphere. It treats ActiveX web sites as legacy software, like banks were treating their mainframe stuff when I started working for them 22 years ago. It's no less a niche product than Wine itself has been all this time, but it's another option, one which might attract some attention when businesses start looking at having to deploy Windows 8 -- where all their existing software is treated as legacy software anyway.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    90

    Default

    If there's a technology that should be pushed to death and buried (be it alive) it's ActiveX for God's sake! Granted there's still a lot of (numbers wanted here) of intranet sites that rely upon it but that is mostly M$ products and other bloatware, anyway products that cost you an arm or both legs.

    The best thing to do is to [continue to] advertise free products and open standards and let companies choose by themselves. First win the battle for open standards and technologies on the public place. Then and only then (maybe) start peeking into companies businesses. But that's not what will make the open source win. It is already on the good way to convincing IT departments by its various attractive features, price coming first... Fiddling with IE while even M$ developers say «that sh** should disappear for good» is just a waste of time.

    There are places that aren't worth conquering.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by r1348 View Post
    You seem to forget the hugely wide deployment of ActiveX for intranet CMS systems in enterprises, which is what CodeWeavers is aiming at. Very often the Windows -> Linux migration is ruled out by companies because the cost of porting from ActiveX to whatever open standard you choose is higher than just buying new Windows licences and sticking to ActiveX. By trying to eliminate this extra cost that is holding back Linux in enterprise, CodeWeaver is actually helping the adoption of Linux, other than of course seeking for private profit, as any company.
    You completely missed the point. I am arguing precisely OPPOSITE to your statement. That this behavior NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.
    If you bring balmer shit compatibility to Linux, there is no longer a strong motivation to fix the software to no longer need balmer shit, hence it is NEVER fixed, and balmer shit doesn't ever die.

    It doesn't matter if the customer is home or enterprise users, the effect is IDENTICAL.
    Why should ENTERPRISE customers insist on their software suppliers building software that is compatible with Linux if hacks can make balmer shit work adequately on Linux? This is a BAD policy.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    You completely missed the point. I am arguing precisely OPPOSITE to your statement. That this behavior NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.
    If you bring balmer shit compatibility to Linux, there is no longer a strong motivation to fix the software to no longer need balmer shit, hence it is NEVER fixed, and balmer shit doesn't ever die.

    It doesn't matter if the customer is home or enterprise users, the effect is IDENTICAL.
    Why should ENTERPRISE customers insist on their software suppliers building software that is compatible with Linux if hacks can make balmer shit work adequately on Linux? This is a BAD policy.
    I don't think most of it is from 3rd party software suppliers. It's in-house crap.

    So, a manager goes to his boss and says we have 3 options:

    1. Stick with Windows so we can run IE6 for our crap internal software.
    2. Pay our developers 5 million dollars to rewrite it properly, so we can switch to linux.
    3. Buy CodeWeavers for 100,000 dollars and we can switch to linux.

    I think you can guess which option the manager will choose (well, it will be either 1 or 3), and I don't see anything wrong with CodeWeavers trying to fill that niche.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haifa
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Disregarding ActiveX, lots of Israeli websites require IE to render properly. I cannot image how these websites were written to break in every other browser so terribly.

    Doubly so for government and Ministry of Education websites. We cannot even register our children for kindergarten without IE. There is nobody to complain to, it is all legal. Arguments about "availablility to everybody" are a joke, because everybody can pirate Windows.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dotancohen View Post
    We cannot even register our children for kindergarten without IE. There is nobody to complain to, it is all legal. Arguments about "availablility to everybody" are a joke, because everybody can pirate Windows.
    This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, but it's even worse in the B2B and G2B spheres, where it's presumed every business is running Windows on every desktop.

    Saying stuff like

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker
    this behavior NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.
    If you bring balmer shit compatibility to Linux, there is no longer a strong motivation to fix the software to no longer need balmer shit, hence it is NEVER fixed, and balmer shit doesn't ever die.
    is only valid in ivory towers and your mom's basement. In the real world, Windows has a 90% market share, and it's not a matter of laziness, spite or anything else that causes developers to only have Windows versions of their programs, or that they use Windows-only technologies to build their websites. It's money. Posting online diatribes about it with copious caps won't solve the problem. Having executives say "I want the entire executive board to have iPads, so any product we buy has to work in the iPad browser or have an iPad app available", as sad as that may be, will help. (So will Android tablets and POS terminals, etc., but to the non-technical folks out there, "tablet" is still sadly synonymous with "iPad".)

    And if a company adopts Wine-based products like this to run legacy Windows products they already own and Windows-only websites they have no choice but to use, when the next vendor comes calling, the guy who made the Wine decision so he could move the entire company to Linux on the desktop isn't going to order the Windows version. He's going to say "We're a Linux shop. What's your Linux support like?" It makes the annoying Windows-only sales calls end abruptly and if more than about 5% of companies do that, it'll make vendors do things differently.

    I say this from direct experience. Unfortunately, my direct experience also says that only smaller businesses with a technical culture and good continuity -- and 800-pound-gorillas like Google -- can make such a migration stick, but it is happening.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •