Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wine To Switch To Yearly, Time-Based Releases

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wine To Switch To Yearly, Time-Based Releases

    Phoronix: Wine To Switch To Yearly, Time-Based Releases

    It was decided at WineConf 2015 last week in Vienna to shake-up how the stable Wine releases are handled...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...table-Releases

  • #2
    At its current state Wine doesn't need stable releases. I don't know anyone who uses them.

    Even CrossOver Office doesn't use them.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by birdie View Post
      At its current state Wine doesn't need stable releases. I don't know anyone who uses them.

      Even CrossOver Office doesn't use them.
      IMHO windows development must cease before wine-stable makes any sense. . .

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by birdie View Post
        At its current state Wine doesn't need stable releases. I don't know anyone who uses them.

        Even CrossOver Office doesn't use them.
        The same people who use Linux LTS are probably the type of people who would use wine-stable releases. I'm assuming here that these releases will have minor bug fix releases to fix the smaller bugs-- but, you know your program will work just as it is now for the next year and that any upgrades won't break.
        All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.

        Comment


        • #5
          Corporations care about stable releases, since they typically never use non-stable builds.

          Comment


          • #6
            In the past I have had games and some other software inexplicably break because I updated wine so I can see why people might want a version labeled stable, if only so that they can say that software 'x' definitely works with wine version 'y'. It may not seem overly useful to a bunch of us here, we who are often using rolling distros, or at least really up to date distros, but like gamerk2 said, corporations love stable or LTS releases.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by gamerk2 View Post
              Corporations care about stable releases, since they typically never use non-stable builds.
              But is there any corporation, that can't afford a Windows license, and has to use Wine?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by m132 View Post
                But is there any corporation, that can't afford a Windows license, and has to use Wine?

                In my case, the company needs to get rid of WinXP for security reasons, but we have old business applications that don't function properly in Windows 7. Wine helps us circumvent that problem. We're actually having the users run Ubuntu in VirtualBox, then they run those old applications using Wine. Some things work differently, but at least they work.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by m132 View Post
                  But is there any corporation, that can't afford a Windows license, and has to use Wine?
                  Companies don't forego Windows because they can't afford it, and it's a bad assumption to make. Even then, it's worth pointing out that Windows can really drive up software costs. If you have 200 machines, a stable rock-solid Linux system running WINE for that old internal program can save you incredible sums of money and guarantee a longer life expectancy for those boxes and a modern environment. That's not including the fact that business computers often come with the "bare minimum", which means hardware upgrades can become involved too.

                  In the real world, companies can use Linux because security is *way better*, unlike the security joke that is Windows. For example, many employees in the company I work for have the bad habit of opening every email attachment, and there's several occasions where virus emails have slipped through our filters and been stopped cold because we run Linux; sure, they were Windows viruses, but our Linux boxes are locked down pretty tight and I sleep soundly a password would be required to do permanent damage.

                  Even then, many recent Windows versions are being naughty (like we've seen in the news) choking networks with Windows downloads, and doing entirely too much snooping for a company to justify running it when a machine has confidential information on it... Business editions can have that crap turned off, but it's still extra overhead and no administrator in their right mind will want machines which can readily leak information if Microsoft wants to add more holes. We're also a Canadian Company and the whole backdoor debate going on in the states scares the crap out of us, because the US government can put pressure on Microsoft to put even more holes in. Linux doesn't have that issue.

                  The company I work at has about 1/2 Linux machines because it's fast and stable. The only computers not running Linux are OSX machines in our graphics department (and one extra for the owner), and 3 Windows machines which are required for various legacy applications and middle-manning some file-types we occasionally need converted. That's it. Once we replace one program which doesn't require Wine, we'll be going down to 1 Windows computer which will be used for those "rare cases" when something from a third-party might absolutely require Windows.
                  Last edited by Kver; 25 September 2015, 01:07 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well that is great news to see. I really need to get back into doing more bug reports for Wine

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X