Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CodeWeavers Announces Rebrand With PortJump + ExecMode

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

  • CodeWeavers Announces Rebrand With PortJump + ExecMode

    Phoronix: CodeWeavers Announces Rebrand With PortJump + ExecMode

    CodeWeavers as the main contributor to the Wine code-base and employing many of the key developers thanks to the development of their Linux and macOS CrossOver software is working on a rebrand and promotion of their consulting services...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...s-2020-Rebrand

  • #2
    Does it mean, that
    CrossOver is the own WINE binary
    PortJump is the own WINE-lib
    and ExecMoe are the people behind them?

    Comment


    • #3
      No

      PortJump is a service, they'll wrap your product so it can run on linux/osx/chromeos.

      Execmode is a consultancy service, you hire them to teach your Windows devs how to code for different platforms

      Comment


      • #4
        As others have mentioned, it's just a matter of time before Microsoft buys Codeweavers. Once MS co-opted Chromium it became kind of obvious what their strategy was going forward. It would be much cheaper for them to switch their kernel to linux and run windows 10 as an emulation layer. Then they can concentrate their efforts on Azure. They've already started to pave the way with WSL.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gbcox View Post
          As others have mentioned, it's just a matter of time before Microsoft buys Codeweavers. Once MS co-opted Chromium it became kind of obvious what their strategy was going forward. It would be much cheaper for them to switch their kernel to linux and run windows 10 as an emulation layer. Then they can concentrate their efforts on Azure. They've already started to pave the way with WSL.
          Maybe not, at least not in the short term I guess:
          https://boxofcables.dev/no-microsoft...dows-to-linux/

          Comment


          • #6
            After reading this, it struck me that Oracle's lawsuit against Google over Java which was just heard by the US Supreme Court may affect this. As I understand it, the Oracle/Google case hinges over whether copying APIs in order to make compatible software libraries is fair use or a copyright violation. While the binary Wine executable could probably avoid this, it seems to me that a porting service which provides compatible libraries might not. I don't know how Codeweavers does this. Can someone who does calm my fears?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by billbo View Post
              After reading this, it struck me that Oracle's lawsuit against Google over Java which was just heard by the US Supreme Court may affect this. As I understand it, the Oracle/Google case hinges over whether copying APIs in order to make compatible software libraries is fair use or a copyright violation. While the binary Wine executable could probably avoid this, it seems to me that a porting service which provides compatible libraries might not. I don't know how Codeweavers does this. Can someone who does calm my fears?
              Wine is, by definition, copying APIs, because it has to provide its own versions of Windows DLLs so the function calls made by Windows binaries into system libraries work.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Julius View Post

                Maybe not, at least not in the short term I guess:
                https://boxofcables.dev/no-microsoft...dows-to-linux/
                Interesting article... thanks for the link. Only time will tell, but seems to me that @boxofcables is wrong on a few points. First of all, he is discounting the resources it takes to maintain and improve windows to keep it competitive. Second, he is over-estimating the resources needed for backward compatibility - which is where the knowledge of CodeWeavers would come in. Thirdly, he seems to believe that MS is concerned about creating a monoculture.... re: Edge/Chromium. I don't believe this is going happen overnight, or even next year... but within the next 5 to 10 years... certainly.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

                  Wine is, by definition, copying APIs, because it has to provide its own versions of Windows DLLs so the function calls made by Windows binaries into system libraries work.
                  I think this hinges on API (Application Programming Interface) vs. ABI (Application Binary Interface). As I am using the terms, API is the source code interface; while ABI is the actual register/stack use and assembly instructions used to call into kernel space, etc. Wine wouldn't need to provide an API which is compatible in order to run executables compiled for Windows it just needs to provide a compatible ABI. POSIX is an API while the particular way the stack is laid out on x86 Linux vs. ARM Linux are ABIs. We don't often think of them as different things, but they are. If Wine provides both a compatible ABI AND API then it seems to me that the Oracle/Google Java case would be relevant. Comments?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by billbo View Post
                    After reading this, it struck me that Oracle's lawsuit against Google over Java which was just heard by the US Supreme Court may affect this. As I understand it, the Oracle/Google case hinges over whether copying APIs in order to make compatible software libraries is fair use or a copyright violation. While the binary Wine executable could probably avoid this, it seems to me that a porting service which provides compatible libraries might not. I don't know how Codeweavers does this. Can someone who does calm my fears?
                    Interesting... yeah, there are several things going on concurrently with that lawsuit... are the APIs subject to copyright, what constitutes fair use and third and equally important, who gets to decide fair use. Initially, the trial court ruled that the APIs were not subject to copyright, then the Federal Circuit court overruled, said they were subject to copyright and then sent the case back for a jury trial to determine if it was fair use. There was a jury trial and the jury ruled that it was indeed fair use. The Federal Circuit then overruled the jury and said it was not. SCOTUS may simply rule that the Federal Circuit was wrong to overturn the Jury (which is only to be done in extraordinary circumstances) and leave the question of copyright for another day. Or the could rule on the copyright issue. Remember that a 4 / 4 decision leaves the circuit court decision intact.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X