I read the WineHQ newsletters when they come out to try and keep up on the goings on of Wine and what will run on it. I noticed that the Wsock32.dllwas suggested as a SoC project. I wanted to point out that Vista X64 has issues with this dll and some of the newer programs arent accessing it right. This could be a really good project to take on for someone as it would give people that are having issues with Vista to use Wine. I also thought that possible control panel rewriting so that it looks better would be a good project. Make it more user friendly. Easier to access. My descriptions of what things do on each tab. Just an overall nice,easy,good looking control panel would be really helpful to first time users. the current winecfg looks like crap and isnt at all user friendly to the first time user. I was a first time users a year ago and I still dont understand half of the control panel. Wine Plugin project might be really useful too. It would help companies that cant afford or wont make direct linux ports to have some kind of ability to get their porgrams working without official linux support. The three things listed above all come from me playing NeverWinter Nights 2. OEI wont make a linux port but have been pretty supportive of Wine in their forums on bioware. .NET is also something needed to get the toolset working, but I thought that was a little big for a 2-3 month project. Supporter, Nicholas "MammothTruk" Baldwin -- Lifes to Short. Stop wasting your time.
MammothTruk wrote:
I read the WineHQ newsletters when they come out to try and keep up on the goings on of Wine and what will run on it. I noticed that the Wsock32.dll was suggested as a SoC project. I wanted to point out that Vista X64 has issues with this dll and some of the newer programs arent accessing it right. This could be a really good project to take on for someone as it would give people that are having issues with Vista to use Wine.
I also thought that possible control panel rewriting so that it looks better would be a good project. Make it more user friendly. Easier to access. My descriptions of what things do on each tab. Just an overall nice,easy,good looking control panel would be really helpful to first time users. the current winecfg looks like crap and isnt at all user friendly to the first time user. I was a first time users a year ago and I still dont understand half of the control panel.
Wine Plugin project might be really useful too. It would help companies that cant afford or wont make direct linux ports to have some kind of ability to get their porgrams working without official linux support.
The three things listed above all come from me playing NeverWinter Nights 2. OEI wont make a linux port but have been pretty supportive of Wine in their forums on bioware. .NET is also something needed to get the toolset working, but I thought that was a little big for a 2-3 month project.
Supporter, Nicholas "MammothTruk" Baldwin
-- Lifes to Short. Stop wasting your time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, I'm going to be applying for GSoC this year, for the mswsock dll mentioned in this e-mail. I've been working on it pretty part time for about week, and with wine as a whole for about 1 month, I think I can handle it. I heard it was a good idea to post and let people know if one is interested in GSoC, so here is my post. I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
Christopher Harvey wrote:
I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
After talking about the concept a bit at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, I really don't like the idea of a "Wine GUI" just for running Wine applications. From the user's persepctive, installers for Wine applications shouldn't be substantially different from any old Linux installer - they just click on them, it adds something to their applications menu, and from then on they can run it from there. Most of the futzing with applications, like messing around with native dlls in winecfg, shouldn't have to be done at all. The same goes with editing the registry. Configuration we'll never be able to eliminate completely, like selecting the windows version, should ultimately be done through an intuitive place and not some central "Wine configuration" program. For instance, I should be able to right click a Windows application, select properties, and then change the Windows version from there. So, yes, I agree. Winecfg is ugly and inadequate for the kind of configuration our users are doing now. But before we put too much effort into sprucing up Winecfg, let's instead talk about how feasible it is to make it unneeded in the first place. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Hi all, 2008/3/13, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org>:
Christopher Harvey wrote:
I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
After talking about the concept a bit at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, I really don't like the idea of a "Wine GUI" just for running Wine applications. From the user's persepctive, installers for Wine applications shouldn't be substantially different from any old Linux installer - they just click on them, it adds something to their applications menu, and from then on they can run it from there.
Most of the futzing with applications, like messing around with native dlls in winecfg, shouldn't have to be done at all. The same goes with editing the registry.
Configuration we'll never be able to eliminate completely, like selecting the windows version, should ultimately be done through an intuitive place and not some central "Wine configuration" program. For instance, I should be able to right click a Windows application, select properties, and then change the Windows version from there.
So, yes, I agree. Winecfg is ugly and inadequate for the kind of configuration our users are doing now. But before we put too much effort into sprucing up Winecfg, let's instead talk about how feasible it is to make it unneeded in the first place.
I totally agree that a wine gui is not what we want. ui's are counter productive. I also found that I need winecfg less and less, I now run winecfg only to set the windows version to vista. Maybe we should make this version the default now? More and more applications don't want to run with windows version set to 2000, and it should just work. Cheers, Maarten.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
2008/3/13, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org>:
Christopher Harvey wrote:
I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
After talking about the concept a bit at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, I really don't like the idea of a "Wine GUI" just for running Wine applications. From the user's persepctive, installers for Wine applications shouldn't be substantially different from any old Linux installer - they just click on them, it adds something to their applications menu, and from then on they can run it from there.
Most of the futzing with applications, like messing around with native dlls in winecfg, shouldn't have to be done at all. The same goes with editing the registry.
Configuration we'll never be able to eliminate completely, like selecting the windows version, should ultimately be done through an intuitive place and not some central "Wine configuration" program. For instance, I should be able to right click a Windows application, select properties, and then change the Windows version from there.
So, yes, I agree. Winecfg is ugly and inadequate for the kind of configuration our users are doing now. But before we put too much effort into sprucing up Winecfg, let's instead talk about how feasible it is to make it unneeded in the first place.
I totally agree that a wine gui is not what we want. ui's are counter productive. I also found that I need winecfg less and less, I now run winecfg only to set the windows version to vista. Maybe we should make this version the default now? More and more applications don't want to run with windows version set to 2000, and it should just work.
Cheers, Maarten.
There was a discussion a while back about setting the default version to XP. Vista may be a bad default, considering how badly it's been running, I wouldn't be surprised if some apps start including their own workarounds for Vista.
Hi Austin, 2008/3/14, Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com>:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
2008/3/13, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org>:
Christopher Harvey wrote:
I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
After talking about the concept a bit at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, I really don't like the idea of a "Wine GUI" just for running Wine applications. From the user's persepctive, installers for Wine applications shouldn't be substantially different from any old Linux installer - they just click on them, it adds something to their applications menu, and from then on they can run it from there.
Most of the futzing with applications, like messing around with native dlls in winecfg, shouldn't have to be done at all. The same goes with editing the registry.
Configuration we'll never be able to eliminate completely, like selecting the windows version, should ultimately be done through an intuitive place and not some central "Wine configuration" program. For instance, I should be able to right click a Windows application, select properties, and then change the Windows version from there.
So, yes, I agree. Winecfg is ugly and inadequate for the kind of configuration our users are doing now. But before we put too much effort into sprucing up Winecfg, let's instead talk about how feasible it is to make it unneeded in the first place.
I totally agree that a wine gui is not what we want. ui's are counter productive. I also found that I need winecfg less and less, I now run winecfg only to set the windows version to vista. Maybe we should make this version the default now? More and more applications don't want to run with windows version set to 2000, and it should just work.
Cheers, Maarten.
There was a discussion a while back about setting the default version to XP. Vista may be a bad default, considering how badly it's been running, I wouldn't be surprised if some apps start including their own workarounds for Vista. It's a good idea to set to vista, I think we'll support it. Some games for example won't run on xp any more.
I only know apps that will run if windows version is set to vista. I don't know any that fail if the version is set to that specifically. Cheers, Maarten.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Austin,
2008/3/14, Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com>:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
2008/3/13, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org>:
Christopher Harvey wrote:
I've had a few ideas that I thought of on my own, but now I'm starting to see they perhaps aren't as useful as the ideas thought of by current developers, but I'll float it out there one last time. I thought it would be cool to create a wine GUI overlay for games, exactly like nvPerfHUD. The thing about doing it in wine that makes it better than nvPerHUD is the fact the to use nvPerfHUD the apps have to give permission for nvPerHUD to run on them. A wine version would actually be able to force every single 3d app, opengl or directX to output nvPerfHUD like output. Anyway, just a thought. Would I be able to apply for both of these projects and pick one last minute? Thanks, Chris.
After talking about the concept a bit at the Ubuntu Developer Summit, I really don't like the idea of a "Wine GUI" just for running Wine applications. From the user's persepctive, installers for Wine applications shouldn't be substantially different from any old Linux installer - they just click on them, it adds something to their applications menu, and from then on they can run it from there.
Most of the futzing with applications, like messing around with native dlls in winecfg, shouldn't have to be done at all. The same goes with editing the registry.
Configuration we'll never be able to eliminate completely, like selecting the windows version, should ultimately be done through an intuitive place and not some central "Wine configuration" program. For instance, I should be able to right click a Windows application, select properties, and then change the Windows version from there.
So, yes, I agree. Winecfg is ugly and inadequate for the kind of configuration our users are doing now. But before we put too much effort into sprucing up Winecfg, let's instead talk about how feasible it is to make it unneeded in the first place.
I totally agree that a wine gui is not what we want. ui's are counter productive. I also found that I need winecfg less and less, I now run winecfg only to set the windows version to vista. Maybe we should make this version the default now? More and more applications don't want to run with windows version set to 2000, and it should just work.
Cheers, Maarten.
There was a discussion a while back about setting the default version to XP. Vista may be a bad default, considering how badly it's been running, I wouldn't be surprised if some apps start including their own workarounds for Vista. It's a good idea to set to vista, I think we'll support it. Some games for example won't run on xp any more.
I only know apps that will run if windows version is set to vista. I don't know any that fail if the version is set to that specifically.
We should set the default version to the version of Windows that we emulate the best. This is determined in part by what version the tests are written for (and thus the implementation is aligned with). As can be seen from the test results, the version with the fewest failures is XP or 2003. Thus, we should set our default version to winxp. Though you say many games don't run on XP anymore, Vista hasn't been around long enough for us to emulate that version correctly. Besides, 'games' is just a subset of the applications people run in Wine. Defaulting to Vista is overreaching our bounds and will lead to many problems. -- James Hawkins
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Austin English
There was a discussion a while back about setting the default version to XP. Vista may be a bad default, considering how badly it's been running, I wouldn't be surprised if some apps start including their own workarounds for Vista.
Given each application tends to have different results depending on which version of Wine is emulated, the solution to me seems that there should be a default set like now, such as XP and then the Desktop Environment should support a right click on the *.EXE where the user can select Open With Wine Open With Wine in Win2000 Mode Open With Wine in WinXP Mode etc -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
Hi Steven, 2008/3/14, Steven Edwards <winehacker(a)gmail.com>:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Austin English
There was a discussion a while back about setting the default version to XP. Vista may be a bad default, considering how badly it's been running, I wouldn't be surprised if some apps start including their own workarounds for Vista.
Given each application tends to have different results depending on which version of Wine is emulated, the solution to me seems that there should be a default set like now, such as XP and then the Desktop Environment should support a right click on the *.EXE where the user can select
Open With Wine Open With Wine in Win2000 Mode Open With Wine in WinXP Mode etc This isn't about specific applications, but for the default application wine setting.
Cheers, Maarten.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Given each application tends to have different results depending on which version of Wine is emulated, the solution to me seems that there should be a default set like now, such as XP and then the Desktop Environment should support a right click on the *.EXE where the user can select
Open With Wine Open With Wine in Win2000 Mode Open With Wine in WinXP Mode etc This isn't about specific applications, but for the default application wine setting.
I was replying to Austins comment about applications behaving differently for vista. They already tend to do this for win2000 verses windows xp so something should be done to address this for users that are running these applications. Winecfg or another program does not feel like the right place to me and Wine needs to tie in better with GNOME in this regard. I tend to agree the default global version should be set to XP as there is a lot of backlash against Vista and XP is going to be with us for a very very long time once SP3 officially goes gold. -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
participants (7)
-
Austin English -
Christopher Harvey -
James Hawkins -
Maarten Lankhorst -
MammothTruk -
Scott Ritchie -
Steven Edwards