You ask:
I am willing to re-write my best Windows software from scratch, but I insist that the result is native or almost on Linux so there are not any weird GUI glitches. Do you think Wine is the way to go for me, or am I better off writing individual versions and keeping the Windows software native and then producing QT or GTK versions for *NIX? I'm at a cross-roads here, since I'll be dedicating years of work in whatever direction I take.
IMO Wine is the perfect tool for you. We know, it's not perfect. But the best use of your time (and the most efficient) would be to: 1. Fix any problems in your apps (like reliance on strange Windows corner cases, use of very obscure features) 2. Help out fix Wine so that your apps run properly.
This will not only help us a lot, but it will help you make good use of your time, and it will allow you to do cross platform development (even for Windows) from your Linux box.
Please direct questions to wine-devel@winehq.org, where people can help you out.
I am willing to re-write my best Windows software from scratch, but I insist that the result is native or almost on Linux so there are not any weird GUI glitches. Do you think Wine is the way to go for me, or am I better off writing individual versions and keeping the Windows software native and then producing QT or GTK versions for *NIX? I'm at a cross-roads here, since I'll be dedicating years of work in whatever direction I take.
I'm sorry, Dimitrie, but I'd say that if nativity of your solution is your primary goal, you shouldn't go with wine. IMHO, Wine is for when you want to have one application that works on both win32 and Linux. Still though, a application running in Wine will look like a _MS_Windows_ application running inside Linux. For me, as a user, I am always aware of the fact that it is running on a compatibily layer.
If you want something that really looks Linux-like, I'd go with QT and/or GTK.
However, you have to decide for yourself what you think is more important: the time that you will safe by going the Wine-way, or the Linux look&feel you will get by going the Linux way.
Grtz, Robert
On April 2, 2004 5:03 am, Robert van Herk wrote:
For me, as a user, I am always aware of the fact that it is running on a compatibily layer.
If you want something that really looks Linux-like, I'd go with QT and/or GTK.
Indeed, currently Wine makes it painfully clear that it's not native. Unfortunately for Linux (and fortunately for my point), the stupid Qt/GTK problem means that whatever you choose, it will not feel native.
But look at the big picture: we are actively working on uxtheme, and it's a matter of time before we will have _very_ good L&F integration. Ideally, we will have a GTK theme and a QT theme that just calls the respective toolkit's theming code, so a Wine app will look native both in GNOME and in KDE. I 100% agree that native integration is paramount, and this is why we will have it.
Since you've mentioned the toolkits, a small comment on that. Of the two only QT is a serious option for cross-platform development. It's a good option, but it's not perfect because your application will not be native in GNOME, you will not be using the native toolkits in Windows, you have to pay a lot of licensing fees, etc. Maybe wxWindows is a better option...
On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 08:31:38 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
Since you've mentioned the toolkits, a small comment on that. Of the two only QT is a serious option for cross-platform development. It's a good option, but it's not perfect because your application will not be native in GNOME, you will not be using the native toolkits in Windows, you have to pay a lot of licensing fees, etc. Maybe wxWindows is a better option...
What's wrong with GTK+/Win32? Last time I checked it used the native XP theming engine and looked right in Win2K/98 as well. There are a lot of open source apps with thriving win32 ports using it, and it's been integrated with the main tree.
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 17:39:14 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
Do you think Wine is the way to go for me, or am I better off writing individual versions and keeping the Windows software native and then producing QT or GTK versions for *NIX? I'm at a cross-roads here, since I'll be dedicating years of work in whatever direction I take.
<morpheus> What is native? </morpheus>
I'd say a native app is one that feels like it was written for the platform. That normally means, native UI, good desktop integration, that sort of thing (in a desktop app).
WineLib is a great way to do this. Pure WineLib apps will not feel native, because you're using a clone of the win32 widget set - suck it up ;) However, WineLib lets you use a native toolkit like GTK+ *and* keep using the same code that you use elsewhere for doing the actual work of the app. For instance, you don't have to rewrite code to use malloc vs HeapAlloc - if you app uses COM you can still do that, if you use the win32 multimedia functions etc, you can keep that.
This means you can produce a program that LOOKS and FEELS native in much less time than would otherwise be required (ie you don't need to rewrite all the code). It also lets you break it up into chunks and port one at a time - for teams without a lot of resources this is a valuable thing indeed.
thanks -mike
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 17:39:14 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
Do you think Wine is the way to go for me, or am I better off writing individual versions and keeping the Windows software native and then producing QT or GTK versions for *NIX? I'm at a cross-roads here, since I'll be dedicating years of work in whatever direction I take.
<morpheus> What is native? </morpheus>
I'd say a native app is one that feels like it was written for the platform. That normally means, native UI, good desktop integration, that sort of thing (in a desktop app).
WineLib is a great way to do this. Pure WineLib apps will not feel native, because you're using a clone of the win32 widget set - suck it up ;) However, WineLib lets you use a native toolkit like GTK+ *and* keep using
Or better yet, lets you use a "native" toolkit like wxWindows. Think about it!
regards, Jakob
On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 13:14, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
Or better yet, lets you use a "native" toolkit like wxWindows. Think about it!
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of toolkit abstractions. Stuff like wxWindows tends not to work well for the same reasons that implementing comctl32 on top of GTK would not work well - widget toolkits vary too much to be easily abstracted.
"Mike" == Mike Hearn mike@navi.cx writes:
Mike> On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 17:39:14 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: >>> Do you think Wine is the way to go for me, or am I better off >>> writing individual versions and keeping the Windows software native >>> and then producing QT or GTK versions for *NIX? I'm at a cross-roads >>> here, since I'll be dedicating years of work in whatever direction I >>> take.
Mike> <morpheus> What is native? </morpheus>
Mike> I'd say a native app is one that feels like it was written for the Mike> platform. That normally means, native UI, good desktop Mike> integration, that sort of thing (in a desktop app).
Mike> WineLib is a great way to do this. Pure WineLib apps will not feel Mike> native, because you're using a clone of the win32 widget set -
Is Motif Look and Feel "native", is XAW "native"? Winelib is a Library like any other, also with some strange concepts...
Bye
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Uwe Bonnes wrote: [...]
Mike> WineLib is a great way to do this. Pure WineLib apps will not feel Mike> native, because you're using a clone of the win32 widget set -Is Motif Look and Feel "native", is XAW "native"? Winelib is a Library like any other, also with some strange concepts...
Is 'C:\My Documents' native?
No.
Wine/WineLib is more than just a GUI toolkit. Sure with WineLib you might be able to hide the Windows drive letters but we don't have that kind of code yet.
And yes, a Gnome/KDE user may not consider Motif, Xaw and especially Athena applications to be native because they don't look like the others. The same would be true of a Wine application... at least until uxtheme is more advanced (uxtheme has the potential to make pretty nice eye candy, btw).
"Francois" == Francois Gouget fgouget@free.fr writes:
Francois> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Uwe Bonnes wrote: [...] Mike> WineLib is a great way to do this. Pure WineLib apps will not feel Mike> native, because you're using a clone of the win32 widget set - >> Is Motif Look and Feel "native", is XAW "native"? Winelib is a >> Library like any other, also with some strange concepts...
Francois> Is 'C:\My Documents' native?
That's what I call a "strange concept" :-)
-
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Francois Gouget -
Jakob Eriksson -
Mike Hearn -
Robert van Herk -
Uwe Bonnes