So why do we still say (the Un*x Windows emulator). ? If it's *not* a emulator ?
The only reason I ever left that in there is because that's the way Eric had it. (And he can always just blame it on being a native .fr speaker.) Maybe I'll change it this week to something more appropriate. I've always hated saying something like "an implementation of the Win32 API for Un*x", it sounds too technical. Emulator, while wrong in a technical sense, does get the point across.
--------------- Brian Vincent Copper Mountain Telecom vincentb@coppercolorado.com
Not to mention that *nix, Un*x, or any other permutation of that name with a * in it is really really annoying....
On Tue, 2003-07-15 at 17:00, Brian Vincent (C) wrote:
So why do we still say (the Un*x Windows emulator). ? If it's *not* a emulator ?
The only reason I ever left that in there is because that's the way Eric had it. (And he can always just blame it on being a native .fr speaker.) Maybe I'll change it this week to something more appropriate. I've always hated saying something like "an implementation of the Win32 API for Un*x", it sounds too technical. Emulator, while wrong in a technical sense, does get the point across.
Brian Vincent Copper Mountain Telecom vincentb@coppercolorado.com
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Brian Vincent (C) wrote:
So why do we still say (the Un*x Windows emulator). ? If it's *not* a emulator ?
The only reason I ever left that in there is because that's the way Eric had it. (And he can always just blame it on being a native .fr speaker.)
Well, you can also evade the issue like Alexandre did on ScreenSavers by saying that Wine really is an emulator<g>: it's not a CPU emulator but as far as Windows applications are concerned it does emulate the behavior of real Windows.
-
Brian Vincent (C) -
Francois Gouget -
Mike Hearn