On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 04:23:45 PDT "Richard L. Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My 1st consern is installation of programs. It > > couldn't be more difficult! Yes installing from the > > Package Manager is easy, but thats the end of it. The > > file system with all of the weirdly named folders > > doesn't help when we (being the XP users) have no > > idea what folder does what and where to move the > > files.
As someone with a long Unix background coming from (now other) FOSS systems, this got to me as well. However, it's a relatively low-level nit. > Typically you don't want to be fooling around at that level of > detail if you're installing packaged software, especially if you don't > know what you're doing. The defaults should be reasonable. And I > expect installation will get easier/smarter as it continues to be developed. > But that does _not_ mean looking more like Windows! (although I have > seen some apps packaged with an "install wizard" that looks kind of similar) > > For an overview of (some of) the different locations (directories, not > folders, please! "folder" is just a metaphor), see the filesystem man page, > also online at > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2252/filesystem-5?a=view The FOSS systems went from the model Solaris is still using, with package-specific directory trees - to a flatter model, folding pretty much all the applications into /usr (GNU/Linux) or their equivalent of /opt (the various BSDs). And yes, that includes making /opt/X* symlinks to /opt to keep older software happy. > > Windows systems use *.exe files for applications and > > also installing applications. It does all the hard > > work for you in a simple GUI window. If OpenSolaris > > could use *.exe 's or create a new file type which > > does the same thing, it would not only benifit us > > (ex-)Windows users but the every other user. Do you mean OpenSolaris should use a funny extension to indicate which things are executable, or use an executable file type to bundle software for installation? The latter would *not* benefit me - in fact, it would make my life considerably harder, as I regularly share executables scripts (something Windows doesn't really support) between multiple different Unix platforms. The former - well Windows doesn't have a package system, so you can't just say (for instance) "pkg_add py-numpy" to add a package. Instead, you have to find it, download it, unpack it, and run the installer. Once the packaging software for ON settles down, it should be much better than for Windows, in spite of not having an executable package format. > Unix has historically never used filename extensions to identify > executables. No .exe (or .com), no .bat, none of that. In most > cases, file name extensions on Unix are just a matter of convention > (although some programs, like the C compiler, may expect certain > extensions to be used for certain types of files). The operating system > itself really doesn't care about such things. That also goes for Linux, > and maybe even for MacOS X, give or take compatibility with historical > Mac-isms. Actually, MacOS X has taken a new approach: A .app "executable directory" to replace the old Mac resource fork facilities. The directory has a few fixed file names in it, and can otherwise contain whatever the application author deems necessary. It cuts down on installation breakage significantly - most are simply "copy this dir to Applications". The downside is that the kernel doesn't recognize it, so you can't plug it in like you can a #! script. Instead, it has to be started from the GUI or via the "open" command. > > Another point I'd like to bring up is the > > incompatablity of Windows Applications. > > I applored those who are working on the Wine Project, > > I cannot tell you If it is any good persoanlly, > > because of the 1st point i braught up -i can't > > install it! > > But none-the-less they are trying to create a > > Emulator of sorts. > > Why can't OpenSolaris create their own emulator of > > windows -- simular to that of Wine's but better and > > works on all applications. For example Apple Macs. > > They are Unix based Operating systems and they > > managed to create an emulator, if it is legal, read > > through their code to get an idea of how to make it > > work successfully. My Mac's have Windows emulators??? Cool! Where? Or maybe you're confusing BootCamp with an emulator? That's just an apple-support way to dual boot windows on an Intel Mac. Or could it be one of the third party emulators? There's one from MS, and various things built around bochs and wine as well. Of course, most of the people who really need Windows applications on a regular basis are running virtual machines these days - parallels seems to be the best available for that purpose, but VMware's fusion product and Sun's VirtualBox aren't far behind, and both have better support for running non-Windows systems as the guest than parallels. All three allow you to have Windows application windows share the desktop with the native applications, with shared folders, etc. With Parallels, you can even configure the mac so double-clicking a Windows data file will launch the appropriate Windows application in the virtual machine, starting it if necessary. VirtualBox is available for OpenSolaris, and works well there, though having both a Windows and GNOME task bar on the monitor is a bit clumsy. > > If you can bi-pass the whole emulator thing and make > > OpenSolaris compatable with Windoes based > > applications, that would be even better. I know the > > file system is different, but if you can't make > > sothing that puts all the files into the normal > > folders for OpenSolaris, surely making a folder > > purely for the storage of these Windows files would > > be easier. (eg. /winapps/program_files/.........) > > I hope eventually wine will (a) be available by default, and (b) work better. > The former isn't up to me, but I think the latter is a reasonable expectation. > It will never be perfect, and neither will anything else, because in all > probability > Microsoft has no interest in making it easier for their competitors to make > Windows unnecessary. > > At one time, Sun had their own thing that was a little like wine, called > "wabi". > But that pretty much faded out in the Windows 3.x days; wine probably is among > the best of its kind right now (i.e. running Windows applications under some > other OS, without having a full virtual machine running Windows, about which > see below). And wine, or at any rate a derivative, also runs on Mac OS, > which probably has more desktop users than Linux and Solaris together > (although nowhere near as many as Windows). So there's probably enough > critical mass behind wine that getting it readily available and usable on > Solaris > might be more effective than trying to create some new thing (which didn't > work > out so well with wabi). > > One could always run Windows under Xen on Solaris. That would be 100% > compatible with all Windows apps (since it would be running Windows in a > virtual > system). But for those apps that will work with wine, I'd expect the > performance > to generally be better, as well as offer the ability to set up one-click > access with > fast startup time. The problem here is that MS has negative incentive to keep their - or anyone elses - apps working on Wine. In my experience, the virtualized solutions provide both better compatability and better performance than Wine. And Parallels has already demonstrated that you can get one-click access (at least on OSX). The startup time is fine if the VM is already running; if you have to take it out of a suspended or halted state, you lose that once. A virtualized system *does* use more resources than wine applications - you really need to have enough ram to keep the VM in memory. If the vm starts paging, you'll wish you were using Wine. > I've heard and read of a fair number of Windows horror stories too. The trick > isn't just to pick up the functionality and ease of use, it's also to avoid > making > some of the same mistakes... Right. If OpenSolaris turns into Windows (or Linux) in pursuit of Windows users, why would anyone switch? <mike -- Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
