Stop Microsoft

Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: Refalm on 20 January 2006, 15:49

Title: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Refalm on 20 January 2006, 15:49
The latest Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark shows that Wine is pretty fast nowdays.
Wine is the most important tool for people to migrate from Windows to Linux.

http://wiki.winehq.org/BenchMark-0.9.5
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 20 January 2006, 22:22
I hope this one works with at least HL 1... I still a copy of Windows 2000 due to this.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: veridicus on 20 January 2006, 22:34
That's truely excellent considering one of the complaints I often hear is people assuming Wine is slower simply because it's an "emulator".  (Yeah, I know it may not exactly be an emulator, but people see it as an extra layer, and therefore assume speed issues.)
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: worker201 on 20 January 2006, 23:22
Too bad darwine still pretty much sucks. :(
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 21 January 2006, 00:17
Is that because darwine is an emulator? Will it get better when Mac becomes x86?

Interesting, I though they should've payed closer to the NA category, perhaps they should've had a marking scheme for compatability.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 21 January 2006, 01:42
Quote from: worker201
Too bad darwine still pretty much sucks. :(

wine pretty much sucks too ... I tried it recently and got not a single program to work ... winex on the other hand is quite good ... every game/program I tried has worked ... well not perfectly, but somewhat close ... I really don't have too much use for it tho, other than a few games.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: worker201 on 21 January 2006, 01:51
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Is that because darwine is an emulator? Will it get better when Mac becomes x86?

Can't rightly answer that question.  But it is obvious that there has been a lot more work done on the wine project than on the darwine project.  And there are a lot more wine users than darwine users too.  Microsoft's supposedly very good VirtualPC program for the Mac makes darwine somewhat superfluous to most Mac users.

Switching data from little-endian to big-endian has to suck, especially if it is done on the fly.  I don't know shit about how wine/darwine work, but I would guess that converting a Windows program to big-endian and then emulating it would be easier.  Then, you could (illegally) distribute the big-endian version, so no one else has to go through the conversion process.

But that raises an even more interesting question, which no one has touched yet.  Are Mactels going to be big-endian or little-endian?  There's nothing that requires all Intel processors to be little-endian, they just are.  Perhaps one of Apple's security strategies is to remain big-endian.  Then you couldn't install Windows on a Mac, or install OSX on a PC without some serious work.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Refalm on 21 January 2006, 18:56
Quote from: ReggieMicheals
I hope this one works with at least HL 1... I still a copy of Windows 2000 due to this.

If Half-Life 2 works on it, so must Half-Life 1 (the Steam version, not that illegal one you downloaded off BitTorrent).
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Orethrius on 21 January 2006, 20:25
Quote from: Refalm
If Half-Life 2 works on it, so must Half-Life 1 (the Steam version, not that illegal one you downloaded off BitTorrent).

Then again, there are those of us who bought the disc... :p
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Refalm on 22 January 2006, 15:37
Quote from: Orethrius
Then again, there are those of us who bought the disc... :p

Me too, you must enter the serial code in Steam. OMFG STEAM R0X0RZ TEH BIG ONE111!
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: noob on 22 January 2006, 17:25
I had the origional HL1 on cd, then my cd drive buggered and the disk has nice big scratched round it. Is it illigal for me to now go and download off LimeWire and use my serial number to play it? I see it as legal as I payed for it, and the origional got damaged, so i still own a license for it.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Refalm on 22 January 2006, 17:49
Quote from: noob
I had the origional HL1 on cd, then my cd drive buggered and the disk has nice big scratched round it. Is it illigal for me to now go and download off LimeWire and use my serial number to play it? I see it as legal as I payed for it, and the origional got damaged, so i still own a license for it.

It's legal to do that in my country.
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 23 January 2006, 05:54
I think that should be legal ... you can do that with Guild Wars ... just download the client and use the serial code you paid for ... you're pretty much paying just for the serial code, so I see nothing wrong with downloading a game that still requires a serial code to play ...
Title: Re: Wine vs. Windows XP SP2 benchmark
Post by: Pathos on 23 January 2006, 07:48
I think the only advantage windows would have over wine would be the graphical over head from memory to screen. Windows has more mature drivers and directx implementation (of course). Its not very clear if they are using opengl or directx in someplaces. I would expect windows to hammer linux with directx because its handled at a lower level.

I suspect that all the tests are done with opengl which is stupid because there are many windows games that only have directx support.