?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile equiraptor.com Previous Previous Next Next
Crossover Office - Equiraptor's Journal
equiraptor
equiraptor
Crossover Office
So, I kept meaning to buy Crossover Office so I could run Quicken in both Windows and Linux, so that I would be more motivated to keep things updated. Instead, I just never updated Quicken. But, nugget today mentioned that Codweavers says Crossover Office now supports running iTunes. This, we both had to see. So, I finally paid for that trial version I downloaded so many months ago, and tried.

Probably as a result of me not reading the directions more than anything else, the iTunes install said it failed the first time. I had let it attempt to "autoreboot" the fake Windows environment. So, I ran the installer again, telling iTunes I would reboot later. This time, the installation succeeded and I could run iTunes. Yay! iTunes was running! But, it didn't see Nugget's share. It could access the music store, so we knew networking wasn't the problem. On startup, iTunes had warned me I wasn't running the latest version. So, I let it open Internet Explorer and download the latest update. That installed, and now I can play music from Nugget's share on our slacker radio (using the Airport Express). Things aren't perfect. I currently don't seem to be able to play music on my own speakers. But, that's okay. When I want that, I have XMMS, and I can output to Slacker Radio, so all is well.

Now, my speakers... Hmmm.....

Tags:

13 comments | Leave a comment
Comments
decibel45 From: decibel45 Date: February 19th, 2005 01:18 pm (UTC) (Link)
My question is: will it run under a real OS using linux compatability?
(Replies frozen) (Thread)
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 19th, 2005 01:20 pm (UTC) (Link)
If FreeBSD were a real OS and Linux wasn't, FreeBSD wouldn't need Linux compatibility.

And if Crossover Office will run with Linux compatibility, you have a chance. I'm not sure if the networking would work or not. *shrug* I'd rather have my desktop running Linux anyway. :-P
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
decibel45 From: decibel45 Date: February 19th, 2005 03:55 pm (UTC) (Link)
The reason for the compatibility layer has nothing to do with linux not being a real OS. It's because it attracted a lot of dumb kids who wouldn't know a real OS if it hit them in the face, and whose rabid fanaticism made it popular, even more popular than some real OS's such as FreeBSD. Hence FreeBSD has a compatability layer to help poor linux users see the light and run software written by people unable to understand writing software to run on multiple unixes, as well as linux (which isn't actually unix, afterall).
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 19th, 2005 03:59 pm (UTC) (Link)
You still haven't explained why Linux isn't a real OS.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
decibel45 From: decibel45 Date: February 19th, 2005 04:38 pm (UTC) (Link)
Well, for starters, linux is just a kernel and nothing more. That alone means it's not actually an OS, since you can't do anything with just a kernel.

Second, stability and security aren't priorities. Based on the fun in 2.6.8 (a supposedly stable kernel), conformance to network standards appears to be low on the list.

Of course, that's assuming there actually are a set of priorities that drive linux. It's hard to tell when there's 2 people driving the boat. I put immenensly more faith in an OS who's direction is set by a core set of people, who are accountable to the community. It's not hard for one or two people to make bad decisions; it's highly unlikely that 7-9 will.

Granted, thanks to the influence of big business, things are improving in linuxland, but it would have been a lot more productive had they started with a good solid OS to begin with.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 19th, 2005 08:16 pm (UTC) (Link)
Well, for starters, linux is just a kernel and nothing more. That alone means it's not actually an OS, since you can't do anything with just a kernel.
True, Linux is just a kernel, an not an OS. In this case, I was looking at "linux" as being "my particular Linux distribution."

Based on the fun in 2.6.8 (a supposedly stable kernel)
The 2.6.x kernels are not supposedly stable. No 2.6 kernel is to be considered stable. The released kernel is a not-quite development kernel that should not be considered stable unless your distribution provider has patched it and named it stable. I don't know about all distributions, but Gentoo does not have any stable 2.6 kernel.

Of course, that's assuming there actually are a set of priorities that drive linux. It's hard to tell when there's 2 people driving the boat. I put immenensly more faith in an OS who's direction is set by a core set of people, who are accountable to the community. It's not hard for one or two people to make bad decisions; it's highly unlikely that 7-9 will.
Okay, so you'll put more faith in another OS. That doesn't make Linux distributions not real OSes.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
decibel45 From: decibel45 Date: February 20th, 2005 11:36 am (UTC) (Link)
Well, if you want to focus on Gentoo, then the issue would be that their priorities are speed, speed, speed, and speed. Notice how security and stability are missing.

You're right, I got confused about even v. odd on stable v. development kernels. Of course a logical OS names such things logically.

As for how the direction determines if something is a real OS, I have to disagree. An 'OS' who's technical direction is determined soley by 2 people is destined to have all kinds of problems, especially if it's not mature (which linux either isn't, or just barely is). Of course, linux isn't an OS anyway, so it doesn't matter. Instead you have to start looking at what step all the different distros use to work towards stability and security, which is all over the spectrum. Gentoo has no regard for stability, though thanks to their bleeding edgeness they tend to do ok on security. RH seems to be slow on security, and it's not a very update-friendly system from what I've heard. I hear good things about debian and mandrake, so maybe they have their heads out of their asses. But I do have to wonder if either does security code reviews. And does either support 3+ different branches of their distro for those who want the ultimate in stability, the ultimate in bleeding edge, or something in-between. And do this with a good update system? And clearly define what is and isn't part of the OS (of course if you never do any kind of testing on the OS I guess it doesn't matter what is and isn't part of it). Gentoo certainly doesn't do this. Debian at least supports multiple branches with multiple levels of stability.

In any case, the sad thing is that FreeBSD has been doing this for years. It even used to handily out-perform linux. It's a stable codebase, worked on by people who care about stablity and security first. And who don't make stupid decisions like randomly killing off procs when the system gets itself into memory trouble. Yet people continue to use 'linux' which has at best a reckless development process. Even with a good distro like Debian, you still have to hope that Linus didn't put something dumb in the kernel that Debian didn't catch. Take this whole hodge-podge together and you have a toy of an OS that's barely moved beyond someone's college science project.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 21st, 2005 07:05 am (UTC) (Link)
Well, if you want to focus on Gentoo, then the issue would be that their priorities are speed, speed, speed, and speed. Notice how security and stability are missing.
No one ever said an OS had to be secure or stable to be a real OS. We're not talking about an OS you want to run, we're talking about what is an OS and what isn't.

You're right, I got confused about even v. odd on stable v. development kernels. Of course a logical OS names such things logically.
Perhaps in your opinion. That doesn't make Linux OSes not "real" OSes.

An 'OS' who's technical direction is determined soley by 2 people is destined to have all kinds of problems, especially if it's not mature (which linux either isn't, or just barely is).
On OS can have problems and still be an Operating System. No OS is perfect, and you yourself said Linux isn't a "mature" kernel, so expecting it to be at the same level as FreeBSD is simply unreasonable.

If you think Gentoo doesn't have branches, you're flat out wrong.

In any case, the sad thing is that FreeBSD has been doing this for years. It even used to handily out-perform linux.
So? Linux can out-perform Windows at many things, yet Windows is still an OS. Just because something out there is better, in your opinion, doesn't make the lesser item no longer an operating system.

Take this whole hodge-podge together and you have a toy of an OS that's barely moved beyond someone's college science project.
It's amazing how many people use this apparent "toy" in production environments stably, securely, and successfully.

Just because you don't like something doesn't make it not real.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
quelrod From: quelrod Date: February 19th, 2005 03:30 pm (UTC) (Link)
I got a tar of it from a friend but haven't tried it on my freebsd laptop yet. Though thanks for reminding me to give it a shot.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
decibel45 From: decibel45 Date: February 19th, 2005 01:18 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh, and I haven't touched MS Money since the accident. I'm not looking forward to this...
(Deleted comment)
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 19th, 2005 02:55 pm (UTC) (Link)
I've used iTunes extensively in Windows. I know how it's supposed to work, and I'm not an idiot. The software makes it quite clear that you are selecting a single output location (at least to someone with experience with similar software).

When I have the music stopped, and then select "My Computer" as the output location, and hit play, nothing comes out of my speakers. Did I really have to explain that?
cowbert From: cowbert Date: February 21st, 2005 12:02 pm (UTC) (Link)
to reply to deci* (because the thread was locked). Yes, it shoudl run on fbsd, but YMMV. Crossover office is just the sanitized binary version of wine wizardified (custom pimped out wine.conf) for a bunch of windows apps, and most of the relevant (core functionality) parts are back-ported back into wine cvs. If you have doubts, feel free to contact the codeweavers people; or better yet, see if you can run your app in wine-cvs first.
equiraptor From: equiraptor Date: February 21st, 2005 02:07 pm (UTC) (Link)
Yeah, I locked the thread because I was tired of, "Linux sucks, and if it sucks, it can't be a real OS." That's just a pathetic reason, and I was tired of the discussion.
13 comments | Leave a comment