Posted by: Anonymous
on April 15, 2008 12:18 PM
It shouldn't be "how can we run Linux apps on Windows." It should be getting the "need to have" Windows apps running on Linux, either from the same developers as native Linux apps or running through an implementation of MS APIs (i.e. WINE) or, better yet, writing programs that are good competiters with the Windows apps out there. Competition doesn't seem to be big in the computer world, for some reason, at least in the MS world. I LIKE having three word processors, two IDEs, 5 music players, etc... to choose from. I don't get why people are content with just MS Office or Nero, etc. It's like only being able to buy a Chevy and no one cares that there's no other alternatives. My point is, if Linux is about choice, why are we finding a way to run our secure, stable and freedom-affirming OS on an inferior OS written by a company that crushes freedom? Instead, I think our attention should be focused on writing good competiton for the "need to have."
I see no reason to run Linux apps in Windows. I use Linux for a reason, and it's because I like that OS. I don't want to run that OS in an OS I dislike. Having a port of the Linux kernel in Windows doesn't suddenly make Windows more secure and stable (the reason I use Linux). I just can't see the purpose behind this.