Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

loss32.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 493 posts

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#261

Post by josephg »

nine_k wrote: post #237
josephg wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Audio is still broken pretty regularly in davinci resolve on Linux. Sometimes I need to restart the application to make audio work. And I can’t record sound within resolve at all. It doesn’t help that they only officially support rocky Linux. I use mint. I assume there’s some magic pipewire / alsa / pulseaudio commands I can run that would glue everything together properly. But I can’t figure it out. It just seems so…

This sounds like a hardware / firmware problem specific to your particular sound chip / card. Similarly, Bluetooth on my Thinkpad T14 is slightly wonky, and it sometimes fails to register a Bluetooth mouse on wake-up (I have to switch the mouse off and back on). This mouse registers fine on my other Linux machines. The logs show a report from a kernel driver saying that the BT chip behaved weirdly. Binary-blob firmwa…

That’s possible, but the hardware (a rodecaster pro 2 connected over usb) works just fine in other Linux apps. I can record audio in audacity. And I can play back audio in resolve. I just can’t record audio in resolve.

I think it’s a software issue in how resolve uses the Linux audio stack. But I have no idea how to get started debugging it. I’ve never had any problems with the same hardware in windows, or the same software (resolve) on macOS.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#262

Post by layer8 »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #190
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #159

Someone please create a windows 7 like user interface or even XP like interface too and you got yourself a serious fan I might seriously recommend it to newbies and like there is just this love I have for windows 7 even though I really didn't use it for much but its so much more elegant in its own way than windows 10 like it can be a really fun experiment and I would be interested to see how that would pan out.

It stuns me that a polished 1:1 2K/XP/7 clone DE (which it mimics is a setting) hasn’t existed for a 10y+ already. It’s such an obvious target for a mass appeal Linux desktop that many techies and non-techies alike would happily use. Rough approximations have been possible since the early 2000s, but they’re exactly that: rough approximations. Details matter, and when I boot up an old XP/7 box there are aspects in whi…

The problems with cloning the exact look is fear of copyright/IP issues with Microsoft. You can be pretty sure they won’t look away if such a desktop becomes really popular. Remember how Apple sued Samsung over using rounded corners on icons?

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#263

Post by mikkupikku »

ok123456 wrote: post #230
ben-schaaf wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only because people aren't putting in the effort to build their binaries properly. You need to link against the oldest glibc version that has all the symbols you need, and then your binary will actually work everywhere(*). * Except for non-glibc distributions of course.

If it requires effort to be correct, that's a bad design. Why doesn't the glibc use the version tag to do the appropriate mapping?

I think even calling it a "design" is dubious. It's an attribute of these systems that arose out of the circumstance, nobody ever sat down and said it should be this way. Even Torvalds complaining about it doesn't mean it gets fixed, it's not analogous to Steve Jobs complaining about a thing because Torvalds is only in charge of one piece of the puzzle, and the whole image that emerges from all these different groups only loosely collaborating with each other isn't going to be anybody's ideal.

In other words, the Linux desktop as a whole is a Bazaar, not Cathedral.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#265

Post by layer8 »

63282836292919 wrote: post #105
hypeatei wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still is if you're an enterprise customer. The retail users aren't Microsoft's cash cows, so they get ads and BS in their editions. The underlying APIs are still stable and MS provides the LTSC & Server editions to businesses which lack all that retail cruft.

In my day job, Explorer still freezes every second day, GUI interactions take several seconds and the sidebar is full of tabloid headlines and ads.

At least with regard to the last point, your enterprise admins must be doing a bad job.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#266

Post by ogogmad »

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #242
pseudony wrote: post #239

I think this project actually has merit and highlights the core issue. We have gone through one perceived reason after the other to try and explain why the year of the Linux desktop wasn’t this one. Uncharitably, Linux is too busy breaking and deprecating itself to ever become more than a server OS, and that only works due to companies sponsoring most the testing and code that makes those parts work. Desktop in all i…

Pretty sure it's Linux not being the default option

Doesn't explain why Chrome beat IE. Or why MacOS has higher market share on the desktop than Linux.

Wine and Proton should have levelled the playing field. But they haven't. Also, if you've only just started using Linux, I recommend you wait a few years before forming an opinion.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#267

Post by pseudony »

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #242
pseudony wrote: post #239

I think this project actually has merit and highlights the core issue. We have gone through one perceived reason after the other to try and explain why the year of the Linux desktop wasn’t this one. Uncharitably, Linux is too busy breaking and deprecating itself to ever become more than a server OS, and that only works due to companies sponsoring most the testing and code that makes those parts work. Desktop in all i…

Pretty sure it's Linux not being the default option

It is not a popularity issue. If it were, company after company would have switched as soon as they could make it work (office365, outlook online, whatever SAAS they use, none care about their desktop, only the browser, and all major browsers are available on Linux).

From there, popularity outside the organization is irrelevant, internal support and userbase is for and on some version of Linux.

As this would spread, we would eventually see global usage increase and global popularity become a non-issue.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#268

Post by kasajian »

I'll check back every few years to see if either this project, Wine or ReactOS can run Visual Studio 2026 (or 2022) and .NET Framework 4.

Not talking about the cross-platform versions of .NET and VS-Code. I'm specifically talking about the Windows-specific software I mentioned above.

I don't see this happening, despite the fact that by now, these types of porting efforts were supposed to be trivial because of AI. Yeah, I'll wait.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#269

Post by HeckFeck »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #159

Someone please create a windows 7 like user interface or even XP like interface too and you got yourself a serious fan I might seriously recommend it to newbies and like there is just this love I have for windows 7 even though I really didn't use it for much but its so much more elegant in its own way than windows 10 like it can be a really fun experiment and I would be interested to see how that would pan out.

https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity is just that, except it's a whole OS that's Win2k styled. If it ever gets good hardware support it might have a chance.

Or maybe ReactOS - the actual windows clone - gets finished. Rumours put a first release date some time after Hurd.

Re: Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux

#270

Post by HeckFeck »

steve1977 wrote: post #137
rickcarlino wrote: post #7

Building GUI utilities based on VB6 instead of status quo web technologies might actually be more stable and productive.

And more performant. Software written for 2005 Windows runs super fast on todays systems.

Sometimes I install Office 97 for kicks and marvel at how much I can do with it, yet it asks so little of my system. <2Mb RAM for Word 97!
Post reply on HN