I'm not sure who you mean by "they", but there's a lot of difference between distros, and many different ways to put the pieces together (or leave them out)
Compiling from source is the most reliable way to run the latest and greatest version of a particular application that I've found to date, leaving out all the middlemen like package mantainers, whose competence I may or may not trust.
And generally speaking, I'd trust a several-decades-old technique much more than something just released.
As far as Windows software goes, I've found Wine to be a much more reliable platform for old Windows applications than Windows 7 or 10, although there's nothing better than emulated Windows 9x for running programs of that era.
(I make "any browser" websites, so running 1995+ software is something I do on the regular.)
What I'm curious about (and probably there are some good write ups about this somewhere) that how come modern Linux and modern Wine is better to run old Windows applications than modern Windows (7 to some extent but mostly 10&11). Did MS "intentionally" "left behind" certain APIs and system calls to sacrifice it for some greater good? Like I use Windows every day and have no problems at all. And I use Linux every day too for work. But by my experience if I come around and old Windows application (Vista, XP, 2000 or before) than I probably have a better chance to run it as it meant to be on Linux w/ Wine than on Windows 10/11
Actually, 20 years old Windows software is more likely to run on Wine than brand new software. If Windows does something well, it is backwards compatibility.
It will work and won’t use new API:s which are not implemented on Wine yet.
As far as old windows games are concerned, I've experienced that they often run more stable and performant with wine on linux than on a newer windows version.
But if you go a little further back, open source has the advantage: It's now easier to run 16-bit Windows programs under Wine on Linux or OS X than it is to run them on a modern Windows machine, and Microsoft has completely ceded the vintage gaming audience to DOSBox.
On the other hand, in my experience WINE runs older Windows apps better than my modern Windows 10 install does. Most things ~pre-2005 run really well, especially games which just refuse to boot on modern Windows (or require compatibility patches).
Bullshit. You're talking about an operating system where the common advice for someone who wants to install up to date software is to fucking compile it from source because the whole community never got their collective shit together enough to allow developers to directly distribute binaries without a gigantic fucking headache.
Christ, it's such a fucking mess that one of the most compatible ways to distribute software is to write it for Windows and rely on WINE.
Outdated APIs don't have to affect the shell and built in programs or anything else that is kept up to date. My linux programs are no more buggy due to having Wine installed for similar compat with legacy Windows executables.
I'm Debian user and I usually install the packages, and the shipped version of the software is just fine for me.
Occasionally I may want to use the newest version of a particular application and I've found that instead of installing dependencies and compiling myself the Linux version, it is way easier to download the Windows binaries and run them with WINE. In some cases, it even works better! (e.g. full screen support)
I have been following WINE since it was still very early in the development, and it is amazing how usable it compares to its early days.
Combined with PlayOnLinux, in some ways, it's better than running Windows apps directly on Windows, as it can isolate one environment from others. (I can make the different WINE virtual drive to run Windows XP environment for one and 7 on another. It can even do 16, 32, and 64 bits, too -- real Windows can't do 16 in 64, though these days it's rare I encounter so much need for that.)
A more interesting variant of your question would be 'how come Wine is better at running decades-old Windows software (on systems such as Linux) than Linux is at running decades-old Linux software on Linux?'
... perhaps Win32 is a more stable ABI/API by design.
That's true, but the overall trend is clear. Wine is pretty good these days. For old windows software it is sometimes better than the latest windows versions.
Compiling from source is the most reliable way to run the latest and greatest version of a particular application that I've found to date, leaving out all the middlemen like package mantainers, whose competence I may or may not trust.
And generally speaking, I'd trust a several-decades-old technique much more than something just released.
As far as Windows software goes, I've found Wine to be a much more reliable platform for old Windows applications than Windows 7 or 10, although there's nothing better than emulated Windows 9x for running programs of that era.
(I make "any browser" websites, so running 1995+ software is something I do on the regular.)
reply