Whatever happened 2 WinLinux

Hi all ,

Under the heading of nostalgia Whatever happened to Winlinux2003, the site is no longer active & it seems it is no longer supported. Has anyone ever used it & was it any good?

Regards & Best Wishes,

ispy

Hi all ,

Under the heading of nostalgia Whatever happened to Winlinux2003, the site is no longer active & it seems it is no longer supported. Has anyone ever used it & was it any good?

Regards & Best Wishes,

ispy

Does WinLinux support Windows 3.X?
WinLinux 2003 was developed to work with Windows 95, 98 and Me versions. If you intend to install WinLinux 2003 in your machine you need at least one of these versions.

Does WinLinux support Windows NT/2000/XP?
WinLinux 2003 works only with Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows Me. Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP are not supported by Winlinux 2003.

This support is expected for a future release of WinLinux, but we do not have a specific date yet.

How do I Start WinLinux 2003 on Windows Me?
To start WinLinux 2003 for the first time, you must create a Startup disk, as shown on steps 13 and 14 of the WinLinux 2003 Installation Guide. You can also install lilo as your boot manager and then choose which system you wish to use at boot time.

Did you test WinLinux running in Windows XP using the Compatibility Mode?
Yes, and it does not work. Even with the compatibility mode, our Configuration Utility don't have access to the information that it needs to work properly.

From:
http://web.archive.o...w.winlinux.net/




Download:

ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/.SAN0/pub/linux/...FreeVersion.exe

Hi Mikorist ,

Many thanks for your informative reply Mikorist, It seems it is only compatible with 9X systems which I am not suggesting is necessarily a bad thing but All my current PC's either have XP or more recently Vista installed.

Have you had any experience in its usage, or for that matter has anyone used it, it may be beneficial in sharing your experiences. I like the concept of being able to load both systems onto the same partition although extra free-space would be required for installation.

From your screenshot it seems to have a fairly attractive interface, looks very similar to windows in fact (9X) the developers web-site no longer seems to be supported as the link you have very kindly provided is not the authors site!

Maybe its just me but I hate to see things like this disappear as the concept of introduction & weaning or convincing die hard windows users, to experiment with an alternative OS system, it could be called a half way house or bridge between Windows & Linux. The concept is very attractive its just a shame it's ongoing development didn't extend to NT systems compatibility.

I have also conducted some further tentative research & some users in older posts maintain that the free version as posted by your good self is missing a crucial system file called a layout.bin & that the reasons this file was omitted was to encourage users to buy the commercial version, this is of course all hearsay & in no way could I validate this accusation or belief. It is a respectable 362Mb's comparable to 9X OS's.

Here is an additional link that users may find useful entitled "Index of /pub/linux/distributions/winlinux/2003"
http://distro.ibibli.../winlinux/2003/
If you look in the RPMS folder there are kernel updates for winLinux2003

It's a shame the source code was never released into the open-source arena for succession development as I think the basic concept is sound, just shows you how much I know, as the marketing of the project has clearly been ineffective. It could have evolved into a NT beast but then the desktop theme would have then reflected a similarity to NT desktops I suppose. However, nothing that a basic skinning theme wouldn't overcome though?

Also, if indeed it had been supported in its development could have been an additional WinBuilder/Winimize project in a mini foot print for boot disk diagnostics & repair capable of repairing windows or linux PC's???

I suppose if you were to draw a very loose comparison with a modern equivalent Linspire formerly known, as Lindows is an attempt to provide middle ground between linux & Windows. It is interesting to note however than M$oft successfully sued the authors of Lindows only to be counter sued to the tune or out of court settlement of 20Million in return for not using the name Lindows, hence the name Linspire. However it turns out, in a twist of fate that Xandros is reputed to have bought out Linspire & Xandros are now on talks & in co-operation with M$oft, what form this business relationship is anyone’s guess. All I.T. roads seem to lead to M$oft. Also just look at the marketing strategies Xandros uses against Ubuntu claiming a basic framework architecture of Ubuntu but claiming additional features over & above Ubuntu. Sorry I'm rambling again with no real point or conclusion.

Judging by the desktop interface it has similar ergonomics to Windows (9X). Windows users would be comfortable with the look & feel of it but would be, at the end of the day be using an introductory Linux system. Dipping your big toe in the swimming pool before diving in!

What are your thoughts about this mongrelistic WinLinux2003 would be interested to know your appraisal & thoughts?

Regards & Respect,

ispy

Call me crazy, but I've wanted to run a Windows binary natively under Linux for a while now; kinda like colinux,
but in reverse, which can act as WinBuilder under Linux and will be some kind of the Cooperative Windows and without limits,
like Wine but more powerful !!!


I don't have experience with winlinux,


try checking out colinux http://www.colinux.org/

Look:

http://www.boot-land...?showtopic=4283

and

http://sourceforge.net/projects/line/

LINE Is Not an Emulator

LINE executes unmodified Linux applications on Windows by intercepting Linux system calls. T
he Linux applications themselves are not emulated. They run directly on the CPU just like all other Windows applications.

@ispy
You can try the Linux Unified kernel:

The LUK project aims to add all Windows kernel mechanisms into the Linux kernel, including Process management, Thread management, Object management, virtual memory management, Synchronization, System calls (Syscall), Windows Registry, WDM (Device driver framework), Windows DPC mechanism, etc., to form a new kernel. Thus, the new kernel allows both Linux and Windows applications and device drivers to work directly without virtualization or emulation.

But LUK is not simply an accumulation of the two kernels. In order to prevent LUK from becoming bloated, if a function has been completed in the ReactOS kernel, and it can also be achieved using the Linux kernel (ReactOS/Wine/NDISwrapper code as a reference if they have implemented the function), then LUK prefers to use the latter.

LUK has two sets of syscalls and their corresponding syscall tables: a Windows syscall set and a Linux syscall set. Windows applications call the syscall table via software interrupt "int 0x2e" to make a system call. Linux applications call syscall table via "int 0x80".

The LUK project does not develop the Windows and the Linux userland libraries. Those libraries are offered by the Wine (or Microsoft Windows/ReactOS) project and the Linux project.

http://en.wikipedia...._Unified_Kernel

Last version is from 17 December 2008. So quite recent.
It uses parts of the ReactOS source code, so I don't know how stable it will be.

@ispy
You can try the Linux Unified kernel:

http://en.wikipedia...._Unified_Kernel

Last version is from 17 December 2008. So quite recent.
It uses parts of the ReactOS source code, so I don't know how stable it will be.

Just for the record, thread is here:

http://www.boot-land...amp;#entry29991


If Linux Unified kernel ever becomes 100% compatable with Windows today,
tomorrow it would not be, so several programs may crash or not work exactly as on Microsoft Windows.

If Linux Unified kernel ever becomes 100% compatable with Windows today,
tomorrow it would not be, so several programs may crash or not work exactly as on Microsoft Windows.

Thats why I mentioned that it uses ReactOS source code. ReactOS crashes even in a emulator when just open some windows. <flame_mode>It doesn't display a BSOD so it needs to improve to be more like Windows </flame_mode>
I personally think that the Linux Unified kernel will be useful on real systems a lot earlier than ReactOS, because the normal part of the kernel can control your hardware so you don't need the ability right away to install windows drivers like ReactOS.

I don't know for sure it it is also the case for the Linux Unified kernel, but in wine you only need the following wine libraries:
kernel32.dll, gdi32.dll, user32.dll, and ntdll.dll.
These libraries require low-level Windows kernel access that simply doesn't exist within Wine.
For all other libraries, you can use the native windows version, if you want. So if the Linux Unified kernel implements those low level functions, almost all windows programs and drivers will work when used in conjuction with the native windows dlls.