🚀 go-pugleaf

In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> 
> An Intel Mac
> Linux.
> 
> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
> needed?

Unless you want to accept sluggish graphics, use Windows for
any Windows-based graphics-intensive apps.

No emulated environment will give you the graphics performance
of the real thing.

But if your biases are more important than performance, running
in a VM or emulated environment is likely fine for either
Mac or Linux. Of those two Corel Draw should not be an
issue- but a flight simulator will be much more noticeable.

Stan

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:52:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> 
> An Intel Mac
> Linux.
> 
> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when
> needed?

One solution would be to take your choice of MacIntel or Linux and 
install MS inside as a virtualy machine using, e.g. virtualbox. You can 
then run it when you need it without rebooting - at least you'd have it 
on a robust foundation.

On 2009-03-18, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:

> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive --
> Corel draw and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>
> An Intel Mac
> Linux.

The question makes no sense.  It's like asking which is better,
AMD-X2 or Windows-2000?  One is a hardware platform, the other
is an OS.

> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody
> windows when needed?

Dunno.  It depends on your needs.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! Are we on STRIKE yet?
                                  at               
                               visi.com            

Stan Bischof wrote:

> Unless you want to accept sluggish graphics, use Windows for
> any Windows-based graphics-intensive apps.

> No emulated environment will give you the graphics performance
> of the real thing.

Wine can run Windows games as well as Windows.

> But if your biases are more important than performance, running
> in a VM or emulated environment is likely fine for either
> Mac or Linux. Of those two Corel Draw should not be an
> issue- but a flight simulator will be much more noticeable.

Flightgear is an open source alternative if the OP can't run his 
simulator of choice in wine.

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:52:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> 
> An Intel Mac 
??? There are a lot more hardware options than that.
> Linux.
??? AFAIK, There are no versions of flight-sim or Corel Draw for Linux.
> 
> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
> needed?
>
Dual boot, I guess.
>
I checked Corel Draw's page at WineHQ and it has a checkered record on
Wine- it depends on what version of Corel Draw you need.
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=440

Also, this story appeared on Slashdot yesterday, 
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/17/2235215

This shows that Wine has made some big strides, and may work for you,
depending on the app. (IMO, the Wine developers gave themselves the
benefit of the doubt when they rated Wine as "1.0" ready).

Virtualization works for non-gaming apps. There are a lot of
choices here. VMWare player is a simple choice. But
virtualization has limits; flight-sim will be better on real hardware,
IMO. You will probably need to dual boot for that.

OT: I tested VMWare Server 2.0 yesterday. It is a bit trickier to get
running than Version 1.0.x. My first impressions:
	* stable (first and foremost)
	* remote client's speed (in a browser, over a 100Mb link) is acceptable.
	* a step towards providing a uniform interface across all product lines
	(ESX, Server)

-- 
Douglas Mayne

Stan Bischof <stan@newserve.worldbadminton.com> writes:

> In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
>> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>> 
>> An Intel Mac
>> Linux.
>> 
>> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
>> needed?
>
> Unless you want to accept sluggish graphics, use Windows for
> any Windows-based graphics-intensive apps.
>
> No emulated environment will give you the graphics performance
> of the real thing.

For 3d graphics it often depends on the opengl performance of the
graphics hardware, so can run just as well under wine as under windows
natively.

I've run a number of windows 3d games under wine where the frame rate
isn't significantly different from that under windows on the same
machine.

Stan Bischof wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
>> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>>
>> An Intel Mac
>> Linux.
>>
>> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
>> needed?
> 
> Unless you want to accept sluggish graphics, use Windows for
> any Windows-based graphics-intensive apps.
> 
> No emulated environment will give you the graphics performance
> of the real thing.
> 
> But if your biases are more important than performance, running
> in a VM or emulated environment is likely fine for either
> Mac or Linux. Of those two Corel Draw should not be an
> issue- but a flight simulator will be much more noticeable.
> 
> Stan
Right. I actually found  the sim in question in Vmwares list of things 
that 'almost but not quite perfectly' work with it..Directx issues

So that can stay on the actual naff windows machine..but it looks like 
software wise for windows, there's no real difference in functionality 
between OSX and Linux ..vmware on either I guess.

Wll I can get a PC for 30% less, and I dont need the sexy fonts and eye 
candy....looks like Linux wins

Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2009-03-18, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
> 
>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive --
>> Corel draw and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>>
>> An Intel Mac
>> Linux.
> 
> The question makes no sense.  It's like asking which is better,
> AMD-X2 or Windows-2000?  One is a hardware platform, the other
> is an OS.
> 
AS far as I know an Intel Mac,which will run windows, will only do so on 
an OSX 10.4 or 5 platform

So th comparison is between OSX or Linux.

But I assumed anyone who had anything worth while to say, would know that.

I guess I wes right, at that ;-)


>> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody
>> windows when needed?
> 
> Dunno.  It depends on your needs.
> 

On 2009-03-18, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2009-03-18, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> 
>>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive --
>>> Corel draw and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>>>
>>> An Intel Mac
>>> Linux.
>> 
>> The question makes no sense.  It's like asking which is
>> better, AMD-X2 or Windows-2000?  One is a hardware platform,
>> the other is an OS.
>
> AS far as I know an Intel Mac, which will run windows, will
> only do so on an OSX 10.4 or 5 platform

Sorry, that statement doesn't make much sense either.

You can also run Linux, or BSD on an Intel Mac, and I don't see
what the OS-X version has to do with whether or not a
particular hardware platoform can run Windows.

> So th comparison is between OSX or Linux.

That's not what you asked.  You asked about Intel Mac vs.
Linux.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! Wow!  Look!!  A stray
                                  at               meatball!!  Let's interview
                               visi.com            it!

The Natural Philosopher :
> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>
> An Intel Mac
> Linux.

What do you like better? If you need Windows, you can virtualize it on
either OSX or Linux given enough hardware resources.

> And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
> needed?

If you have less than two gig of ram, I'd say yes. If not, Virtualbox is
you friend on Linux, and I've seen the Windows run on a modern Mac even
though I cant pull the name of the sandbox proggy it uses. Either way,
virtual machines are a Good Thing, and you can network the virtual
machine to the host so you can work with files in two different
environments. Images (Draw) in Windows and vim or emacs or ed or
whatever in Linux for code.

-- 
MINIMIZE BAD THINGS

www.websterscafe.com

The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better

Do you have a flight sim in mind?  You have about 30 years' worth to choose
from, and most of those will work on whatever platform through emulation or
virtualisation.  Only if you need the absolute latest versions is your
choice of platform going to be restricted by performance.

Do you need Corel Draw specifically, or will something like Xara or Inkscape
do?

Theo

The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> and a flight sim - tell me which is better

You can probably run them in Wine these days, and sometimes applications 
actually run faster in Wine, than on the Microsoft Windows platform.

Mark.

-- 
Mark Hobley
Linux User: #370818  http://markhobley.yi.org/

Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> writes:

> That's not what you asked.  You asked about Intel Mac vs.
> Linux.

I know peeople who install Windows on an Intel Mac (not in a VM).
They like the hardware....

In article <gpr7q9$tm1$2@news.motzarella.org>, White Spirit wrote:
>Stan Bischof wrote:
>
>> No emulated environment will give you the graphics performance
>> of the real thing.
>
>Wine can run Windows games as well as Windows.

But Wine Is Not An Emulator :-)

(And it can run _some_ Windows games as well as Windows. Quite a lot,
but not so many the OP should assume the one he cares about works
without checking first. The Microsoft Flight Simulator page, for example
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=278
isn't very promising. CorelDraw looks a better, but depends on version:
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=440)

In article <slrngs2474.386.jason@jason.websterscafe.com>,
 Handover Phist <jason@jason.websterscafe.com> wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher :
> > So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
> > and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> >
> > An Intel Mac
> > Linux.
> 
> What do you like better? If you need Windows, you can virtualize it on
> either OSX or Linux given enough hardware resources.
> 
> > And should I attempt to run in parallel or just boot bloody windows when 
> > needed?
> 
> If you have less than two gig of ram, I'd say yes. If not, Virtualbox is
> you friend on Linux, and I've seen the Windows run on a modern Mac even
> though I cant pull the name of the sandbox proggy it uses.

VirtualBox is becoming a viable contended on MacOS X (Intel) too. 
Otherwise there is Parallels Desktop, and vmware Fusion.

In article <1237400429.21073.1@proxy02.news.clara.net>, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2009-03-18, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> 
>>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive --
>>> Corel draw and a flight sim - tell me which is better
>>>
>>> An Intel Mac
>>> Linux.
>> 
>> The question makes no sense.  It's like asking which is better,
>> AMD-X2 or Windows-2000?  One is a hardware platform, the other
>> is an OS.
>> 
>AS far as I know an Intel Mac,which will run windows, will only do so on 
>an OSX 10.4 or 5 platform
[...]
>I guess I wes right, at that ;-)

Or you don't know far enough, which appears rather more likely.

Theo Markettos wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
>> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> 
> Do you have a flight sim in mind?  You have about 30 years' worth to choose
> from, and most of those will work on whatever platform through emulation or
> virtualisation.  Only if you need the absolute latest versions is your
> choice of platform going to be restricted by performance.
> 
> Do you need Corel Draw specifically, or will something like Xara or Inkscape
> do?
> 

I need Corel Draw specifically. Compatibility with other project co-workers.

I looked up WINE yesterday, its come a long way. It mostly works under 
WINE. And WINE needs no XP license. It runs corel with a few reservations.

And the flight sim might..its old and uses an early version of DirectX 
which might have half a chance..WINE has problems with DirctX9 it sems, 
but cops reasonably well with earlier incarnations..its less important 
on this machine anyway.

I think it is leaning towards Linux/WINE frankly.

> Theo

Mark Hobley wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote:
>> So, given that the two apps I need are graphics intensive -- Corel draw 
>> and a flight sim - tell me which is better
> 
> You can probably run them in Wine these days, and sometimes applications 
> actually run faster in Wine, than on the Microsoft Windows platform.
> 
Yes.

I managed to get an OSX native  (rather than x windows) version of Open 
Office installed on this dire old Mac yesterday. Infinitely better than 
the CPU grabbing MS Office..

Open software moves along smartly enough.

And WINE looks like its not staying still, either.


> Mark.
> 

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:46 +0000, Alan Braggins wrote:
> 
> (And it can run _some_ Windows games as well as Windows. Quite a lot,
> but not so many the OP should assume the one he cares about works
> without checking first. The Microsoft Flight Simulator page, for example
> http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=278
> isn't very promising. CorelDraw looks a better, but depends on version:
> http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=440)

You can't really go by those pages.
It does very much depend on the versions of the software you are trying 
to run and the version of wine.

I have had very good results with apps that didn't look good on the list.
Dreamweaver for example works really well for me.

Best way is to just try it out.

The other thing is that people often publish complicated hacks to make an 
app work with wine. In all the cases that I've tried (not many) the hacks 
didn't work, but just installing as you would on windows did.


JohnT

John Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:46 +0000, Alan Braggins wrote:
>> (And it can run _some_ Windows games as well as Windows. Quite a lot,
>> but not so many the OP should assume the one he cares about works
>> without checking first. The Microsoft Flight Simulator page, for example
>> http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=278
>> isn't very promising. CorelDraw looks a better, but depends on version:
>> http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=440)
> 
> You can't really go by those pages.
> It does very much depend on the versions of the software you are trying 
> to run and the version of wine.
> 
> I have had very good results with apps that didn't look good on the list.
> Dreamweaver for example works really well for me.
> 
> Best way is to just try it out.
> 
> The other thing is that people often publish complicated hacks to make an 
> app work with wine. In all the cases that I've tried (not many) the hacks 
> didn't work, but just installing as you would on windows did.
> 
> 

Reading between the lines, it looks like there is a bug in the X3 and X4 
installations, that crashes them under wine. Essentially reading data 
from a deallocated memory block, which Windows allows, but wine has 
overwritten in the de-allocation process.

The workaround might be to copy an existing installation. And patch the 
registry..

> JohnT