Talk:Wine (software)

message: This article needs clarification.  I can't tell whether or not there is a version of this for non-Linux OS.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dullstar (talk • contribs) 17:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WINE Operating Systems 

message: ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.148.37.120 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 26 June 2009
:You'll have to provide us with a little more to go on than that. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 13:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why PlayOnLinux redirects here? 

message: Does Wine support Windows Mobile applications? --164.67.235.98 (talk) 00:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Currently, only software for desktop versions work. I think a clarification may be needed here. (Stefan2 (talk) 09:55, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows Mobile? 

message: http://www.airwebreathe.org.uk/wine-icon/
http://www.winehq.org/images/winehq_logo_glass.png  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sav vas (talk • contribs) 20:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New wine logo/icon 

message: Why does this article start with such an awkward sentence? Is it really of such monumental importance to let everybody know what "Wine" stands for? Surely it would be must better just to start the article with "*Wine* is a free software application that aims to allow Unix-like computer operating systems to execute programs written for Microsoft Windows." There is a "Name" section in the article to explain it more fully, after all; alternatively it could be explained in the first paragraph, but I don't see how it adds to that sentence.
The current initial sentence frankly reads as though the phrase about recursive acronyms was put there gratuitously to satisfy some nerd's infatuation with recursive acronyms. 143.167.37.22 (talk) 14:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cut down the lead. Let's see if it's reverted... Alksentrs (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wine, a recursive acronym for... 

message: Apparently WINE not always meant Wine Is Not an Emulator, at one point it was an acronym for WINdows Emulator. See The WINE (WINdows Emulator) FAQ dated 27 November 1998. Anyone know why it was changed? The two even contradict each other.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.135.192.59 (talk) 16:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Wine (software)/Archive_2#Add_in_history_of_the_name_.22Wine.22.3F. Alksentrs (talk) 17:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the name? 

message: As mentioned above, Wine was named as an abbreviation for "Windows Emulator," but later the name's meaning was changed.  This name change was in made in  an attempt to differentiate the function of Wine from other programs that run in virtual machines.  But that doesn't necessarily mean that Wine isn't an emulator.  In fact, it is an emulator by the definition here on wikipedia. See Emulator.  Objectivesea2 (talk) 05:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wine kind of is an emulator 

message: The citation needed tag was removed with the edit summary explained in article body.  I'm probably just missing it, but I'm not seeing where it explains that that Wine provides "alternative implementations of the DLLs that Windows programs call." - SudoGhost™ 19:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you referring to this? Well, yes, the body does explain it indeed. See Architecture section. Fleet Command (talk) 11:48, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still not seeing where it says that wine provides alternative implementations of the DLLs that Windows programs call.  The only mention of DLLs in that section is at the end, where it discusses Wine's DLLs being used on Windows. - SudoGhost™ 14:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Section says: "Wine implements the Windows API entirely in user space". The lead section refers to Windows API as "DLLs that Windows programs call". Seriously, isn't that obvious? Still, maybe you like to see more source. Fleet Command (talk) 16:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerning the citation needed tag 

message: The language describing WINE has been changed multiple times. I originally changed it to say "WINE is both a compatibility layer and an emulator." I support that claim using the definition of "Emulator":
The definition for "Emulator" here on Wikipedia states that an emulator is "hardware or software or both that duplicates (or emulates) the functions of a first computer system in a different second computer system, so that the behavior of the second system closely resembles the behavior of the first system." By such a definition, WINE is certainly an emulator. 
Merriam Webster's definition for emulator: "hardware or software that permits programs written for one computer to be run on another computer." Again, WINE fits the definition. 
I have changed the language, hopefully for the final time. It now reads "Wine is a compatibility layer." If anyone wants to add the statement "Wine is not an emulator," they should find supporting sources.  It is not sufficient to cite WINE's meaning, nor the fact that WINE differs in function from other emulators. It is still an emulator. 
Objectivesea2 (talk) 05:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Talk:Wine (software)#Not emulated, but substituted might fit this topic. Even if Wine fits the definition for an emulator, it's a bit of a messy topic, it's probably safer just to define Wine as a translation layer (compatibility layer). Orowith2os (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: WINE is not an emulator 

message: :Talk:Wine (software)#Not emulated, but substituted might fit this topic. Even if Wine fits the definition for an emulator, it's a bit of a messy topic, it's probably safer just to define Wine as a translation layer (compatibility layer). Orowith2os (talk) 00:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: 2023

message: Whether Wine "is an emulator" or not depends on exactly how you define "emulator". There is no absolute, perfect, correct definition. As the word is usually used, I would say Wine is an emulator. It does not modify executables. It runs executables in an environment that looks to the executable like Windows.
But really, what's in a name? If the developers say Wine stands for "Wine is not an emulator", that's their decision. It's their work, they can call it whatever they like and explain the name any way they like. If they're using the word "emulator" in an unusual sense ... so what? Longitude2 (talk) 23:13, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: 2022

message: i update preview version to new with [+/-] but the article one time saved doesn't corresponds to correct update. Is possible add stable/preview version to edit and delete this two templates?.
--Patrios (talk) 22:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  fix preview version 

message: It's actually nothing whatsoever to do with Wine, and it doesn't have an article itself, just a redirect here for no actually good reason. Being something that emulates a bit of Windows in Linux is not really sufficient - David Gerard (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the Linux Unified Kernel have enough notability for an article? 

message: An API serves source code portability, it results in being able to compile, then execute programs. The same API can be maintained over multiple instruction sets, e.g. x86, ARM and Power Architecture.
An ABI server binary portability, it results in being able to execute already compiled programs. It is not possible to have the same ABI over different Instruction sets!
This is absolutely not the same. It is much harder to implement and maintain an ABI. In case you want to run already compiled programs, Adobe Photoshop or some Video game, you care about the ABI. ScotXW (talk) 12:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect you're quite correct here. WineHQ talks about "API calls" (and so does the article), but the way that a binary makes an API call is ... using the ABI - David Gerard (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

text: I've changed "API" to "ABI" as appropriate (in the ones I left, I think they really do mean "API") - David Gerard (talk) 20:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  API or rather ABI? 

message: The refs appear to be first-party. I've never heard of this thing. Has Pipelight/wine-compholio attracted any verifiable third-party noteworthiness anywhere? - David Gerard (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd try to explain. Take netflix which is used by quite a lot of people. It does not work on linux, but with Pipelight/wine-compholio does. For those netflix users which have linux the software it is noteworthy. Then there is no other way to run Silverlight  in native browser, other than with Pipelight. So was there an attempt to have silverlight on linux? yes, Moonlight (runtime) which was abandoned, but still was noteworthy. Pipelight is another attempt which works with most of Silverlight 4/5 apps on the net. SergeyKurdakov (talk) 21:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That appears to be "no, there is no verifiable third-party evidence of noteworthiness" - David Gerard (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any evidence of noteworthiness for Pipelight/wine-compholio? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Wine (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100211142218/http://www.desktoplinux.com:80/news/NS8454912761.html to http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8454912761.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081219102335/http://www.winehq.org:80/site/docs/wine-faq/index to https://winehq.org/site/docs/wine-faq/index#UNDER-WHAT-PLATFORMS-WILL-WINE-RUN
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Wine (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820055126/http://www.tatanka.com.br/ to http://www.tatanka.com.br/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231090654/http://www.winehq.com/?issue=208 to https://winehq.com/?issue=208
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081226133323/http://www.winehq.org/status/directx to https://winehq.org/status/directx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110110171608/http://gametreelinux.com/ to https://gametreelinux.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081113104906/http://www.reactos.org/en/dev_faq.html to http://www.reactos.org/en/dev_faq.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100412042723/http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/os2warp/index.html to http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/os2warp/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It's been ages since Catalina went live, and TTBOMK Wine still doesn't have a working build for it. I know they're working on it, but should this maybe go in the article anyway? Magic9mushroom (talk) 06:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worth mentioning the Catalina issues? 

message: Jargon and things that are not introduced include "WineHQ" (may or may not refer to the web site www.winehq.org), "wine-compholio", "upstream", "bottle versioning", and "fork" (given the intended audience).
--Mortense (talk) 12:29, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I linked the word "fork" to Fork (software development), which is a fairly widely-known term. AnonMoos (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Widely-used, at least in the free-software community, but I think User:Mortense may have been suggesting that the intended audience has a lot of members not in the free-software community and not familiar with the term. Guy Harris (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much (non-introduced) jargon