Author Topic: WINE can beat XP!  (Read 7689 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Screenor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • My own little world.
    • View Profile
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2006, 06:53:36 am »
There was something on G4 the other night about how Windows was the revolution because people never had to worry about difficulty playing games anymore, or something a long those lines that Dos was too complicated and hard to use.

Only reason I use Windows is because I love gaming, and wouldn't be able to not play things like WoW, and CS.

Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2006, 08:38:46 am »
Quote
something a long those lines that Dos was too complicated and hard to use.

Heh, DOS isn't hard to use, it just pisses off the hunt-and-peck typers.. a lot. =p
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.


Offline rabbit

  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8092
  • I speak for the entire clan (except Joe)
    • View Profile
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2006, 09:16:16 am »
There was something on G4 the other night about how Windows was the revolution because people never had to worry about difficulty playing games anymore, or something a long those lines that Dos was too complicated and hard to use.

Only reason I use Windows is because I love gaming, and wouldn't be able to not play things like WoW, and CS.
IIRC WoW runs fine on WINE.

Offline Newby

  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10877
  • Thrash!
    • View Profile
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2006, 10:44:28 am »
Haha. I don't think Wine cheated, considering they implemented that wmf implimentation verbatim (it was affected by the vulnerability too).
- Newby
http://www.x86labs.org

Quote
[17:32:45] * xar sets mode: -oooooooooo algorithm ban chris cipher newby stdio TehUser tnarongi|away vursed warz
[17:32:54] * xar sets mode: +o newby
[17:32:58] <xar> new rule
[17:33:02] <xar> me and newby rule all

I'd bet that you're currently bloated like a water ballon on a hot summer's day.

That analogy doesn't even make sense.  Why would a water balloon be especially bloated on a hot summer's day? For your sake, I hope there wasn't too much logic testing on your LSAT. 

Offline Warrior

  • supreme mac daddy of trolls
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7503
  • One for a Dime two for a Quarter!
    • View Profile
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2006, 11:17:33 am »
I think it's been stated pretty well in this forum that those comparisons were pathetic.
Somepeople should actually *look* at the benchmark before all the Linux fanboys run up
"YES WE DID SOMETHING TO GAIN SOME SORT OF FALSE BELIEF THAT WE STAND WITH THE BIG BOYS"
One must ask oneself: "do I will trolling to become a universal law?" And then when one realizes "yes, I do will it to be such," one feels completely justified.
-- from Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Trolling

Offline iago

  • Leader
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17914
  • Fnord.
    • View Profile
    • SkullSecurity
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #20 on: January 22, 2006, 11:24:33 am »
Haha. I don't think Wine cheated, considering they implemented that wmf implimentation verbatim (it was affected by the vulnerability too).
The vulnerability is in the specification, not the implementation.  The thing is, it's not exploitable without a broken image viewer, which is why it wasn't exploitable until Windows 2000 came along, with the broken image viewers. 

Offline iago

  • Leader
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17914
  • Fnord.
    • View Profile
    • SkullSecurity
Re: WINE can beat XP!
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2006, 10:06:00 pm »
Interesting but how an you actually benchmark something like this? WINE is unfinished so it goes without saying that calling a stub will be faster than calling a real function. Furthermore WINE may cheat at somethings for the speed vs functionality.

I finally got around to reading it, so I can answer the question. 

Did you look at the benchmarks?  For the most part, they where "draw a line", "allocase xxx bytes of memory", "createa  3d object with 3 light sources", etc.  You can't exactly stub that out and hope that the benchmarker doesn't notice.  Either it works, or it doesn't.