>
WINE is a recursive acronym that stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator - perhaps you know a lot more than the people actually working on it.
>

I am aware of what Wine stands for. For the record, here is a relevant definition:

em·u·late ( P ) Pronunciation Key (my-lt)
tr.v. em·u·lat·ed, em·u·lat·ing, em·u·lates

To strive to equal or excel, especially through imitation: an older pupil whose accomplishments and style I emulated.

To compete with successfully; approach or attain equality with.

Computer Science. To imitate the function of (another system), as by modifications to hardware or software that allow the imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same programs, and achieve the same results as the imitated system.

Wine - its name notwithstanding - IS an emulator. It's existance is to "fool" windows apps into thinking they are running under windows when the actual host platform is Linux. To achieve that result, Wine seeks to - emulate if you will - windows.

Why emulate? Because you don't need a windows license.


>>Also, from a business and economic standpoint - needing a full license for each Linux box …
>
>The closest any of us can get to the truth is the clarification (sic) “You may use VFP in conjunction with Windows”.
>
>Your argument above is just as specious as Windows subsidizes VFP and that the early Fox distribution kit was some sort or royalty charge – pure drivel.
>

Not sure what argument you are referring to here. The bottom line is that you cannot use the royalty-free runtimes on Linux. Therefore, the only way you can run Fox on Linux/Wine - and not run afoul of MS exclusive rights under Sec. 106 of the US Copyright law - is to purchase a full license for each machine Fox will run on. Some very mis-informed folks out there believe that what they are doing - running the royaly free runtimes on Wine/Linux is A-OK. They forget (or more likely just don't know) - that a copyright owner has exclusive rights for how their work is displayed. Some believe that an affirmative defense of copyright mis-use exists because what MS is doing runs afoul of US antitrust law - that this is all somehow anti-competitive. This is a very tough case to make out and I suspect a few folks realize this now.

The fact is, Windows DOES subsidize Fox. That said - MS could very well charge for the right to distribute. Given that it is royalty free on Windows - it is clear that Windows subsidizes that benefit of royalty free distribution. Take Windows away - and you don't get the benefit. Some try to claim that is a vertical restraint on competition via an impermissble tying arrangement. Without getting into the techncial issues on that - suffice it to say it is not - and that is why any copyright mis-use affirmative defense those in the Linux/Wine camp might mount would not succeed. Of course, it only becomes an issue if MS sues for infringment.

FWIW, experiementing with Fox on Linux IS permissible. That is a fair use. And from what I gather - that is all that has been done thus far. But - what I hear more and more - are those that advocate VFP on Linux via Wine and basically ignoring the copyright. Quite possibly - they could be on the hook for contributory and/or direct infringment sometime in the future. We shall see.

>
If you had argued that Windows (and Office etc.) had subsidized Internet Explorer then there would have been little scope for argument. Knowing that IE was or is free, but VFP is rather more expensive causes one to question what is going on between your ears.
>

IE is not really free - to the extent that you need a valid windows license to run it (or a Mac OS license). IE is a wholly different class of product. Far better to compare .NET to Fox - as their EULA's are pretty much the same.

Your analysis is only looking at the up-front costs. MS has and is positioning Windows as a platform. As such - it makes sense to allow people to write applications targeted to the platform. The economics are pretty simple - you spread the costs out over the dozens/hundreds/thousands of computers an application may be deployed on.

Require people to shell out $500+ per machine for a full VFP license on each Linux/Wine machine - and that pretty much takes Fox out of the running.

Maybe somebody should question what is going on between your ears. That said - lets not get into personal shots here. If you have a disagreement - keep it professional and to the point.

< JVP >