No, Peter, I confess I haven't. Not because of costs or that I was unaware
of it, but merely because I'm making a genuine effort to stick to Linux
alone, as I do need to learn it as well as I can. Hence, I'm not installing
wine, so that I don't fall for the temptation of resorting to windows when
I need.
I want to be able to find a linux solution for these kind of situations, as
I'm sure it is possible. And if I resort to wìndows every time I stumble
upon a tricky one like this, I'm sabotaging myself and my intentions.
That's my personal mindset on this, of course... will take me time and
patience, but hey... I'm a patient stubborn bugger, lol...
As for the commercial related bit, I already replied to MR and it stands
for here as well...
Tda ;)
On 12 Jul 2017 21:45, "Peter Flynn" <pe...@silmaril.ie> wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 08:45 PM, Joao Monteiro wrote:
> > I have been using Turbocad for nearly two decades and rely heavily on it
> > for my electric schematics. Sadly, the software authors/company never
> > provided any drivers for linux. And after a fairly deep search for
> > alternatives, the odd couple of them available are exceedingly
> > inadequate and unstable in behaviour for my cad needs.
>
> Have you tried Codeweavers WINE? It's a well-supported commercial fork
> of WINE, which provides a Windows environment inside Linux/Mac. I use it
> on the occasions where I specifically need to use Microsoft Word instead
> of Libre Office. I think it's $50 or something like that. You will need
> a fast machine with lots of memory but IMHO it's well worth it.
>
> > Not a Linux shortcoming, see... just one of the many cases where
> > authors/developers don't bother considering linux usage for it when
> > developing it.
>
> The clue is in your first sentence ("for nearly two decades"). Twenty
> years ago, Linux was niche and hardly even known by Windows or Mac
> developers. It's quite common for an old codebase like Turbocad to be so
> heavily rooted in the Windows way of doing things that creating a Linux
> version would be too expensive for the small number of users.
>
> Despite the fact that Mac OS X is basically Linux, the differences both
> in code standards and in the display manager make it a majot task to
> develop a Linux version.
>
> > So the question obviously is: why don't software developers in some
> > areas even bother with linux when developing their applications?
>
> Many commercial software companies are also very poorly informed about
> Linux and other Open Source platforms. There is a huge amount of both
> misinformation and disinformation in the very narrow scope of business
> decision makers, so unless the decision is simple and quick and
> profitable, they will not take it.
>
> ///Peter
>
> --
> xubuntu-users mailing list
> xubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
> mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-users
>
--
xubuntu-users mailing list
xubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-users
