Someone left a comment on one of my posts similar to, "Linux won't be popular on the Desktop until it runs Windows applications." To which I silently responded, "Huh? and, "You've got to be kidding me." We have WINE for running Windows applications and it works reasonably well for those who care to spend the time to work through any problems with it. I don't think the Linux Community needs to spend time on such an undertaking. Is anyone asking Apple to run Windows applications so that it will gain popularity? No? Then, why should Linux? If you want to run Windows applications, run them on Windows.
Linux is Linux. Mac OS is Mac OS. And, Windows is Windows.
Why does anyone want or need any crossover?
If application vendors want to create applications that run on Linux, that's great. I'm behind that 100 percent. If Intuit, for example, wants to create QuickBooks that runs on Linux, I'd buy it. If Adobe created Photoshop for Linux, they'd have an audience. And, if Microsoft created Microsoft Office for Linux, it would sell too. After all, the first operating system that MS Office ran on was the Mac OS.
And, why would you want to run Windows applications when we have OpenOffice.org, KOffice, GIMP and many others that are actually better than their Windows counterparts? They're so good that all three of the ones I mentioned have Windows versions available.
Why don't the other vendors make the same concessions? Why don't they provide their applications to all audiences?
I don't want Linux to run Windows applications unless those applications, produced by their respective vendors, become available as native Linux applications.
Run Windows applications on Linux? Thanks but no thanks.