I'm not talking about the DOS games at that point (it's a reference example for a pattern, as mentioned), but newer generations of games and the basic principle of operation. There are already some older ca. Win 98 era games that run better on Linux+Wine than on Windows past Vista due to compatibility problems, and I do think it'll eventually become a commercial reality to sell those kinds of games packaged into a a Linux VM once their numbers increase, yes.
It's easier to test, doesn't require costly porting work if it already works, VM tech is increasingly commoditized, low licensing costs, the performance overhead won't matter, etc. Just like no one notices today if a DOS game is sold bundled with DOSBox.
The alternative would be to maintain the native Windows port of Winet that's effort - I bank on laziness with the VM bit. The fact that WSL went VM from 1 to 2 is an indicator of viability for the general idea of transparent virtualization, too.
Honestly, if you take this another round I have to assume you're being intentionally obtuse for trolling purposes.
> Honestly, if you take this another round I have to assume you're being intentionally obtuse for trolling purposes.
You said you would bet that someone would use wine to deliver an old windows game on linux that runs inside window's linux compatibility layer, doubled down, and say anymore who says that is nonsense must be trolling.
Do you think that maybe instead of being likely to happen, it is likely to never happen due to wine being open source? It could just translate to a modern windows API instead of Linux. There is even something called reactOS that is an open source and windows compatible.
> Do you think that maybe instead of being likely to happen, it is likely to never happen due to wine being open source?
That's what I meant with the last paragraph. Linux doesn't come with a licensing cost; maintaining a working "Windows backend" to wine is effort. Just bundling with Linux seems lower effort and cheaper. Cf. also just about all of the system containerization trend and what's driving it - and it's in part API surface between the delivery and the system.
It's easier to test, doesn't require costly porting work if it already works, VM tech is increasingly commoditized, low licensing costs, the performance overhead won't matter, etc. Just like no one notices today if a DOS game is sold bundled with DOSBox.
The alternative would be to maintain the native Windows port of Winet that's effort - I bank on laziness with the VM bit. The fact that WSL went VM from 1 to 2 is an indicator of viability for the general idea of transparent virtualization, too.
Honestly, if you take this another round I have to assume you're being intentionally obtuse for trolling purposes.