I think this conclusion is incredibly naïve given the dramatically increased bioavailability and significantly decreased side effects that sublingual administration has over oral estradiol. Flooding the liver through oral administration results in strain that is significantly reduced by sublingual administration, and the increased bioavailability alone accounted for comparable testosterone suppression without an anti-androgen at the same daily dosage. So on top of the decrease in liver damage by moving away from oral administration, this approach also does not account for the side effects of the anti-androgen. The miniscule sample size doesn’t do any favors to this study, either. The supposed “alarming excursions of serum estradiol” is solved simply by adjusting the dosage and spreading it out into more frequent doses throughout the day. It seems they did split the dosage into 4 doses for sublingual administration, but they are providing the same daily dosage despite significantly increased bioavailability of the sublingual route (which also accounts for the testosterone suppression). Additionally, a dosage of only 2mg of estradiol daily via oral administration is quite low for trans women.

I have a lot of problems with the conclusions of this study.

I’d like to link to a much more complete analysis of the sublingual route of administration for estradiol that analyzes a wide variety of sources (including the one linked in this post) for those interested in a more accurate picture of the benefits and shortcomings of sublingual administration:

An Exploration of Sublingual Estradiol as an Alternative to Oral Estradiol in Transfeminine People

Your best bet for finding compatibility with WINE (and by extension Bottles, because that’s what it uses) is through their AppDB:

https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&sTitle=Browse+Applications&sOrderBy=appName&bAscending=true

Here is the page for Photoshop (and all its different versions) and here is the page for Fusion 360 (or rather, a version of it being developed to work with WINE)

As with many things WINE, the answer is “it depends” (silver is workable, but still has very significant flaws). You can always try it out yourself, and I recommend walking through the HowTos that people post in the listings and the known bugs. The two programs you asked about are particularly difficult, as they are incredibly complex and use many libraries that are specific to only their own application, meaning their implementation in WINE is not priority (WINE tries to be as compatible as possible, targeting the broadest stuff first before gradually narrowing). Most programs “just work” through WINE, but these two in particular have been struggles to get working for years. Development is always happening, so I recommend to try it out if you’re curious if it’ll work for you. And if not, perhaps it will be better in a couple years.

The token recommendation for apps that don’t work through WINE is to try to find alternatives that play nicer. After all, supporting the anticompetitive business practices of Adobe or Autodesk spits in the face of Linux and the libre software movement as a whole. If you are able to reasonably find alternatives, then that would be ideal, but I find that recommendation quite naïve. As an alternative, you can run Windows in a VM from Linux, or you could dual boot if you only need to use these programs occasionally.

Bottles is really just a frontend for WINE with some extra features baked into the GUI to make the experience better for the end user. Compatibility in Bottles will still be determined by the compatibility a program has through WINE.

While I’m aware that sublingual requires a much lower dosage, and obviously oral has the disadvantage of liver strain from estrogen flooding, did you find data that actually empirically analyzes the feminizing efficacy of oral vs sublingual? Or are you just referring to the difference in dosage?