Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 10th Apr 2005 17:55 UTC, submitted by Peter
ReactOS ReactOS 0.2.6 is out. Look at the changelog. Screenshots you will find here, here and here.
Order by: Score:
complains?
by thjayo on Sun 10th Apr 2005 18:24 UTC

if anybody was complainig about how the alternative os scene was down, omfg, today it is your day
reactos running unreal tournament, haiku milestones...

i really like this project
by sn0n on Sun 10th Apr 2005 18:48 UTC

soon i'll be able to give friends ReactOS instead of Windows when they call me up to fix their computer..
I've tried Linux (for friends PC's) but it just creates more headaches then its worth right now.. Soon thou since gnome and others are really comming of age..

3d!
by human on Sun 10th Apr 2005 18:51 UTC

From the changelog-
"NVIDIA OpenGL hardware acceleration works"
Wow, these guys really are moving quickly!

re: thjayo (IP: ---.146.40.193.adsl.gvt.net.br)
by CaptainPinko on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:07 UTC

while on the subject of the alternative OSes... when does anyone think that Meneut will go x86-64

Not yet...
by [Knuckles] on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:28 UTC

I also look very forward to ReactOS, and altough the changelog seems that very nice things have happened and the SS's are nice and all, when you use it, 99% of the options of the menu don't work, and just by doing my 5-min-what's changed check i had 3 BSODs. It reminds me of skyOS, very nice on the outside 'n' all, but not very stable (at lest the last beta i've tried, 5.0 beta 5 or 6...).

At the end of the day, we like these projects and all, but for almost all of us, it goes like this "hey it's goin pretty well" * reboots to linux/osX/windows * "ahh that's better".

Props to syllable, which I've even tried in real hardware, and I couldn't crash it a single time (and the things that were present _DID_ work).

p.s.: this is just IMHO of course. You are of course free to think otherwise.

it's great but....
by Anonymous on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:39 UTC

I love this! all these apps working! but i'm worried that MAYBE Microsoft might tell them to cease development due to patent or IP infringment... or are my fears unfounded?

RE: it's great but....
by voidlogic on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:43 UTC

Yes they are, reverse engineering is legal in the U.S. if the original product is not disassembled in the production of the clone product

RE: Not Yet
by Renato on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:47 UTC

Of course it crashes, of course things dont work... ReactOS is ALPHA 2.6. Networking will start working on the 3.0 release. What i think matters is the potential of this project.
All windows drivers and apps in a free OS is something huge. I am also worried about Micro$oft now that the project is atracting more attention and momentum...

I wish them the best luck!!!

(correction)
by Renato on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:55 UTC

.26 not 2.6. i misread the number...

Changelog
by Steven Edwards on Sun 10th Apr 2005 19:56 UTC

Note the changelog listed only shows maybe 5% of the real changes. You need to grep the ReactOS and Wine SVN/CVS logs to see everything which is quite a bit.

Question about wine
by re on Sun 10th Apr 2005 20:47 UTC

I notice that Reactos uses alot of Wine and im wondering
will wine ever be able to emulate windows xp?

does anyone knows if...
by angustia on Sun 10th Apr 2005 21:18 UTC

..this project tries to be a clone of actual NT or NT done right?

Re: Question about wine
by Gé van Geldorp on Sun 10th Apr 2005 21:19 UTC

Since Wine Is Not an Emulator no, it will never be able to emulate windows XP.

Why though?
by re on Sun 10th Apr 2005 21:36 UTC

My understanding is that its not an emulator but somehow allows the calls that windows programs make to the windows sub system to be turned into calls to the x windowws sub system. Which is a damn impressive feat. But why cant that just be extended to the calls that xp makes instead of what 2000 makes.

Is it an issue with the windows xp api? Or with the x windows api?

Thanks!

Very good news!
by XDelusion on Sun 10th Apr 2005 21:43 UTC

This is supposed to be resource friendly to right? I bet it would be pretty stable and usable when Long Horn finally comes out...

...this can only be a good thing, glad it runs on my XBOX's too, can't wait to see updates on that side as well!

@ CaptainPinko
by human on Sun 10th Apr 2005 22:27 UTC

"when does anyone think that Meneut will go x86-64"

If you mean MenuetOS, it already has... look here..

http://www.co.jyu.fi/~villemt/64/

The older 32bit version is still being worked on by many people, and probably will be for a long time to come. The 64bit version is pretty much just Ville's work.

Awesome...
by FH on Sun 10th Apr 2005 23:16 UTC

The reactOS team is definitely turning up the juice of late. Ever since the OS started running a GUI, there has been a significant amount of development interest. Seems there are strides with every SVN daily build.

IMO, ReactOS, and not <insert linux distro of your choice here>, will become Microsofts competition on the desktop as soon as it matures a bit. I suspect that they will *never* achieve 100% binary compatibilty with Windows, but it'll be so damn close that most folks wont even notice - the odd application or two that won't run out of the box. Time will tell, I guess.

Re: Why though?
by Anonymous on Sun 10th Apr 2005 23:31 UTC

"Is it an issue with the windows xp api? Or with the x windows api?"

Neither. Wine _IS_NOT_ an emulator!

It's an API library layer and runtime system; it's (in a nutshell) Windows DLLs for non-Windows operating systems.

Wine uses the underlying OS to provide hardware access. It does _not_ create an environment for XP to run -- it _replaces_ XP entirely; it can't be an emulator as it does not emulate!

Re: Why though?
by Anonymous on Sun 10th Apr 2005 23:41 UTC

"It does _not_ create an environment for XP to run -- it _replaces_ XP entirely; it can't be an emulator as it does not emulate!"

To emulate is to imitate. You don't emulate or imitate something by creating an environment for it. That's hosting it. WINE neither hosts nor imitates, but allows programs to run using a different technique.

Thanks!
by re on Sun 10th Apr 2005 23:47 UTC

But none of these comments really answered my question. Anyway this is about ReactOS and not Wine. I was mearly curious.

Re: Awesome...
by Anonymous on Mon 11th Apr 2005 00:00 UTC

ReactOS will be just as linux. You will see different distributions if it is somewhat succesfull. That is not bad because competition is good as it introduces pricing pressure and multiple ways to solve a problem. The last one is important because with most problems it is impossible to say what the best way is before you have solved it.
ReactOS will also not need 100% compatibility because people will make sure their software works with it if it gets even a small share of the market

Nicely done!
by C on Mon 11th Apr 2005 00:33 UTC

This project has a big advantage over other "alternative OS's" (well, another if you compare it to closed-source SkyOS ;) , which is that it will actually have a fairly good software library on the first stable release. That could be crucial in weaning people off of Windows.

RE: Nicely done!
by Anonymous on Mon 11th Apr 2005 01:07 UTC

A good sized supported hardware library too, being able to use windows drivers and all.

RE: RE: Nicely done!
by C on Mon 11th Apr 2005 01:26 UTC

True, very true.

And, I find this amazing myself: ReactOS is compatible with Tribes! It just totally won me over, as foolish and immature as that may be. <3

http://reactosde.re.funpic.de/catappdetail.php?cat=Games&appnr=93

Other current compatibility information is available here, it's quite interesting:

http://reactosde.re.funpic.de/compatibility.php

v analogy
by Nii on Mon 11th Apr 2005 01:42 UTC
v analogy - oops
by Nii on Mon 11th Apr 2005 01:44 UTC
@Gé van Geldorp
by Jesse McNelis on Mon 11th Apr 2005 05:53 UTC

damn it!
WINE is an emulator.
It emulates win32.

They can't not call themselves an emulator just because they don't emulate the hardware.

@Jesse McNelis
by Amaranth on Mon 11th Apr 2005 06:05 UTC

You can't emulate an API, you can only implement it.

v No thanks
by gggg on Mon 11th Apr 2005 06:05 UTC
@ReactOS Devs
by Valio on Mon 11th Apr 2005 06:25 UTC

Keep up the good work ;)

NT 4.0 compatibility only?
by sLiCeR on Mon 11th Apr 2005 07:40 UTC

I would like ReactOS to aim 5.x compatibility, so we could use all current drivers and USB (which doesnt work even with SP6), my dream was a platform fully compatible for Games and free from MS (i need Wintendo only for gaming of course)

A support for x86-64 would also be fine...

Re: NT 4.0 compatibility only?
by johnlein on Mon 11th Apr 2005 08:16 UTC

Why is ReactOS aiming at NT 4.0? To get work done! There are APIs from Windows 2000, Windows XP and Windows 2003 Server that are implemented. There are people working on getting XP drivers working. But the overall aim is still on NT 4.0 to have a fixed target to aim at and get work done and not argue over features in XP or Longhorn or something user X wants.

Re: NT 4.0 compatibility only?
by Gé van Geldorp on Mon 11th Apr 2005 09:28 UTC

We do aim at 5.x compatibility. The USB support you mention is a nice example, a USB stack is in active development. Plug & Play is also being worked on.

@Geldorp
by johnlein on Mon 11th Apr 2005 09:41 UTC

You know, I just looked and couldn't find anything about NT 4.0 anymore. I must have been sleeping. But at least it kills that dumb argument.

gaming
by Nick Borrego on Mon 11th Apr 2005 09:57 UTC

Is there anyway this could help us bring gaming to linux?

@johnlein
by Gé van Geldorp on Mon 11th Apr 2005 10:24 UTC

The reference to Windows NT 4 was removed from the website some time last year, 'cause it didn't make much sense with some of the Win2k and WinXP subsystems and routines under development.

RE: gaming
by Nicram on Mon 11th Apr 2005 10:55 UTC

as long as WINE is developed it is.
But ReactOS is not Linux (& that's the best).

RE: @Jesse McNelis
by Marcus Sundman on Mon 11th Apr 2005 11:02 UTC

Amaranth wrote:
> You can't emulate an API, you can only implement it.

Yes, but you can emulate a bunch of DLLs by implementing the same API as they do.

Emulate
by Lennart Fridén on Mon 11th Apr 2005 12:22 UTC

>> You can't emulate an API, you can only implement it.

> Yes, but you can emulate a bunch of DLLs by implementing the same API as they do.

From dictionary.com, seems to be in favour of WINE emulating
------
1. To strive to equal or excel, especially through imitation: an older pupil whose accomplishments and style I emulated.

2. To compete with successfully; approach or attain equality with.

3. 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.

good for WINE?
by Evert on Mon 11th Apr 2005 12:59 UTC

hopefully this will gove WINE another boost, and give WINE a platform where it reeally shines.

i'm very happy with this developments, because some day I may need a lightweigt w32-compatible OS for some of my users of just for myself.

v ReactOS
by ex-slacker on Mon 11th Apr 2005 13:26 UTC
@ex-slacker
by emacs on Mon 11th Apr 2005 13:47 UTC

Because hardware manufacturers don't see a significant, paying, desktop market for Linux and FreeBSD.
Thus, for the user, beating platform lock-in is problematic.
Now, if you really want to see a knee tremble in Redmond, consider the fruit of ReactOS, when they integrate its API goodness directly into a Linux kernel...

icons?a
by Anonymous on Mon 11th Apr 2005 14:32 UTC

are there any plans to re-do the icons?...they look atrocious in the screen shots

Re: icons
by Jon on Mon 11th Apr 2005 15:57 UTC

Yeah, I'd like to see the Nuvola iconset or maybe something from Foood.net (which would be more familure for Windows users).

RE: icons
by zrln on Mon 11th Apr 2005 16:13 UTC

> are there any plans to re-do the icons?...they look atrocious in the screen shots

Only on osnews.. icon's are probably one of the last thing on the to-do list..

Secret API's
by Andrewg on Mon 11th Apr 2005 17:59 UTC

How is the problem of secret APIs going to be overcome or did MS have to release all those? I am sure people will want to run MS Office for example.

Applications
by Buggy-Boo on Mon 11th Apr 2005 17:59 UTC

Why would anyone want to clone Windoze when we got Linux and FreeBSD?

Applications for one thing. There are Windows applications for which there are not now, and never will be, a Linux version, and which run quite poorly under WINE. I've been watching WINE over the years and it seems to move at a glacial pace.

Re: Secret API's
by johnlein on Mon 11th Apr 2005 18:32 UTC

It doesn't mater. Apps don't use Secret API's and if apps use them they aren't secret now are they?

 RE: Re: Secret API's
by Andrewg on Mon 11th Apr 2005 18:54 UTC

I was under the impression that many MS apps used them and that anti-virus apps used them.

File System
by XDelusion on Tue 12th Apr 2005 05:36 UTC

It would be nice if they could improve upon the File System as ANYTHING M$ has done up to this point has been UTTER crap. Amiga once gain beat M$ years in advanced.

Anyhow, what is the lowest specs you need to run this, as opposed to 98 or XP...

...or Long Horn? ;)

RE: Re: Secret API's
by Anonymouse on Tue 12th Apr 2005 06:22 UTC

Applications on MS do use secret API's. Autocad is a very good example. See the lately speed increase using directx...

secret APIs
by Morin on Tue 12th Apr 2005 09:09 UTC

> How is the problem of secret APIs going to be overcome or
> did MS have to release all those? I am sure people will want
> to run MS Office for example.

It is done the hard way: Use the API to find out what it does.

They might also fall back to a cleanroom implementation based on reverse-engineering the original code. As opposed to direct reverse-engineering, this was found to be legal even in the US (which has among the strictest laws in this field).

DirectX is a secret API, alright
by Anonymous on Thu 14th Apr 2005 19:16 UTC

Full of mystique and intrigue.

Maybe you can point to the interface with this secret API, since DirectX is accessed through COM.