Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Jun 2007 16:30 UTC, submitted by Michael Zandstra
ReactOS "Alex Ionescu, the ReactOS kernel coordinator, has resigned. Alex first joined the project in 2004, around the 0.2.2 release. Since then, he's been at the center of quite a few squabbles about how to code the kernel. However, Alex has also been responsible for completely rewriting the kernel almost from the ground up. Today, about 60% of the kernel code is probably his. The reason for Alex's departure is because of his joining David Solomon's Expert Seminars as an instructor. Because this job would place him in close contact with many Microsoft programmers and also give him access to other Microsoft properties, continuing with the project would have resulted in possible conflicts of interest."
Order by: Score:
Too bad. Reactos has much potential
by Chuck Norris on Thu 7th Jun 2007 16:45 UTC
Chuck Norris
Member since:
2007-03-24

I have never understood why so few people have shown interest in Reactos. It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha. It implements the Win32 API, and you can install a number of Windows applications. Isn't that a lot better than Linux and Unix in general? I'm sure that when Reactos reaches the stable release, it'll be a breakthrough among the Windows community. Maybe Reactos will be to Windows what Openoffice is to MS Office?

Reply Score: 4

Crono Member since:
2006-11-08

I have never understood why so few people have shown interest in Reactos. It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha.

I think I just found out why ;-)

Reply Score: 5

Darkelve Member since:
2006-02-06

"I have never understood why so few people have shown interest in Reactos. It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha."

Shoulnd't that be a pre-alpha? :p

Reply Score: 2

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
I have never understood why so few people have shown interest in Reactos. It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha.
"""

I'm a Linux proponent. And I can tell you why I haven't been interested. Perhaps I am uninformed; I haven't ever really given this much thought.

But I have followed the excruciatingly slow progress of the Wine team for about 11 years now, I guess, and I put ReactOS in the same mental pigeon hole.

Whenver I am reduced to depending upon Wine to run one of my customer's apps, I find myself thinking to myself "Abandon all hope ye who enter here".

Could I be running ReactOS under Xen or something and get better results?

If so, I would be *very* insterested.

Edited 2007-06-07 17:15

Reply Score: 4

Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

It's the chicken & egg dilema. The more developers, the faster it's developper and the more attractive to users and to developers.

Few developers -> Slow -> Unattractive -> Less developers

Reply Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
It's the chicken & egg dilema. The more developers, the faster it's developper and the more attractive to users and to developers.
"""

Thinking about Wine, I'm not sure I agree with that. While implementing Win32 under POSIX OSes may not be exactly sexy, the first organization which does it really well has attained a Holy Grail of sorts.

One oft-quoted reason for the slow progress has been the "fact" that Win32 is a moving target. However, Wine developers have explicitely noted that the Win32 is, as a practical matter, not fast-moving. Most developers still want their apps to work on Win98, even today. And they will still want their apps to work on XP several years from now.

I believe the Wine devs are more critical of the poor to nonexistent documentation and the "secret" api's.

Sometimes people try to deny that the secret calls exist. But, hey, when your Microsoft app, running under Wine, complains that some call does not exist, and try as you might, you can't find any documentation that even suggests the existence of that call, well...

Edited 2007-06-07 17:45

Reply Score: 5

Elektro Member since:
2006-08-19

I guess the real point to be made is ressources. You need far more developers. What changed over the years is that now the architecture is more or less clean. All it needs is someone to pay some skilled full-time developers.

Reply Score: 1

draethus Member since:
2006-08-02

I guess the real point to be made is ressources. You need far more developers. What changed over the years is that now the architecture is more or less clean. All it needs is someone to pay some skilled full-time developers.

All the major wine developers are employed by Codeweavers.

Like any big project wine is difficult for new people to get involved in: you need a deep understanding of not just the Windows API and the UNIX APIs, but wine's internals as well. It's rewarding work though.

Speaking as a wine hacker myself, yes wine is basically complete: the architecture is all there, what is needed is a lot of work to finish off the last 10%. There is interesting differences between some fundamental APIs in Windows and in UNIX, some of which I suspect Microsoft deliberately put in to make porting away from Windows more difficult. As an example one bug I fixed recently concerned the send() function that sends data over a socket. On UNIX the semantics always were that write/send for a blocking file descriptor sends as much data as it can in one go and then returns. On Windows the semantics are that it sends everything, waiting as long as it takes. The result is apps written with the UNIX assumptions worked perfectly on Windows and wine, but apps written with the Windows semantics broke due to the short writes until I patched wine to loop calling send() until all the data is sent.

What a sneaky trap: the Windows semantics are a subset of the UNIX semantics so UNIX apps can be recompiled for Windows and still work, but apps written with the Windows semantics will encounter short writes on UNIX that didn't happen on Windows, needing a lot more work to port away from Windows.

Reply Score: 4

Elektro Member since:
2006-08-19

I don't mean codeweavers, I mean a sponsor who says: Let's dump 10 developers on the directX implementation or so and let's finish it. Someone needs to spent real money on Wine. Once Corel supported it. When you compete with a company that had thousands developers to build something you require some people. The wine development team did not scale very well.

Reply Score: 1

Morin Member since:
2005-12-31

> There is interesting differences between some
> fundamental APIs in Windows and in UNIX, some of
> which I suspect Microsoft deliberately put in to
> make porting away from Windows more difficult.

Not defending MS (whose tactics could certainly include a "trap" as you describe), but Windows' version of send is actually more intuitive to a developer, so the reason for this difference could as well be the decision to make it as easy for application developers as possible (which is IMO a sensible goal, as it results in higher-quality applications, increasing the overall quality of the whole platform).

Reply Score: 2

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha.

So to save anywhere from $50 to $500 (depending on where you buy Windows), you would put up with alpha quality software? The only advantage of ReactOS is cost. If ReactOS was a 100% perfect clone of Windows, which it is far from being, then it will still only be Windows.

I don't use Linux because it's free, I use it because it works better for me than Windows (for most tasks). Because of that I can put up with the disadvantages like lagging support for laptop hardware that one inevitably encounters with alternative OS's. Why would I put up with that pain to run what is essentially a really bad version of Windows? I don't want to put down the project, it is very interesting to play around with and work on as a hobby, but it holds no interest for me as something that can be actually used.

Reply Score: 5

Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

you would put up with alpha quality software?

No, definitely not. I would test it, report bugs, and I would use it only when it's stable. This is true for any software, including Linux development releases.

I don't use Linux because it's free, I use it because it works better for me than Windows

I don't use Linux because although being free, it doesn't work as good as Windows for me.

Reply Score: 4

Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Yes, but one day your copy of Windows XP won't validate anymore, or you'll come across some data that only works with an ancient and dead program that does not work on a modern version of Windows.

Just like DosBOX before, ReactOS and WINE will be the only way to access these older programs and data - so it's importance now, even at alpha quality, cannot be understated.

Reply Score: 5

Silent_Seer Member since:
2007-04-06

Yes, but one day your copy of Windows XP won't validate anymore, or you'll come across some data that only works with an ancient and dead program that does not work on a modern version of Windows.


So if ReactOS never matures (i.e. a dead project) you are going end up cracking a copy of XP ;)

Seriously this project will certainly fill the same role one day as is now filled by the FreeDOS project. Since the original DOS license is proprietary, many people now use FreeDOS to run old programs or programs that need to be very close to hardware and perhaps not be in a full fledged OS environment (like BIOS flashing software on a bootable CD /disk or a home made embedded system).

And there is a good reason why it deserves more developers and better progress than what it has now. It offers one less reason for Linux distro makers to sign up with MS, the Reactos team can extend their hand towards OS related compatibility. And if Reactos works perfectly (or perfectly enough) then hardware vendors can offer it on their systems without licensing OSes from MS and not face any sort of 'displeasure' from MS if they also offer linux with the same level of endorsement (patent problems! fine, then offer it outside US).

If there is enough interest for projects like Darwin, there should be even more so for ReactOS.

Edited 2007-06-07 21:52

Reply Score: 2

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

I don't use Linux because although being free, it doesn't work as good as Windows for me.

Fair enough, but is it really worth thousands of hours of testing, bug reporting, and fixing, just to get something that works as well for you as Windows? Just use the real Windows. Sure it's not free, but it's also not prohibitively expensive (especially with a new computer) and it will always work better than ReactOS, no matter how many developers join the team.

Reply Score: 2

aent Member since:
2006-01-25

From my interpetation at least, thats what the parent is saying, and why reactos won't take off.

Reply Score: 1

miles Member since:
2006-06-15

The only advantage of ReactOS is cost.


No. The main advantage of ReactOS is not cost - it's its license.

Its license allows you to do things you can't with Windows - thus enabling a BETTER Windows. You won't have to cope with Windows deficiencies because the system will be implemented in a far saner way. You have the possibility to end up with a system that is far more stable and, more important, far saner.

Even if we might prefer Linux, ReactOS will allow better integration in virtual machines - which, along with a good license, is worth far more than the 500$ of Windows.

Reply Score: 5

alexandru_lz Member since:
2007-02-11

Its license allows you to do things you can't with Windows - thus enabling a BETTER Windows.

Ugh, at this point I'd say that the license is almost as capable as the code.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work that has been put up so far, I couldn't do even half as well -- but ReactOS is *still* both slow and unstable. Well, it is a Windows clone after all :-P.

Reply Score: 1

deanlinkous Member since:
2006-06-19

have never understood why so few people have shown interest in Reactos. It's basically a free version of Windows in version alpha. It implements the Win32 API, and you can install a number of Windows applications. Isn't that a lot better than Linux and Unix in general?

Only for those that WANT windows or a *better* windows. I personally do not want a *better* windows. I dont want windows apps - if I did I would use windows. Doesn't interest me at all.

Reply Score: 2

knightrider Member since:
2006-12-11

That is because this bit of alpha software is still too buggy to be of any use.

Reply Score: 1

Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

A featureless implementation of a bad designed system is not what I would see "a lot better" than Linux and Unix in general :-)

Reply Score: 2

Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

I'm talking about the potential, not the current state. Linux also has been in an early alpha state one day. Give it some time. Reactos doesn't want to reproduce the bugs and annoyances of Windows also, that wouldn't make sense. I think it's a lot better than Linux because Linux has matured and very few computers in the world have Linux installed, while 90% of computers use Windows with the problems we know. So, Linux isn't for everyone. Please no destructive comments ;-)

Reply Score: 1

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Actually, Windows NT was a poor implementation of a good design, IMHO

Reply Score: 2

Aaarrrggghhh!!
by fretinator on Thu 7th Jun 2007 16:48 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

I hate when Work interferes with Real Life!

Reply Score: 5

RE: Aaarrrggghhh!!
by l3mr on Thu 7th Jun 2007 22:46 UTC in reply to "Aaarrrggghhh!!"
l3mr Member since:
2007-05-01

Real life as in, spending the week-end at home in front of your pc programming? ;)

Reply Score: 2

It's a pity
by dominik.holler on Thu 7th Jun 2007 17:35 UTC
dominik.holler
Member since:
2007-05-24

It's a pity that he is leaving the free software project.
Alex is one of few people having knowledge of windows and was sharing this knowledge public

Reply Score: 5

clever
by poundsmack on Thu 7th Jun 2007 17:46 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

clever move on microsofts part haha

Reply Score: 3

RE: clever
by Chuck Norris on Thu 7th Jun 2007 17:56 UTC in reply to "clever"
Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

clever move on microsofts part

Yes, it's not good for Microsoft to let a project like Reactos survive. Ten years from now, with the funds of venture capital, Reactos could become a serious problem for Microsoft.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: clever
by Touvan on Thu 7th Jun 2007 20:34 UTC in reply to "RE: clever"
Touvan Member since:
2006-09-01

I tend to disagree. Why would Microsoft not fund development of ReactOS in the open, and save money on support for such a large code base, by sharing that burden with anyone who uses it (which is a lot of people at the moment) and wishes to contribute code. Instead they spent $6 billion on what amounted to a Service Pack upgrade to Windows XP, with a new Window Manager.

They have plenty of incentive to support ReactOS, they just don't seem to understand the benefits of OSS (well that and technically, they have a very monolithic engineering culture - OSS is much more decentralized and modular than MS stuff seems to be, IMHO).

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: clever
by BluenoseJake on Fri 8th Jun 2007 15:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: clever"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

" Instead they spent $6 billion on what amounted to a Service Pack upgrade to Windows XP, with a new Window Manager."

I'm not a Vista user, but I have to say, I am getting tired of this claim, feel free to use google, there is a lot more to Vista than just XP SP3.

"They have plenty of incentive to support ReactOS, they just don't seem to understand the benefits of OSS"

MS does what it's shareholders want, they are a company who's main source of income is making an OS. it is their right to decide how to develop and distribute that product. In their eyes (and they are right, Windows and Office are MS's cash cows) They would lose their main source of income for the company, which in most shareholders eyes, is the wrong thing to do.

Reply Score: 2

Why not ReactOS?
by MightyPenguin on Thu 7th Jun 2007 18:03 UTC
MightyPenguin
Member since:
2005-11-18

Because if it has basically the same support as wine I'd rather just run my Windows apps in Linux then have to reboot than run an entire VM for it which WILL be slower than wine.

If wine can get copy protection stuff working than the last reason most people would need ReactOS over wine will be gone.

The only other reason would be some specialized device driver that only Windows has. And there are very few of those out there.

Of course you could use this to deploy Windows apps if you don't have a copy of Windows. But it will be awhile before it's stable enough for that.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why not ReactOS?
by KenJackson on Fri 8th Jun 2007 18:01 UTC in reply to "Why not ReactOS?"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Because if it has basically the same support as wine I'd rather just run my Windows apps in Linux then have to reboot than run an entire VM for it which WILL be slower than wine.

Yes! That's exactly my view when it comes to running Windows apps.

But I still like the idea of ReactOS, and I hope it survives and thrives. There are people who (gasp!) prefer Windows. ReactOS will give them the license benefits of free software while not making them learn another system. And I also am somewhat surprised that it doesn't have a larger following.

Reply Score: 2

It's....
by knightrider on Thu 7th Jun 2007 18:46 UTC
knightrider
Member since:
2006-12-11

Sad to see that he's leaving though. With more resources they could achieve much more. This is quite a blow....

Reply Score: 3

To all who say "why"
by MighMoS on Thu 7th Jun 2007 19:17 UTC
MighMoS
Member since:
2006-07-15

To everyone who says "Why is ReactOS important? Its just a clone of Windows", remember where Linux was in the early 90's. "Just a clone of UNIX", but now that Linux has grown bigger and started to make its own decisions and grow, some UNIX vendors now get slammed for not being Linux-y enough.

The advantage of ReactOS is the same as Linux. It implements an existing standard/interface (win32 / POSIX), but does so openly.

Reply Score: 5

RE: To all who say "why"
by sbergman27 on Thu 7th Jun 2007 20:49 UTC in reply to "To all who say "why""
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
To everyone who says "Why is ReactOS important? Its just a clone of Windows", remember where Linux was in the early 90's. "Just a clone of UNIX", but now that Linux has grown bigger and started to make its own decisions and grow, some UNIX vendors now get slammed for not being Linux-y enough.
"""

I can see what you are saying. But Linux was never in danger of being sued out the wazoo for patent infringement. Not by the proprietary Unix vendors, anyway. A certain degree of openness has always been part and parcel of the Unix way.

But what is to keep Microsoft from suing that hell out of the ReactOS devs, if they ever become a threat?

At this point, if Microsoft sued a Linux vendor they might unleash a patent holocaust.

But the rise of Linux has alerted them that these kinds of threats have to be nipped in the bud.

And here comes along ReactOS, a clone of Windows, itself, without the support of Microsoft, or of patent holders with enough clout to gain Microsoft's attention.

Sure, the ReactOS devs are finishing up a code audit to asure themselves that they are not committing any sort of copyright infringement.

But from a patent perspective, I can't help but suspect that ReactOS is worm food, if it gets that far.

Edited 2007-06-07 20:54

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: To all who say "why"
by wirespot on Fri 8th Jun 2007 10:38 UTC in reply to "RE: To all who say "why""
wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

But Linux was never in danger of being sued out the wazoo for patent infringement. Not by the proprietary Unix vendors, anyway. A certain degree of openness has always been part and parcel of the Unix way.


Heck no. The way things were done in the UNIX world was what made RMS start the free software movement. It was not pretty and open, to say the least.

And yes, the danger is looming over Linux as well, because software patents won't simply go away. They are an abomination by definition and it has reached a point where any piece of software in existence today violates a patent or more.

There are several reasons for which Linux hasn't been taken to court over patents (so far).
1. It would be a big suite, which may well destroy the entire software patent idiocy. Big corps don't want that.
2. Many big corps have invested in Linux. You kick Linux, you kick them. They won't take it lying down, and they have patent portfolios of their own. It would trigger a nuclear patent war from which nobody survives.

But what is to keep Microsoft from suing that hell out of the ReactOS devs, if they ever become a threat?


They might, but it's most likely they would choose other excuses: "reverse engineering" and DMCA is a nice one. Either way, ReactOS does not have the level of endorsement that Linux has, it would have a tougher time fighting Microsoft.

Besides, why bother to sue when you can just hire the main developer and set back the project for months or years?

Reply Score: 3

WIN32
by shiva on Thu 7th Jun 2007 22:20 UTC
shiva
Member since:
2007-01-24

It doesn't care if ReactOS never will be more than a toy OS. Wine is the important thing because with it linux, solaris and other free OSes can run win32 applications.

If MS say that linux infringe their patents, I imagine what they would say about ReactOS legality.

People don't use or like windows. They use windows only to run their win32 apps. If wine permits them to use linux or any other free OS, windows will ruin.

Reply Score: 1

RE: WIN32
by poundsmack on Thu 7th Jun 2007 22:40 UTC in reply to "WIN32"
poundsmack Member since:
2005-07-13

no people use windows because its what is farmilliar to them. people dont change because they dont find a compelling enough reason to. the sys tem is "good enough" for them. if it was a truely bad system and it were broken people would move away from it. the fact is it does things well enough to just get by and that keeps people where they are.

Reply Score: 1

RE: WIN32
by PJBonoVox on Fri 8th Jun 2007 07:44 UTC in reply to "WIN32"
PJBonoVox Member since:
2006-08-14

"People don't use or like windows"

Awww, *pat pat there there*.

Windows has hundreds of millions of satisfied users. I'm one of them.

Edited 2007-06-08 07:45

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: WIN32
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 8th Jun 2007 09:43 UTC in reply to "RE: WIN32"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

"Windows has hundreds of millions of satisfied users. I'm one of them."


I have to admit, for the longest time, I was too. Since Win95 and through Win98SE, Windows was my OS of choice (hated the original Mac, didn't help with my opinion that the ones at school crashed all the time... even in comparison to Windows at the time...). Sure, Win9x was not remarkable in any way... other than maybe ease of use, and it *did* do everything I wanted quite well, and fast, without much problem.

Never really got into those expensive Server versions of Windows, but finally, eventually, upgraded (clean install, obviously) to XP Pro. The added stability really is nice, but it's got so many things that drive me up the wall it's just insane. I won't bother getting into that here, but let me just say... Linux matured enough (for me) by just the right time. ;)

And with Microsoft's future direction, if I ever get another copy of Windows (for backward compatibility with some apps), it will most likely be nothing higher than XP (I can barely tolerate the crap it gives me--I don't even want to see what they added in Vista...). One thing's for sure... for what it is, ReactOS is looking real good. I just hope everything turns out well, and we get a good Windows-like OS with the speed and relative simplicity of the older versions, with the stability and without all the extra annoyances of later versions.

On a side note, Mac OS X is one nice looking OS. Much better than the original, in my opinion. I wouldn't mind owning one these days.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: WIN32
by wirespot on Fri 8th Jun 2007 10:40 UTC in reply to "RE: WIN32"
wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

Windows has hundreds of millions of satisfied users. I'm one of them.


How many are truly satisfied and how many simply don't know any better?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WIN32
by predictor on Fri 8th Jun 2007 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WIN32"
predictor Member since:
2006-11-30

"How many are truly satisfied and how many simply don't know any better?"

99% of the userbase is non-geek and for them, XP2 or Vista is simply the best option. OSX may be easier for super-n00bs, but Windows has the software.

The idea that most people are unhappy with Windows is an urban legend.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: WIN32
by Soulbender on Fri 8th Jun 2007 13:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WIN32"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"99% of the userbase is non-geek and for them, XP2 or Vista is simply the best option"

You are confusing "sufficient" with "best".

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: WIN32
by BluenoseJake on Fri 8th Jun 2007 16:18 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: WIN32"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

It may be the best solution for those users, don't presume to know the motivations and desires of a few hundred million people. I think you are confusing your opinion with fact.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: WIN32
by Soulbender on Tue 12th Jun 2007 04:23 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: WIN32"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Unless you have "facts" supporting the notion that it's the "best" for them my assertion is just as valid.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: WIN32
by BluenoseJake on Wed 13th Jun 2007 00:51 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: WIN32"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

My "Fact" is that you don't know the motivations and desires of those millions of people, and neither do I. Everything else is just that, assertions.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: WIN32
by Chuck Norris on Fri 8th Jun 2007 18:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: WIN32"
Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

You are confusing "sufficient" with "best".

I doubt. What do you suggest for mom and dad instead of Windows XP? Linux? OpenBSD? LOL

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: WIN32
by miles on Fri 8th Jun 2007 21:43 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: WIN32"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

Actually, I live far away from my mom and Linux is the solution. My brother installed her Windows 2000 (quite a good OS according to Windows users) and it never works more than - at best - a few weeks. And that's considering she doesn't open it often because it's a bit complex.

I've installed Ubuntu 4 month ago, and hasn't come back home during that times. She opens her computer in the morning, and leaves it open and connected to the internet till she goes to bed, coming back once in a while to check if somebody she knows is online and have a chat, or just use some apps (one of them through wine).

Guess what? It's still on and running. It's even newbie-proof, while not dumbing the user like Windows.

Yes, LOL

Windows has been making me LOL since its conception. Mac too, by the way, but at least they eventually got a decent OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: WIN32
by Chuck Norris on Fri 8th Jun 2007 23:13 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: WIN32"
Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

I'm really having a hard time believing this. I read everywhere on the Internet people who say they run Linux, who say they installed Ubuntu on their parents'computers, at work, in the library, etc... I have seen a few people using Macs at work, even at home. WHEREVER I GO, I HAVE YET TO SEE SOME ONE WHO USES LINUX.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: WIN32
by Soulbender on Tue 12th Jun 2007 04:25 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: WIN32"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"I doubt. What do you suggest for mom and dad instead of Windows XP?"

Do you even understand what the word "sufficient" mean?

Reply Score: 2

RE: WIN32
by Chuck Norris on Fri 8th Jun 2007 10:31 UTC in reply to "WIN32"
Chuck Norris Member since:
2007-03-24

It doesn't care if ReactOS never will be more than a toy OS.


Oh yes it does. Imagine 10 years from now, you go to CompUSA and see on the same shelf Windows priced at $699 and Reactos priced at $19, with the same features.

Wine is the important thing because with it linux, solaris and other free OSes can run win32 applications.


Yes, Wine is a fundamental part of Reactos.

People don't use or like windows.


I think you need to get down from your cloud. People do like Windows and have pleasure using it. Probably not developers, but people in general do like Windows, Windows Internet Explorer and Windows Live Messenger. The old days of Windows 98 crashing are long over. My kids always reboot into Windows XP when they want to use the computer and when it's running Ubuntu.

They use windows only to run their win32 apps.


Yep, so do Linux users. They use Linux to run Linux applications. So do Mac users, they use their Mac to run their favorite applications. Makes sense.

If wine permits them to use linux or any other free OS, windows will ruin.



It's beens years that you can find all material to download a user-friendly Linux version, to install Wine in a few commands, and to follow frankscorner.org to install popular Win32 apps on Linux in a stable and free environment. What's the status? Is everybody using Wine in their offices and at home? Has Windows disappeared?

Reply Score: 2

RE: WIN32
by BluenoseJake on Fri 8th Jun 2007 15:52 UTC in reply to "WIN32"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"People don't use or like windows. They use windows only to run their win32 apps. If wine permits them to use linux or any other free OS, windows will ruin"

Lots of people like Windows, lots of technical people don't. Don't equate your opinion with fact. We are in the minority.

Reply Score: 2

payola
by viator on Thu 7th Jun 2007 23:52 UTC
viator
Member since:
2005-10-11

Ive said this would happen on their forums and in irc in the past ie....microsoft buying off developers so the project will not be able to create a usable product in a feasable timeframe..

Reply Score: 2

Alex Ionescu should be watched
by PlatformAgnostic on Fri 8th Jun 2007 01:00 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

Ionescu seems like an amazing young programmer (he's only 21-23 right now) who will probably do some really interesting things with his career. I think all of you who are claiming that this is a big buy-off from Microsoft or something like that should take a look at Ionescu's work so far. He has been heavily involved in the reverse-engineering business and kernel development field after starting a company that wrote a piece of BASIC software that does spam filtering.

Much of his work thusfar has been training and self-development for real jobs. Ionescu is finishing up college in a year or two, and as an extremely talented programmer, he'll probably be making the big bucks with his skills. He can get paid to do what he loves to do, so why should he continue with OSS? It seems to me to be just a matter of someone growing up and using his well-deserved reputation to support himself.

Reply Score: 5

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"It seems to me to be just a matter of someone growing up and using his well-deserved reputation to support himself."

It's not nice to insinuate that people who work on OSS software are immature and not able to support themselves.

Reply Score: 2

ReactOS and Linux combination?
by WereCatf on Fri 8th Jun 2007 03:11 UTC
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

I dunno how useful others find my idea, but when ReactOS is a bit more stable and mature I imagine some Linux distro shipping some virtualization solution and ReactOS already fully-configured just for those Windows compatibility reasons. This is all theoretical, but imagine installing Ubuntu and finding out there is a fully working copy of ReactOS and f.ex. QEMU installed ready to be used if you run into a situation where you simply have to use a specific Windoze app. Or in my case, I'd most likely install drivers for my scanner in ReactOS and use it from there since my scanner isn't supported natively in Linux.

Ps. Someone mentioned something about copy-protection support in wine..Well, they already started coding a working ntoskrnl last month, so we will hopefully soon see all those copy-protection drivers working. And in theory, it might be possible to install other kinds of drivers too at that point.

Reply Score: 1

RE: ReactOS and Linux combination?
by Morin on Sun 10th Jun 2007 14:39 UTC in reply to "ReactOS and Linux combination?"
Morin Member since:
2005-12-31

Hardware devices like your scanner are the main reason for such a combination. For applications, it would make more sense to back-port the relevant parts from ReactOS to Wine.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ReactOS and Linux combination?
by draethus on Mon 11th Jun 2007 06:32 UTC in reply to "ReactOS and Linux combination?"
draethus Member since:
2006-08-02

...I'd most likely install drivers for my scanner in ReactOS and use it from there since my scanner isn't supported natively in Linux.

I've been working on a patch to wine that gets scanners working with their Windows driver. Wanna be a beta tester?

Reply Score: 1

Monkey see, monkey do
by B. Janssen on Fri 8th Jun 2007 06:36 UTC
B. Janssen
Member since:
2006-10-11

The interesting part for me is the point that Mr. Ionescu quits his position in an free and open source project because he may gain insight into Microsoft properties. I do not blame him for quiting his hobby to pursue a job, I blame the employer that requires him to quit his hobby to get this job.

I know things are not that easy, but that is the basic structure behind it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Monkey see, monkey do
by RandomGuy on Fri 8th Jun 2007 09:49 UTC in reply to "Monkey see, monkey do"
RandomGuy Member since:
2006-07-30

His employer did not require this. He made the choice.
From his blog:
"I made the difficult choice of amicably severing my ties with the project."

And it was the right decision. Otherwise people would claim that he used his new insights into Windows' architecture to improve Reactos' kernel.
This would be _very_ harmful to the whole project since MS would get yet another reason to sue the sh*t out of them.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Monkey see, monkey do
by BluenoseJake on Fri 8th Jun 2007 15:57 UTC in reply to "Monkey see, monkey do"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

I don't believe that MS made him quit ReactOS, it could be he took it upon himself to keep from being caught in a conflict of interest and potentially doing damage to the project. ReactOS cannot claim to keep a cleanroom implementation of the Win32 api or the NT kernel if Alex Ionescu has seen the code for a part of Windows, and then works on ReactOS after that.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: To all who say "why"
by gedmurphy on Fri 8th Jun 2007 12:07 UTC
gedmurphy
Member since:
2005-12-23

Can I just state that Microsoft have _not_ hired Alex, and that his leaving _ has not_ set the project back.

He will surely be missed, but the project can now start to move in a different direction. With the kernel rewrite complete and relatively stable, the rest of the system now needs to catch up.

Reply Score: 3

Yuk
by predictor on Fri 8th Jun 2007 12:39 UTC
predictor
Member since:
2006-11-30

Always sad to see people spending so much time on a project that is doomed from the beginning.

If the lawyers don't kill ReactOS, time will. It is still pre-alpha - IMO at least 3-5 years away from beeing useful on a day-to-day basis. By that time, Windows has evolved even more and playing catch-up is already impossible.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Yuk
by suryad on Fri 8th Jun 2007 14:15 UTC in reply to "Yuk"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

I dont think ReactOS is trying to play catch up the way you are suggesting. They dont want to do a Vista clone. They want to, it seems, do a basic Windows clone that runs all windows software and has a familiar UI. Thats all. You dont need Vista to run software when you can get along with XP Pro. In all honesty, nLite + XP Pro = awesome. Sure there is Linux and OS X and they more performance and security and UI pizzaz but XP Pro is sort of like a workhorse for me now. No antivirus, no anti malware software and my year old nlited installation is chugging along just fine. I dont even remember the last time I rebooted.

Reply Score: 1