Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Sep 2011 21:10 UTC, submitted by AmineKhaldi
ReactOS "During his visit to the school, President Medvedev spoke with the school's students, including [ReactOS'] Marat Karatov. Marat made a short presentation of the latest build of ReactOS, including system boot up and running a few Windows-compatible applications. During conversation with the president, Marat said that the OS was ready approximately for 80% of real world usage and that roughly one million euros would be needed to complete its development within a year. 'This is an interesting project indeed', was President Medvedev's response."
Order by: Score:
He needs to talking to the wrong people ;-)
by kragil on Mon 12th Sep 2011 21:53 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

Putin would have been the right person. He is so rich 1 million is probably nothing he spends a lot of time thinking about.

Let's hope Dmitry tells Boris about it the next time he has to present his report, but I guess he will forget :-(

Reply Score: 1

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

What exactly is "80% of real world usage"?

I've been following ReactOS for a few years now and love what the devs are doing, but it really didn't feel "80% complete" the last time I used it.

However for arguments sake: even if those arbitrary figures were accurate, the last few percentage of usability usually take the largest percentage of time to develop. So I really don't think 52 weeks is long enough to make this thing production ready.

Edited 2011-09-12 22:17 UTC

Reply Score: 5

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Form the article, it seemed as if a high schooler was the one who said it. I'm not bashing the youth, but they aren't the best at estimating project times or costs. Which in the case of Linux, was a very, very good thing ;)

Reply Score: 4

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

What!?!?!? Medvedev is a manager while Putin is a spy. Medvedev was the chairman of Gazprom, he has enough money in his account...

Reply Score: 3

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

The question is not "who was", but "who is"

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Question is "Where's my money Lebowski?!?!?"

Reply Score: 2

Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

In Soviet Russia investors own you.

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So it's just like everywhere else?

Reply Score: 5

Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I was thinking the same, but it was the obligatory joke.

Reply Score: 2

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

In Russia, system operates you.

Reply Score: 4

Liquidator Member since:
2007-03-04

It's incredible to see that some one as important as Medvedev now knows about ReactOS, a hobby O.S. and it's incredible also to see what could be the consequences of a donation from a millionaire to such a project... A free win32 O.S. given away to the whole world...And legally :-)

Reply Score: 4

Comment by benb320
by benb320 on Tue 13th Sep 2011 00:57 UTC
benb320
Member since:
2010-02-23

'In Soviet Russia' is one of the dumbest memes

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by benb320
by emerson999 on Tue 13th Sep 2011 06:57 UTC in reply to "Comment by benb320"
emerson999 Member since:
2007-12-08

Actually, was it the first internet meme? I know I saw it long before the word meme was repurposed for the internet.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by benb320
by benb320 on Tue 13th Sep 2011 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by benb320"
benb320 Member since:
2010-02-23

It is from before the internet, but still the internet made a meme out of it, and it it's pretty dumb

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by benb320
by sorpigal on Tue 13th Sep 2011 21:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by benb320"
sorpigal Member since:
2005-11-02

I don't think it can properly be called an "Internet meme" at all - I have not noticed an upswing in the use of 'In Soviet Russia' jokes due to the internet, except in isolated cases like the fact that it became the thing to do on Slashdot for a while. It was always the sort of thing that spread virally from person to person and back again, in gentle waves.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by benb320
by zima on Wed 14th Sep 2011 13:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by benb320"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe it's like that locally to you, however I strongly suspect that "In Soviet Russia" joke was, pre-Internet, also fairly local (mostly to your place?)

But the internet and its memes are a much more, well, global thing. "In Soviet Russia" also most likely became much more widespread that way (I'm certain it wasn't really present at my place, even now that form is well-known mostly only to English capable internet-regulars; sure, there were tons of jokes and cabarets about the Soviets and our regime - "here" being back then a Comecon, Warsaw Pact country - but this particular form was absent)

Edited 2011-09-14 13:07 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by benb320
by Phucked on Tue 13th Sep 2011 23:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by benb320"
Phucked Member since:
2008-09-24

It is from before the internet, but still the internet made a meme out of it, and it it's pretty dumb


Internet is more than 40 years old so I doubt its older.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by benb320
by zima on Wed 14th Sep 2011 12:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by benb320"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

The origins go back 40+ years. But not only it can be called the Internet proper maybe for around 30; it was also a fairly niche thing for most of that time, not really impacting ~popular culture.

What we call "internet memes" came only with popularisation of the network in the 90s; "before the internet" in ~popular culture also referring to times before those. And "In Soviet Russia" comes mostly from 80s comedy act...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by benb320
by demetrioussharpe on Fri 16th Sep 2011 15:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by benb320"
demetrioussharpe Member since:
2009-01-09

Internet is more than 40 years old so I doubt its older.


Correct, but since common use of the internet didn't really happen until the early 90's, this meme is probably older in spoken form than the common internet usage of it.

Reply Score: 1

AMD's sucess
by Jondice on Tue 13th Sep 2011 01:31 UTC
Jondice
Member since:
2006-09-20

A large part of AMD's success seems to be due to compatibility with the existing platform norm. ReactOS and Wine could potentially be as successful as AMD, if they only had the resources. Somehow being able to turn a profit would help; if they could directly work with fortune 500 companies and governments, and give them new features for less than Microsoft demands, maybe they'd stand a chance.

I know it is a long shot. Lobbyists, the old boys' club, etc.

Reply Score: 2

I'd be eternally grateful to Russia
by ozonehole on Tue 13th Sep 2011 02:17 UTC
ozonehole
Member since:
2006-01-07

I'd be eternally grateful to Russia if they'd pick up this project and finally make ReactOS usable. And I say that even though I'm a Linux user and have no intention of changing operating systems. Unfortunately there are just a few times when I really need Windows (like, for example, loading maps on my Garmin GPS, or updating a BIOS). Having ReactOS available for those few necessities would be a dream come true.

Undoubtedly, Microsoft would have a hissy fit if Russia does this. Their lawyers would roll out their thousands of software patents, the DMCA, plus "look and feel" trademarks. The American ambassador would demand a meeting with Putin to discuss the issue. The US embassy in Moscow would reveal its true function as official headquarters for the US Chamber of Commerce. And the Russians would laugh at them.

Edited 2011-09-13 02:24 UTC

Reply Score: 11

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ozonehole,

"I'd be eternally grateful to Russia if they'd pick up this project and finally make ReactOS usable."

Same here. I took a look at ReactOS today. I agree with others that it doesn't look 80% complete, but it looks extremely promising.

"Undoubtedly, Microsoft would have a hissy fit if Russia does this. Their lawyers would roll out their thousands of software patents, the DMCA, plus 'look and feel' trademarks."

Well, I think they could make a genuine case that ReactOS might confuse consumers because it can pass for windows. This would be extremely dangerous for MS to admit though...imagine the attention ReactOS would receive if MS claimed consumers couldn't tell it apart from windows.

As far as software patents, I agree it's all BS. However there's little doubt about it, ReactOS will necessarily infringe on many patents. As soon as they are commercially viable the lawsuits will start.

As for the DMCA, it's not really applicable here is it? For one it is US law. For another, my understanding is that ReactOS is a completely new implementation with no copied code. The only possible copyright infringement angle I can think of is if ReactOS installs windows hardware drivers without a license for ReactOS. It's not clear to me whether hardware manufacturers would care.

Edited 2011-09-13 03:41 UTC

Reply Score: 4

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The only possible copyright infringement angle I can think of is if ReactOS installs windows hardware drivers without a license for ReactOS. It's not clear to me whether hardware manufacturers would care.


ReactOS doesn't install drivers, users do. If a hardware OEM writes a Windows driver for their hardware, and it happens to work on ReactOS as well, (1) why would the hardware OEM care, one way or the other, and (2) what on earth does this scenario have to do with Microsoft anyway?

What exactly would a license be required for?

Reply Score: 6

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lemur2,

"what on earth does this scenario have to do with Microsoft anyway?"

Nothing...?


"What exactly would a license be required for?"

It may be standard practice to ignore licenses, but drivers are software protected by copyright too. It would be within the rights of the manufacturer to restrict the use of their software to a specific platform.

Reply Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

lemur2, "what on earth does this scenario have to do with Microsoft anyway?" Nothing...? "What exactly would a license be required for?" It may be standard practice to ignore licenses, but drivers are software protected by copyright too. It would be within the rights of the manufacturer to restrict the use of their software to a specific platform.


No, it wouldn't be.

1. It is not the hardware OEM's platform. The hardware OEM cannot distribute permissions/restrictions pertaining to a platform that is not theirs.

2. Anyone who buys the hardware package buys the software license for the driver which goes with it. This would come under the heading of "implied license".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_license

3. The OEM can't sell the hardware without the attentdant software, because if they did so they would be offering defective product for sale. Consumers could complain that hardware without any driver software at all was "unfit for purpose".

4. In respect to the above, the hardware OEM cannot offer to Joe something in a package which they do not offer to Susan, regardless if Susan has a Windows license or not. Doing so would be a trade practice violation, it would come under either "product tying" or "refusal to deal".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_tying

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refusal_to_deal

At the very most, the hardware OEM could say that their product was "untested for ReactOS", or they could say that their product was "recommended for use with Windows". Something like that. That is about the worst they could do.

Edited 2011-09-13 06:40 UTC

Reply Score: 4

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

But none of that applies under Russian General Law.

No Software Patents
No DMCA
etc
etc
etc

If you go to almost all of the Prospects on the outskirts of Moscow you can easily buy any bit of Microsoft Software for up to an order of magnitude less than it costs in the US/Europe. A lot of it is supplied under the counter by local MS agents. They are using the tried and tested method of getting people hooked on stuff. Free/cheap at first then full price later.

Reply Score: 2

OSbunny Member since:
2009-05-23

Yep that's how it is in most poor countries. The downside of this is that it prevents the development of alternatives to Windows. Alternatives like Linux for instance. If the billions living in the poor countries couldn't get their hands on pirated versions of Windows so easily they would be forced to adopt and develop for Linux. This would also lead to the development of a software industry in these poor countries catering to the local market.

Reply Score: 2

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

And Bill knew this. That is why it was never enforced in those countries.

Reply Score: 3

Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

Nobody pays for Windows. Here people pay for a computer and they discharge their M$ tax with it. It's really hard to own a computer/laptop and not owning a Windows copy. Being it Europe or North America.

Price is not the major reason to use free software today. It should also not be. It would be a sad state of the GNU/Linux world if all it could over would be "cheap".

Reply Score: 0

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lemur2,

I don't believe that buying a hardware/software bundle voids the software license.

The hardware may be unfit for purpose under your OS without drivers, but then again the operating system is usually explicitly stated in the system requirements on the box.

Edit: I'm not trying to imply that all manufacturers care how we use their software. But there are realistic scenarios where the bundled software is not even written by the manufacturer - the software license isn't void. IE DVD-ROM + DVD Playback software. There was a time when it wasn't legal to play DVDs under linux at all because all the commercial software was written and licensed for windows.

Edited 2011-09-13 07:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

lemur2,

I don't believe that buying a hardware/software bundle voids the software license.


Who said that it did? When you buy the hardware, you automatically receive a valid license (i.e. permission) to use the hardware and software bundle that you purchased.

You can use the hardware for whatever purpose you like ... it is now your property. The only restrictions you may face relate to re-sale of the hardware, whereupon it becomes your property no longer.

This is NOT in any way dependent on you having a Windows license. It can't be, since a hardware OEM requiring such a thing would directly violate laws against "product tying".

To require that a consumer must have another product from some other company is akin to a hardware store selling you a hammer and then insisting that you only use brand X nails. Sorry, but the original hardware vendor just doesn't get that power. Go ahead and use brand Y nails to your heart's content. Enjoy.

The hardware may be unfit for purpose under your OS without drivers, but then again the operating system is usually explicitly stated in the system requirements on the box.


Recommendations. They CAN say that they recommend 1GB RAM for example, but they certainly cannot tell you what make of RAM chips to use, and if their hardware still works with only 512MB, they can't tell you that you must buy another 512MB.

Edit: I'm not trying to imply that all manufacturers care how we use their software. But there are realistic scenarios where the bundled software is not even written by the manufacturer - the software license isn't void. IE DVD-ROM + DVD Playback software. There was a time when it wasn't legal to play DVDs under linux at all because all the commercial software was written and licensed for windows.


It is perfectly legal to play DVDs under Linux.

You use this library:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libdvdcss

Do not confuse this libdvdcss software for Linux with DeCSS from Windows, since the libdvdcss library for Linux has never been challenged in court. It is not a copy of any other software, it does not violate copyright. It does not use "cracked keys" (While DeCSS uses a cracked DVD player key to perform authentication, libdvdcss uses a generated list of possible player keys.). It pre-dates the DMCA.

End users are licensed to run libdvdcss because libdvdcss has a GPL license.

It is perfectly legal to play legally-purchased DVDs on Linux. What law is being violated?

Are not DVDs meant to be played on DVD players? Have Linux users somehow not legally purchased the DVD and the player? Linux users have a license (the GPL in most cases) to run all the software required. Well then, enjoy!

Edited 2011-09-13 10:53 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lemur2,

"Who said that it did? When you buy the hardware, you automatically receive a valid license (i.e. permission) to use the hardware and software bundle that you purchased."

http://www.osnews.com/thread?489308

In this post, you state that software license agreements cannot restrict where/how the software is used. However it's not all that uncommon. Apple does it, IBM does it, microsoft does it. I think this is common knowledge so I won't cite any sources.


"It is perfectly legal to play legally-purchased DVDs on Linux. What law is being violated?"

Legal DVD playback required a license, for a long time non of these issued for linux software.

"Sorry, you also mentioned DVD-ROM software, I presume you mean for DVD burners?"

I know linux has DVD burning software, but I'm not sure how this relates to my post? I specifically said DVD-ROM.

Reply Score: 2

umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

End users are licensed to run libdvdcss because libdvdcss has a GPL license.

It is perfectly legal to play legally-purchased DVDs on Linux. What law is being violated?

Are not DVDs meant to be played on DVD players? Have Linux users somehow not legally purchased the DVD and the player? Linux users have a license (the GPL in most cases) to run all the software required. Well then, enjoy!


The problem is - and this is of course entirely opinion since it hasn't been tested in court - it's arguable that DVDs are only meant to be played on "licensed DVD players" where the developer of the player has paid for a license allowing their software (or hardware) to play DVDs.

IOW, you can only legally play a DVD on an authorized player, which libdvdcss is not.

The DMCA comes into play because any DVD playback software that isn't licensed is considered a "circumvention" of the "effective copy protection" (you can argue about "effective" separately - but that's what the MPAA believes).

The same library that allows dvd playback can be used to "rip" dvds to a non-encrypted video format - so obviously they would like to prevent that from happening. They want to make sure anything that can play a DVD is only being used for "licensed and authorized" purposes.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

But there are realistic scenarios where the bundled software is not even written by the manufacturer - the software license isn't void. IE DVD-ROM + DVD Playback software. There was a time when it wasn't legal to play DVDs under linux at all because all the commercial software was written and licensed for windows.


Sorry, you also mentioned DVD-ROM software, I presume you mean for DVD burners?

http://www.k3b.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K3b

Linux users are fully licensed to use k3b. Enjoy. Burn baby, burn.

GNOME/GTK users might prefer Brasero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brasero_%28software%29

Reply Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

This whole discussion is moot anyway as ReactOS currently doesn't support Windows drivers and has no plans to implement WDF (Vista / Win7's driver model).

Granted they are working on a more basic NT driver model, but it's far from complete (easily more than a years work there alone) and worst of all it's already out of date so any new Windows drivers wouldn't work anyway.

So i think copyright issues would be the least of your troubles if you're hoping for cross-compatibility between ReactOS and Windows drivers ;)

Reply Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Laurence,

I thought I read they were going for compatibility with windows 2000 and the earlier windows driver model which predates WDF, no?

A (very quick) search popped up this from wikipedia: "other WDM drivers can be used as long as the driver does not call a non implemented Windows API." So I do believe driver compatibility is a goal.

Anyways, I think most manufacturers would be happy to see their existing drivers working on reactos without modification.

Reply Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Laurence,

I thought I read they were going for compatibility with windows 2000 and the earlier windows driver model which predates WDF, no?

Yeah, the NT driver model which I mentioned ;)

A (very quick) search popped up this from wikipedia: "other WDM drivers can be used as long as the driver does not call a non implemented Windows API." So I do believe driver compatibility is a goal.

WDM is a subset of NT driver model, so compatibility is theoretically possible. However that doesn't change the fact that it's far from complete and is already 2 generations of Windows behind.

Also this is all on ReactOS's website:
http://www.reactos.org/en/dev_whitepaper.html

Anyways, I think most manufacturers would be happy to see their existing drivers working on reactos without modification.

I don't think they'll care.

Most put very little effort in Linux drivers and desktop Linux (like it or loath it) is years ahead of ReactOS in terms of completeness, user base and developer interest. So I can't really see why manufacturers would care any more about ReactOS.

Edited 2011-09-13 08:25 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I think the key words are: "without modification"

Reply Score: 2

gedmurphy Member since:
2005-12-23

ReactOS supports WDM drivers. In fact, some of the built-in drivers use WDM.

Reply Score: 3

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

ReactOS supports WDM drivers. In fact, some of the built-in drivers use WDM.

Got a source document to back this up?
I ask because their own white paper states it's not completed:
ReactOS currently aims to implement the NT driver mode, of which the Windows Driver Model (WDM) is a subset of.

http://www.reactos.org/en/dev_whitepaper.html

Why list as an aim if it's a completed project?

[edit]

Ahhh just spotted you're one of the ReactOS guys.
I'm guessing your white paper is out of date then if WDM compatibility has already been achieved?

Edited 2011-09-13 10:42 UTC

Reply Score: 2

bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Why would the russian government care about american software patents? They aren't valid in russia.

Reply Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I'd be eternally grateful to Russia if they'd pick up this project and finally make ReactOS usable. And I say that even though I'm a Linux user and have no intention of changing operating systems. Unfortunately there are just a few times when I really need Windows (like, for example, loading maps on my Garmin GPS, or updating a BIOS). Having ReactOS available for those few necessities would be a dream come true.

You can use FreeDOS to update the BIOS, however some mobo manufacturers (ASUS for example) have updater tools built in so all you need to do is load the BIOS device on any FAT formated device (inc removable media) then boot into the BIOS and update from there.

Reply Score: 2

dusik Member since:
2007-01-25

I have used Flashrom to great effect: http://flashrom.org/

Reply Score: 1

Comment by marcp
by marcp on Tue 13th Sep 2011 06:06 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

And what else could he possibly say? he's probobly not a techie guy and he is a politician in post-soviet regime place. He has the power to adopt that kind of stuff, but he's a politician in the same time, so that looked more like "yeah, yeah, now go away".

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by marcp
by emerson999 on Tue 13th Sep 2011 06:59 UTC in reply to "Comment by marcp"
emerson999 Member since:
2007-12-08

It's one of the annoying things about democracies. We elect people based on a cult of personality. But when they get into office, their job description includes giving up any opinions or personality. We get the worst of both worlds.

Reply Score: 3

Translation
by Tractor on Tue 13th Sep 2011 08:41 UTC
Tractor
Member since:
2006-08-18

In politicial language, 'This is an interesting project indeed' means 'i don't give it a damn'

Reply Score: 3

RE: Translation
by vitae on Fri 16th Sep 2011 22:32 UTC in reply to "Translation"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

True, but watching a demo of React has still got to be better than kissing a pig.

Reply Score: 2

Just wait until/if it becomes a success
by OSGuy on Tue 13th Sep 2011 08:43 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

Only then the patent law suites will start I believe.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by ddc_
by ddc_ on Tue 13th Sep 2011 09:32 UTC
ddc_
Member since:
2006-12-05

There are two possible ends to this story:

1. Money are not paid to project. ReactOS reaches 99% compatibility with WinXP by Y2015 (Y2020?) and if the will to complete the project doesn't fade, the project gets compartible with previous Windows version in a couple of years.

2. Money are paid. Effectively of a million issued the project recieves a couple of hundreds of thousands (that's the way it work in Russia). Governmental agency of youth (or ministry of information and communications) takes close control on a project. By Y2015 the project is completely screwed and f**ked up.

Reply Score: 1

The curious thing about ReactOS
by artemis_gordon on Tue 13th Sep 2011 16:56 UTC
artemis_gordon
Member since:
2011-09-01

is that a foreign government like Russia or China, or even a big corporation like Google, hasn't taken an interest in this already

Reply Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Because it really isn't worth the effort.

They are chasing API compatibility with a proprietary OS, that have 1000s of times the resource they do and hire some of the best programmers in the world.

Also it is essentially a knock off of what is already existing ... and Microsoft are pretty cheap if you know the right people to talk to.

For example ... Microsoft offer large discounts for Charities (most software companies offer charity discount ... most of the time all you must do is ask them whether they will consider it and they will usually do BOGOF or better).

If you want Open Source ... Linux and BSDs are a more mature product.

China has their own resources to manufacturer processors (which is not easy feat .. I was told in about 2003 that my university was one of the few places in the UK there were CPU fabs in the whole country), and Red Flag Linux I believe is already about.

Google wants everything via the Web ... so tbh as long as you have a browser they don't care.

Russia I don't know .. because I don't know much about their IT ... but I know they are investing in Linux and probably forking something like Redhat.

So there is really no incentive IMHO.

Edited 2011-09-13 20:52 UTC

Reply Score: 3

80% of real world usage?!
by Gullible Jones on Tue 13th Sep 2011 22:26 UTC
Gullible Jones
Member since:
2006-05-23

I can't see how such a statement could be considered anything other than absurd, however it is intended. It's been in development for over a decade, and it still has poor hardware support, zilcho security, and lacks all but the most basic operating system features.

ReactOS is not going anywhere. Not with a million euros, not with anything.

Reply Score: 2