Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Feb 2012 23:40 UTC, submitted by AmineKhaldi
ReactOS Oh ReactOS. This project has been with us for a very long time now, and since day one, I never really knew what to think of it. They always seem to be running at least 300 miles behind the Win32 bandwagon, but what they've accomplished so far is insanely impressive nonetheless. This new release comes with quite a lot of new stuff.
Order by: Score:
Pretty cool...
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 7th Feb 2012 23:47 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

...although to be fair, I don't expect much. I'll play around with it a bit, but I'm sure the fun will be short. It always is--because I always very quickly run into crashes. Last time I used it, it felt like it was approaching the stability of Win9x (which itself was not that good). I'm hoping these major bugs get squashed sooner or later... better sooner.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pretty cool...
by matthekc on Wed 8th Feb 2012 02:20 UTC in reply to "Pretty cool..."
matthekc Member since:
2006-10-28

Around the 2005 or 2006 I used to have a fairly decent P3 laptop it worked great on. Well great as long as you didn't expect more than a Windows 95 level of experience.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Pretty cool...
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 9th Feb 2012 07:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Pretty cool..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Why is it that when you say even the slightest criticism of an open-source project, you always seem destined to be modded down?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Pretty cool...
by MacTO on Thu 9th Feb 2012 08:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pretty cool..."
MacTO Member since:
2006-09-21

It's not what you said. It's how you said it. Saying that the developers need to address stability is one thing. Comparing its stability to Windows 95 is easily (mis)interpreted as trolling.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Pretty cool...
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 9th Feb 2012 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pretty cool..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Bleh. I guess comparing to another OS that it is is supposed to be mimicking as close to 100% as possible is somehow "wrong" then? Where the f*** is the logic in that? Maybe I should be comparing ReactOS to Mac OS 9 then? Or Linux? Or maybe even one of the BSDs? Then maybe I'd be modded down for trying to compare it to unlike operating systems. WTF? I mean... come on, seriously.

Yeah, yeah--you can say that "these days ReactOS is targeting Win2000". But I can say right back, sure, but it was originally targeting Win9x... and it has yet to get caught up fully to *either* target. No matter what Windows version it is targeting, it is Win32, which means both Win9x and WinNT (32-bit).

I say that it has has yet to surpass its predecessor from 1995 in terms of stability, what's so unfair about that? Seriously... is ReactOS trying to compete against something besides Win32 these days or something?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Pretty cool...
by Andre on Thu 9th Feb 2012 20:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Pretty cool..."
Andre Member since:
2005-07-06

Windows 9x has a totally different architecture then the NT family. So just saying it's Win32 is not really working. It would even be more adequate to compare it with NT 4.0 then Windows 95.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Pretty cool...
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 10th Feb 2012 00:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Pretty cool..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Well maybe I should've clarified myself by saying "Win32 API" which runs on both of the OSes that I mentioned...

Reply Score: 2

"300 miles behind the Win32 bandwagon"
by zima on Wed 8th Feb 2012 00:20 UTC
zima
Member since:
2005-07-06

At least we know where the Start Button will live on, right? (vs. http://www.osnews.com/story/25581/Microsoft_Removes_Start_Menu_Butt... ) And no Metro.

Sometimes I wonder what could happen if ReactOS were to be ~ready when corporate XP machines start to be decommissioned on a really massive scale*...
...nah, such places would probably at most run XP under virtualisation, I guess.

(* or maybe it is already happening, already a bit too late)

Reply Score: 10

Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

...nah, such places would probably at most run XP under virtualisation, I guess.


Yep. Several of our customers have been investigating that approach - Windows 7 and IE8/9 desktops for those apps that will certify on a modern desktop, and VMs running XP and IE6 for the legacy stuff.

Those people are never going to look at ReactOS, because even if it were perfectly compatible, they'd have no support from vendors.

Reply Score: 6

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Nice seeing a new release, some really good stuff in there too. For such a small amount of developers it's a really impressive achievement that they've gotten the project this far.


Those people are never going to look at ReactOS, because even if it were perfectly compatible, they'd have no support from vendors.

Well it could be a business opportunity for the ReactOS devs, however if ReactOS would reach a point where it could be used commercially as an alternative to say XP then Microsoft would hit it with the patent hammer faster than you can say -'oh shi..' .

Reply Score: 4

bhtooefr Member since:
2009-02-19

The good thing is, my understanding is that ReactOS is based in Russia.

So, it'll be significantly harder for Microsoft to sue, unless Microsoft sues ReactOS users (which, well... they've shown a willingness to do that before - see the whole SCO fiasco - as the old Slashdot troll went, "don't forget to pay your $699 licensing fees, you cock-smoking teabaggers!")

Reply Score: 2

fran Member since:
2010-08-06

I remember a story a while back where ReactOS lobbied the Russian government for funding. I wonder how this panned out.

http://www.reactos.org/ca/news_page_67.html

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Cryovat
by Cryovat on Wed 8th Feb 2012 00:35 UTC
Cryovat
Member since:
2012-01-11

Always glad to see some news from the alternative operating systems category. It feels like the trickle of news there is slowly drying out. ;)

Congratulations to the ReactOS team on their release! ;) I played around with the live image in QEMU, and as always, their work is impressive.

Edited 2012-02-08 00:35 UTC

Reply Score: 7

LiveCD
by robojerk on Wed 8th Feb 2012 01:40 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I always felt that if they could get the LiveCD portion working well enough, and had a way to build custom LiveCD, it would make for an excellent and legitimate alternative to WinPE, BartPE.

Reply Score: 8

Comment by stabbyjones
by stabbyjones on Wed 8th Feb 2012 04:15 UTC
stabbyjones
Member since:
2008-04-15

Don't think I'll ever need it personally but the progress is great.

This could be used by bank atm's and heaps of other devices which still run on windows xp.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by Anonymous Penguin
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 8th Feb 2012 05:31 UTC
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

I am impressed. Since the last time I saw it (probably years ago) the progress has been remarkable.
I wish I could really use it instead of Windows, but I use Windows only because of complex apps not available on a Mac. Thus I am afraid it is an impossible dream.

Edited 2012-02-08 05:33 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Anonymous Penguin
by Kivada on Wed 8th Feb 2012 06:13 UTC in reply to "Comment by Anonymous Penguin"
Kivada Member since:
2010-07-07

Haven't tried ReactOS in a VM or Wine http://winebottler.kronenberg.org
http://wiki.winehq.org/MacOSX
or Play On Mac http://playonmac.com/en/ to get your Windows apps to run without using Windows directly?

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

They are very complex applications, as I said. Some of them will run in Parallels.

Reply Score: 2

MajorTom Member since:
2005-07-09

WINE and all its by-products are doomed as long as they depend on X11. X11 on Mac OS X never showed much potential and hasn't changed in ten years, so to speak.

There isn't a strong WINE community on Mac OS X -- X11 was a temporary evil for running it, an implementation using Quartz (Mac OS X native display system) was coming. It was 2006 or 2007. I'm still waiting.

Reply Score: 1

Elv13 Member since:
2006-06-12

Well, it has changed. It have been replaced by XQuartz and it is based on recent Xorg code. It is also installed by default.

Reply Score: 2

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

WINE and all its by-products are doomed as long as they depend on X11.

Good that Wayland is well underway then ;)

Seriously, the ReactOS Win32 subsystem is largely Wine and it isn't running on X11. Wine itself will probably switch to a more modern display system when it becomes sensible to do so.

Spelling doom for a project that is nearing 2 decades of existence is funny though.

Reply Score: 2

Why?
by PieterGen on Wed 8th Feb 2012 13:25 UTC
PieterGen
Member since:
2012-01-13

Who needs ReactOs? I DO see the need for WINE, and I understand that WINE and ReactOs developers cooperate, which is a good thing.

But I can't see the need for ReactOs. If you need an OS to run Windows programs, why not use.. eh.. Windows?

Edit: in the longer run, the lack of safety of XP might be a problem. My solution would be to run it in a virtual box and kill that box (including all possible malware) when you're done.

So: favourite OS > Virtual Machine > XP > programs

Edited 2012-02-08 13:27 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why?
by orestes on Wed 8th Feb 2012 13:30 UTC in reply to "Why?"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Licensing costs, licensing terms, or disgreements with recent design choices by Microsoft spring to mind immediately. There's also a significant case to be made for having the ability to modify the OS as needed and having multiple potential venues of support on a timetable that isn't controlled by a single corporation.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Why?
by siride on Thu 9th Feb 2012 05:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Anyone for whom the licensing costs would be prohibitive will be a large enough organization to afford the licensing costs, especially when that cost is basically built into the price of modern PCs.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why?
by Vanders on Wed 8th Feb 2012 14:33 UTC in reply to "Why?"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

ReactOS is to Windows as Linux is to UNIX. It's that simple.

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Why?
by ebasconp on Wed 8th Feb 2012 23:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

ReactOS is to Windows as Linux is to UNIX. It's that simple.


Not as accurate; maybe fifteen years ago, but not now. Nowadays the leading Unix-like technology is being written in Linux before than being ported to the real UNIXes and BSDs. In several cases, the ports are second-class citizens because not all UNIXes implemented several things built in Linux (udev comes to my mind).

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by The123king on Thu 9th Feb 2012 00:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
The123king Member since:
2009-05-28

Surely that even more of a reason for the existence on ReactOS? A free software implementation of the win32 and NT API is able able to be tweaked and changed in ways Microsoft wouldn't even dream.

Plus, a complete cleanroom rewrite of Windows Server 2003 (as ReactOS is "cloning") is likely to produce a cleaner, more efficient and lightweight system than Microsoft's own Windows Server 2003, as the codebase that Microsoft has dates back to the days of Microsoft's OS/2 v3, which NT evolved from.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by Vanders on Thu 9th Feb 2012 11:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

"ReactOS is to Windows as Linux is to UNIX. It's that simple.

Not as accurate; maybe fifteen years ago, but not now.
"

Maybe, perhaps, but Linux certainly started out as a UNIX clone.

Nowadays the leading Unix-like technology is being written in Linux before than being ported to the real UNIXes and BSDs. In several cases, the ports are second-class citizens because not all UNIXes implemented several things built in Linux (udev comes to my mind).


I'm not so sure that's true. Solaris had dtrace and ZFS before Linux developers responded with SystemTap and Btrfs, neither of which have achieved feature parity yet.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Why?
by ebasconp on Thu 9th Feb 2012 13:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

I'm not so sure that's true. Solaris had dtrace and ZFS before Linux developers responded with SystemTap and Btrfs, neither of which have achieved feature parity yet.


Yes, you are right on this and other technologies being developed in the BSD/Unix fields.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by orestes on Thu 9th Feb 2012 15:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Solaris would like a word with you.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why?
by TemporalBeing on Wed 8th Feb 2012 16:05 UTC in reply to "Why?"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

Who needs ReactOs? I DO see the need for WINE, and I understand that WINE and ReactOs developers cooperate, which is a good thing.


They do a bit more than cooperate. Without ReactOS, you wouldn't have Wine/WineHq.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why?
by bogomipz on Wed 8th Feb 2012 16:53 UTC in reply to "Why?"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

The only need I have for Windows is to run proprietary VPN clients required when connecting to our customers' networks. This will never be possible with WINE. I currently run XP virtualized, but as someone else mentioned, this requires a license (just to connect to a VPN...)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why?
by fithisux on Wed 8th Feb 2012 20:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

The only need I have for Windows is to run proprietary VPN clients required when connecting to our customers' networks.


The only need I have for Windows is to run current FOSS products. Addditionally some of them are windows only (miranda/infrarecorder/notepad++/cdrtfe/peazip/7zip) I wish they were cross-platform.

There are linux equivalents, but on windows some of them are really nice.In any case I wouldn't lose my sleep if windows went down tomorrow. I am usually on my linux desktop but ReactOS is a good FOSS home for this FOSS work.

If Firefox/Libreoffice/Erlang/Sharpdevelop and some other MSVC only FOSS were buidable with mingw on ReactOS, the world would be a better place.

I would have no problem to run ReactOS on a VM (but I need a new HW/ currently on a D510 atom with opensuse 12.1_x86-64)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why?
by boxy on Wed 8th Feb 2012 21:00 UTC in reply to "Why?"
boxy Member since:
2011-06-20

Who needs ReactOs? I DO see the need for WINE, and I understand that WINE and ReactOs developers cooperate, which is a good thing.

But I can't see the need for ReactOs. If you need an OS to run Windows programs, why not use.. eh.. Windows?

To answer the question of why:

1) Why not
2) Just because
3) No licensing costs
4) Open source implementation
4a) Not just of another *nix, but a completely different kernel
5) Binary compatibility meaning any existing drivers should 'just work'
6) Educational value
7) Do I really need to keep going?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Why?
by siride on Thu 9th Feb 2012 05:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Yes, you really should keep going. Unless you were making a joke, that list was not at all convincing.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why?
by bebop on Thu 9th Feb 2012 02:33 UTC in reply to "Why?"
bebop Member since:
2009-05-12

Why would you come to a site that's main purpose is to talk about operating systems (alternatives in particular) and then ask why we are talking about an operating system?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Why?
by zima on Tue 14th Feb 2012 23:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't think he really asked that - more like wondered what's the point of that particular project (which falls under "talking about an OS"), a perfectly valid question and to which answers seem to be... vague.

Anyway, in regards to "a site that's main purpose is to talk about operating systems (alternatives in particular)" ...I don't know, have you seen the main page lately, how many news are about alternative OS in particular? (note I don't count Android, or Linux in general, as such)
Indy OS scene seems mostly dead ...seems it was a relatively short burst before people gave up / fully accepted the field is largely delineated already / it got boring.

Edited 2012-02-15 00:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Finally!
by Hussein on Wed 8th Feb 2012 14:21 UTC
Hussein
Member since:
2008-11-22

I've been following ReactOS since 0.3 and had high hopes that it could reach a usable state soon. 6 years later and still we're not there. Thankfully during the same time Wine improved considerably and I do use CrossOver to run some Windows apps now and then.

With the way things are going ReactOS will never replace Windows in any sense, which is a shame because I wanted it to reach that critical point where it can be a drop-in replacement for a segment of the population, not necessarily everyone. ReactOS is an amazing project but I guess somethings are harder than imagined.

Reply Score: 1

niche OS related news
by fran on Wed 8th Feb 2012 14:45 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

I browsed a lot of niche OS sites lately scouring for news to submit.
Some of the reasoning below might be false. Reason some sites mainly update news through mailing lists and not on the site itself.
But here are my general impression.

Seems like the last of the golden OS hobby years ended in 2009.

Jnode
Last news post 01/29/2009
http://www.jnode.org/node/2879

Coyotos
Last news post 16 May 2008
http://www.coyotos.org/

DexOS
No front end news items.
Forum not much help
http://dex.7.forumer.com/

HelenOS
Some news end of Jan 2012 about a meeting.
http://www.helenos.org/

Hurd
Difficult to scour news events from this site.
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html

Inferno
Don't have a news section but a mailing list.
Don't know how active that is.
http://www.vitanuova.com/news/newsgroup.html

Kolibri OS
Last release in 2009
http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Main_Page


http://www.l4hq.org/
Has current news.
"The L4 community had some news last month.
NICTA and Open Kernel Labs have announced a joint public release of the formally-verified seL4 microkernel. The release, for non-commercial and evaluation use, contains seL4 kernel binaries for ARM and x86, documentation, user-level example code, x86 Linux on top of seL4, and the formal specification of the kernel for the ARM platform."

MenuetOS
Site not very news friendly.
Most .x1 "Bugfixes and improvements"
Mailing list would probably be best here to scour for news.
http://www.menuetos.net/

MonaOS
Last news not to long ago. Aug 5
http://www.monaos.org/

Plan9
Mailing list has news.
Feb saw some news release me thinks.
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9/

Puredarwin
Not quite sure. The news does not list dates.
The attachement to the last news item is dated to 2009 though.
http://www.puredarwin.org/developers/qemu


StormOS
Some news Oct 2011 about a collaboration with Debian.
http://www.stormos.org/

Capros
Not easy to glance news from the site.
http://www.capros.org/

SkyOS
Last news seem to be 2008

Breadbox
Last news 2009
http://www.breadbox.com/news.asp

Visopsys
Has a news section and has current news events.
http://visopsys.org/about/news.php

Unununium
Some news but not very meaty.
http://unununium.org/

Maybe these project has current developments.
It is just not that easy to find.
And also there is other projects not listed here.

Edited 2012-02-08 14:46 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE: niche OS related news
by zima on Wed 8th Feb 2012 15:13 UTC in reply to "niche OS related news"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

And I believe L4 doesn't really belong on a list of niche OS projects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family

L4 is widely used; Open Kernel Labs claims deployment of one billion L4 kernels. ( http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/development/42934 deployed in more than one billion mobile handsets )
#Commercial_deployment
In November 2005, NICTA announced that Qualcomm was deploying NICTA's L4 version on their Mobile Station Modem chipsets. This led to the use of L4 in mobile phone handsets on sale from late 2006


It seems to run radio stack and/or isolate it from the "user OS" - so for example many (most?) Android phones might be also running L4, by the virtue of using Qualcomm chipsets.

Edited 2012-02-08 15:21 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: niche OS related news
by sourcerer on Thu 9th Feb 2012 18:44 UTC in reply to "niche OS related news"
sourcerer Member since:
2012-02-09


Kolibri OS
Last release in 2009
http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Main_Page

Didn't you noticed "Nightly builds" link? Last version was build at 6 Feb 2012. Few days ago was added driver for Intel videocards. Also, Kolibri has tons of new ports.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: niche OS related news
by fran on Fri 10th Feb 2012 18:37 UTC in reply to "RE: niche OS related news"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Did not notice it.
Nice to hear about the progress on Kolibri. You must submit pal.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: niche OS related news
by sourcerer on Fri 10th Feb 2012 18:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: niche OS related news"
sourcerer Member since:
2012-02-09

In fact, we're afraid that new distributive can't be stable yet, so we don't publish new version yet. Previous stable version was 0.7.7.0 (svn revision ~1350). Today's nightly build (svn revision ~2350) should have number at least 0.8.5.0 because was added very important things (ext2/3 support, Intel video support, HD audio support, new mutexes, new disk subsystem, ACPI, new almost fully compliant POSIX compatiblity RTL, PE DLLs, tons of new ports). But all that features aren't well-tested. We are shorthanded and need new developers and testers, but it's hard to find them.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: niche OS related news
by fran on Fri 10th Feb 2012 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: niche OS related news"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

That is very nice features added.
If i'm not mistaken Kolibri is mostly written in machine language.
Does this make finding contributors even more difficult?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: niche OS related news
by sourcerer on Fri 10th Feb 2012 19:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: niche OS related news"
sourcerer Member since:
2012-02-09

Kernel is written entirely in assembly, and 80% of software too. But API is very easy, and assembly coding for Kolibri is much easier than C coding with WinAPI. Also, we have ports of C, Lua, Python and Basic, and cross-compilers for C++ and FreePascal. I did few ports by myself, and I think that few new ports of non-assembly software (Java, AbiWord and WebKit, for example) would be nice.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: niche OS related news
by fran on Fri 10th Feb 2012 19:41 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: niche OS related news"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Would like to pick your brain some more:-)
I saw Menuet has closed source it's 64bit version.

Would like to know your thoughts on the challenges and advantages of a possible 64bit version of Kolibri.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: niche OS related news
by sourcerer on Sat 11th Feb 2012 05:37 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: niche OS related news"
sourcerer Member since:
2012-02-09

Yes, Menuet64 is closed-source and non-free for commercial use. Also, mp3 player for Menuet64 isn't free too. Menuet32 is died. That's why we forked off. Now Kolibri kernel has not more than 20% Menuet code.

Our developers have thoughts about SMP and 64 bits. One of possibilities: launch one core in 32 bit mode, and second (and may be others) in 64 bit mode. So, with such technology you can launch both 32 and 64 bit applications without any problems and compatibility layers. 32 bit mode is enough for many desktop applications, and 64 bit mode is for apps using math library, for example.

Reply Score: 1

They are far, far behind
by twitterfire on Wed 8th Feb 2012 15:10 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

There are at least 6 years since I discovered this project. I hoped that they'll close the gap but they were always far behind Windows. Windows is a moving target and even if they'll come up with a fully functional Windows XP alternative, by that time Windows 9 or maybe 10 will be released and will have very little in common with NT 5.1/ Windows XP.

I don't know why this project makes very little progress. Look at Haiku and BeOs. Haiku not only reached BeOs compatibility but even surpassed old BeOs in terms of quality.

Reply Score: 2

RE: They are far, far behind
by zima on Wed 8th Feb 2012 15:40 UTC in reply to "They are far, far behind"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

More love? (towards lost darling, BeOS)

Whereas with ReactOS... not only the original is around and doing fine, I guess most of the potential "in love" devs aren't that much into OSS and/or would rather aim to work at Microsoft.

Reply Score: 2

RE: They are far, far behind
by ebasconp on Thu 9th Feb 2012 00:07 UTC in reply to "They are far, far behind"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

I don't know why this project makes very little progress.


You cannot compare having a bunch of passionated, skilled but volunteer developers that dedicate some of their spare time reverse-engineering Windows and writing ReactOS with having hundredths of full-time employees that have all the internal APIs well documented.

I think that ReactOS should look at the amazing system they have implemented, starting to make it stable with the features it has right now and start to grow in its own direction; South America, Africa and all the developing countries would be nice markets for OSes like this.

Getting the level of functionality that Windows has (that reinvents itself every 4 or 5 years) is just an unreachable utopia.

Edited 2012-02-09 00:08 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: They are far, far behind
by znby on Thu 9th Feb 2012 13:44 UTC in reply to "They are far, far behind"
znby Member since:
2012-02-03

Windows is a moving target and even if they'll come up with a fully functional Windows XP alternative, by that time Windows 9 or maybe 10 will be released and will have very little in common with NT 5.1/ Windows XP.


If anything, this is one of the reasons why ReactOS is desirable. There's a huge amount of software that runs on Windows XP, and a lot of people (particularly in the business world) are dependent on the OS behaving/operating in a particular way. Newer versions of Windows are changing a lot, and this has caused problems in the past (and will continue to do so) so it would make sense to have an open OS that will be available/supported after MS finally kills off XP.

At the same time, you could argue that by the time ReactOS is usable, WINE will probably cover most bases, and that people may have moved on from XP. Even then, it will still be relevant in the way FreeDOS is.

Reply Score: 1

Ignorant comment
by earksiinni on Wed 8th Feb 2012 15:17 UTC
earksiinni
Member since:
2009-03-27

Caveat emptor: I have never attempted to design an operating system.

But, I've followed ReactOS's changelogs assiduously since God knows when, and it always strikes me that they're constantly making infrastructural improvements to their build system, CVS, testing framework, etc. As an OS dev layman, these things strike me as things that should've been done from the get go, and each time it feels like, "Aha! Now the floodgates will open and they'll really be able to start progressing by leaps and bounds!" ...And time and time again, I've been disappointed.

I mean, a kernelspace testing infrastructure as part of the last release--isn't it about time for such a major project?

Do my sentiments make any sense? I don't mean to criticize, I'm genuinely ignorant and curious.

At any rate, kudos to the team! I'm a big fan and wish them all the best.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ignorant comment
by TemporalBeing on Wed 8th Feb 2012 16:11 UTC in reply to "Ignorant comment"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

Caveat emptor: I have never attempted to design an operating system.

But, I've followed ReactOS's changelogs assiduously since God knows when, and it always strikes me that they're constantly making infrastructural improvements to their build system, CVS, testing framework, etc. As an OS dev layman, these things strike me as things that should've been done from the get go, and each time it feels like, "Aha! Now the floodgates will open and they'll really be able to start progressing by leaps and bounds!" ...And time and time again, I've been disappointed.


Well, if they are continuously changing it, then that could hinder developers as once developers get comfortable enough to try to participate, it changes. So it bites both ways.

That said, as you build out, you learn of new things you need to do; new capabilities you need; etc. I haven't followed them closely, so I don't know how much of is change for change sake or how much of it is to meet real needs, etc.

Reply Score: 2

Great Idea
by jefro on Wed 8th Feb 2012 16:34 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

Shame not enough good people supported it. Should be on version 10 by now. Using wine instead brings more interaction so this was the proper way to try to use windows drivers and programs I think. Wine was a cure for those who ran other OS's mainly and needed a small subset of windows applications.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by neticspace
by neticspace on Wed 8th Feb 2012 18:24 UTC
neticspace
Member since:
2009-06-09

This will bring more attention to the Windows users around the world. Might as well make a server edition of ReactOS in the near future.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by neticspace
by zima on Thu 9th Feb 2012 16:29 UTC in reply to "Comment by neticspace"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm sure it will give just as fruitful results as Syllable Server...

(and while you're quite possibly technically correct in the first sentence, the "more attention" increases would likely be measured in per mils, at best)

Reply Score: 2

Hope yet for ReactOS.
by tanishaj on Thu 9th Feb 2012 01:10 UTC
tanishaj
Member since:
2010-12-22

The need for ReactOS is clear. There is some software that will never run on WINE. Also, there is some hardware for which only Windows drivers are available.

You could just buy Windows but ReactOS brings all the benefits of Open Source. Look at the response to MS introducing the Metro UI and removing the start button. If I was a business that did not want to retrain all my employees, I might choose to stay on the old interface if I had more control over the code.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Hope yet for ReactOS.
by zima on Tue 14th Feb 2012 23:36 UTC in reply to "Hope yet for ReactOS."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

You probably wouldn't be a very good business (boss?), if micromanaging about niche tech toys like that instead of focusing on the, well, business... (parts of which can be done, at worst, in virtualised XP environment)

Edited 2012-02-14 23:52 UTC

Reply Score: 2

ReactOS will be important in the end
by tanishaj on Thu 9th Feb 2012 01:18 UTC
tanishaj
Member since:
2010-12-22

Just as Linux now evolves more quickly than the old UNIXs, ReactOS may someday outrun MS. That may sound fanciful but I remember the Solaris (and other) guys saying the same thing.

The problem ReactOS faces is that it may be sometime before it sees any commercial backing. Linux really benefited from commercial support, first home-grown and then from more established players.

Still, I would hardly bet against ReactOS at this point even though it's day in the sun might be a way off.

Reply Score: 2

Will Dev accelerate?
by tanishaj on Thu 9th Feb 2012 01:37 UTC
tanishaj
Member since:
2010-12-22

ReactOS is taking a long time but I think it may evolve faster than history suggests.

First, it seems much better managed lately. It used to seem quite hostile to users and potential new devs. After many years of failing they finally were accepted into the Goggle summer of code. They have even been making a little money lately here and there.

Second, people may not realize it but they lost a lot of time doing an audit. They were worried at one point that somebody may have contributed MS code so they spent almost a year vetting the code. They lost not only time but some devs in the process. This is now behind them.

Third, they seem open to cooperation with other projects. For example they just got USB support from adapting code from Haiku and I know they contributed patches back. They also improved the regular networking code using code from elsewhere I believe. Of course, they also codevelop a lot of code with WINE and they have project to enable using more of the WINE code as is.

Finally, I think they will attract more users and devs. ReactOS is on the verge of becoming much more useful. USB support, wireless, sound, etc make running it on real hardware a possibility. Also real software like Firefox, OpenOffice, and .NET are beginning to work.

There is real work to do but we may be pleasantly surprised by what apps start to work over the next few years. The guts of Windows have not been changing as much as some people think and many apps are written to work on versions of Windows that are ten years old.

One final note about the constant rejigging of build systems. I know one of the big pushes has been to get ReactOS to build with both GCC and Microsoft's compiler. That effort largely complete and could also accelerate development from here.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Will Dev accelerate?
by earksiinni on Thu 9th Feb 2012 05:40 UTC in reply to "Will Dev accelerate?"
earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

Great points.

Reply Score: 2

alternative to Wine
by FunkyELF on Thu 9th Feb 2012 14:37 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

I just tried installing Photomatix in Wine to no avail on Fedora 16.
I got a giant red X across the menu bar.
I couldn't re-size or move the MDI windows.
Unusable.

For my photos I use rawtherapee and GIMP. Both are excellent applications. But for HDR nothing comes close to what is available on Windows or Mac. I don't want to buy a Mac, build a hackintosh, or even get it running under VirtualBox because I'd still have to pay Apple for the OS. Looks like ReactOS is my last resort before having to actually buy an OS.

I hope Photomatix works well under ReactOS on VirtualBox and that I can easily move files between there and my host.

Reply Score: 2

It's boring
by twitterfire on Thu 9th Feb 2012 18:32 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

It seems to me that in 2000 - 2008 there were much more interesting os-es being in active development and even interesting and exciting features added to old OS-es.

It's just me that finds the current OS landscape grey and boring?

Reply Score: 2

on 3 oses
by W__W on Thu 9th Feb 2012 19:27 UTC
W__W
Member since:
2005-10-20

I'am long follower of alternative OS's. KolibriOS is defenitely alive, though don't have releases for 2+ years, since we wait for completion of USB driver (in asm...) before major release. I admit that based on svn activity, ReactOS is more active then Kolibri and Haiku, but activity can be diffirent - copying of Windows API and creating OS from scratch differs a lot.

Reply Score: 1

Alt Oses Passion
by Tanner on Fri 10th Feb 2012 16:26 UTC
Tanner
Member since:
2005-07-06

Passion in alternative oses is a complex thing.
I followed in the past EVERY single news about a new, fabulous alternative operating system and dreamed about a better IT world only to escape the boring and frustration of using Windows or a "then horrible and unfriendly" os (Linux anyone?).

Now things are changed, we are all olders and mature.
I work with Windows, I evangelize Linux and 1 Month ago I bought a Mac to develop.

The only interesting projects out now, IMHO, are Haiku and ReactOS (in the sake of ol' better world dreamings) and Visopsys for diagnostics on malfunctioning systems.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Alt Oses Passion
by zima on Tue 14th Feb 2012 23:59 UTC in reply to "Alt Oses Passion"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

As always, younger rebellious people, inevitably seeing "wrong" with the world, got new toys back then (PCs); fluctuations of a new unknown & exciting field.

...but just like with, say, model airplanes it calmed down after a while, after enthusiasm died out, project goals mostly revealed themselves as overenthusiastic.

Oh well, life goes on & now young devs seem to be on the mobile bandwagon, we'll see what this one will give.

Edited 2012-02-15 00:02 UTC

Reply Score: 2