Linked by Kevin Adams on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 19:17 UTC
ReactOS Jason Filby wrote to tell us: "ReactOS 0.1.0 has been released! ReactOS is an Open Source effort to develop a quality operating system that is compatible with Windows NT applications and drivers. In this release, among other new features and fixes, especially worth mentioning are the ability to boot from CD and self-hosting capabilities." For more infomation, go to the ReactOS website.
Order by: Score:
Nice but...
by No@one on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 20:14 UTC

I'm not trying to troll here, but..... why? If you want NT compatibility, why not provide your time and talent to the nice folks in the wine group?

I really think that the open source world could be far better off if we didnt duplicate _so_much_work.

Re: Nice but...
by FH on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 20:19 UTC

Try reading their site before you spout off.

>>We are also working with the WINE project to help bring a GUI to ReactOS.<<

For

Re: Nice but
by offtangent on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 21:43 UTC

Check out the window icon on http://www.reactos.com/img/winhello.PNG to get a clue.

Reactos
by Roberto J Dohnert on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 21:58 UTC

Downloaded the ISO couldnt get it to boot my system. USE WITH CARE

Looking Good
by Rick Caudill on Sun 2nd Feb 2003 22:34 UTC

Looking good! Looking good! Still a long way to go, but I definately commend you guys!

Looking bad
by Iggy Drougge on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 00:34 UTC

Why, oh why, is it that open source developers have to be not only bland and boring, but sometimes even utterly tasteless?
First they clone UNIX. Now they clone Windows. What's next? Cloning M$ Bob?

Re: looking bad
by Richard Fillion on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 00:45 UTC

Why, oh why, is it that people have to be not only stupid and vocal, but sometimes even condescending?

You dont like the project, fine, but shutup will ya? What do you develop may i ask? What makes you so important as to giving you the right to bash developers? Let them do what makes them happy.

I'm looking forward to it
by Charlie on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 01:05 UTC

I'm looking forward to trying it out when there's been a bit more progress.

I wonder what the final intentions are of reactos? A pixel for pixel clone? I'd love to see stuff like freetype built into reactos so that it doesn't clone nt, but surpass it.

Re: I'm looking forward to it
by Dave on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 01:14 UTC

>I'd love to see stuff like freetype built into reactos so that it doesn't clone nt, but surpass it.

Freetype is already built into win32k and used for font rendering IIRC (although the version is a bit old). There was talk of exporting freetype into an external dll so it can be updated more frequently. Run gditest.exe to se it in action.

RE: RE: Looking Bad
by tom6789 on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 02:25 UTC

>>You dont like the project, fine, but shutup will ya?

I'm not the original poster to your reply, but I don't like your attitude so I'll respond anyways. No I don't like it. No I won't shut up. Web boards are here for people to post opinions. You don't like opinions expressed? Piss off; your reading a goddamn webboard; what did you expect?

>>What do you develop may i ask?

Nothing. Your point?

>>What makes you so important as to giving you the right to bash developers?

Developers should love reading feedback (both good and bad) on webboards if they are so inclined.

>> Let them do what makes them happy.

I don't think a bad comment on OSnews webboard will fold up a project. And I'm sure any dev working on ReactOS will not lose any sleep over comments made here.

ReactOS is a waste of time. Its like FreeDOS: Projects like this are an eyesore on the OSS landscape. They are worked on for years and never complete and useful to select few at best. They are unimaginitive at best. Flame away or not. This conversation will be long dead and forgotten much like ReactOS. At the rate its being developed by time a significant level of NT 4 compat is achieved, only 4 people will need it.

On the other side of the coin. I am in awe of anybody that can create (or clone) an OS and wish I had half of their skill. I just think its too bad that the OSS community is so devoid of LEADER visionaries; who could harness the power of developers currently working their asses off on wasted projects like this and focus them on something truly useful.

Just my 2 pieces.

everyone's a critic
by Skipp on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 03:44 UTC

To Iggy and Tom:

I wonder how much flack the inventor of the wheel received? Every innovation starts small, even ReactOS. This may seem useless to you, but I am glad that these developers are "waisting their time"! Your comments could easily be said to any project in its infancy. Linux started out as a clone of Unix, a popular operating system at the time. Linux could not run a majority of the UNIX programs at the time, and *gasp* it also had no GUI. Should Linus and gang have stopped "waisting their time" and contributed to something useful too? Praise be to developers waisting their time on projects like this, for if they didn't exist, nothing new or interesting might ever happen! Thank you for your comments, but, I think they definately lack foresight.

Skipp

better this
by anonymous on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 04:23 UTC

than something as lame as BeOS.

Re: everyone's a critic
by Iggy Drougge on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 05:14 UTC

Don't dare compare ReactOS to the wheel. The wheel was a new paradigm. This is a copy (clone) of an imperfect wheel. What kind of response do you expect?

"Wow, that looks great, that square wheel of yours. It's so innovative, really. I suppose that the fact that it looks really much like Bill Grub's square wheel is just a coincidence, too. Really innovative. Keep up the good work."

Invention. How much do you invent by copying Windows? Nothing. Do you go around applauding every Taiwanese engineer because of all his inventions such as the transistor, the integrated circuit or the latest VGA card?

FYI, yes, I think Linus wasted his time. In hindsight, he even agrees.
Is this some kind of contest going on in the open-source world?
"If Linus can be so innovative, cloning UNIX and all, we'll prove that we can be even more innovative by cloning Windows! Behold the innovative nature of open source!"

but
by DavidGentle on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 05:25 UTC

why is innovation important to you (or anyone)?

If "innovation" is so hard for people other than "you" to understand, then why don't you go and write your own OS and show the OSS world how wrong they are to work on what they want to work on.

FreeDOS is fantastic. Soon it will have Fat32 support. later it will run protected mode. Once it covers that, It definitely has a future in embedded applications. THE OS IS TINY. Couple it with SEAL GUI, and you've got a multi-threaded, USB compatible, Fat32 reading, 32bit OS with a usable GUI, or command line that's absolutely TINY. Batch file programming is the easiest thing on earth, easier than writing scripts of any kind for any other OS. I only WISH command line Linux was half as easy to use and undertstand as DOS is.

There are still those of us who love Legacy software. Some businesses, still run it.

Re: but
by Iggy Drougge on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 05:51 UTC

Because I'm a neophile. So there.

Why ReactOS is important
by Dario on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 09:40 UTC

In a not-so-distant future, you will not be able to install WinNT4 in new machines. Perhaps you have some software/drivers that *requires* WinNT4.

Or the other way around; perhaps you need some hardware support for WinNt4 and couldn't make the driver because you have to patch the kernel (and you have no sources).

The ReactOS project gives a solution for those situations.

Just think about it...

P.S.: And is also interesting for the OS/2 community, as OS/2 *could* be implemented atop of ReactOS when there is no more OS/2 (right now, you have eCS to run OS/2 apps).

An innovative OS: Ununumium !
by >>Forward Agency on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 09:54 UTC

Hello, this is a simple introductory invitation, to surf the new Ununumium project website.

>>> WE'RE NOT AFFILIATED IN ANY WAY WITH UUU TEAM: SIMPLY WE LIKE IT, SO WE'RE TRYING TO SUPPORT IT IN SOME WAY !
(WE'RE ALSO ENCOURAGING DEVELOPERS TO MEET EACH OTHER FOR COMPARE THEIR WORKS AND IDEAS, BEING ABLE TO GROW TOGETHER IN MORE EFFICIENT AND COMPLETE WAY) <<<

"The Unununium Operating Engine is designed as a highly componentized system, where each component can be dynamically loaded, unloaded, replaced at runtime. This concept is pushed to the extreme, completely removing the presence of a kernel. The code is based on the VOiD architecture, originally used in the Axis4 Operating System."

"The creation of a project like ours involves the contributions of many people, each with their own personal and differing reasons for helping out. Some do it in order to learn more about assembly programming; others to explore the realm of operating system development, or to prove to the world that asm is suited for such tasks; yet others in the hope of being able to dump Windows and Linux."

Wanna learn more ? Check the official website:

HTTP://UUU.SOURCEFORGE.NET/

If you have questions, suggestions, constructive critics or you want join the project, drop an email to: CESARYANEZ@MYREALBOX.COM

Why UUU sucks
by Charlie on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 16:16 UTC

It's assembler... but not because it's assembler, but because it's x86 assembler.

I even suggested to them to try out tdasm, a platform independent assembler, but they were rude about it.

UUU simply won't take off. Too much of it is going to be platform dependent and machines are moving on with 64 bit architectures and all.

Re: Why UUU sucks
by Richard Fillion on Mon 3rd Feb 2003 17:35 UTC

Changing a topic on a channel isnt exactly NOT rude, you could have emailed our uuu-devel mailing list.

As far as Uuu not taking off...see if we care. We code it because we love coding it, not so that you can use it, but so that we can use it. Dont like it, fine, but we do.

It'll take many more years before the general public really starts adopting 64bit computers, the cost will just be way too much for a while.

As for a portable assembler...i cant possibly imagine how that could be better than a compiler. To take advantage of assembly you have to know the tricks behind the architecture. A trick that works well for x86 probably wont work taht well for Alpha. Not to mention the various things that the Alpha can do that the x86 cant and vice versa. What do you own thats not x86? Most people dont own anything else. Windows is x86 only (with minor exceptions), so is it worthless also? Most linux distributions only support x86, they useless?