ReactOS just released version 0.3.0 RC3 of their Windows compatible operating system. Their code audit is now 94.3% complete. You can get it from their download page.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-27
Granted at this time it is not suitable to replace anything including a server. However, once we get closer to 1.0 we will be able to run all samba tools. We already can run file and printing client samba tools and will soon (starting in 0.3.1) be including samba-tng command line tools in all our releases.
Member since:2006-04-17
Then once you're on samba, why would you use reactos
over linux for enterprise file serving?
Definitely not because it is faster or more scalable,
more stable, better tested, or better supported?
The only thing I can think of is where the win32 API is
required. If that is a critical requirement, then in
server space, any enterprise would be highly likely to
keep their existing NT installation, no?
Member since:2005-12-19
Look at vista, with increasing requirements for HW 3d
acceleration. Now consider that 3d drivers are closed
source, and that both nv and ati completely closed up
sources and specs after getting xbox contracts.
I thought one of the main points of React is binary compatibility with 2000/XP drivers. I don't see nVidia and ATI dropping support for 2000 and XP until LONG after Vista has been out. But it would be nice for stability if the majority of React drivers are open source ports from Linux.
Member since:2006-01-16
There are people out there that would rather spend the 500 euros for Windows Server 2003 before going with Linux as a file server because they don't want to have to learn "another operating system". So just because Linux can do the job doesn't mean people will automatically look at it.
About a reimplementation of NT having no use in the server space, well I disagree. Dave Cutler know what he was doing and NT has everything a good server OS needs, MS has just made some really bad decisions about where to go from the original design. From what I can tell Reactos has all those good features and with some effort somebody could make a really good server distro based on Reactos.
Member since:2005-07-06
There are people out there that would rather spend the 500 euros for Windows Server 2003
And what about the license costs?
That's a magnitude more.Even if you don't need support you have to pay big bucks.Now i could imagine if one doesn't need AD but just a file or webserver it would be much cheaper to order a linux/*BSD CD.
Member since:
2006-04-17
No way would it replace Linux+Samba as a fileserver /
AD server.
Look at the amount of resources being poured into Linux,
and the amount of work required in samba to implement a
compatible server.
No, a reimplemented NT really has no use in the server
space. As a client there should definitely be a niche,
though. Although I'll wager MS will step up efforts to
hamper this kind of thing like they do successfully with
AD/CIFS against samba.
Look at vista, with increasing requirements for HW 3d
acceleration. Now consider that 3d drivers are closed
source, and that both nv and ati completely closed up
sources and specs after getting xbox contracts.