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."
Thread beginning with comment 245951
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

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 Parent Score: 4

Chuck Norris Member since:

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 Parent Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:

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 Parent Score: 5