ReactOS 0.2 Final is now available. ReactOS is an Open Source operating system that aims to be compatible with Microsoft(R) Windows(R) applications and drivers. The main functionality change is that of booting into the graphical ROS Explorer. The changelog details the complete list of changes for this release and screenshots are available.
ReactOS 0.2 Final released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
for the release:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=6553
(the reactos site currently suffers from the /. effect by getting attention of heise.de)
if you use vmware you could use one of those images:
http://129.125.140.135/~w3seek/
(they aren’t the release though, but compiled from current cvs)
It seems their aims is not only to be compatible with MS Windows, but to look like MS Windows too! You even have to click on “Start” to shut your computer down |8-)
> You even have to click on “Start” to shut your computer
> down |8-)
I’m a bit surprised at people continually picking up on this. I suppose it might actually look funny to some people the first time they encounter it, but if you think about it, even for shutting down a computer you have to start somewhere…
Yes, it is our goal to be usable to for people who now use windows, like your neighbour or grandmother. Those people shouldn’t need to go through another learning curve. If you don’t like it you can always use another shell though… (or even boot in textmode, and start gui progs, like in al prior ros-versions
)
Because they have the right to do whatever they want. If people WANT to work on ReactOS instead of wine, then let them be. You have no right whatsoever to stop them.
I think these guys have a much better chance at doing the Windows emulation thing properly 🙂 You would still have to manage a Linux system seperately, with all the slowdown of emulating the API on top of Linux…
I think that the chance to convert billions to a free OS outweighs the practicality of it
> Why not put effort into WINE instead, and use an already
> mature kernel like Linux or FreeBSD?
If you look at the front page of the http://www.reactos.com you will see that:
“ReactOS has always planned to work with the WINE project to share as much programming effort as possible. This will mainly concern User Mode DLLs and will happen once ReactOS’s Kernel Mode areas are more complete, as those areas form the underlying infrastructure. Other areas of cooperation lie in applications and testing suites.”
As for using Linux or FreeBSD kernel. They intend to make the OS binary compatible for drivers as well as applications. Using the Linux or FreeBSD kernel binary compatible for drivers would be quite a bit of work, in addition to this, they also have complete control over the denstiny of their kernel, this is something they wouldn’t have with another kernel, unless they forked it – in which case it would eventually be a different kernel anyway so creating their own to do exactly what they want makes sense.
well, reactOS is a bit too loud name for a simple shell. two letters in it – OS, proposes this being a stand-alone, self-contained OS, but guess what, it’s far from that.
it’s like calling a notepad-type-program a complete office suite.
Uh, wait a minute, I thought it WAS a standalone OS.
when i saw the headline thought it was too. that’s what im talking about.
I was under the impression they where using their own kernel… in that case it would be an OS, the shell came later.
It IS a standalone OS: you can run it without having any other OS installed on your computer. Of course, this being a 0.2 version, it is far from complete yet.
Gé van Geldorp, ReactOS developer.
i have no clue
Cu is talking about ROS Explorer which can be used as a shell for Windows as far as I can tell.
ReactOS itself is a standalone OS as other have pointed out.
Your guess is as good as mine. What I know is that we aim to be a complete replacement for Microsoft Windows, you should be able to run standard, unmodified, Windows programs on ReactOS and use standard, unmodified, Windows drivers for your devices.
Let me set it clear. We have our kernel that is a 100% clone of Microsoft Windows NT/2K/XP/Blah. Most of our Win32 subsystem comes in the help of code ported from WINE back to a Windows/ReactOS host that then sits on top of our kernel. The goal of ReactOS is to be a 100% compatible replacment for Windows. Meaning you can take any part of Windows or ReactOS and swap them out. We work with the WINE project and many of the WINE and ReactOS interact on a regular basis.
ReactOS is a clone of Windows as Linux is a clone of Unix…..
Now for the question “why would you want to clone Windows?”
Why the hell would you want to clone Unix.
-sedwards
ReactOS is a cool little project.
sorry, i was mistaken
I want to wish you guys good luck, you’re doing a terrific job. One of my concerns however is that Microsoft could take legal action against you. Are there any plans to lessen the chance of legal action?
Now for the question “why would you want to clone Windows?”
Why the hell would you want to clone Unix.
Great line! Keep up the good work, at least you’re copying something people want to use.
I Know the Homepage since very early Stages – and interesting
to look further – well, but when we can count with a 1.0 Release? Somewhere in 2006/2008?
ReactOS is a really nice try – to run standart Apps based
on a FREE Windows Clone – think about especially on the
3rd World and their poor old Hardware – will it run with them?
Also – let’s say about ReactOS 1.0 will be avialable theoretically in late 2005 – so NT4 Functionality about 10 Years after Microsoft!
Quick question: Are you guys planning to ever refactor some bits of the Windows architecture? Most of the NT architecture is pretty nice, but some stuff that has been done since NT 3.x is a bit dubious. I can understand that you would focus on compatibility first, but maybe down the road, it’d be nifty to see an OS that did NT like it was meant to be done
You are right, there are some parts of the architecture which seem a bit dubious. However, the current focus is very much on compatibility. We try to stay away from re-inventing another filesystem for example.
But this is an open source project. It’s not possible to say what people will want to contribute. The main thing is that we need to maintain binary compatibility with existing applications and binaries. If a contribution advances the project and doesn’t break that compatibility it will be gratefully accepted.
Gé van Geldorp.
> Also – let’s say about ReactOS 1.0 will
> be avialable theoretically in late 2005 –
> so NT4 Functionality about 10 Years after
> Microsoft!
A few months ago the was a screenshot posted running Mono in ReactOS. I don’t think that NT4 did run .NET apps.
Maybe once Longhorn is released ReactOS + Mono are a good alternative.
It’s nice that it even runs on QEMU ( http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/ ).
It’s pretty usable though a bit slow, especially font rendering is so slow that you can watch rendering…
Despite that I routinely get BSODs (funny to meet them again) talking about not using existing bug codes it’s a nice OS.
Funnily the mouse cursor is more responsive than under Win98.
P.S.: Nice boot screen.
This project has made some good progress over the past year. I applaude the efforts of the ReactOS team.
Maybe (a completed) ReactOS could take some of the users that would otherwise have picked up Linux. Since ReactOS will always have open apis, I don’t see how it really matters if a large number of people keep using the windows architecture but with ReactOS.
Good luck to them anyway.
Is the goal to be compatible with 95, 98, NT 4, 2000, XP, or all of them?
Also, what kind of time line are the developers looking at? When do they expect to achieve their goal? How many years for compatibility with 98 apps, and how many years for compatibility with XP apps?
It just seems like such a huge task, that one immeadietly expects no usable results till 2010. I mean, if it can take MS 5 years or so to come out with a new version of their OS, when they have a bunch of programmers working full-time on it, imagine how long it would take just a couple of developers doing it in their part-time.
However, they’ve come so far in such a short period of time, that I honestly no longer have any idea how long it would take. They’ve blown me away.
Just curious how the developers plan on tackling the DirectX issue? I mean, to recreate the entire DirectX api has got to be so difficult (while maintaining speed and features).
Is it something they plan on recreating, and if so, do they expect to be able to succeed in getting it to run as good?
Does anyone remember that Freedows project that made all the ruckus many moons ago that only seemed to produce updated websites purporting their own greatness? Its truly great to see this OS moving along, i’m very impressed as i can imagine recreating what Microsoft has built to be very tedious and difficult at the least.
Great line! Keep up the good work, at least you’re copying something people want to use.
I’m a person. Linus Torvalds is a person. Together, we’re people. I want to use Linux. Linus Torvalds wants to use Linux. Therefore, people want to use Linux.
The screenshot looks cool and much similar to windows 98.
But I find very little apps listed in your website to be compatiable with Reactos.
Can I run Internet expolrer, Yahoo messenger 5, etc…
or what are the major windows applicatins supported.
> But I find very little apps listed in your website to be
> compatiable with Reactos.
ReactOS is in a very early state of development. It already runs some windows applications out of the box and more will be supported in the future. Until then, don’t rely on using it for anything except development and testing.
> Can I run Internet expolrer, Yahoo messenger 5, etc…
> or what are the major windows applicatins supported.
Go home and stop trolling.
Whats the situation like with binary Windows drivers? would it be possible to retrofit a “comptibility” layer which will allow Windows drivers to be able to get loaded when running a *BSD/*NIX like how *BSD can load Linux modules?
This is mainly from the point of view that most of the time *NIX/*BSD support the hardware but in cerntain cases, especially with exotic hardware like capture cards and so forth, compatibility ranges from alright to “it doesn’t work and so support anytime soon as the hardware vendor is a [profanity]”.
” but if you think about it, even for shutting down a computer you have to start somewhere… ”
Oh, for Gods Sake!
M$ aopologists really stretch credibility.
I’m a person. Linus Torvalds is a person. Together, we’re people. I want to use Linux. Linus Torvalds wants to use Linux. Therefore, people want to use Linux.
I’m a person. Bill Gates is a person. Together we’re people. I would never touch Linux. Bill Gates would never touch Linux. Therefore, people don’t want to touch Linux.
Well, personally, i think the startbutton might be a bit unlogical, but i don’t think to have three buttons like in early chicago builds would be better
On the compatibility issue, most apps don’t work yet, because ReactOS hasn’t implemented everything yet. However, since this release some apps begin to do, which gives much hope for the feature. Apps which have been reported to run (some with little modificition, or with dll’s from wine)
WinEmbed (stripped down mozilla)
mirc 4 (without much functionality, since network isn’t ready)
trillian
winamp (pre 1.0 version, but still
)
winrar 2.0
setup.exe from the win xp cdrom
win xp notepad.exe
solitaire
reactos explorer
some other apps that come with reactos
passwordkeeper
win95 procesviewer
xaos 3.1
some screenshots can be seen at:
http://129.125.140.135/~mark/ros/
http://129.125.140.135/~ravelo/
http://wiki.osdev.info/index.php?%5B%5BScreenShot%2FRea…
Mark
Hi Mark,
I know it’s a very huge task to re-create such an OS Type,
but any guessing about “when it’s done?” 4 to 6 years or earlier?
If the developer team still have the time and
nerves to finish it..i hope so someday.
thomas
I’am also a part-time sysadmin for a small company where only a handful of applications are used (accounting, wordprocessing etc.). Turns out we have pirate copies of Windows2000 and users for some reason don’t want XPs – I would love to find myself in a situation where I could simply install some freeware Win2000 clone, even though not perfect.
, intead of buying licenses for old OS so we can use what 3 apps (all legal). So… one *can* dream!!
There already is such a compatiblity layer for Linux, enabling binary Windows driver loading.
I don’t remember the URL but iirc there’s a post on slashdot about it. Go search for yourself.
> There already is such a compatiblity layer for Linux,
> enabling binary Windows driver loading.
> I don’t remember the URL but iirc there’s a post on
> slashdot about it. Go search for yourself.
It’s named Captive and it’s made by Jan Kratochvil, but that allows only running file system drivers from Windows on Linux. There’s also another project on sf.net for loading windows network drivers on Linux (search for it yourself :-).
> Just curious how the developers plan on tackling the
> DirectX issue? I mean, to recreate the entire DirectX
> api has got to be so difficult (while maintaining speed
> and features).
It’s not as hard as you think, because most of the actual work is in drivers and almost nothing is emulated. So if we talk about hardware accelerated Direct3D/DirectDraw support, it could be implemented relatively quickly. DirectSound would be a bit harder and know barely nothing about it’s architecture and DirectShow can be taken from Wine with not so big effort.
> Is it something they plan on recreating, and if so, do
> they expect to be able to succeed in getting it to run
> as good?
In long term, we plan to do a complete clone of DirectX, because the M$ redistributable version comes with very restrictive license.
Filip Navara, part-time ReactOS developer
English word ‘Start’ could mean a beginning of work.
But in a Russian version of Windows it translated
as ‘Pusk’, which is much worse then English version.
It doesen’t mean a beginning of work. In real life this word means launching a rocket or an engineering process,
reactor. This word is better could be translated as ‘Launch’.
That’s why many people that have never seen Windows are
afraid of pressing this button.
English word ‘Start’ could mean a beginning of work.
But in a Russian version of Windows it translated
as ‘Pusk’, which is much worse then English version.
It doesen’t mean a beginning of work. In real life this word means launching a rocket or a technological process,
reactor. This word is better could be translated as ‘Launch’.
That’s why many people that have never seen Windows are
afraid of pressing this button.
I’ve had my eye on this project for quite some time now, and I’m impressed! This is a huge milestone! I honest think that if you can clean up the interface, and if Mozilla, Xine, winamp, and Abiword run ok on it, I will switch over from Slackware. I never liked linux more anyway, it was just moral reasons. A free windows sounds real good ^_^
“I’m a person. Linus Torvalds is a person. Together, we’re people. I want to use Linux. Linus Torvalds wants to use Linux. Therefore, people want to use Linux.”
I’m a person. Bill Gates is a person. Together we’re people. I would never touch Linux. Bill Gates would never touch Linux. Therefore, people don’t want to touch Linux.
It depends on how you interpret the initial statement, i.e “at least you’re copying something people want to use.”
Clearly, the implied meaning is that people don’t want to use Linux, i.e. no one wants to use Linux. Felix countered that at least some people want to use Linux, therefore the first statement was false.
At first sight, your statement seems to rebuff this claim, or at least show the specious logic behind it – but in fact, all your statement says is that some people don’t want to touch Linux. As it happens, this statement is not mutually exclusive with Felix’s, and therefore both can be considered true, unless you specifically used “people” to represent everyone (which is often the case when using “people” in the negative). In such a case, your statement would have already been proven wrong by Felix’s statement, despite the similarity in logical structure, due in part to the relative meaning of the word “people” in this context.
In other words, Felix proved the original poster wrong, but you didn’t prove that neither Felix nor the OP were wrong.
First thing that happened after I loaded was to get a blue screen just like NT4.
G
> First thing that happened after I loaded was to get
> a blue screen just like NT4.
Could you report it to our BugZilla (www.reactos.com/bugzilla) along with the stack trace and registers that are printed?
If you’ll do it, there’s a great chance that it will be resolved in the next version. My wild quess is that it can be cause by some bug that apper with ceretain CD-ROM drivers (Bugs #10 and #106).
> Oh, for Gods Sake!
> M$ aopologists really stretch credibility.
I’m no M$ apologist mate, Microsoft is one company I do not trust at all, and Linux has been my primary desktop since Red Hat 5.2. But I do strive to be fair, objective, unbigoted and giving both criticism and praise where they are due. In this case, I happen to find nothing truly strange in pressing ‘Start’ when you want to shutdown your system. There is no flaw of logic in it. If most people happen to have minds that illogically find it incongruous, there’s little I can do about it.