Slashdot Mirror

The Linux kernel isn't the cause of Linux's lack of pep on the desktop. Sure it isn't a particularly good desktop OS kernel as it's mostly made with the server in mind, but it isn't bad. The real reason why Linux hasn't been adopted be Joe Average everywhere is because of the high-level parts of the system: the KDE, the Gnome, the package mess, the difficulty installing software, the hard to use programs, and so on.

If you're not happy with Linux, there are other places to find what you're looking for. The world doesn't need to be Linux.

There is a project out there building a free NT system, kinda built on the basic foundation of NT from a design point of view, goal is to have driver compatibility. That would be nice if it was further along, it's still in a very pre beta state - missing lots of stuff still.

I believe Vista has the edge on XP, but an edge that won't really show up for another few years. This is stuff that could probably be updated into XP but patching on top of patching is a complex way to manage an OS. (And if windows patched/updated as clean as linux patches and updates I wouldn't say that, you can run a linux box for years replacing every file eventually.)

I'll also say I only got Vista because it came with the laptop new, I have specifically recommended to my friends not to upgrade their computers to Vista unless they buy some major manufactured system that comes pre-installed, otherwise keep the XP and just add more RAM (my number one upgrade suggestion). It's not past SP1 yet, and to get it running nicely on my machine took a chunk of time and configuration that most people aren't into. But it does run nicely, so there's hope for anyone who is stuck with it instead of XP.

"But on second thought, I can think of one bad scenario: OpenSolaris and Linux end up with different groups of users, where-as they previously would have mostly used Linux. This makes it harder for *either* open-source OS to get enough market share to attract ISVs, manufacturers writing device drivers, etc."

If it's going to be more binary junk, they can keep their drivers. What everyone wants is the hardware specs to write their own. ISVs? They can follow POSIX/SUS, or go away. And why exactly do you care anyway? Unix isn't going away in the foreseeable future. People are always going to write code for it. What does it matter to you what OS $randomCorporation happens to use? Does the market share affect your net income?

[mostly unrelated rant]

This is why I don't use Linux, and probably won't use Solaris. Too much worry about market share, always wondering how to make it easier to convert Windows users, blah blah. I just want Unix to be Unix, and focus on improving Unix itself, not making it "easier" just for the sake of converting users. If people don't want to learn that the config file is under /etc for base stuff or /usr/local/etc for installed stuff, so be it. It seems to me more and more every day that what Linux devs/users really want isn't Unix, it's ReactOS.

Want to make things easier? More Linux distros could quit throwing base system stuff into /usr/local/, for a start. If I just did a clean OS install, that directory should be at least damn near *empty*. SysV startup scripts? Wtf? /etc/ should not be a maze of twisty little passages. If you don't know the pid, use pkill. If the daemon doesn't handle signals properly, it is improperly written and should be replaced. Startup scripts should handle startup, nothing more. If I want it, it gets enabled in rc.conf. If I want custom flags passed to it, same deal. Having symlinks with #'ed filenames to control order is a hack. Or the kernel could use proper versioning. Which 2.6 has what scheduler anymore? When will it start breaking atime? And at that, what's the problem with mounting the drive "noatime" if it's an issue? Remember those Microsoft ads in Germany with the 4 penguins, all with different heads? Way to prove them correct.

A when's the last time Linux did something truly new? OpenBSD has put out a slew of improvements that makes most trivial local exploits a fucking headache to pull off. NetBSD was the first to support IPv6 and AMD64, and likely has the cleanest HAL in existence making portability (especially for drivers ;-)a breeze. FreeBSD... well not so much off the top of my head, but I don't use it all that much. Of course they all have their problems too. OpenBSD's TdR is a complete ass. NetBSD's devs aren't as organized as they could be. FreeBSD is sometimes known to sacrifice code cleanliness for raw speed. You could also say none of them have significant corporate backing, but that only really matters if market share somehow affects you. But the only news I ever hear about Linux anymore is that some major component is being replaced without a real version bump, or there's a new more-Windows-like distro, or the GPL is being broken (really, what's the point of v3 other than market share?).

[/mostly unrelated rant]

Besides all that, even with Solaris's code being even more a nightmare than Linux (even though the kernel and userland and package managers are by three different groups...), it will slaughter Linux in the corporate market once it starts gaining ground. End of support for Solaris 7 isn't until *next year*. Solaris 8 will be supported until *2012*. They were last updated in 1999 and 2004, respectively. No Linux distro has that kind of long-term support. But honestly? With their code, that fucking scares me. I'd rather see them using Microsoft Singularity or some such (or you know, OpenBSD :P).

... to get rid of the Microsoft monopoly, and happen to be proficient at C programming:
you could cooperate with the ReactOS project (a windows compatible OS) and lend them a hand or two.

I'd love to help them, but I have little spare time and I'm not very good with C - just C++.

Vista is far more secure than Lunix.

Now that you speak of different versions of Windows, remember there's a project making a GPL'ed clone of Windows XP: ReactOS. It may be slow, but progress is steady. And when it's out we won't have to deal with Microsoft's forced Big Brother updates.

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

there you go.

Run windows apps on Linux

http://www.reactos.org

It's looking vaguely possible, though it is in an early alpha.

The big problem with NT is its "Message Passing" architecture, whereby various components of the OS talk to each other by putting messages on queues ... The weakness of the architecture is that the component handling any one message queue is automatically single threaded and tied to a single processor.

IANAOSA (I am not an Operating Systems Architect), but I'm worried about this. Since I'm particularly interested in ReactOS as an alternative to Windows, do you think there's a way to optimize this and retain software compatibility?

Not at all. That's patently stupid. Someone goes and makes Linux, while someone else makes ReactOS. Helps avoid monoculture.

You are forgetting about an important competitor: ReactOS. They expect to have a beta (usable system) ready by 2008, if not later this year. At the same time, the Wine is advancing in compatibility. Vista is definitely is a serious competitor, but the open source options are rapidly maturing.

You are forgetting about an important competitor: ReactOS. They expect to have a beta (usable system) ready by 2008, if not later this year. At the same time, the Wine is advancing in compatibility. Vista is definitely is a serious competitor, but the open source options are rapidly maturing.

You are forgetting something: ReactOS will be in beta by then according to their roadmap, "meaning a system which is suitable for every day use." At which point, users wanting to get off an aging OS will be able to move to ReactOS instead of Vista. Even if ReactOS moves slower than their roadmap predicts, it will be ready well before XP extended support ends in 2014. (You left out Linux, so I assume we are talking about Windows-like OSes. Significant improvements in WINE and the Linux desktop experience could nullify the necessity for a Windows-like OS, but that could be a long way off.)

You are forgetting something: ReactOS will be in beta by then according to their roadmap, "meaning a system which is suitable for every day use." At which point, users wanting to get off an aging OS will be able to move to ReactOS instead of Vista. Even if ReactOS moves slower than their roadmap predicts, it will be ready well before XP extended support ends in 2014. (You left out Linux, so I assume we are talking about Windows-like OSes. Significant improvements in WINE and the Linux desktop experience could nullify the necessity for a Windows-like OS, but that could be a long way off.)

Is Vista in trouble? Why wouldn't it be? Even if Microsoft gave the thing away for free, it totally ignores the fact that there's an enormous cost to upgrading. Microsoft doesn't need a fire sale, it needs to be paying people to install this thing.

Let's run down the usual suspects of people who upgrade and see how they feel:

• Business users hate it. The hardware required to run it cost a lot of money when multiplied by tens, hundreds, or thousands of employees. Add to that the training costs, the support costs, the deployment costs, and so on ad nauseum, and the business decision easily becomes a no-brainer. And for what? Beefed up "security" that causes your user base to go nuts answering "Allow or deny" dialog boxes?
• Gamers hate it. It just plain doesn't run with the hardware that's out right now. I really think that Vista is trying to be the proverbial egg that comes before widespread manufacturer support (the proverbial chicken), but it's just not happening. Every gamer I know is avoiding Vista like the plague. As long as gamers aren't begging for Vista support in their high-end components, manufacturers are still going to continue to be reluctant.
• Speaking of manufacturers, it's obvious that they hate it, too. When I tried Vista for a week a while back (not the beta, the so-called real version after launch), two things didn't work. My Creative SoundBlaster Live! card and my nVidia video card. To be fair, the latter technically worked, but some of its higher-end functionality didn't. We're not talking about little no-name manufacturers here or bizarre equipment, we're talking about common cards from major manufacturers. Have you even seen the hoops that hardware manufacturers have to jump through to comply with Vista's outrageous requirements?
• The emerging home entertainment market hates it. Let's not mince words: One of Vista's primary design goals is Digital Rights "Management," keeping these people from doing what they want to do. Why would buy software that takes functionality away!!?

I could go on, but you get the point. Is Vista in trouble? You bet. Add to all of the above the competition that it faces from various Linux distributions that are easier than ever to install and use, products like Mac OS, clever new projects such as ReactOS, and even its own predecessor! and it becomes clear that Microsoft should be praying that people pirate it, because that's the only way it's going to make any kind of splash when all is said and done.

Don't get me wrong, it won't die completely, any more than Windows ME is dead. But in the annals of operating systems, my money is that it will be merely a blip on the screen. If Microsoft is smart, it should be working on adding features to its operating system, making it faster and more powerful and easier to use. It should be fighting with us against DRM, not against us by crippling their software with it.

Personally, I think that Microsoft is not very smart, but who knows, I guess we'll see. At any rate, after giving it a week to try to convince me that it's not as bad as everyone says it is, I was very disappointed in it and won't be running it anytime in the forseeable future.

NTVDM really does depend on the CPU being able to run in V86 and DPMI compatible modes. That's why the non x86 versions of NT couldn't run DOS or Win16 apps (but would have been able to if NTVDM was a full emulator, although the Alpha port did have a 486 emulator using unique Alpha features). Ntvdm.exe is a container for a Win16 or DOS environment instance, but it depends on the kernel NtVdmControl function to switch to V86 or 16-bit protected modes and setup traps as needed. Since NT doesn't allow user apps to access hardware as a matter of principle (unlike Win9x), NTVDM does indeed emulate some hardware components by trapping interrupt, IO and DMA requests.

I'm sure that Microsoft could write a full emulator if they really wanted to, ala DosBox, but I think they'd rather the whole thing just went away. When the VDM system was created for NT 3.1, full emulation would have been far too slow. The architecture has not changed since.

See also:
DOS from the ReactOS project
Writing a VDD
VDMSound
NTVDM Compatibility Drivers

If I had my choice, I'd still be using 2000. I had to upgrade because of my work. When I get a new machine, if I'm still in the software business, I suspect I'll switch to ReactOS if it'll support everything I need. I assume that by the time I need a new machine, ReactOS will be in beta, at least and that'll be good enough for me. I have no intention of inflicting Vista on myself.

ReactOS was frequently accused of being tainted by Windows source. It made the project have to do a long code audit.

This one, but it's not done yet.

Are you referring to this discussion:

http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/200 6-January/007393.html

Here's a quote from one of the messages about the standard policy, which helps to put the discussion in perspective:

">From Section C of the ReactOS IP Statement (C. Copyrights of Others) ....Any source code produced by direct reverse engineering should be treated in exactly the same way as any other non-free source code useful for study and understanding of the system, but not permitted for inclusion in ReactOS."

If ReactOS is a clean-room implementation, they probably can't do squat about it.

There is work towards Xen support. Though, Xen doesn't provide a GUI like VMWare or even Qemu so you'd have to run something like VNC to get the display.

an environment identical to Windows, both visually and internally.

an environment identical to Windows, both visually and internally.

If ReactOS is almost a Windows clone, but a sub-par one, this begs the question of why do we need ReactOS anyway? Well, to find the answer I went straight to the source reactos.org, but apparently they haven't figured out the answer yet either.

They actually did a "code audit" a while back. You can get details here: http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/Audit.

They might want to look up what "identical" means. There is still a very long way to go. (I could have put a traditional screenshot up there too, from W2K or even W95, and it would still be true.)

How about a link to ReactOS in the summary?

I think id Games used to compile on SGIs. I know MS did some development on Xenix/i286 and Xenix/i386 (somewhere, there's an MS quote about how MS-DOS/Win is not suitable for serious development..hah). In fact, the i286 had a memory management unit, but the only OS (that I know of) which took full advantage of it was Xenix. Minix/i286 may have supported it to some extent, as well.
Some emulator pages....mac&ppc, simos (for SGI/IRIX5), DEC 10 and Big Iron, various DEC emulation, Apple Lisa, Z80 sim&development, yaze Z80, Apricot and Amstrad, bochs x86, ... and there's always emulators that run under DOS that you could run under Bochs or QEMU.

Other possibly helpful links:
emulators on freshmeat
OS kernels on freshmeat
OS's on freshmeat
bunches of old OS disk images
CP/M and MP/M
CP/M disks
Lisa Xenix
LisaOS
tandy xenix
elks and uclinux
freevms
freedos
Apple I (not II) development
reactos - winnt clone
MAME stuff and pinball Mame
info about tandy disk images
solaris minix
minix info and version 3
various free (as in beer and/or speech) OS list
The OS list at tunes.org

Now if we could only rewrite Windows from the ground up

Didn't you see the story the other day?

We are.

Well, ReactOS just released version 0.3.1. At this rate, you'll have your SP5 sometime around 2009. The good news: after that, you'll get regular updates again for (potentially) ever.

Well, ReactOS just released version 0.3.1. At this rate, you'll have your SP5 sometime around 2009. The good news: after that, you'll get regular updates again for (potentially) ever.

Yes, the project has been working on support for non-x86 architectures. See http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/PowerPC

http://www.reactos.org/media/screenshots/2007/ros_ 031_cpuz.jpg This screenshot shows PII Processor with clock core running at 2410.9 MHz Is that really possible. Something just doesn't seem right here

Seeing them plug ahead is one thing, donating to help them plug ahead is another. http://www.reactos.org/en/fundraising_campaign_don ate.html

Except some of the ReactOS developers peeked at the Windows source code. Or, as the ReactOS developers put it, "...the term reverse engineering can mean many things to many different people."

http://www.reactos.org/en/news_page_14.html

here: http://www.reactos.org/en/screenshots.html

The legal issues are kinda scary but it looks like they have them under control. All respect to them for attempting the impossible... and from the look of it, they're a good way to succeeding :)

According to ReactOS, 0.3.1 was released today! http://www.reactos.org/en/news_page_34.html

But don't you realize that most people use Linux because it is a Unix system? http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

I'm so glad you're not the one in charge. What's the point of making Linux just like Windows? Haven't you heard of ReactOS? http://www.reactos.org/ -- This is where the "just like Microsoft" attitude belongs.

You can find a solution(s) to your problem at one or more
of the following locations:

http://www.centos.org

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/

http://en.opensuse.org

http://www.opensolaris.org/

http://www.ecomstation.com/

http://www.redhat.com

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/

http://www.openbsd.org/

http://www.freebsd.org/

http://www.netbsd.org/

http://www.dragonflybsd.org/

http://www.osfree.org/doku/en:start

http://www.skyos.org/

http://www.freeos.com/

http://www.minix3.org/

Added to bypass the stupid slashdot lameness filter which apparently doesn't like a post full of links. WTF is wrong with the
stupid lameness filter? Jeez, what does it want, for us to type paragraphs of meaningless drivel just to get past the lameness filter?
Sheeesh. OK, this is really stupid. Why don't ajfajf al;djal a fa fa lkdf jaa fal ja;ljf af af ajf;lajf alfjalf a fjal;fjafl; jaflakjf af;laj
jalkfaj fjf af af fajjjajal jajfa f afjdlakej2233 2235t2352 dsfalkfjal f 222j2 afdkja f23 2 2 2t2352322 233252352 2323232.

Alex will be speaking on the first day of the 5th annual Southern California Linux Expo which will be taking place February 9th and 10th. Alex will be speaking about how to bridge the gap between Windows and Open Source using ReactOS. If you use the promotional code SLASH, you will receive a 40% discount off a full priced ticket.

You actually think Vista is good for gaming? Hardly.
Check this out.
Me, I'll wait and see what the good folks at ReactOS come up with before I even consider switching to that buggy, insecure piece of bloatware that is Vista. XP does everything I need without throwing on unnecessary visual absurdities like a 3D desktop, and will continue to do so for a long time to come.

Although I think you were speaking about something like Cygwin (GNU userland and Posix compatibility layer inside an actual Windows OS from Microsoft),
We should maybe point that ReactOS is an actual Windows-compatible open-source kernel and may one day actually end up being available as Debian GNU/ReactOS.

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

that would be reactos http://www.reactos.org/

You're just being picky for the sake of it. So they've picked a word that isn't entirely accurate on its own due to its marketing skew, but the meaning is still there and conveyed just fine. It doesn't take big leaps to get from not licenced to not authorised, from not authorised to not authentic, from not authentic to not geniune.

"Who cares if it is pirated"

Can you really not think of anyone who might care? I mean, I personally don't, but that doesn't mean I can't think of anyone who would do. If even 1% of windows users owed ME money, I'd care.

"I can see some company making a Windows-clone"

You wouldn't have to look far

Wine isn't a windows clone. It's a compatibility layer for Linux. ReactOS (note: page is down as I type this) is the windows clone.