Slashdot Mirror
ReactOS 0.1.0 Released
JasonFilby writes "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 (ReactOS can be compiled on ReactOS)." ReactOS has been in progress for a while, often tied to other projects with the aim of seamlessly replacing Windows: you can download an image of Bochs 2.0 with ReactOS 0.1.0 preloaded from the download and changelog page.
From the site, the focus seems to be on 4.0, not 2K/XP. While this will be great for those who have a huge amount of time and effort invested in implimenting an NT4.0 environment, it doesn't make much sense for someone who has migrated to 2K/XP to move back to ReactOS.
I do think this is really cool though, and I plan to keep my eye on this. With any luck it'll come far enough to start implimenting 2k/Xp compatibility.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
I wonder if ReactOS, if they become successful, might end up in a bit of legal trouble from Microsoft. I'm sure MS has patents and copyrights up the wazoo on Windows NT, and is not afraid to take advantage of them. Remember how they arrogantly sued the company they bought MS-DOS from out of existence because they were worried they would add multitasking to it? Even though that company had some contractual rights to the IP MS purchased from them, which ReactOS hasn't.
While this is cool a bunch of guys with time on their hands figured out how to get binary compatility with NT, the one thing that holds people to NT now(XP/2k) is the direct X layer between hardware and OS.
It's still a pretty good feat though and is noteworthy of frontpage news. If the authors are reading would you mind answering a few questions?
1. What timeline do the authors see for adding a directX layer?
2. Do you forsee using the wineX code for reference or will you rewrite it from scratch?
Is this actually intended to supplant Windows on the desktop, or is it more aimed at small embedded systems? Or alternately, is there a parallel project that aims to replace Windows CE for the latter? I know there are a lot of similarities between NT4 and CE.
I am not personally a fan or a "user" (hah!) of Windows, but I have...friends...who might be interested in a "sidegrade" to an open-source embedded OS which is WinCE compatible. If nothing else we might be able to improve the security and reliability of embedded applications that have already been developed for Microsoft OSes. There is nothing worse than a small, single-purpose appliance - say for making toast - that can't perform reliably because the underlying OS is faulty, or constantly requires patches to assure peace of mind (hah!).
Could I interest anyone in some toast?
This announcement of this OS may seem interesting, but if you play the endlessly fascinating game of Go, your insight can become more balanced. For example, When Microsoft was well on the way of total OS dominance, it was as if the board had many stones, but all in one corner. Then Linus Torvalds, almost absentmindedly, played a stone in the opposite corner that was mostly vacant and Microsoft and the rest of the world ignored it, so Linus played a few more stones. Soon there was a formidable structure that Microsoft and the rest of the world couldn't ignore. And that's where we are today. Now ReactOS comes along and plays a stone, but no matter where the stone is placed on the OS board, the position is weak.
BTM
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
I know quite some people with this attitude, and I'm afraid that most of them Just Don't Get It.
Most of the people writing Open Source software are doing it because they like to do it. That's all.
If somebody is doing something special just for the fun of it, you can't just kick him and say: "That's of no use for anybody, why don't you just do $THIS instead?"
Won't work at all if he's not interested in doing $THIS. Things just don't work this way. And this is a Good Thing[tm].
And, coming back to your question, no, the world wouldn't be a better place. :-) Definitely no.
[Footnote and rant: Maybe I should send good ol' George W. a mail asking him to do something different because that would make much more sense for everybody else than what he's doing at the moment. But I'm afraid this won't work either. He just likes what he's doing ATM too much, I'd guess.]
42. Easy. What is 32 + 8 + 2?
First off, this is "supposed" to be a drop in replacement for Windows NT 4.0. Why? Even Microsoft is trying to abandon NT 4.0.
But, Ok you want a drop in replacement for NT 4.0. So, where is the GUI? There is no GUI. Second, but perhaps most importantly, where is the file system support. This thing uses FAT32. Windows NT 4.0 can use FAT32 but, its primary file system is NTFS.
How can they possibly call it a seamless replacement for NT 4.0 with no GUI and no NTFS file system. I'm sorry but, renaming FreeDos utilities to try to emulate the CMD.EXE shell is hardly a substitute for NT 4.0 and I won't even mention Windows 2000.