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.
How many Operating Systems do we actually need?
Three OS for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
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.
If you thought Mono was a legal minefield, this is has to be akin to strinking and flicking matches in dynamite wharehouse.
Where are the screenshots?
Oh, that's why.
This isn't going to replace Windows anytime soon if it doesn't have a graphical interface of any sort.
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?
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 certainly don't want to start a flamewar here, but I'm not sure if I think this is a useful product. It sounds like the objective of this project is to create a free clone of Windows NT, so people have choice. In order for this to be useful, I need to be able to install an app on either Windows NT 4.0 or ReactOS X.Y, and have the application not know the difference, right?
In order to make that work, the OS must look the same to the app. That means APIs and, at a higher level, the architecture, has to be the same. The reason we don't run any Windows NT based systems in production is that the architecture is flawed. It's a desktop OS with "enterprise" features tacked on. The fundamental architecture of NT is why it sucks, in my mind. To emulate that, even if you give it away for free, doesn't solve the security issues, the performance issues, etc etc.
I have a lot of respect for these guys, kernel hacking from the ground up is tough stuff, but I'd rather see them contributing their talent to the Linux or BSD projects rather than copying a flawed architecture.
Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong.
FWIW, some parts of ReactOS use FreeDOS components. For example, the ReactOS cmd.exe is based on the FreeDOS "FreeCOM" (the FreeDOS command.com).
Thought you'd like to know. If you're interested in the DOS parts of ReactOS, you're probably better off to download FreeDOS, which is more stable & mature anyway.
yes, no gui whatsoever...
Although we aren't expressly targeting embedded, it is an option. However, I'd say ReactOS would make the biggest impact on the desktop.
Cheers
Jason
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?
For one thing you have to start somewhere. If you'd read the article you'd know that it isn't planned to be compatible with NT 4.0 only. They're thinking ahead and planning for all future iterations of NT (ie Win2k, XP etc.)
.9x releases of Linux berating Linus for not having SMP or IDE support?
/. readers are interested in and if this intrigues even one talented OS programmer/enthusiast to contribute to the project then that's a good thing for ReactOS.
Secondly, and I realize this has been mentioned by others already but I'll say it again, WHY are you berating a product at 0.1.0 for lacking features??? Your nick is FreeLinux, I wonder were you around for one of those
I'm not a an OS or kernel hacker or any other type of programmer. But it seems to me this is exactly the type of project that many
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Work is being done on the ROS GUI, windowing is still being implemented. I personally am helping out in this area (or at least trying to) so i assure you there is in fact work being done, don't like how slow things are progressing? help out! ROS is starving for ready and able developers.