ReactOS Now Runs Abiword

martijn-s writes "Reactos will now run, amongst other programs, AbiWord, IrfanView and its own Explorer clone. Screenshot here. I keep getting amazed by the quality of the code that is coming out of this project..."

Comments

Nice to see it coming along

[squiggleslash]

ReactOS, for those unaware, is an attempt to create a free (as in freedom) Win32 compatable OS.

While I'm no great fan of the copy-cat mentality parts of the FOSS community are infused with, I must admit I think ReactOS is a good idea. It's ok to clone a Windows interface when the underlying operating system is Windows, the whole "Let's make GNOME just like IE!" thing has always worked terribly because the underlying OS is not Windows and doesn't look or work anything like Windows. The NT generation of Windows (NT, 2000, XP, 2003) is a reasonable design for an operating system too, so if you're going to start somewhere...

That's my 2c. Coming up, a skateboarding rabbit. That's after a word from our sponsors.

Re:Nice to see it coming along

[thegrassyknowl]

I have mixed feelings about this... it's nice to see somebody working on a replacement for Windows that your average L-user will want to use (Because it will run all their L-user software) and look like their L-user operating system.

But, at the same time their efforts could be better used to improve the Wine project. I still can't get Wine to run IrFanView.

I'd like to see ReactOS and Wine get together and share their code and ideas. It could really help to improve both systems. It can't be that hard to emulate Windows (I'm not saying it's easy though). Just clone all the Windows system calls by starting with the common ones, work up to the less common. If you had a good clone of the system calls you could use the DLLs straight out of your cloned version of Windows and then replace them at your leisure.

There was talk of a Microsoft SDK detailing most of the Windows system calls except the "obsolete" ones that their own applications happen to call (and probably get preferential treatment from the OS because of it). Could start there, but I dont' recall where I heard the talk about the SDK.

At the end of the day I don't care how it's done, as long as I can play the same Windows games at LANs that all my friends want to play...

Just my $AU0.02 + gst.

Re:Nice to see it coming along

[smari]

It's been quite a few years since I was active on their mailing list.. in those days people were still arguing over the minor details. I can't remember why I unsubscribed, but it's nice to know that they're alive and well and doing a wonderful job.
Congrats ppl. :)

Re:Nice to see it coming along

[maxbang]

First, why are you using IrFanView under Wine in Linux when any distro has a number of comparable image viewing/editing utiliies? Very bizarre...almost troll-like. Anyway, to answer your comment:

...their efforts could be better used to improve the Wine...

From the ReactOS website:

Why don't you help the Wine project instead?

Actually we work very closely with the Wine project. Wine probably has a lot more in common with ReactOS than with Linux. The Wine project has the goal of implementing the entire windows API on top of WineServer. There are only a few WINE dlls that cannot be used in ReactOS. These are NTDLL, USER32, KERNEL32, GDI32, and ADVAPI. The rest of WINE's DLLs can be shared with ReactOS. We have several developers in both the WINE and ReactOS projects that work on cross-compatibility issues between the two projects.

It is our view that Linux + Wine can never be a full replacement for Microsoft(R) Windows(R). ReactOS has the potential for a much higher degree of compatibility - especially for Microsoft(R) Windows(R) drivers - which WINE does not address.

ReactOS

[Drakker]

Isn't copying Windows rather useless? If you want something that works like windows, why not simply use windows? Or why not use a window manager like IceWM?

Why copy a bad interface anyway? I thought that everyone should have learned that copying Apple at least gives you a much better interface. :)

Seriously, I don't get it, if you make something new, you might as well try to do it different, or improve on what already exist, not simply clone something.

Last point, I think that the failure of the Wine project has shown by now that emulation is HARD to get right and will never be 100% reliable. I doubt they will ever get good compatibility with windows applications, it's just close to impossible to do if you dont have access to the source.

Re:ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't copying Windows rather useless?

Isn't learning Windows rather useless?

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

Some people like Windows. Right now, GNU/Linux is suffering because a lot of those people have pretty much become the standard bearers for the major GNU/Linux desktop projects, which has meant GNU/Linux has been getting steadily more absurd and clumsy interfaces based upon ideas from the Windows world - it's not that the interfaces are bad in their native habitat, it's just they're trying to dress POSIX up to look like something it isn't.

ReactOS is most definitely a good direction for these people. It provides them with what they wanted in the first place, and they can develop an environment that works according to the paradigm they find most suits them. Meanwhile, GNU/Linux can progress and turn back into some sort of POSIX system.

| As for the comment about IceWM, that merely changes the look, it doesn't change the OS. It's a little like saying "Why run GNU/Linux when you can run Cygwin and WindowBlinds?".

Re:ReactOS

[FlipmodePlaya]

I think the point is to make a free Windows. The idea is having a free way to run Windows applications perfectly, the copycat interface is probably just a way to attract those farmiliar with Windows who do not wish to pay for it. Aso, Wine Is Not an Emulator...

Re:ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

The goal is to give lasting freedom to as many computer users as possible.

We can do this by:
a) making a better product and trying to get people to change their habbits
b) making the same product at a better price
c) both

MS and the MPAA are trying to block us off, so we have to try multiple avenues. We have GNU/Linux, GNU/Hurd, WINE, DotGNU+Mono, Reatos. People work on them because they're fun to work on, and the more the merrier.

Re:ReactOS

[ComputerSlicer23]

Remember the goals here. First, it's they are trying to be binary compatiable with Windows, so applications and drivers will work exactly the same.

In particular the version of Windows they are working on is old, and has been EOL'ed. So you can no longer get support for it. It'd be novel to have a version that was fully compatible, and you could have the source to keep up to date with bug fixes.

Second, they aren't trying to be like Wine. The Wine project is orders of magnitude harder then ReactOS (in some ways). Wine is attempting to make a translation layer from Win32 calls into a Posix/UNIX/Linux environment. That's a whole heck of a lot harder in a number of ways. Things are set absolutely in stone, and can't be changed. On top of all that, at points they get stuck because they are attempting to emulate kernel space functionality in a userspace application a lot of the time.

ReactOS, can make map kernel space things to kernel space things. They can map user space things to user space things. They already have the entire design, and a known model to follow. That's a lot easier then Wine in terms of implementation. Wine is attempting to live withing a much harder set of constraints then ReactOS. However, ReactOS does have to actually implement an entire OS (so it might be a wash). I know I'd rather try and make ReactOS go, then attempt to make Wine work the way it does.

Finally, part of the reason Wine has so many problems, is it started out as a Win3.1 or 3.11 tool, doing 16-bit applications. Now it's moved on to covering a half dozen versions of Windows (at least that many). They also support multiple platforms, and are attempting to be reasonable portable.

The other thing I'll be interested to see is if the ReactOS guys can manage to make it run on MIPS, Sparc, x86, x86-64, Alpha, and any other random platform you can think of. It'd be interesting to see what all they can come up with.

Kirby

Re:ReactOS

[ealar dlanvuli]

Why? Because when someone strange sits down at my machine I don't want them freaking out.

I've also never found any benefit from more advanced "window managers." Give me a virtual pager and I'm set.

Re:ReactOS

[Elledan]

"Seriously, I don't get it, if you make something new, you might as well try to do it different, or improve on what already exist, not simply clone something."

I think you fail to see the potential of this particular project.

If a project like ReactOS results in a viable drop-in replacement of Windows (NT, 2k, XP), while adding many of the benefits of OSS (e.g. Linux), it may ultimately end up destroying (a good part of) MSFT's market share of desktop OSs, as few companies and individuals will see the need to pay for 'Windows' (the OS). Imagine Walmart selling those cheap PCs again, but this time with ReactOS installed.

Certainly, Windows is a bad OS in too many ways (security-wise, as well as because of the messy API), but that doesn't mean that through a project like ReactOS we can't end up improving 'Windows'. And do what Linux has failed to do so far: take over the desktop OS market.

Re:ReactOS

[DrSkwid]

Presumably you forget that NT is a POSIX Environment.

Re:ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want something that works like windows, why not simply use windows?

Because you also want to use free-as-in-speech software?

Why copy a bad interface anyway?

Slashbot groupthink doesn't like the Windows interface, but plenty of people do. That's why Gnome and KDE also copy it.

I think that the failure of the Wine project...

Aha, I understand now: you're a filthy troll. What failure of the Wine project? Did all the developers commit mass suicide while my back was turned? Nope, looks like the Wine project is still active, still improving, and already runs a few applications, although so far it can only handle simple things that nobody uses much... like Microsoft Office.

Whoever modded this guy up is on more crack than usual...

Re:ReactOS

[AllUsernamesAreGone]

as few companies and individuals will see the need to pay for 'Windows' (the OS).

Don't forget that one of the things that puts those very people off FOSS is the fact that it is free: free means no support, nobody to sue when something goes wrong, no way to show your shareholders that you're spending money wisely.

ReactOS will only be a sucess as a "drop in Windows replacement" in industry if it manages to do everything in the same way as windows, look the same as windows and have a company sat there offering support and a target for blame.

Re:ReactOS

[treerex]

A "free" Windows? Please. If you bought a PC there is a pretty good chance that you have Windows already, no? Dual boot your system if you want to run Windows. If you don't want to use WINE, you're dual booting to ReactOS.

Don't get me wrong though: ReactOS (and WINE) are amazing technical developments, but this whole concept of the need for a "free" Windows seems silly.

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

No, NT isn't a POSIX environment. To make it POSIX compliant you have to install a seperate POSIX subsystem. And while, under those circumstances, it's broadly compatable with POSIX, it's certainly not a "POSIX system" by any stretch of the imagination to end users (it's POSIX in the same way as a Linux machine with WINE is a Win32 system...)

Re:ReactOS

[Elledan]

Does MSFT even offer support for its products? I was under the impression that support to companies who went with a MSFT solution is provided virtually solely by third-party companies with no relation to MSFT.
Things are even worse for home-users (esp. OEM), who either have to rely on the helpdesk of the OEM they brought their PC from (e.g. Dell, HP), or subject themselves to the knowledge of family-members, friends, and similar.

With OSS OSs like Linux and *BSD there are many companies willing to offer support (IBM, RedHat, SuSE, etc.) and if that fails (or you don't want to buy/extend your support contract), there are tens of thousands of users out there who are willing (and able) to help you (or hit you with the 'RTFM'-bat).

As far as I can tell support for 'Windows' (ReactOS or similar) is likely to improve considerably if ReactOS or a similar project proves to be successful.

In regards to providing users with a single entity to blame, is there really a need for this with, or example, Linux? And even if there is, if a company buys a Linux solution from IBM, it can blame IBM if it fails to fullfil its obligations, and if IBM is not at fault, the company (or IBM) can submit a bug report to the developers and wait till the issue is resolved, or fix it themselves (especially an option for larger companies, who, coincidentially, have more to lose from software bugs and missing features in critical software).

Re:ReactOS

[The Fanta Menace]

The only PC's I ever got with Windows on them were laptops. All of my other PCs were clean.

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

Yeah, but it wasn't a "free" Windows. It both upped the cost of your PC, and you have few, if any, rights regarding it. Your ability to deal with bugs and security holes is limited by what Microsoft decides to do, including (as with the 9X series), having to buy an entirely new operating system. You can't either modify it yourself (if you're technically competent) or have someone do it for you (either a hired professional, or rely on the resources of a third party support group.)

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

it may ultimately end up destroying (a good part of) MSFT's market share of desktop OSs

And this matters why?

We can argue the benefits of having a free and open Win32. We can argue the benefits of having a choice of implementations. But "Grotmaster Inc. will sell less Grotmaster 2000(tm)s" isn't really a great argument for the end user.

And yes, I'm aware Microsoft has engaged in various immoral business practices over the years, and would like them to get more than a slap on the wrist for it, but Microsoft losing market share is not an advantage unless end users actually benefit - ie what they lose market share too is ultimately superior. It's the improved choice that's the advantage, not the loss in market share for the incumbent.

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

ReactOS will only be a sucess as a "drop in Windows replacement" in industry if it manages to do everything in the same way as windows, look the same as windows and have a company sat there offering support and a target for blame.

Nonsense. That would be easy. That's so easy I dare say an Icaza could do it. The reality is tougher.

ReactOS will only be a success as a "drop in Windows replacement" in industry if it manages to do everything better than Windows, looks better than Windows and have a company sat there offering support and a target for blame.

Re:ReactOS

[Elledan]

This (MSFT losing a significant part of its market share) matters because it would be the first time in many years that such a huge shift in the desktop market occurs.
I didn't imply in my post that this would directly benefit the end user, but only used it as an example of one of the potential effects of the success of a project like ReactOS.

But indeed, indirectly it would likely benefit end users.

Re:ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you actually ever used Wine or are you just talking out your ass? There are literally thousands of Win32 apps that work not just as well, but better under Wine than on native MS Windows. I hear so many people complain about Wine and yet I've rarely ever had problems with it. Could it be that these people aren't even interested in making it work?

Re:ReactOS

[treerex]

Yeah, but it wasn't a "free" Windows. It both upped the cost of your PC, and you have few, if any, rights regarding it.

Fair enough. So a Free Windows is a Good Windows?

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

All other things being equal, a Free (as in speech) Windows is superior to a Proprietary Windows, for most of us. I don't particularly want to rely upon Redmond for support, or for making sure the bugs aren't in there to begin with.

Re:ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Wine Is Not an Emulator, you trolling cunt.

Re:ReactOS

[Marxist Hacker 42]

One big word- Price. Microsoft has been making an 85% profit for years now- soon to go to 95% when the Hydrabad R&D center gets in on a serious percentage of Longhorn Development. For those of us like This Guy who distrust the whole "Capitalism is about concentration of wealth" trend, this is a BAD THING . OSS is a solution to this- and ReactOS is an OSS solution that may, one day, have the potential to compete directly with Microsoft on that company's [SARCASM]greatest strength[/SARCASM], the Windows Platform.

P.S.- who says that WINE has failed? How can any project still in development be considered to have failed?

Re:ReactOS

[treerex]

I don't particularly want to rely upon Redmond for support, or for making sure the bugs aren't in there to begin with.

So all you need now is a Free (as in speech) version of MS Office and whatever other Windows-only software you use, and you'll be all set.

I'm just being the devil's advocate here...

Re:ReactOS

[squiggleslash]

Personally speaking, Windows and the Windows-way isn't for me, which is why I've stuck with Linux, before that AmigaDOS, and recently when Mac went Unix looked at OS X and decided I like it so are there now.

Others have different feelings. I certainly have friends who think that Windows is how an operating system should act.

It certainly helps them to have a Free Windows. If they run OpenOffice.org on it, then that's fine. Yes, they could run it under GNU/Linux, but they'd lose compatability with the few closed apps they want to run, and most importantly they'd no longer have the environment they prefer.

GNU/Linux vs Windows is seen by far too many people as a straightforward "Free OS vs Proprietary OS" thing. Unfortunately that's meant we've had GNU/Linux development driven by people who think that getting GNU/Linux ready for the desktop means bolting a poorly-fitting Windows GUI on the front "because that's what people are used to, and unless we make GNU/Linux work exactly like Windows nobody will switch to our superior free software." Sure, free vs non-free is important, but The Windows Way is nothing like The POSIX Way, and people want to make those choices too.

I like what ReactOS is doing. Even though as a Windows OS I'm unlikely to want to use it, I see areas where it can help me - the NT kernel is, by all accounts, a very nice system and seeing a non-commercial implementation is definitely positive. I also like the fact that it's creating a Free choice for people who like Windows. It creates a safe place for those people to play without them feeling the need to corrupt POSIX. Hopefully as ReactOS matures, those who've been insisting, lobbying, demanding, etc, that GNU/Linux be more like Windows will migrate to the Free operating system they always wanted.

Re:ReactOS

[polyp2000]

One of the nice things about ReactOS is that they are working with the wine project. System level libraries etc have already been written so it makes sense to use them. This is a great bonus because it means the two projects can feed of each other and that cant be a bad thing.

Wine is a tall order admittedly but it just gets better and better. There is plenty of mileage to go before it really approaches the same level of compatibility as real windows. You can run most of the usual business apps MSOffice etc. But by the time Longhorn comes out backward compatibilty will be maimed hugely by the DRM/Palladium nonsense.

nick ...

Ummm . . .

[erikharrison]

Well. To clarify I guess . . .

Wine and ReactOS *are* sharing code and ideas. Wine is really a reimplementation of the Win32 API, and ReactOS is working with them both to improve the Wine DLLs as well as port those DLLs to the ReactOS kernel.

Wine does work with native Windows DLLs, and so will ReactOS (may now, not sure). As for how hard it is to emulate Windows, it's hard. The Windows runtime is a twist maze of libraries all alike, and it's not just source compat were after here, its binary compat.

And as for lusers and their software, the disadvantages of a closed system have been widely discussed here on /. This could allow companies to upgrade at their own pace, rather than at Microsoft's, and allows public code review for security holes. This isn't just lusers, this is large corporate installs of NT gaining a signifigantly different and more flexible upgrade path.

Olds?

[RAMMS EIN]

I've seen this screeshot a long time ago on some japanese site.

When I saw that, I was absolutely stunned. The last thing I saw of ReactOS they barely had a GUI. Is it the cooperation with WINE that makes this quick progress possible?

Re:Olds?

[GvG]

The code we re-used from Wine certainly helps to speed up development. But we can't re-use everything and have to develop a lot of stuff ourselves. For example, Wine uses X11 primitives to do BitBlts (bitmap copying). Since ReactOS is not X11 based we had to write that stuff ourselves. Also, in Wine, everything is in userspace, while ReactOS follows the NT4 (and later) design where there is a split between userspace and kernelspace, with most of the work actually being done in kernelspace. Still, we try to co-develop as much stuff as possible with Wine. Ofcourse, since Wine has been around much longer and the number of Wine contributors is larger than the number of ReactOS contributors most of the shared code originates in Wine. Ge van Geldorp, ReactOS developer.

Re:Olds?

[Sepper]

Since there is less code, is ReactOS FASTER than, say, Windows NT4 or Win98?

Re:Olds?

[GvG]

No, not at this moment anyway. We're concentrating more on getting the features in than on speed.

Re:Olds?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Spoken like somebody who doesn't remember programming in less than 16kb of memory.

Hint: speed and size are INVERSELY porportional. You can create fast code, or you can create small code- but small fast code requires Steve Gibson

Re:Olds?

[Anonymous Coward]

in the age of 16KB icaches, smaller code often is faster code.

Repost of a previous comment:

[truefluke]

Some others have asked the same question as others have here: Essentially: "Why Bother?"

Here's the URL of my answer (a comment), (the comment)... from an article preceeding slashdot's posting by several days... I'll even paste it (my reply) for you if you're adverse or too lazy bother to visiting signalnine.com...

I still think the POTENTIAL for having a 'free' platform to EASILY port your code to is a good thing. We have no idea what might become of Windows (as we know it) once Longenhurden manifests. This project, I think, offers a small amount of comfort to businesses (think enterprise and small biz, too) who have invested exorbitant amounts of programmer-time and dollars on in-house, 'vertical applications'. They may not need the lastest whiz-bang Microsoft 'features' (that MS says we can't do without). Even if they can't implement all of say, DirectX for gamers; or .Nyet, (I say this because of the potential of land-mine-infested patents...c'mon you KNOW MS isn't benign, ADMIT IT!), running a 'cheap' Delphi application that does your check processing/imaging on NT 4 or Win2k is a VALID REASON for this effort ('what we have right NOW works just FINE, thank you'). There might yet be good cause to dread at what's coming up on the horizon. Just my 2 cents. Was that rambling? I tried to write something lucid and coherent. Sorry if I failed. I'm very tired as I write this.

just what we needed

[Anonymous Coward]

yaos

waste of time

[tanakan]

Why on earth are people with so much talent wasting their time trying to re-do existing things !!! Why don't they try to do something new ? A free NT may be a good idea in some way, but by the time ReactOS is 100% compatible with NT5.x, microsoft will have new features, new incompatible things etc... therefore ReactOS will be again behind them and will have to catch up with all the new stuff. In a situation like that Microsoft have the interesting job, because they invent new things and concepts andReactOS is simply trying to re-do it. If you are talented enough to build an OS, why not using that talent to build something fresh, new and groundbreaking ?!

Re:waste of time

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't they try to do something new
The single thing which determines the ultimate success of an OS is the number of applications available for it. MS-Windows at the moment has by far the most apps available. I'm not claiming that each and every one of those apps is the best or that there are no alternatives available for e.g. Linux, I'm simply claiming that more apps are available for MS-Windows than for any other OS.
What ReactOS tries to do is tap into that vast amount of available apps (and drivers too, btw) and allow you to run them on an open source OS. For me, this is a much more fulfilling project to work on than writing my own OS from scratch.

Re:waste of time

[tanakan]

My view on ReactOS is similar to what is going to happen with Doom3 or Half-Life2 for exemple. Those games will come with several new graphical improvements, which have not been seen so far. That will be something really new regarding the current games that are on the market...and that's the reason why everybody (well, every gamer) is looking forward to them. Then, after the release of those games, a lot of new games will appear but with no improvement at all. They will just be clones of Doom3 or HL2 and that's it, just because it's cool to make a game like doom3. In my opinion it's not interesting to re-do the same thing even if it's open sourced or faster or whatever else. What is really interesting is what you can get from your imagination to make something new. (it doesn't mean it's better to write a new OS from scratch ;))

Re:waste of time

[Anonymous Coward]

You also have to consider, with all the information we have regarding Longhorn, MS's new features will be EXTREMELY restrictive, and basically rejected by the "geek/nerd" community. Now, when that happens, why not fall back on something free that runs all the apps that you have already bought, since once they release Longhorn, say goodbye to official support of 98/2k/XP. Far better that you have a 2k/NT clone, that you can add code onto to try and get limited usage out of these new 'features' only minus the DRM.

Besides, windows has been successful partially because MS is smart at marketing, and partially because people like it, it's easy to use, et all. If so many people like it, why not provide it? Especially considering the alternatives 'new' potentially mean less freedom.

Re:waste of time

[HuguesT]

Others have replied thoughtfully, now consider what is happening in the proprietary Unix market due to the introduction of Linux and the free BSDs. Sun is hurting, IBM is considering dropping AIX, SCO has become a litigation company, HP and Novell are going full steam ahead with Linux.

In the meantime Microsoft is forging ahead with new versions of Windows that don't seem to add much to what the customer wants. Does XP innovate with respect to win2k? I'm not sure. Will Longhorn be any good when it is released? I don't known.

The point is that if when Longhorn is released ReactOS can already run most win32, and win64 things as well, then it provides competition with Microsoft on its home turf. Microsoft will cease to have a stranglehold on win32 and that can only be good. We can look forward to a sleek, efficient, Free platform that can run most of the commercial and Free software that exists now. How can that be bad?

Dutch

[RAMMS EIN]

Your name looks very dutch. :-) Are you?

Re:Dutch

[GvG]

Yes :-)

Re:Dutch

[RAMMS EIN]

And don't tell me you created that account solely for replying to my comment...I feel too much honored.

OT: Heb ik toch de hele konninginedag mn bed niet uit kunnen komen...

Isn't this called Mono?

[mactari]

This project, I think, offers a small amount of comfort to businesses (think enterprise and small biz, too) who have invested exorbitant amounts of programmer-time and dollars on in-house, 'vertical applications'.

Though I'm admittedly intrigued by ReactOS' idea of shooting for NT 4.0, why pour resources into an already unsupported platform? Isn't the .NET platform, targetted already by the open source Mono project a better use of resources?

In the Mono case, we've even got a relatively good breaking point. There's enough C# in the ECMA standard (so even ignoring WinAPIs) for us to build a right good, copyright issue free (IANAL, etc) platform that'll support current and future work that leverages .NET. Instead of asking people to migrate code that runs and works on NT, which I'd argue from the company's point of view that there's no need to jostle, why not have them target new development towards the current [and optionally MS-free] platform Mono/Rotor/.NET CLR represents?

NT 4.0 isn't rusting; it still does what it's always done. The easiest way for a business to keep NT 4.0 apps running is to keep running NT 4.0, not to migrate to anything less than absolutely seamless, licensing fees included.

You can't make a successful business case to enough people using NT 4.0 to switch to an open reproduction to bother. You can, I'll wager, get people to target C#/.NET via a robust Mono with new development. To use what's lately become much too popular a metaphor, target the tip of the spear, not the shaft.

The question isn't, "Why bother creating a drop-in replacement for Windows?" but, rather, "Why bother creating a drop-in replacement for NT 4.0 instead of .NET?" Allow new development to easily target multiple platforms. If you haven't learned anything else from the lack of Linux game ports... "Targetting after the fact" is a bad idea.

(boy, sorry for the liberal use of bold there)

Is there a WM solution?

[Anonymous Coward]

My understanding is that on Linux the GUI layers are:
(1) X
(2) WM (Gnome,KDE)
(3) then GUI toolkit (Gtk,Qt,lesstif, many more...)

Is there a project that is a combined WM and Toolkit, specifically one compatible with (most) of the Win API? If it were possible to at least recompile win apps using such a WM/toolkit, it would provide easy cross platform development. And although I've abandoned Win platform development (except for GLUT/OpenGL apps which port easily) I've always thought that the Windows API was fairly well designed and easy to use.

I wonder if Microsoft themselves will eventually provide their own (nonfree,non-open) Windows compatible desktop for linux someday when they abandon the OS market and retain just the applications software business.

Not that I work for the ReactOS project , but.....

[Nursie]

I have been following the project for four or five years now.
Damn cool idea. IMHO

The argument he was putting forward above is that what gets in the way of replacing XP or the .Net platform is twofold:

1) Microsoft will probably, or even just possibly at some point come out and stomp mono (and any similar .Net replacements)into the ground. best not to aim for that really.

2) Microsoft has stopped support for NT, and will at some point stop it for 2k. People (or more likely, business) use NT and 2K. People have software that runs just fine on it, and are reluctant to move to things with whizzy new features and millions of potential incompatibilities and even security holes.

Why ReactOS? == Why GNU?

[Valdrax]

Your argument -- almost word for word -- was probably used over a two decades ago when RMS started the GNU project to build a Free UNIX. The exact same reasons why the GNU project was started apply to why the ReactOS project should exist.

Today we have Linux. Who knows what we'll have ten years from now if ReactOS can keep up the good work?

Why use Windows?

[Cardbox]

Because one day Microsoft will ban you from using anything that resembles what you now call "Windows". In the interest of providing you a better service, of course, and nothing to do with trying to get more revenue.
Or Microsoft will die. Computer companies are short-lived things, compared to their customers.

ReactOS isn't a panacea

[magefile]

I agree with most of what you said; I think ReactOS will fill an important niche. I ran it in Bochs on my Fedora box once, and it's making me consider buying a small (cheap) hard drive to run it natively.

However, while some bugs can be fixed, and it will be possible to make it run faster, how do you know which bugs (or other non-standard behavior) are taken advantage of by programs that won't run on ReactOS if the bug is fixed?

I asked up-thread, but ...

[magefile]

Since you're a ReactOS dev, I'll ask again.

"I ran [ReactOS] in Bochs on my Fedora box once, and it's making me consider buying a small (cheap) hard drive to run it natively.

However, while some bugs can be fixed, and it will be possible to make it run faster, how do you know which bugs (or other non-standard behavior) are taken advantage of by programs that won't run on ReactOS if the bug is fixed?"

How is this being handled by the developers? What is the plan?

Re:I asked up-thread, but ...

[GvG]

If the bug/non-standard behavior is present in all NT-derived Windows versions then we simply do what Windows does. If it was fixed (or introduced) in later Windows versions, we need to look at the compatibility setting for the particular program (which NT version does the program expect?) in order to determine whether or not to emulate the bug.

Re: Not supported

[RedLaggedTeut]

That the platform is not supported is not a good reason, because the question is: Is the platform being used ?

So you want to reproduce the platform exactly in order to be able to support it; If you have people and source code to work with, you might for example get USB support running on NT, or support for even newer devices.

You could do this for fun, to be able to use old software or for software archeology.

Ever tried running vmware under ReactOS running linux running Wine running CoLinux ?

Re:waste of time:posting on Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you wasting your time posting on /.? Why waste your talent and genius when there are new geek forums waiting for your wisdom?

ReactOS is a good idea

[Orion Blastar]

Good enough to run some Windows apps. I wonder if it is effected by the same Malware and Security breaches that Windows has, or if it is immune to it? If it is the later, I would be very interested in seeing ReactOS run more Windows applications in the near future.