Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ReactOS Now Runs Abiword

Posted by timothy on from the when-vms-is-too-manstream dept.

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..."

5 of 62 comments (clear)

  1. Ummm . . . by erikharrison · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  2. Re:ReactOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    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...

  3. waste of time by tanakan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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 ?!

    1. Re:waste of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      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.

  4. Isn't this called Mono? by mactari · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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)

    --

    It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.