Slashdot Mirror
Ekush: A CherryOS For the Windows World?
GvG writes "Yesterday, Ekush version 0.10 was released (binary only, no source). Ekush is a relatively new attempt at cloning Microsoft Windows. The ReactOS project has the goal of creating a GPLed OS that is compatible with Microsoft Windows applications and drivers.
The release of Ekush caused some uproar in the ReactOS community, since it soon became apparent that Ekush was not much more than a repackaged version of ReactOS. Doing a simple string search for ReactOS on the Ekush binaries showed a number of hits. (Read on for more.)
GvG continues "Shortly after this was reported on the ReactOS mailing list, the Ekush website went down "for maintenance". Today they are back with a slightly altered set of binaries, which no longer contain the ASCII string "ReactOS". However, they forgot to search for Unicode strings... Ekush is not only violating the rights of ReactOS by deriving a product without releasing the modified source, they also derive code of (and are violating the rights of) Wine, FreeType and QEmu."
Larry Snyder adds "Additionally, at the time of this writing, their binary floppy diskette driver appears to be a near exact copy of the Windows 2k pro fdc.sys driver, with the copyright string and header changed."
I have already covered it here.
http://www.winehq.com/?interview=14
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
They do have copyright law in Bangladesh -- they signed onto the Universal Copyright Convention. And they're WTO members, so that's even more restrictive when it comes to intellectual property.
Slow???
We have third party drivers loading, a explorer.exe clone, application support such as OpenOffice for Win32 loading not to mention we have made replacement apps for regedit, taskmgr, and a Windows like install system. Whats slow about ReactOS development?
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
"You see you say open source is not the same as public domain. WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG."
Uhh... only public domain is public domain. Open source is NOT the same as public domain. He's completely correct in this statement.
GPL, BSD, LGPL, etc. are different licenses, true... but none of them are public domain. Public domain refers to a work that has no license attached to it because it was either released to the public domain or the copyright expired.
No. The term "Open Source" is a trademark of the Open Source Initiative and/or Software in the Public Interest, and it has a very specific meaning.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
The interesting thing is that this guy is not a stranger to OSS either, he's got a savannah account.
A picture of this con artist showing off the work of other's he's trying to take credit for: here
The related article says:
"Licensing is one of the problems the Ekush team is expecting to face. As the project is not based in the US, Ekush OS will not be able to obtain the license banner of General Public License (GPL), the US-based licensing company."
Showing that either Mr. Ranju or the journalist (or likely both) have little clue on the GPL.
The fact they went back to hide more 'evidence' clearly shows their intent.
Anyone can mess up ( 'we plan on releasing source',' we didnt mean to change said copyright text', etc ).. But clearly this isnt a screwup.
Looks like their site has been turned off by their hosting service.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
Actually, they still claim they will release Cherry OS on November 25.
As a direct result of the overwhelming response to our October 12 announcement, and in order to provide current and future customers with the timely service and attention such high-volume demand requires, MXS has chosen to extend the beta development for CherryOS. In order to accommodate those who were inconvenienced by the interruption of immediate access to the CherryOS download, and to further validate this breakthrough product, MXS will provide a free trial download of the CherryOS software, in addition to the purchase download on November 25, 2004.
It'll be interresting to see if they will actually still try to release it after it's already been proven to be a fake.
Give me a job. Please?
You don't understand the difference between copyrights and patents.
Many people here are for Microsoft enforcing Microsoft copyrights to the full extent of the law: only if Microsoft actually enforces their copyrights do people realize how overpriced their software actually is. But Microsoft marketing knows full well that the company wouldn't exist without widespread piracy. Selective and inconsistent enforcement by companies like Microsoft is a huge problem.
What people get upset about is when Microsoft applies for patents on technology they usually didn't invent or that is blatantly obvious and then try to enforce those patents.
they also derive code of (and are violating the rights of) Wine, FreeType and QEmu
Just a pit-nick; AFAIK FreeType is distributed under a license which does not require redistribution of source.