Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

ReactOS 0.3.14 Released With Improved Networking Stack

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the alternative-os-for-the-alternative-hacker dept.

Open Source 176

An anonymous reader wrote in with news of the latest release of ReactOS, a project to create a complete reimplementation of Windows. The highlights of this release are the integration of a new network stack based upon lwIP, the ability to build using Microsoft's C compiler, and Wifi support. There are a few options for trying it out (emulator image and a livecd amongst others) and source code over at Sourceforge.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Windows 98, finally! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967267)

Ah, FOSS Windows 98 for the masses! How we've missed you...

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967423)

I thought their target was an NT-based system. XP, perhaps?

Re:Windows 98, finally! (4, Informative)

MagicM (85041) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967479)

From reactos.org [reactos.org] :

ReactOS is a free, modern operating system based on the design of Windows XP/2003. Written completely from scratch, it aims to follow the Windows-NT architecture designed by Microsoft from the hardware level right through to the application level.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967513)

Yeah, only a moron would remake a 14 year old OS. Now a 9 year old OS, that makes perfect sense. I hope they finish soon and get started on a FOSS version of Mac OS 8.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (2)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967647)

That is a pretty declarative statement. Something has to power those masses of Pentium4/256MB machines, and something has to play those ancient games your mom buys in the clearance aisle of the discount supermarket.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967911)

and aren't win7 and win8 still more or less continuations of that "branch" over at MS anyways?

anyhow, reactos seems like a very well done oss project actually. they have working stuff and ms driver compatibility is actually pretty cool(though they don't seem to support modern 3rd party gfx card drivers too well, if they had that and sound.. well, fuck, then it would be a fun os to run more seriously, but even now it's a pretty cool hobby project, certainly cooler than yet another bsd anyways).

Re:Windows 98, finally! (2)

edmicman (830206) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969417)

Funny you mention this because the last few family machines I've had to mess with (and all of the computers that haven't been replaced yet at my wife's workplace) have been Pentium4/256MB Dell or Dell-knockoffs. What was with all the WinXP P4s with only 256MB of RAM? They don't run half-bad with 512 minimum or especially if you max out the RAM. But it's downright painful to run XP with a piddling 256MB....I can't believe they ever sold them.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967727)

Maybe they're just doing it for fun? What's wrong with that?

Re:Windows 98, finally! (3, Insightful)

robthebloke (1308483) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967859)

They were reacting to microsofts monopoly on the OS market in the mid 90's, and aimed to produce a free version. IIRC, a number of academics got involved because it was very useful to help teach the kernel differences between WinNT and linux (obviously you can't look at the actual WinNT source!).

Re:Windows 98, finally! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967985)

Yes you can. Microsoft created the Windows Academic Program for teaching the kernel internals in an academic setting. You get access to the Windows Research Kernel with source code.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968105)

Then you too can forever be polluted in a way that makes you unable to work on any other OS, WINE, or dozens of other commercial and free software projects!

Who in the hell would want to hire someone exposed to that to work on their software? You would be living in fear of the MS lawsuit.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38970009)

I don't know, does looking at the Linux source make it impossible for you to ever write non-GPL-compatible OS's ever again?

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967857)

Yeah, only a moron would remake a 14 year old OS. Now a 9 year old OS, that makes perfect sense.

So what design is Windows Vista based on?
And Windows 7?

Re:Windows 98, finally! (2)

spongman (182339) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968601)

wow, you would have had to have been really moronic to have remade a 20-year-old OS back in 1991...

Re:Windows 98, finally! (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969513)

Since so many businesses still rely on software that itself rely on Windows XP, they're doing great work.
Supose a big business relies on X, and X only works in XP. That business is stuck with XP, specially if they software vendor for X is unwilling to upgrade, or the cost it too high, etc.

It's true, shame on them for using X in the first place, but since ReactOS aims to be binary-compatible with XP, it's a good alternative in future, since I'm sure it'll have a better ecosystem for a more "gradual" migration from Windows to another real OS.

Also, wine use to lag about 4 or 5 versions of DirectX behind. Now they're almost catching up. You need to start with an older target and then catch up if you want a binary-compatible replacement for windows.

Re:Windows 98, finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38970187)

WinXP works fine for the few Win-specific apps I still use. I look forward to the day when ReactOS is functional enough to use them, so I no longer have to concern myself with "being allowed" to use my Windows install disc on some old hardware/virtual install. Also,a lot of the work ReactOS does, goes into Wine.
    Economically, when ReactOS becomes fully usable, it'll probably cause Microsoft to lower the price of their latest release, in order to entice people to upgrade to MS's DRM-encumbered, industry-surveilled, backwards-incompatable OS.
    You'd like a better price on that, wouldn't you?

Re:Windows 98, finally! (1)

Tim4444 (1122173) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967823)

Didn't you read the headline? "improved networking stack" -- That was XP!

At least the project is in the spirit of things: http://www.reactos.org/about.html [reactos.org]

ReactOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967303)

I remember testing this out a few years ago, hopefully it's more stable than previously as well.. looking forward to trying it when I get home.

Re:ReactOS (1)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967987)

it's still the same mess of code with a fraction of the hardware support that linux or even bsd has.

Re:ReactOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968185)

Given that one of its pluses is that it explicitly supports Windows device drivers, isn't it likely to end up with rather better hardware support?

Re:ReactOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968835)

Given that one of its pluses is that it explicitly supports Windows device drivers, isn't it likely to end up with rather better hardware support?

Nah, it's been my experience that Linux has far better overall hardware support than Windows. It's only with the newest hardware that it has trouble.
  It's frequently the difference between an in-mainline, actively maintained driver shipped with the Linux kernel, and an old, unmaintained binary blob from five years ago that you have to download from an unreliable FTP server in Singapore, and which randomly locks up the hardware and/or the computer it's attached to.

Re:ReactOS (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969383)

Nah, it's been my experience that Linux has far better overall hardware support than Windows....

  It's frequently the difference between an in-mainline, actively maintained driver shipped with the Linux kernel, and an old, unmaintained binary blob from five years ago that you have to download from an unreliable FTP server in Singapore, and which randomly locks up the hardware and/or the computer it's attached to.

Usually "better" denotes quality.

Re:ReactOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969555)

Nah, it's been my experience that Linux has far better overall hardware support than Windows....

  It's frequently the difference between an in-mainline, actively maintained driver shipped with the Linux kernel, and an old, unmaintained binary blob from five years ago that you have to download from an unreliable FTP server in Singapore, and which randomly locks up the hardware and/or the computer it's attached to.

Usually "better" denotes quality.

So when the old, buggy Windows driver "randomly locks up the hardware and/or the computer," it's not an indicator of poor quality on your planet? What color is the sky there? Is it orange? I bet that's cool.

Time to switch operating systems (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967307)

At this point I think it's time for me to upgrade from FreeDOS to ReactOS.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (0)

protohacker (1208806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967347)

Why would you use FreeDOS over any flavor of Linux?

in the words of foghorn leghorn (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967385)

it's a joke, son

Re:in the words of foghorn leghorn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969203)

i'm not your son, pops

Re:Time to switch operating systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967399)

Cuuuz It's NOT Linux? :D

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967453)

I guess one might use FreeDOS to run classic games and other legacy applications designed for MS-DOS in a virtual machine. Is DOSEMU (paravirtualized DOS for Linux) still maintained?

Re:Time to switch operating systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967547)

For that I would recommend DOSBox [dosbox.com], which is specifically optimized for running classic MS-DOS games.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (2)

sg_oneill (159032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967593)

Its all about DosBOX these days. it runs very well and still actively maintained.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (5, Informative)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967775)

As a matter of fact, DOSBox is superior to DOS in a virtual machine. Try running a multimedia CD-Rom game of the era, like Burn:Cycle, 11th Hour, Phantasmagoria in DOS virtual machine and you get terrible frame rates, popping and cracking audio, goofy mouse problems, etc. DOSBox seems to "Just work".

Also, DOSBox is not only still being poked at, a lot of games on Steam use DOSBox to run.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (4, Informative)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968613)

DOSEMU is still maintained, though it doesn't get a whole lot of development these days; not a huge deal with it to fix yet. As other replies explained, DOSBox is usually better for games (especially for sound support), but DOSBox has a strict development policy of being only for games, and there's plenty of DOS applications DOSBox does not run and likely will not run in the near future. DOSEMU packages FreeDOS with it and is nearly 100% compatible with all DOS software.

One thing I particularly like about DOSEMU over DOSBox is the filesystem handling. Everything in DOSEMU is mounted as a network share inside of DOS, even the C: drive; this allows you to change around files and whatnot on the native Linux filesystem and have the changes immediately appear in DOS (can't do that with DOSBox). Additionally, DOSEMU has long filename suppport, which is a huge godsend; DOSBox only supports 8+3 names (with its own muddling of non-DOS-compatible names behind the scenes... DOS games don't need long filename support so DOSBox is likely to never support LFNs).

All that being said, I highly recommend avoiding the release version and go straight to the subversion trunk. There are many quite serious bugs in 1.4.0, but I'm not aware of any that exist in the trunk; the developer is rather quick to look into and fix problems when they're reported.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967459)

Because FreeDOS has more games and commercial software that it can run?

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

Narishma (822073) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967845)

I wouldn't be so sure of that. DosBox on Linux will probably run more games than FreeDOS, especially if you try to run FreeDOS on modern hardware.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968011)

Native games. Using emulator is cheating.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967549)

Why would you use FreeDOS over any flavor of Linux?

Because it's DOS compatible.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (-1)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967561)

You are a fucking moron.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (4, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967829)

Why would you use FreeDOS over any flavor of Linux?

1. You can boot it from a floppy (or CD or USB key) in seconds, which is perfect for basic testing of older hardware.

2. Many situations do not require multitasking, ie: point of sale, etc. Many good but older point of sale programs exist that run in DOS. You can back up the entire system in seconds. I'm actually considering it for a system as we speak, since I already own the $3000 software.

3. Many situations do not require internet access (see point of sale, above).

4. Great as a standalone, or for dual booting, or virtualization for playing old games.

5. Flashing BIOS.

6. Linux isn't the answer to all computing needs. Many of them, but not all.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969615)

Linux is faget OS. Fucking faget Linux zealot.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (3, Informative)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967391)

At this point I think it's time for me to upgrade from FreeDOS to ReactOS.

FreeDOS has legitimate uses -- I have found it on manufacturers' BIOS updater images.
I, of course, do my updates under Linux with flashrom utility, but I have some taste and sanity, things that most people lose after being exposed to BIOS source code.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967663)

It's also used in quite a few embedded systems running low-end x86 chips. The advantage of something like DOS in this respect is that it's almost like not having an OS, but it still gives you a basic filesystem and program launcher, then gets out of your way.

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967809)

It's also used in quite a few embedded systems running low-end x86 chips. The advantage of something like DOS in this respect is that it's almost like not having an OS, but it still gives you a basic filesystem and program launcher, then gets out of your way.

Actually that would be the original GRUB (or GRUB2 if you like having a requirement for boot media that contains modules -- I don't because my embedded system that uses it, boots from a section in the same flash chip as BIOS).

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

jampola (1994582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967491)

I've got an old 19in CRT, p2 450 and an old game cabinet that I want to put to good use. Using an FOSS version of Windows instead of messing with WINE is quite attractive to me, especially for the games that won't run in FreeDOS!

Re:Time to switch operating systems (2)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967817)

Well, WINE is leagues ahead of how capable ReactOS is. At least WINE will have a stable kernel and drivers behind it

Re:Time to switch operating systems (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968095)

Really? Windows games in an arcade cabinet?

What's the point??!?!?! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967351)

There are many possible reasons why people want a functioning clone of MS Windows that can use the same drivers etc.
If nothing else, it's an interesting project.

Why not Linux? Because drivers don't always work. Why not WINE? ReactOS and WINE share a lot of code, but WINE is aiming to solve a different problem. Why not just use old MS Windows? Because the source is not there, and neither is support.

People would find a use for a Free MS Windows clone the same way that people find a use for a Free MS DOS clone (FreeDOS).

I for one am excited about ReactOS. Here's hoping they continue the good work for many years

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (0)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967477)

Duplicating decade old technology is an interesting project?

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967595)

Yes.. Ask Linus about Linux, us BSD folks, OS x is nextstep etc.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (2)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967667)

Except that your examples are not trying to be exact duplicates.

And didn't answer why.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

imakemusic (1164993) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967605)

Yes.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967705)

ReactOS is duplicating Windows NT, which is a design originally from 1993, although they're actually aiming for compatibility with the 2001 version. Linux and *BSD are duplicating UNIX, which is a design originally from 1969. Interesting? Maybe not. Useful? Probably.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968389)

Linux and *BSD are duplicating UNIX, which is a design originally from 1969. Interesting? Maybe not. Useful? Probably.

Way to be inaccurate and outright liar!!!!

They are not duplicating anything. The modern Unices are *based* on the original design. They have evolved
quite a lot. Something which of course cannot be said for ReactOS, since it is actually *duplicating* decades old technology.

Keep your hobbies, and your opinions about them, to thy self, especially if you are going to lie about them.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968895)

ReactOS is not just duplicating the design. It is also extending it. It is, however, aiming to keep the same ABI. This is hardly an original goal - it is one shared by several modern UNIX and UNIX-like systems. If you think ReactOS is just copying the Windows NT design and not adding improvements, then you've obviously not paid any attention to it in the last ten years.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (2)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969337)

Not according to ReactOS's home page.

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html [reactos.org]

"The main goal of the ReactOS project is to provide an operating system which is binary compatible with Windows. This will allow your Windows applications and drivers to run as they would on your Windows system. Additionally, the look and feel of the Windows operating system is used, such that people accustomed to the familiar user interface of Windows® would find using ReactOS straightforward. The ultimate goal of ReactOS is to allow you to remove Windows® and install ReactOS without the end user noticing the change."

I don't see anything about adding improvements there.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969471)

And the design goal of Linux was to provide a POSIX-compliant kernel for running UNIX programs. There was nothing about adding improvements there either. So, ummm, what's your point?

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969497)

Cite any improvements that ReactOS has made or is going to make. Otherwise, your claim is baseless.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969809)

I don't really follow ReactOS development actively, but one thing that they've done is improve the OS personality layer so that it's possible for userspace programs to use libraries that depend on different personalities, unlike Windows where you have to pick between Win32 and POSIX.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969973)

If you think ReactOS is just copying the Windows NT design and not adding improvements, then you've obviously not paid any attention to it in the last ten years.

That is your statement a moment ago!

Now read again what you just answered :

I don't really follow ReactOS development actively

Do they award eponymous trolls with medals in slashdot? o_0

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969527)

Why do you keep trying to twist this?

Comparing the goals of these 2 different efforts is apples and oranges and effectively dishonest.

Answer me this: Why would someone want to use ReactOS?
My answer: Because someone would like a windows system without the MS logo on it.
Your answer:?

Answer me this: Why would someone want to use a *nix(Linux,BSD,blah) system?
My answer: Because someone would like a *modern* OS, that just *happens* to be *based* on an old design/platform.
Your answer:?

Do you see now why I think you are trying to twist this?

Sorry that I don't have an account.

Anonymous Coward

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (5, Interesting)

johanwanderer (1078391) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967787)

With Windows XP going away, in a few years you might be looking for an old box to run your favorite program. In another few years you might be completely out of luck. Even further out, what if Microsoft went bankrupt (or bought by Apple, Google, RedHat, whoever) and their OS division is shelved?

Projects like ReactOS, Wine [winehq.org] , DOSBox [dosbox.com] , etc. allow you to have another possible path in that uncertain future. Your program might not work out-of-the-box, but you have the source to tinker with and try to get it to work.

That is probably the same reason for running Wine on Windows [winehq.org] , which is probably better than running an old program within a virtual machine [microsoft.com] .

Soon enough, you will probably run all of your programs in a browser [slashdot.org] anyway. But I digress :)

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968047)

You do realize you can still run XP all you like even after it's been EOLed, right? Why not just keep running XP instead of an alpha-quality clone?

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (2)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968239)

So long as you are happy never receiving another update, security or otherwise.

Don't get me wrong - I seriously doubt that ReactOS will be up to XP-standards in 2 years, but such a thing certainly WOULD be useful.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (4, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968247)

Um, because hardware evolves. Before too long nobody will have XP drivers for any hardware that is being manufactured. Compatible hardware will gradually cease to be available. Ever try to find a working MFM hard drive to put in that original IBM PC with MS-DOS? How about a Soundblaster card which is the only sound hardware that a lot of DOS games supported?

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969733)

Virtual machine.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968533)

Alpha quality doesn't mean unsuitable for a certain purpose, if it supports a minimal subset.

One particular use is in software support where an external client may have a certain configuration of XP/Vista/7 that is unable to be deployed on the company's network for licensing, availability reasons.

Having a free clone is another implementation of 'Windows' that may demonstrate a particular fault not detectable on a developer's machine. On more than one occasion my bacon has been saved by running wine on linux in a VM for a flaw that didn't show up in a particular service pack of XP or as the client had migrated to Win7.

Having ReactOS deployable without licensing or activation concerns would be another option and closer to the XP experience that wine in an X11 context.

Re:What's the point??!?!?! (0)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968323)

Quick! Travel back in time and tell Linus Torvalds not to reimplement decades-old UNIX!

Only one minor disappointment. (5, Interesting)

Lose (1901896) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967387)

They almost finished getting the new USB stack up and running in a different branch, but it isn't reliable (or stable even in most virtual environments) to sync it into the main branch prior to release. That's fine in a virtual environment, but on real hardware it would be nice for a few different reasons (ReactOS on USB may be possible soon because of this, maybe even debug output over USB, to name a few).

I'll just keep building the USB branch until then.

thIs is goatsEx (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967419)

worse and worse. As against vigorous shit-filled, RAM) for about 20 confirmed t^hat *BSD

Gone a long way (1)

Muramas95 (2459776) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967469)

ROS has fixed a lot of their issues this last release and I look forward to the upcoming years when it will be stable enough for daily use.

Re:Gone a long way (3, Insightful)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967607)

daily use

To do WHAT?

Re:Gone a long way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967701)

I would download it if it could play games like System Shock 2. That's about it.

Re:Gone a long way (3, Funny)

robthebloke (1308483) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967947)

To do WHAT?

Look at pron on IE6,
Run some malware,
You know, the usual....

I'm normally all for "just because" but... (0, Flamebait)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967633)

I can't help but think a number of talented people have wasted quite a lot of life on a project that is pretty much without value. Sometime the bazaar just really does produce chaos.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967771)

Just like Linux right?

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968031)

I can't help but think a number of talented people have wasted quite a lot of life on a project that is pretty much without value. Sometime the bazaar just really does produce chaos.

I'd hate to read what you think of the wine project.
These kinds of projects take time, decades even. So its not for the "I want it now" cry baby crowd.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968075)

If these talented people have enjoyed the time they spent building ReactOS, then they haven't wasted it at all.

In addition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968391)

The Random Joe who pulled that creaky old "waste of time" argument out of the toilet has absolutely ZERO say on what makes a good use of the developer's time. Only the developer himself has any say in that, because quite simply, his brain is inside his head and therefore his thoughts and conclusions belong exclusively to him, not Random Joe.

So Random Joe, get off your high horse and do something useful like the developers you speak of.

Re:In addition (1, Troll)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968681)

I've been involved in Linux since Red Hat was pre 1.0, I have worked on numerous projects and volunteered time for things like the OLPC project... so sorry AC, but save it. There are projects that looking back I had wasted a lot of time and effort on that were "just because" type things, as I now get older I look back and realize the folly of youth and wish I had maybe spent that time on something more productive or valuable. They are free to do what they want, but I doubt this will ever be more than Alpha/Beta stuff and really not worth the effort.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (0)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968653)

I get that, and I'm sure they did gain some valuable insight and learned a lot but the end result is a bit useless. Not that it could not become useful or have value in some cases, but if this really is truly all new code then it is a waste in that they could have put that effort into an OS or improving an OS instead of still being in alpha of a 14 year old OS. Different strokes and all that but lives are short and I've wasted time on failed projects that now that I'm older I wish I had not.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968189)

I can't help but think a number of talented people have wasted quite a lot of life on a project that is pretty much without value. Sometime the bazaar just really does produce chaos.

I disagree...The value lis in the experience of new programmers getting their feet wet in an actual production environment. Teaching them how to program and debug their codes.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968223)

The fact that you can so quickly and easily sum up the volunteers' time as wasted betrays how narrow and constrictive your philosophical world view is. You sound very sure that your world view and methodology for assigning existential value to human activities is correct. Perhaps it's not.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (4, Insightful)

jdavidb (449077) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968595)

They said that about Mozilla for years. Sometimes the bazaar produces something that only few people find to be of any value for many many years that suddenly becomes of value to many people. Probably most projects never make it, period, but as long as someone finds it interesting to work on, more power to them.

If you don't find it of value, don't invest time or resources in it. :)

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (3, Interesting)

ilikenwf (1139495) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968763)

Well, I guess this gives an alternative to an alternative for that old pentium 100 I have in the attic...

In all seriousness, I guess this COULD be eventually useful if they manage to get it working with modern DirectX games and such... While I'm a Linux guy, I do enjoy gaming, natively and in WINE. ReactOS as I understand it contributes code to WINE [reactos.org] (and vice-versa)...so IMHO it's still a win. Not necessarily epic yet, but it could be. That symbiotic relationship is worth something...I'm just not sure what.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969015)

What everyone else in this thread is failing to realize is that there is quite a bit of the NT API that is undocumented. So, creating a reverse-engineered clone of the OS can help learn more about the undocumented bits. This will be more important as later versions of Windows certainly implement more DRM in the OS itself (and certainly you can count on them to use more and more undocumented functions) and as Microsoft continues to put more and more layers between the OS and the programmer, hiding a lot of what is really going on from the programmers.

Re:I'm normally all for "just because" but... (1)

evil_aaronm (671521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969361)

I view this in terms of the number of clients of mine who come to me after hosing their Windows machines and have also managed to lose their official Windows product keys or installation media. Sure, I could charge them the cost of replacement, but if and when ROS works - well enough, of course - it would save them money and me the hassle.

And it may be "old" Windows, but lots of my customers don't need Win 7. Heck, even at my day job - sounds like seamen's - we're still using XP Pro. This work is not "without value."

Dooooooomed. (2, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967807)

Best case: ReactOS remains a toy of little practical use.
Worst case: ReactOS succeeds, Microsoft sues either the devs or the users for infringing several thousand patents.

Re:Dooooooomed. (2)

HBI (604924) | more than 2 years ago | (#38967991)

There will be a repository beyond the reach of Microsoft's software patents.

In 2014 when XP support ends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38967913)

I really hope ReactOS is at 0.5 beta by then. It'll be a relief from having to choose between 50 linux distros, because there's no way I'm getting another Windows or Mac OS.

Then again there is PC-BSD :)

Re:In 2014 when XP support ends (1, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968115)

Or you can just continue to use XP since it's not going to stop working?

Re:In 2014 when XP support ends (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968699)

Except that many cooperations continue to cling to XP as staff retraining on 7 and the cost of upgrades aren't justified in a struggling economy. Purchasing new hardware for which only Win7 drivers exist is problematic. When you have the source to the OS, writing drivers that can be possibly based on other platforms such as Linux or BSD may be a blessing. A free stable clone is a migration path.

Further, not every platform is x86, nor does every use case require binary compatibility. e.g. Can Windows XP, not this shiny new Win8, run natively on ARM? Booting into ReactOS to run libreoffice on an 'Android' tablet such as the Asus Transformer is a possibility in the not too distant future. The OP suggested he had no desire to run a different Windows, Mac or Linux.

This project scratches an itch for a number of people. That it might not be personally beneficial to you is no cause for skepticism.

Re:In 2014 when XP support ends (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969467)

Huh? Most of your rant has nothing to do with what I was responding to. He was talking about replacing XP with ReactOS and as such my question was why not just continue using XP if that's what you want? What does ARM or companies not wanting to upgrade to Win or the rest of your rant have to do with anything?

Interesting project, but not a real alternative (1)

Mithent (2515236) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968385)

It's an interesting project, but I fear that its progress is too slow for it to be of any practical use. It's been under development since 1998, and is still in alpha and lacking core features. As a hobbyist project I'm sure it's great, and it's hugely ambitious, so I'm hardly surprised that progress has been slow. But I have no idea when it's going to achieve its aim of being 100% compatible with Windows, if ever.

Almost like Hurd (4, Interesting)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968477)

I've been hearing of this OS since the time I was a member of an Alpha-NT group. They've been taking all these years, and are not even on 1.x even now. These guys are giving Hurd strong competition on who takes forever to come up w/ an OS, particularly given all the FOSS OSs out there.

On the project itself, I think that it had a window of opportunity when MS abandoned the MIPS and Alpha versions of NT years ago. At that time, there were NT users for this platform worried about where it would leave them, and this would definitely have been a godsend. However, on the x86 platform, it's pretty much irrelevant - either people have Windows, and if that's not acceptable, they can run Linux. As it is, there are some things, like NTFS file system support that ReactOS doesn't/can't support, so it's not like even close to a complete substitute. The only people I can imgaine who might have (had) an use for it would be NT/RISC users, but that assumes that they never moved from NT to Linux or RISC to x64.

Re:Almost like Hurd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38970111)

I'm sure that there will be a 3rd party NTFS driver that you can install by the time ReactOS is ready for at least geek-level general use.

The race is on (3, Interesting)

Liambp (1565081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38968499)

to see if they can they release version 1.0 of ReactOS before the X86 architecture becomes obsolete.

Re:The race is on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969057)

There is an ARM branch in the works

FAT CHANCE: Qemu will save the day. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38969773)

With projects like Qemu, then ReactOS will just grab a Virtual Terminal or XDisplay, so this way DRI drivers will become obsolete in favor of drivers deployed to a safe-standard NT architecture.

Transgaming WineX and CodeWeavers Wine and ReactOS have always had the reputation among Linux gamers as stealing the light from GNU/Linux in favor of another HAL and SAL.

Virtual Box Support? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38968579)

They can't even do a release that supports the Virtual Box Additions, I tried installing them and it bluescreened me.

ntfs3g, fuse, ext4 ... (3, Interesting)

GodWasAnAlien (206300) | more than 2 years ago | (#38969649)

Without support for modern file systems, It can not be taken seriously.

They should not dismiss suggestions to adopt use of fuse based filesystems such as ntfs3g, as this may likely be the most direct way to get support for popular file systems.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?