Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Sun Dec 21, 2014 1:14 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: XP may have died today, but ReactOS 0.3.5 is released
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:18 pm 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
The day Billy steps down, we have an free and advanced open source operating system providing a ground-up implementation of a Microsoft Windows XP compatible operating system. ReactOS aims to achieve complete binary compatibility with both applications and device drivers meant for NT and XP operating systems, by using a similar architecture and providing a complete and equivalent public interface. ReactOS is not Linux and aims to run your applications and use your hardware, a free operating system for everyone!

This download is in ISO format. You will need a program like NERO to burn it to an installation CD.

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:59 pm 
[Team Member]
[Team Member]

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 4:31 am
Posts: 11117
Location: Home Sweet Home
Well...I downloaded both files and the live cd did not work :cry: the bright side is the install cd works just fine :D ...but then again there is no way to install drivers and the A drive doesn't show up :cry: This distro has a verrry long way to go. :wink:

Nasty


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:00 pm 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
Nastyman wrote:
Well...I downloaded both files and the live cd did not work :cry: the bright side is the install cd works just fine :D ...but then again there is no way to install drivers and the A drive doesn't show up :cry: This distro has a verrry long way to go. :wink:

Nasty


Huh? No problemo with the live CD on my end, but I didn't play with it all too long. I soon installed into a partition and sailed off with the new OS. I like what I see.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:42 pm 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
How much progress have they made?

Glanced at the screenshots. It shows promise.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:08 am 
[Team Member]
[Team Member]

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 4:31 am
Posts: 11117
Location: Home Sweet Home
kleinkinstein wrote:
Nastyman wrote:
Well...I downloaded both files and the live cd did not work :cry: the bright side is the install cd works just fine :D ...but then again there is no way to install drivers and the A drive doesn't show up :cry: This distro has a verrry long way to go. :wink:

Nasty


Huh? No problemo with the live CD on my end, but I didn't play with it all too long. I soon installed into a partition and sailed off with the new OS. I like what I see.


Did you get any drivers to install and how did you do it? The only things I could install so far were 7zip, Firefox and Thunderbird. As for trying to install drivers, I don't get the option to point to the inf file, just the folder it is in and it won't go no farther in the install sheild :cry: Have you found a way around this and please explain how you did it.

As for the live cd, I may have a corrupt file I tried to make the cd from.

Nasty


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:24 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
I might drop this in a VM when I get home tonight...

Does it have a supported hardware list?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:43 am 
Malware specialist
Malware specialist
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:49 pm
Posts: 11696
Location: Kansas City, KS
CrashTECH wrote:
I might drop this in a VM when I get home tonight...

Does it have a supported hardware list?


I've tried it in a VM, it should run on any x86 processor with at least 512MB of RAM.

For a complete list of drivers and software that are compatible, see here.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:33 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24238
Location: Granite Heaven
You guys might want to read their 'about' page for an interesting explanation of their project.

I don't agree with their comparison of WinNT with the Unix family, but I recommend reading what they are about: link


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:53 am 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
Indeed a very interesting open-source project began in 1996 has led to the alpha release of ReactOS, a clone of Windows XP based on the architecture of Windows Server 2003. I predict these folks can produce a stable, free OS within the next few years if they are encouraged and supported. This could prove to be a bigger threat than Linux to Microsoft 's dominance.

Microsoft has been in these battles before, but those against the clones of MS-DOS were rather easy for the company to win because the tech media simply parroted whatever Microsoft told them. By the time any serious threat could emerge, the Windows phenomenon was under way, and Microsoft was unstoppable. But since the invention of Windows NT—of which all subsequent versions of Windows, including Vista, are direct relatives—the company has been standing still in terms of new development. Thus, the company and the Windows OS are a sitting target for a workable clone. Even the next version of Windows, dubbed Windows 7, is more of the same. Microsoft will have to resort to suing any cloners who come around.

If an open-source version of Windows can be developed that is totally compatible with the abundance of Windows drivers—the idea behind ReactOS—then Microsoft will have to go back to work.

What I'd like to see in a new OS is the elimination of the Registry. This was a bad idea, and made sense only in a world where things had to be shared to an extreme. The Registry is the bane of the basic Windows architecture and should be unnecessary in our age of infinite storage. There was a time when programs needed to share resources, but there is no reason for that anymore. If a program needs a specific DLL, it should be able to simply find it and copy it to the subdirectory in which the program bundle resides. In that way, you would be able to move the program bundle easily from machine to machine. Yet it is still difficult to upgrade your computer and take your apps with you without annoying reinstalls. The newest versions of Laplink PCmover are a step in the right direction, but wouldn't it be easier to just pick up a folder and move it without worry? Ahhh the simple nirvana. One can dream, right?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:01 pm 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:29 pm
Posts: 6328
Location: Far away from you
heh.. they tout it as reliable, but on top of the page and then say ReactOS 0.3.5 is still in under heavy development (alpha stage) and is not ready for everyday use.

Sounds like they hired marketing people before developers ;)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:19 pm 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
furball146 wrote:
heh.. they tout it as reliable, but on top of the page and then say ReactOS 0.3.5 is still in under heavy development (alpha stage) and is not ready for everyday use.

Sounds like they hired marketing people before developers ;)


No different than say Skype in it's perpetual beta version. Read thru the tea leaves grasshopper!


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:43 pm 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:29 pm
Posts: 6328
Location: Far away from you
Interesting comparison since Skype's worst enemy is themselves.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:31 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24238
Location: Granite Heaven
kleinkinstein wrote:
furball146 wrote:
heh.. they tout it as reliable, but on top of the page and then say ReactOS 0.3.5 is still in under heavy development (alpha stage) and is not ready for everyday use.

Sounds like they hired marketing people before developers ;)


No different than say Skype in it's perpetual beta version. Read thru the tea leaves grasshopper!


True .. but there is a huge difference between alpha and beta releases.

I'm also not a fan of the Windows architecture, so I'm not sure I'd encourage someone trying to reinvent technology is a decade out of date .. that is an eternity in CS!

Linux has evolved far beyond Windows ... look at the plethora of filesystems that offer features that Vista had to abandon, for instance.

Still, I do like seeing someone stepping on toes in Redmond, and it is an interesting project .. :) .. thanks for the link, klein.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:09 am 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:54 am
Posts: 551
actually i would argue that vista is NOT simply an upgraded version or NT, which is why is has enjoyed less then steller success. While the file system is pretty much the same(NTFS i believe V5), the kernal and network stack from my understanding have been totally re designed.
All the non 9x based OSes before vista I would agree, and un officially are even versioned as such

NT 3.51 -> 4.0
2000 = NT 5.0
XP = NT 5.1x
server 2003 = NT 5.2x
while vista is technically 6.0/6.1, the kernal and stack arent.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:53 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
Jipstyle wrote:
I'm also not a fan of the Windows architecture, so I'm not sure I'd encourage someone trying to reinvent technology is a decade out of date .. that is an eternity in CS!

Linux has evolved far beyond Windows ... look at the plethora of filesystems that offer features that Vista had to abandon, for instance.

Still, I do like seeing someone stepping on toes in Redmond, and it is an interesting project .. :) .. thanks for the link, klein.


Come on with your history now Jip. Linux has roots far older than windows. I am sure you know that UNIX started in 1969, and Linux didn't come till 1991! That is a bit more than 10 years. I don't think the Windows arch is as bad as you seem to think it is. All opinion of course. React OS is probably (assuming it succeeds) going to squish Linux in terms of compatibility, meaning that it could be the idea alternative to windows, especially for those who really like their current windows applications (or just want something plain familiar).


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:57 am 
Klamath
Klamath
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 240
rpcblast wrote:
actually i would argue that vista is NOT simply an upgraded version or NT, which is why is has enjoyed less then steller success. While the file system is pretty much the same(NTFS i believe V5), the kernal and network stack from my understanding have been totally re designed.
All the non 9x based OSes before vista I would agree, and un officially are even versioned as such

NT 3.51 -> 4.0
2000 = NT 5.0
XP = NT 5.1x
server 2003 = NT 5.2x
while vista is technically 6.0/6.1, the kernal and stack arent.


my understanding was that XP and 2000 were built on the NT kernel....Vista was built on 2003's kernel.
Never did like 2003...
Glenn Condrey


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:31 am 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:54 am
Posts: 551
from my understanding, server 2003 was pretty much built on the xp kernal, and that vista was a kernal rewrite.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:52 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
rpcblast wrote:
from my understanding, server 2003 was pretty much built on the xp kernal, and that vista was a kernal rewrite.


You are correct.

For all intents and purposes... XP and Server 2003 are "near" identical as far as the kernel goes. I am sure there are differences but you will find that if you try one of the many tutorials for turning server into a work station that you are able to use most XP drivers on 2k3.

Vista was a re-write, and a much needed one. They still have a ways to go, but you need to get what you have out there and get it tested and see what issue crop up from real world useage.

Server 2008 is a MUCH improved version, although still based on Vista. You have the same relationship with Vista and 2k8 as you did with XP and 2k3.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:58 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24238
Location: Granite Heaven
CrashTECH wrote:
Jipstyle wrote:
I'm also not a fan of the Windows architecture, so I'm not sure I'd encourage someone trying to reinvent technology is a decade out of date .. that is an eternity in CS!

Linux has evolved far beyond Windows ... look at the plethora of filesystems that offer features that Vista had to abandon, for instance.

Still, I do like seeing someone stepping on toes in Redmond, and it is an interesting project .. :) .. thanks for the link, klein.


Come on with your history now Jip. Linux has roots far older than windows. I am sure you know that UNIX started in 1969, and Linux didn't come till 1991! That is a bit more than 10 years.


Linux has ROOTS far older than Windows (though I think your date of conception for Windows is about half a decade late .. Windows was released in 1985 ), but linux itself uses technology that is much more recent that Windows Vista.

For instance, journaled filesystems arrived in linux in '99 and we are still waiting for them for Windows. They were supposed to arrive with Vista (along with a DB-based FS which actually would have been more 'advanced' than any of the linux FS), but got canned. NTFS? Come on.

Quote:
I don't think the Windows arch is as bad as you seem to think it is. All opinion of course.


All opinion indeed. :)

It is clear that the architecture used for GNU/linux is ideal for open-source collaboration. Unlike Windows, which hauls massive amounts of antique code around until the next rewrite (I think Vista is the first OS to get rid of all the code used in DOS), linux is designed to be modular. IMO, any OS that requires a reboot after installing drivers needs an overhaul. ;)

Quote:
React OS is probably (assuming it succeeds) going to squish Linux in terms of compatibility, meaning that it could be the idea alternative to windows, especially for those who really like their current windows applications (or just want something plain familiar).


ReactOS is wine for the OS, really. Wine is a rewrite of Windows APIs while ReactOS is a rewrite of Windows.

As for squishing linux .. ReactOS has at least a year but reasonably more like 4 or 5 years before they can produce anything ready for the masses. Actually, a year is ridiculous, so lets say two.

In two years, processors will be multi-core and all apps will be 64-bit. Is ReactOS 64-bit and multi-core aware? If so, I hope it does a better job with both than Windows XP.

In two years, MS will have released Windows 7 (giggle .. ok .. that is their current target), so ReactOS will be a clone of an OS that is two versions and 8 years out of date.

8 years ago, we were transitioning from Win98SE to either WinME (:lol:) or Win2k. Would you run a clone of either of those OSes now?

ReactOS is a nice idea, but this is an industry in which any step backward is a step into irrelevancy, imo


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:49 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
Jipstyle wrote:
8 years ago, we were transitioning from Win98SE to either WinME (:lol:) or Win2k. Would you run a clone of either of those OSes now?

ReactOS is a nice idea, but this is an industry in which any step backward is a step into irrelevancy, imo


Possibly. It will be just like having Linux for older hardware. I know that people are still using hardware that is 12-14 years old now for various things.

I will say that, my comments about it being able to squish Linux was assuming a lot (as you pointed out :P ). It's progress has been slow. Even though Linux has been gaining ground, it hasn't made a considerable creep into desktops yet (main stream, we are all "geeks" and run it anyway, our high percentage of usage doesn't count imo). It IS possible for them to make some headway and be a heavy competitor to Linux.

Even with Vista being initially poorly received (I have noted, more than once, that I happen to like it) I don't really see Windows taking a backseat to anything, anytime soon.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

© 2014 Future US, Inc. All rights reserved.