Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:31 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:08 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
I'd also point out that Linux does not play to the gamer crowd .. so it won't lose its current market share to ReactOS. I can't imagine a single developer using ReactOS as his dev environment, for obvious reasons.

It looks like a fun project and if it becomes serious enough, I'm sure all the lead devs will be offered cushy jobs in Redmond. ;)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:28 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
Jipstyle wrote:
I'd also point out that Linux does not play to the gamer crowd .. so it won't lose its current market share to ReactOS. I can't imagine a single developer using ReactOS as his dev environment, for obvious reasons.

It looks like a fun project and if it becomes serious enough, I'm sure all the lead devs will be offered cushy jobs in Redmond. ;)


If it remains free, and a virtual clone of windows, it might. At least with windows converts afraid of change.

I am sure most of them will be, so I really don't envision React going too far, but IF it did... well who knows.

Nobody thought MS and Windows as a big deal when they started either...


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:35 am 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:54 am
Posts: 551
I would argue the point about the kernal needing a rewrite. The nt 5.1/5.2 kernals(xp/2003) are stable, reliable, and known quantity. Aside from being 7 years old, what do we really lack with the XP kernal? IT is a known quantity, reasonably secure(and it depts know how to secure it further), compatable, and works with new hardware.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:38 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
rpcblast wrote:
I would argue the point about the kernal needing a rewrite. The nt 5.1/5.2 kernals(xp/2003) are stable, reliable, and known quantity. Aside from being 7 years old, what do we really lack with the XP kernal? IT is a known quantity, reasonably secure(and it depts know how to secure it further), compatable, and works with new hardware.


Stable != Best it can be. There were many 1.x versions of the Linux kernel that were stable. That said, it wasn't the best (or they'd have stopped working on it).


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:12 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
rpcblast wrote:
I would argue the point about the kernal needing a rewrite.


You would, or you are?

Quote:
The nt 5.1/5.2 kernals(xp/2003) are stable, reliable, and known quantity. Aside from being 7 years old, what do we really lack with the XP kernal?


MS-DOS was very stable. Why did we move on? As Crash points out, stability is not a terminating value. It is a necessary value.

I dislike kernels that have more code than I require to run my system, and I dislike any system that requires rebooting for non-kernel code.

I have several reasons for my criticisms.

First, the dangers of placing all of your code into the kernel address space has been very well documented. The ease with which Windows OSes can be hacked can be laid in part at the feet of the design of the kernel and kernel-space. Buffer overflow exploits should not be so easy!

Contrast this with the linux kernel, whose address space is much more tightly regulated, and you can see where I find my objections.

Second, MS' kernel is not modular and this is just plain silly for a pre-compiled kernel. Unlike any open source product, you can't compile Windows to run optimally on your system. You are handed a binary and told 'this is Windows' and the code is exactly the same whether you are running a quad-core 64-bit Phenom or a 1Ghz single-core 32-bit Duron with a fraction of the on-die cache.When you combine that with the fact that you can't load modules you require or unload modules you do not require, and you don't have a modern OS in my opinion.

Imagine how much faster Crysis would be if you could strip the kernel down to just what it needs to run the game at run-time and then re-load the modules you need for web surfing when you want to brag about your score. Imagine how much faster your PC experience would be if you could recompile your entire system so that it is optimized for your hardware.

Quote:
IT is a known quantity, reasonably secure(and it depts know how to secure it further), compatable, and works with new hardware.


It will be replaced in 3-5 years, as every OS is, so this is not an argument worth presenting.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:15 am 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:54 am
Posts: 551
I didnt say stability was the ONLY reason. I just overall have been VERY happpy with XP/2k/2k3, and it seems that there isnt a ton lacking. MS imo did a very good job with xp, espeically once they hit SP1a/2


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:45 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
rpcblast wrote:
I didnt say stability was the ONLY reason. I just overall have been VERY happpy with XP/2k/2k3, and it seems that there isnt a ton lacking. MS imo did a very good job with xp, espeically once they hit SP1a/2
My prediction is the same for Vista SP2

I also think that Windows 7 will get slammed with bugs and driver issues the first bit of its release, and then there will be a service pack, and all will be well again.

Why bet against history?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:23 am 
Klamath
Klamath
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 240
CrashTECH wrote:
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.


Slightly disagree with you...it is gaining ground slowly but surely.
Its already big elsewhere in the world...and gaining traction here in the US as well.
Its why Dell started shipping Ubuntu computers, and why the EEE Pc was released.
Its why Microsoft backtracked and made Windows XP available for a couple of more years...because the newer sub-notebooks couldn't run Vista and M$ would rather you run A outdated windows product than a linux computer any day.

PS I know everyone makes fun of it now...but I kind of liked Windows Millenium....or maybe it was just the alterations that Hewlett Packard made for theirs.
Glenn


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:59 am 
Clawhammer
Clawhammer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 4406
Location: In the closet
New version of ReactOS is released, 0.3.6


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:15 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
Changes summary
A consolidation of all changes in great details can be found in the changelog. Summing up the most important changes:
    More architectures support: ARM version improvements, beginnings of x64 architecture support
    FreeLdr's memory requirements for ReactOS bootup were reduced
    Driver unloading now possible
    Numerous kernel fixes and improvements (APC delivery issues, timer issues, lots of work on architecture-independent parts of the memory manager)
    More Win32 applications are supported now thanks to the fix in the RTL heap implementation (e.g. InnoSetup-based installers, Delphi applications, etc)
    Network stack bugfixes and memory leaks elimination
    Win32 subsystem improvements, most of usermode DLLs synced with Wine


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:30 pm 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 3:02 pm
Posts: 60
Location: The Great Lakes State!
Is reactos compatible with windows themes? (using the msstyles format, like something you might find on deviantart)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:36 am 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:52 pm
Posts: 3189
It's a very intriguing project, but it's also pretty pointless. To quote their faq:

Quote:
First of all, ReactOS is not a clone of Windows. ReactOS is an operating system that is compatible with Microsoft Windows applications and drivers. Some of the reasons are the same as the reasons for developing Linux (an open-source UNIX clone)? In short, Linux is a great operating system, but it is not the answer for everybody. There are a lot of people that like Microsoft Windows, but are very frustrated with Microsoft's policies on various issues.


There's a very good reason RMS chose to clone unix and not DOS. Plain and simple: anything based on the DOS concepts is a POS, and that includes WinNT.

There's absolutely no reason why anyone would ever need this OS, and Microsoft will make sure that it never works completely until the day MS dies a horrible death.

The real answer isn't wine. The real answer isn't ReactOS. The answer is to promote free software, and not sketchy ways to run proprietary software on a free OS. That's why I don't use wine.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:08 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
Welcome back to the forum, Yuri.

Why is wine 'sketchy'? It is a fine way for me to run MS Office, Visio, and some MS-based games .. what is 'sketchy' about it?

Stallman wrote his Unix-clone because he was upset and concerned about the progression of copyright law and because he needed a system that wasn't wrapped up in legal red tape. 2 years later, he published the GNU manifesto.

None of these things had *anything* to do with DOS. He was fighting Bell Labs, Berkeley, SCO and the battleground was UNIX.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:52 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:52 pm
Posts: 3189
Jipstyle wrote:
Welcome back to the forum, Yuri.
Thanks! :)
Jipstyle wrote:
Why is wine 'sketchy'? It is a fine way for me to run MS Office, Visio, and some MS-based games .. what is 'sketchy' about it?


I never said it was sketchy. I just said I don't promote using proprietary software in a free OS as an alternative to finding and/or developing alternatives. Wine itself just seems a waste of time to me..

Jipstyle wrote:
Stallman wrote his Unix-clone because he was upset and concerned about the progression of copyright law and because he needed a system that wasn't wrapped up in legal red tape. 2 years later, he published the GNU manifesto.

None of these things had *anything* to do with DOS. He was fighting Bell Labs, Berkeley, SCO and the battleground was UNIX.


Stallman looked at a lot more systems than just unix, as he's said before. He chose unix because it was the least horrendous of all the other architectures, and he made some modifications along the way.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:53 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:52 pm
Posts: 3189
Jipstyle wrote:
Welcome back to the forum, Yuri.
Thanks! :)
Jipstyle wrote:
Why is wine 'sketchy'? It is a fine way for me to run MS Office, Visio, and some MS-based games .. what is 'sketchy' about it?


I never said it was sketchy. I just said I don't promote using proprietary software in a free OS as an alternative to finding and/or developing alternatives. Wine itself just seems a waste of time to me..

Jipstyle wrote:
Stallman wrote his Unix-clone because he was upset and concerned about the progression of copyright law and because he needed a system that wasn't wrapped up in legal red tape. 2 years later, he published the GNU manifesto.

None of these things had *anything* to do with DOS. He was fighting Bell Labs, Berkeley, SCO and the battleground was UNIX.


Stallman looked at a lot more systems than just unix, as he's said before. He chose unix because it was the least horrendous of all the other architectures, and he made some modifications along the way.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:24 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:23 am
Posts: 4053
yurimxpxman wrote:
The answer is to promote free software, and not sketchy ways to run proprietary software on a free OS. That's why I don't use wine.


Oh jes u did! :P


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:05 pm 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
Also, the wine project aims to be completely open source .. no use of MS binaries at all. I've only had to install a handful of .dlls


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:57 am 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:52 pm
Posts: 3189
-Lawless wrote:
yurimxpxman wrote:
The answer is to promote free software, and not sketchy ways to run proprietary software on a free OS. That's why I don't use wine.


Oh jes u did! :P


Okay, my bad. It is sketchy in quite a few circumstances.. it works, yes, but not very well most often (mostly graphical issues in my experience, like blacking out the whole screen until you refresh it). But even if it worked perfectly, I wouldn't recommend it because it doesn't promote the use of free software. It just makes it easier to run non-free stuff outside of Windows (and extremely rare instances of free software only available on Windows, but I wouldn't recommend that software, either..)

Jipstyle wrote:
Also, the wine project aims to be completely open source .. no use of MS binaries at all. I've only had to install a handful of .dlls


Yeah, wine is, but not the software it helps you run.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:26 am 
SON OF A GUN
SON OF A GUN
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:41 am
Posts: 11605
There are some commercial products that just don't have equivalent F/OSS version.

And I don't care what you say, GIMP != Photoshop... However, it does work well for most people that *think* they need Photoshop...


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:56 am 
Java Junkie
Java Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:23 am
Posts: 24224
Location: Granite Heaven
yurimxpxman wrote:
Okay, my bad. It is sketchy in quite a few circumstances.. it works, yes, but not very well most often (mostly graphical issues in my experience, like blacking out the whole screen until you refresh it). But even if it worked perfectly, I wouldn't recommend it because it doesn't promote the use of free software. It just makes it easier to run non-free stuff outside of Windows (and extremely rare instances of free software only available on Windows, but I wouldn't recommend that software, either..)


True on both counts, though the quality has improved drastically since they released 1.0.

I do believe in supporting open source software, but I don't believe that limiting my personal computing options helps OSS. I need to use MS Office from time to time because the people who pay my invoives require my output be in a format they can read, and I need to use Visio on a regular basis because I have yet to find an OS product that even comes close to being a replacement. They are so far off that I can't even pick up a project like Dia and help develop it into a viable replacement for Visio.

I prefer to support it directly, either by paying for software that I use regularly by contributing to the developers, or by helping in the dev process (testing and in two cases, actual coding).

Quote:
Yeah, wine is, but not the software it helps you run.


True. Wine is meant to run MS software and there is nothing I can do about the quality of that software .. other than convince my clients to move away from it. ;)


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

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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.