ReactOS

I see what they did here, but did you? ReactOS is still unknown among many, and it could use more developers, so I'm spreading the word, and you should, too.

ReactOS not only allows you to learn a lot from Windows, but it'll eventually become very usable as a free, open source OS that runs Windows software - a free, open source Windows replacement.

Besides, after Windows 2000 and Windows XP are totally phased out and we don't get drivers for them, we'll be forced to move on to Vista. The problem is not the scary amount of bloatware built into Vista as much as it's the fact Windows Vista is Windows DRM. Unless people finds a way to crack away the digital rights infringement so built into Windows Vista, we'll have to move to ReactOS for a free, non-criminal, non-r1aa/m9aa/gay-oriented operating system.

Linux trolls refrain from posting, I already know Linux exists and it's so free and all. (And if being an advanved Linux user I'm looking for a free Windows-compatible OS, it must be because Linux isn't/doesn't do what I want, even games aside.)

What sort of loophole in the law that ReactOS use to be able to run Windows software natively? Bcos if ReactOS doest come out big, I am pretty sure Microsoft are not going to sit back.

>>2
No loophole; you can make such a thing. You're not copying Windows but writing your own OS, and you're not copying applications, just they may run. (ReactOS' own console, tools, desktop, and file manager are provided, together with GCC and other free software; then you can install and run Windows drivers and stuff you legally own. Drivers are free.)

You can't reverse engineer Windows however. ReactOS doesn't plain out copy the Windows microkernel and architecture; in fact it uses its own, but it implements a fully compatible interface.

Driver interface and the Win32 API is documented in MSDN, so they know what do do. Of course, there are a few undocumented features here and there, especially old stuff, and I suppose a few internals that need to be done and are not documented. Let's suppose the ReactOS have great divination powers and an outstanding intelligence to do them, and Billy doesn't have enough proof to call that reverse engineering. Considering Microsoft says Windows is documented and with documented Windows you can do it, they can't accuse ReactOS of reverse engineering without admiting there's something to reverse engineer, which would get them in trial again (they lost a cause of undocumented behaviours IIRC), so it's kinda safe.

And how, may I ask, is this expected to be any less flaky and useless than WINE?

>>3
And we all know Microsoft cares immensely about what other people are allowed to do under the law. If ReactOS ever became big, Microsoft would sue it out of existance.

Chances are, if it hasn't been done before, there's probably a good reason.  >>5 brings us one reason why.

>>4
Well, it's not an API implementation to attempt to run Win32 software; it's a complete OS designed to be kernel and API compatible with Windows, which means you can use drivers too; applications which install devices can work, etc.

>>5
Microsoft is powerful because the more money you have, the more fat lawyers you hire, the more "right" you are. However, Microsoft is not infallible. Remember it did lose some antimonopoly trial. Open source and free software communities aren't absolutely defenseless either. First, once they grow up big, they're harder to track as they span over a bunch of countries and all you initially know from a developer is "this is Mark369, I wrote this function". Second, remember how SCO invested it all on fucking Linux (possibly with money from Microsoft too), and failed miserably. Not only it failed from a legal point of view, but the companies using Linux totally ignored them, and Linux users like myself just thought "lol faggot".

>>6
If it hasn't been done before it's because:
- It's hard and requires development balls.
- Windows wasn't so well documented under a few years ago (since Windows 2000 I think); after Microsoft released new versions and after it lost a trial on undocumented features.
- It's not lunix, and many people in the free software community don't like anything that's not lunix.

I heard about this a while ago, but just passed it off as an invisible WINE with a WinClassic environment.

But now I ask you: where are its warts? The only criticism I can find is that it's not Unix, but.. Does it work? Deus Ex is in windowed mode, for example, but beyond that, are there any massively glaring compatibility issues? If so: then isn't this just a dev. toy right now? I couldn't give this to my mom instead of buying XP, even if she DID only need exactly 4 programs that were working properly, could I?

Also, is it better than Windows? I like Unix because it's extremely well organized and secure, but I like Windows because I can use it. If they redesigned the OS, did they improve upon the WINDOWS folder (lol) or user rights?

Not really.  I tried the Live CD on my setup and it was a pain.  The hardware support sucks and it doesn't have very many native applications.  Fails hard.

>>8
where are its warts?
It's a development toy, just like any other free software project was, until it wasn't.

The only criticism I can find is that it's not Unix
Lol fanboi. As if Unix was perfect. In fact, I mostly like the Windows NT architecture better.

I couldn't give this to my mom instead of buying XP
I haven't tried it myself yet; I'm waiting for my new hardware to arrive to repartition everything and try it. I don't think it's polished enough for that, but it made an awesome progress since 2 months ago, so perhaps it will be good enough for moms in 6 months.

Also, is it better than Windows?
Besides the fact it's free of charge and open source, obviously no, not yet.

I like Unix because it's extremely well organized
ROFLMAO, I'll print that and stick it on my door. Unix is, in many cases, a worse mess than Windows already is. See the FHS for example: pure, absolute bullshit.

If they redesigned the OS, did they improve upon the WINDOWS folder (lol) or user rights?
The Windows folder was a mess in the 3.x and 9x era, but you should check it out today. Besides, you can relocate most of Windows to any particular folder if you so desire -- without breaking existing software or having to recompile everything. I do that; my idea of order and organization is far stricter than anything Windows, even modern Windows and Unix ever had.

As for user rights, they are already there, but the default configuration doesn't do much with it, and some software forgets it ever existed, but you can count that ReactOS will make a more extensive use of the user system, and the default configurations once it's more mature will most likely be closer to your demands, coming from open source communities.


>>9
ReactOS is not mature enough for LiveCDs, and it's very unfair to compare it to Linux LiveCDs. ReactOS is at a stage equivalent to what Linux was short after Linus released his kernel. Please give it more time.

ReactOS' own hardware support WILL suck - because it won't need any! The idea is to be 100% compatible with Windows device drivers. That way, you can run nVidia's Forceware drivers for your nVidia card and so on. It'll have the best hardware support - that of Windows.

>>10
Wow, so instead of answering my question you attack unix and promote how flexible the Windows system folder is. Fucking dumbass, when I said "I can't find" I meant in terms of internet searching.

When did it become cool to be a Windows fanboy- oh ya WHEN UNIX BECOME TOO POPULAR LOL

The main problem WINE has is not correctly implementing the win32 API - it's incorrectly implementing it. win32 is poorly specified and buggy. A lot of software rely on certain bugs in the API, which forces MS to port the bugs to each next version of the OS or face users refusing to upgrade because it "breaks" their software. So if you have a correct implementation of win32, your software won't work on it.

My point is, how does ReactOS plan to get around this? In fact I'm sure I heard somewhere that ReactOS is based on WINE.

>>11
I did answer your questions, quit complaining faggot. I'm not a Windows fanboy, otherwise I wouldn't be looking for a free replacement. I like its architecture better (not that it's perfect, and not that a good part of it was kind of unnecessary), and I like its software, but I don't like DRM, bloat, and other stuff Microsoft does.

>>12
ReactOS is sharing some efforts with WINE, but they're basically different, and ReactOS intends to behave exactly as Windows, API bugs included if that'll make software to work. I suppose if software relies on these bugs/features, then third parties other than Microsoft must know about them, so they are not trade secret.