“ReactOS is an open source (GPL) operating system built to be compatible with Windows NT applications and drivers. ReactOS is currently just a development platform; it is not a useful desktop system for the average user in any way, but it has potential.” Read the review at NewsForge.
ReactOS Concept is More Promise Than Production
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Mmm, nice review, but I don’t think he conducted it too fair. The goal ReactOS has set for itself are far more difficult than any other goals other OSs have ever set for themselves. A more positive tone could’ve been justified.
except he’s right. as of now, there is nothing all to useful there. there is no need to be sucking up, and he was hardly harsh.
this seems to be the general theme of some people who feel like certain reviews are too negative. get over it. its an opinion.
on topic: reactos is a neat idea, but it seems that they have a LONG LONG way to go and i dont exactly see the same time of community getting on board as is with the linux side. good luck to them, but they are facing a very steep uphill battle.
How could it be anything but more promise than production when they haven’t even made a production release yet?
they already made the nvidia driver work
[the windows one..yeah binary compatible
]
they have a long road, but already showed some results
I had no idea they were even this far along. Good for them, I say. One step at a time, and one way or another, MS`s days are numbered.
Soon. We have had a lot of good reports of users with SCSI cards and third pary video drivers working. Networking should be to the point in a few weeks where IRC works. I have even had some report of OpenOffice loading under the current CVS.
Looks neat. I gotta make a mental note to follow the development of ReactOS.
kosta: useless to you does not imply useless to others
cool
Vote my pool @ TheOpenCD.org:
TheOpenCD + ReactOS: an alternative Windows distro !
http://theopencd.sunsite.dk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=625&sid=596e6d997…
So what are they trying to do? Just another Windows, with the same problems? So a user can easily install a Windows program on ReactOS and also install the hidden spyware? Will they support ActiveX (with the whole shell/command security flaw)?
I think being compatible with Windows means that the whole OS will have the same design flaws, otherwise a lot of programs will not work.
And they’re working on NT, that’s pretty old, they will not be able to keep up, what are they going to do, Longhorn as well?
Probably the real benefit is the knowledge gained, they can use it to make projects like Wine better, because I think that’s the better solution, retain your OS of choice, and just use something like Wine for incompatible programs.
TheOpenCD? What on earth is that? I’ve never heard of it! No honstly I don’t know.
By the way, ReactOS is a good project
Never mind, I found their site. It says everything on it. Combining ReactOS with this thing would be a good idea.
… when `longhorn’ is spreaded over the world, these guys have to do the [whole] job again. they should have come up with the idea of reactos four or six years before.
They DID come up with the idea of ReactOS four or six years ago.
http://web.archive.org/web/19991008000009/http://www.reactos.com/
Just like NT has turned into W2k, XP and beyond, so will ReactOS. I believe ReactOS uses WINE for the userspace compatibility, so if WINE is able to run the Longhorn-applications, so will ReactOS.
ReactOS already supports quite a couple of features that 2k/XP support. We definitely do not just aim NT4 compatibility. There are some apps that rely on features introduced in 2k or later that already can work in reactos.
Why would you want to clone unix? Same stuipd question.
For me, the best thing that’s possible for ReactOS is as an OS for older hardware.
If ReactOS can be kept slim and trim, and not bloated like current Windows Releases, AND support modern hardware as well as legacy hardware…
It’s a cheap alternative OS for all the old boxes out there.
I have TONS of P233MMX and similar boxes I could give away or sell cheaply to friends IF I had Legal OS’es to put on them.
I could put an older Linux Distribution on them, but these boxes won’t run that well.
And often the price of a used Windows 95/98 Licence is more than the hardware is worth.
Having a Free OS to put on them, that would run Standard Windows Apps and Games would be great!
And imagine how ReactOS would impact in the Third World?
A free Windows Compatible OS would be INCREDIBLE.
And now that we have a Freeware Office Suite (OpenOffice), Freeware Browsers (Mozilla), Freeware E-Mail (Thunderbird), and tons of other free/shareware…
Once ReactOS is useable as a “Daily Driver” the possibilities are immense.
One reason Windows is so ubiquitous is that it’s one of the most highly pirated OS’es out there. That’s one of the reasons why it’s a standard.
When PC’s were owned almost solely by IBM, and clones started coming out, IBM lost control of their market. Even coming out with the PS/2 and MicroChannel didn’t save their control, because once a clone PC came out…
They weren’t the only source of hardware.
Imagine a world where Microsoft didn’t control Windows?
Imagine NOT having to upgrade your hardware expensively to run Longhorn?
Imagine a version of Windows that was more like MacOS, in that with each successive version… Instead of being a pig and eating more and more resources… It became faster and tighter with each release?
ReactOS has the possibility of TRULY breaking the Microsoft Monopoly in a way that Linux and MacOS don’t have a shot at. Because while both of them can functionally replace Windows, they don’t ACTUALLY replace it.
ReactOS can ACTUALLY replace Windows (if the developers stay the course), and provide REAL CHOICE to the market.
As soon as it’s usable for me (I need the Networking for my Cable Modem), I’ll start using it on one of my systems. And hopefully, sometime next year… Use it full time.
I’d love to give Microsoft the “Heave-Ho” from my systems. And use something that’s hopefully less bloated, and faster.
I’m encouraged that this project has gotten as far as it has. There have been “Free Windows” projects announced for the last 10 years, but NONE of them has gotten to a bootable OS, no less running some Windows Apps.
I actually congradulate the ReactOS people on getting as far as they did. Of all the Windows clones that were proposed this is the inly one that is still alive active and progressing. As for the two other others that I know of.
Freedows:
This one collapsed due to an over ambitious mission. (wanted to represent every os out there in a single OS.)
OpenWindows:
Ran into the Micro$oft legal department over the use of the term windows. Limited their goals to Win9x and eventually collapsed.
The only problem I actually see with ReactOS is a legal one not coming from Micro$oft but from the GPL if the entire system (including the dlls) is under the GPL. This is that 90 percent of the software for Windows is closed source proprietary software that in a sense would be “illegal” to run on an all GPL OS since it would be dynamically linking to GPL libraries under ReactOS and therefore have to be GPL itself under a “to the letter” interpretation of the license.
Not true. The GPL only covers distrabution not use. The user is free to load any Non-free software he wants that was developed for Microsoft Windows.
Try again.
OpenWindows:
Ran into the Micro$oft legal department over the use of the term windows. Limited their goals to Win9x and eventually collapsed.
I don’t see how M$ would have a leg to stand on, however I could see Sun having a problem with this since they’ve been using the name OpenWindows since the beginning of Solaris . . .
I just been to the ReactOS site and found out they are basically using a modified version of WINE source code for the GUI stuff which means they would probably have to keep that under WINE’s LGPL licensing.
I would really like to give the boys at reactos a big pat on the back, the last version i tested before this one was rather basic and they have come a long way since. I love the fact this it is not yet fat. a basic win98 install is only 120MB a basic XP install is 1.2GB a full linux install is 2-4GB (or <20MB if you know what you are doing)
if it gets full driver support and DX support it’s goodby M$ from me, anything else i’ll install/program myself. [sVen]
>Imagine a version of Windows that was more like MacOS, in >that with each successive version… Instead of being a pig >and eating more and more resources…
Try running MacOS X 10.x on 128MB, 600Mhz G3 and a ‘crap’ graphic card…
I’m running MacOS X 10.3.4 on a Blue and White G3 350mhz, with 256mb of RAM and the stock Graphics Card.
It’s fine.
I am NOT having ANY problems with it.
I’d *LOVE* to have a 600mhz G3 in there. But, I just can’t justify that kind of money.
I’ve been meaning to overclock it. I think I can get at least 400mhz out of it. I used to get 450mhz out my older G3 B&W with a G43 350mhz ZIF in it.
And I think I was running THAT at 400mhz before getting the G4 chip for it.
128mb is a bit slim for MacOS X. RAM is SO cheap, that there’s no reason for that.