Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
What A New OS Needs
pcmag.com — Could there be a bigger threat than Linux to Microsoft's OS dominance? 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.
optimusprime01- 1195 diggs
- digg it
- skmice2, on 05/12/2008, -5/+108I have to second that, getting rid of Registry would be great. What I would also like to see is much better sand-boxing and elimination of ActiveX.
Even though ReactOS doesn't do this (it aims to replicate the functionality), it is a great project and I hope that it will become successful.- IphtashuFitz, on 05/12/2008, -6/+49Unfortunately the vast majority of Windows software wouldn't be able to run without ActiveX and/or the registry. Doing away with these (which I would also love to see) would require a significant amount of work not only by the engineers at Microsoft but also by the engineers at most software companies.
- fanclerks, on 05/12/2008, -4/+63That's why they should pull an Apple. Start with a completely new code base that doesn't utilize a registry or ActiveX. Start with a solid foundation and build upon that. For backwards compatibility, use virtualization. Most computers now a days are powerful enough to run that sort of environment. They can also take the opportunity to build a faster and slimmer OS. There's so much cruft left over from the 9x and prior days that is slowing down the core OS. Improve the driver model too. Yeah, it would cause everyone to redesign their programs and start over, but it needs to happen. This always having to be backwards compatible with stuff that is over 10 years old is killing Windows.
- charlesray, on 05/12/2008, -8/+9If Microsoft started a completely new OS they would have to compete with Apple directly for users. As it is there is a massive amount of people who use Windows for specific programs, backwards compatibility, and because they are used to the interface. If you change this then Windows is on level ground with OS X, and if the new Windows isn't quite up to par people won't be so hesitant to switch to OS X. Of course this hypothetical new Windows has an advantage in being compatible with more hardware than OS X, and more polished than Linux, but it still levels the playing field quite a bit.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+6"Of course this hypothetical new Windows has an advantage in being... more polished than Linux"
How so? What about this vague concept of a hypothetical Windows rewrite would necessarily make it more polished than Linux?
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+6"Of course this hypothetical new Windows has an advantage in being... more polished than Linux"
- Joeyrev, on 05/12/2008, -3/+5I have to agree. I've been for the most part a Windows user. I've messed around with Linux and OS X, but always go back to Windows for its familiarity. However, if Windows suddenly became an unfamiliar OS, I would probably be more likely to switch to one of the other alternatives.
- MWeather, on 05/12/2008, -4/+1So you haven't heard about Vista yet?
- brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -0/+8You wouldn't switch because most the familiarity would still be there. As default interface 9x=>XP=>Vista were big changes. People piss and moan and get over it because eventually all their stuff work or they upgrade to new apps. If this virtualization came with the OS (MS Virtual PC is free right now anyway) and wasnt obvious thats what it was doing people wouldnt care. I won't buy a MAC for a similar reason a lot of Linux users wont use windows. They can't change the software and I can't change the hardware. And i hate mac-fanboys hyping the damn warranty. If I need it fixed now I want to be able to do it.
MS has needed to change the code base for years. Windows 2000 was the last of the good NTs (I'm using XP64 right now so I'm not stuck in the stone age). It may either never happen, or it'll happen after a huge failure, like ME. Wait... VISTA is the new ME? Maybe, maybe it not bad enough yet- MWeather, on 05/12/2008, -5/+1"They can't change the software and I can't change the hardware"
So get a laptop, where that is not a problem. - brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -4/+2WTF? Yes it is, have you ever worked on a laptop? I'm guess not, or your just talking about imac vs ibook.. neither compares to swapping hardware on a pc. MAC hardware period is a problem because of the price compared to pc hardware and the hard to findness of decent hardware.
- tetsuo29, on 05/13/2008, -4/+2Please quit propagating the MYTH that Apple hardware is more expensive than other hardware.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -1/+3@tutsuo29
Maybe the official prices of Macs and the average prices of comparable PCs aren't significantly different, and from what I've read this may be the case, but because of the very fact that with PCs there is much more choice, you are far more likely to find good deals (and therefore less expensive hardware). - brocruit, on 05/13/2008, -1/+3I've done work for people that put me in the position of purchasing said hardware (both PC and MAC). Replacement parts (video cards especially) are way overpriced. I'm propagating the FACT I've been there, done that, and hate Apple for its hardware lock. Apple has some great ideas and a decent OS, but as a hardware geek any MAC I might acquire is novelty.
(the iBook is slightly tempting because you cant break off the power plug - by far the most common problem I've seen with laptops)
- MWeather, on 05/12/2008, -5/+1"They can't change the software and I can't change the hardware"
- charlesray, on 05/12/2008, -8/+9If Microsoft started a completely new OS they would have to compete with Apple directly for users. As it is there is a massive amount of people who use Windows for specific programs, backwards compatibility, and because they are used to the interface. If you change this then Windows is on level ground with OS X, and if the new Windows isn't quite up to par people won't be so hesitant to switch to OS X. Of course this hypothetical new Windows has an advantage in being compatible with more hardware than OS X, and more polished than Linux, but it still levels the playing field quite a bit.
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -0/+7Stateless computing is the future. Virtualize the registry and call it day. Vista makes a half hearted attempt at this, but the reality is that the ENTIRE registry needs to be virtualized. It also needs to be stateless. Which means that a user can no longer bork up their computer as the "real" registry is only modified with proper permissions only in very specific instances.
- Atomic1fire, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Its not like they cant just make a new look based off the old one
Startbar?
Not that hard to find IT SAYS START therefor I don't see any change that could screw someone up
My Computer?
Just leave Icons there and make it blend with the rest of the UI and remove that explorer dependency since its not helping anyone security wise.or uninstalling internet explorer wise. If you really need explorer support in my computer I'm sure there is a plugin somewhere that can fix that.
Desktop
Icons on wallpaper, Linux does that too. again just take the same formula from the last windows and just keep the same functionality with a different codebase and some improvements and new helpful (but optional) ideas - rpgmaker, on 05/13/2008, -1/+1Big software companies like the registry to lock their applications up. Even if Microsoft wanted to get rid of it (something that I roughly doubt) they wouldn't, Big Software lobbies will get a hold on the issue :|
- fanclerks, on 05/12/2008, -4/+63That's why they should pull an Apple. Start with a completely new code base that doesn't utilize a registry or ActiveX. Start with a solid foundation and build upon that. For backwards compatibility, use virtualization. Most computers now a days are powerful enough to run that sort of environment. They can also take the opportunity to build a faster and slimmer OS. There's so much cruft left over from the 9x and prior days that is slowing down the core OS. Improve the driver model too. Yeah, it would cause everyone to redesign their programs and start over, but it needs to happen. This always having to be backwards compatible with stuff that is over 10 years old is killing Windows.
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -5/+29There's nothing wrong with the registry itself. It's a useful place to put system-wide settings, while avoiding a number of problems that things like flat xml files have (DOS attacks, per-key security, parsing speed, etc.), and it's absolutely vital to the operation of COM.
It's been abused, certainly. No one will deny that, but I'm not sure getting rid of it is the way to fix the problem.- willgonz, on 05/12/2008, -3/+23Actually there are a lot of problems with the registry and even Microsoft has admitted it was a bad idea. The registry is a resource hog. Just to open Notepad requires thousands of keys to be read. Go and grab a copy of NTREGMON from www.sysinternals.com (now owned by Microsoft) tell it to filter out everything except notepad.exe. Start the capture and run notepad. See all those thousands of keys that must be read. Now imagine opening a bigger program like photoshop.
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+10Actually, the VP in charge of the Windows Architecture team (Rob Short), when asked the question "do you ever wish the registry had never been developed?" answered something like "I don't regret the registry was developed; It's unfortunate that the registry was overused"
http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=1488 ...
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+10Actually, the VP in charge of the Windows Architecture team (Rob Short), when asked the question "do you ever wish the registry had never been developed?" answered something like "I don't regret the registry was developed; It's unfortunate that the registry was overused"
- ArielMT, on 05/12/2008, -2/+15It was the creation of the registry that led us from the so-called .ini hell into the registry hell. Before then, the single point of failure was win.ini, which an ungodly number of third-party developers also felt the need to muck with, though with consequences not nearly as disastrous as a corrupt registry. Seriously, why do Windows XP and Windows Vista need registry entries telling it that the executable file format .exe is supposed to execute itself?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/837334 - XP
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950505 - Vista
http://filext.com/faq/broken_exe_association.php - all versions
And COM is another ring of hell entirely, according to many Windows developers. It's as necessary to Windows as a bicycle is to a fish.- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5> It's as necessary to Windows as a bicycle is to a fish.
Only if it needs that bicycle to live. Windows is built on COM.
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5> It's as necessary to Windows as a bicycle is to a fish.
- grimward, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5The registry is a behemoth to say the least. It should be restructured entierly and the read/write permissions should be alterable on a user basis. Furthermore, in the interests of security, there should be an operating system area which just SYSTEM would be allowed to write to, and a special applications portion in which software could write to as they pleased.
- ArielMT, on 05/12/2008, -0/+7Unfortunately, I've seen what happens when precisely that is done. I don't have the slightest idea how it happened, but Norton Internet Security (I never was able to learn which version) managed to hose the ACLs throughout the registry on a customer's XP system so completely that not a single file association was valid, which means that nothing could run, not even the shell. A repair install was attempted from the CD with absolutely no effect at all. The repair install did not repair the registry. The misconfigured security throughout the registry was so pervasive and so complete that it would've cost labor enough to buy twelve new PCs to fix the registry security on the one. The only real choice was to save the files and sacrifice the programs and settings to the format-reinstall mantra.
Microsoft took your suggestion with XP's registry, and they still found a way to do it wrong. Sad, really.- Tenoq, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2System Restore wasn't enabled? You could have done a manual registry rollback from the Recovery Console or using UBCD4Win or something.
- ArielMT, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3Nothing would run once logged in, not even System Restore.
- ArielMT, on 05/12/2008, -0/+7Unfortunately, I've seen what happens when precisely that is done. I don't have the slightest idea how it happened, but Norton Internet Security (I never was able to learn which version) managed to hose the ACLs throughout the registry on a customer's XP system so completely that not a single file association was valid, which means that nothing could run, not even the shell. A repair install was attempted from the CD with absolutely no effect at all. The repair install did not repair the registry. The misconfigured security throughout the registry was so pervasive and so complete that it would've cost labor enough to buy twelve new PCs to fix the registry security on the one. The only real choice was to save the files and sacrifice the programs and settings to the format-reinstall mantra.
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5I dugg you up, but honestly, there are better ways. *nix has it about right. Libs are separated from the user and they get a "copy" of the libs to use. However, like I said before, the only real solution is stateless computing.
- bradleyland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6I have to wonder if many of you even know what stateless computing is? Stateless computing means that the OS is disposable. Every time you reboot, you start from a clean build. This solves some problems, but it is not the holy grail of computing, and it definitely does NOT solve the registry problem. You still have to hold your configuration data somewhere. If that configuration store gets corrupt, you end up with the same problem you had before.
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Did you not bother to read my other post. Oh and stateless computing does not mean a totally clean build or it would be pointless. There is a baseline build that solves numerous security issues.
It DOES solved the registry problem by storing the configuration data in a virtual registry that is reset when you log out. So all the malware that you get means nothing. You always revert to baseline. Registry problem solved on multiple levels:
A) You can now trash the registry as it stands and only use a virtual registry
B) You never can change the settings on the machine without some form of multi factor authentication (password and biometric scan or password and RSA key or password, RSA key, biometric scan, or....well you get the point).
This stops the stupid users cold and solves a bundle of MS security issues all in one neat package. Done... - bradleyland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+2You're going in circles. If the registry can be altered, it can be attacked. Virtualization doesn't solve that problem. If you believe that a configuration database can be discarded at the end of each session, then you're incredibly naive. This doesn't pertain only to the registry. This pertains to any system configuration mechanism. If you believe that there is a scenario where everyone could have a sysadmin/nanny watching over their shoulder to make sure they don't make any dangerous modifications to their system, you're doubly naive.
- boot20, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1What? Sure it can be attacked, but it will never stick. It's not virtualization as in VMWare it's virtualization as in not really there. Why can't a CMDB be discarded and generated? Please help cure my naivety. What's the problem with having a baseline install (of some flavor) that means no matter what the user does in user space, kernel space is protected by default. Why am I going in circles by describing a perfectly rational way of securing Windows?
Have you never used thin clients or worked in IT in the enterprise?
Who said anything about home users...who cares...let them use duct tape and cat food for all I care...
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Did you not bother to read my other post. Oh and stateless computing does not mean a totally clean build or it would be pointless. There is a baseline build that solves numerous security issues.
- bradleyland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6I have to wonder if many of you even know what stateless computing is? Stateless computing means that the OS is disposable. Every time you reboot, you start from a clean build. This solves some problems, but it is not the holy grail of computing, and it definitely does NOT solve the registry problem. You still have to hold your configuration data somewhere. If that configuration store gets corrupt, you end up with the same problem you had before.
- willgonz, on 05/12/2008, -3/+23Actually there are a lot of problems with the registry and even Microsoft has admitted it was a bad idea. The registry is a resource hog. Just to open Notepad requires thousands of keys to be read. Go and grab a copy of NTREGMON from www.sysinternals.com (now owned by Microsoft) tell it to filter out everything except notepad.exe. Start the capture and run notepad. See all those thousands of keys that must be read. Now imagine opening a bigger program like photoshop.
- RadicalEdward, on 05/12/2008, -4/+4How about a stupid frickin os, that can see a stupid frickin ssid (or ssid+mac address) and configure your predetermined settings for that network. ie: change your static ip/dns addresses, change default printer, etc.
- MWeather, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3I've always liked that about Linux. Try out Ubuntu if that's what you're looking for.
- EthylAdded, on 05/12/2008, -4/+11Why replicate a failed experiment? MacOSX demonstrates that unix-based kernels can form a solid core to a windows-based system that out-performs Windows in every way. By the time ReactOS gets to stability, Windows will probably be dropping below 50% market share.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+5At the very least, the React kernel and improvements to Wine will prove useful (maybe there will even be React-based distros with their own repos and everything).
- Atomic1fire, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Call the package manager Add Remove Programs.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2lol. Or they could either adopt Winapt (implementation of APT on Windows) or better yet, they could implement a POSIX subsystem (maybe based on Cygwin or something) and adopt the real APT as the default package manager, allowing it to take advantage of Debian's build scripts and very quickly build up decent-sized repositories.
- Atomic1fire, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Call the package manager Add Remove Programs.
- P373Y, on 05/12/2008, -2/+3doubt it.
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Why? Same thing happened to IBM, why won't the same thing happen to MS?
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -1/+1Because Microsoft is in a better position. With their recent acquisition of Yahoo!, they are ready to take the marketing world by storm.
- boot20, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2Brilliant! I was tempted to pass this one over...but bravo! 8/10!!! Good jorb!
- boot20, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Why? Same thing happened to IBM, why won't the same thing happen to MS?
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+5At the very least, the React kernel and improvements to Wine will prove useful (maybe there will even be React-based distros with their own repos and everything).
- IphtashuFitz, on 05/12/2008, -6/+49Unfortunately the vast majority of Windows software wouldn't be able to run without ActiveX and/or the registry. Doing away with these (which I would also love to see) would require a significant amount of work not only by the engineers at Microsoft but also by the engineers at most software companies.
- wukillabee, on 05/12/2008, -54/+7NO NO NO! i want pros to create software so i can pirate it
- jay019, on 05/13/2008, -0/+0Sorry, most prostitutes dont even own a computer. Oh, you meant a different type of pro?
- suwoo244, on 05/12/2008, -56/+4Perfect OS would be Windows w/ GarageBand
- audiologic, on 05/12/2008, -12/+6That is the one thing that keeps me on a mac. GarageBand / Logic Pro 8.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -5/+14Garage band? REALLY? THAT'S your music suite of choice?
- kipmartin, on 05/12/2008, -3/+15MOST musicians love having a small footprint, easy to use, cheap, high quality digital recording studio at home. the plugins available out there are astounding. the basic software is good out of the box, and its compatible with bigger suites.
i use it for working stuff up before hitting a protools studio for a real recording. high quality demos. but i gotta say--sometimes the garageband demo, with care and diligence, would work fine.
dont put garageband down--it works as intended and more. its the best deal for under a grand. im willing to bet there are indie albums/tracks done on garageband out there with repectable sales.
hmmmm....- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -8/+5We put it down because people who have no idea how much they suck at computers think the songs they make with the preloaded samples and riffs are awesome.
Garageband DOES suck. The interface is frustrating and there isnt enough control over everything. - dpcamp, on 05/12/2008, -6/+4"musicians" that use garage band, are the same that use fruitloops
that's not a compliment.
- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -8/+5We put it down because people who have no idea how much they suck at computers think the songs they make with the preloaded samples and riffs are awesome.
- rowjimmy, on 05/12/2008, -7/+3garage band is great for what it is - a toy. it is fun, easy, and not frustrating at all. it is not a music suite in the sense that reason, pro-tools, or even any of the many n-track studio clones are
- kipmartin, on 05/12/2008, -3/+15MOST musicians love having a small footprint, easy to use, cheap, high quality digital recording studio at home. the plugins available out there are astounding. the basic software is good out of the box, and its compatible with bigger suites.
- TheSpook, on 05/12/2008, -37/+8ReactOS? They should call it something like Lindows.
- fredmv, on 05/12/2008, -8/+19Problem is, there's already a Linux distro by that name (now called Linspire).
- thcobbs, on 05/12/2008, -2/+20/me watches joke fly harmlessly above fredmv.
- fredmv, on 05/12/2008, -8/+19Problem is, there's already a Linux distro by that name (now called Linspire).
- bumcheekcity, on 05/12/2008, -8/+96I've been following ReactOS for about 3 years now, on and off, and it's gone nowhere. It's a great idea, but it just doesnt have the support, both in terms of people and money, behind it that both Linux and Windows do. It's got good ideas, but it's just nowhere near useful at all. Hopefully, people posting things like this will mean more people see and get interested in it.
But at the moment, you can't game in Linux, and you can't do pretty much anything in ReactOS.- TheZorch, on 05/12/2008, -22/+42You have hear of Wine and Crossover Linux, right? Both allow you to run Windows based applications and games in Linux, and now it supports Direct X 9.0c and you can even install DX9.0c in Wine to improve performance and graphical accuracy.
- Ki77erB, on 05/12/2008, -9/+14I dont understand why you are being dugg down. He is just giving information about how to use windows applications (such as games) in Linux. Whats the big deal? Are we not here for information?
- Lunarbunny, on 05/12/2008, -4/+10Perhaps because Wine is a sub-optimal solution for playing games, unless something's changed significantly between .97 and 1.0rc1. Plus any Punkbuster enabled game is SOL unless you play on a non-PB server.
- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -2/+6No, everybody here already knows everything
*rolls eyes* - grimward, on 05/12/2008, -3/+10I agree with lunarbunny here, WINE does not work for all games out there, and some of those it's claimed to work for are without sound or have horrible graphics glitches in them. I'm sorry, but saying that wine is a good solution is as true as saying that shoving a peeled chilipepper up your ass would feel nice.
- xerox, on 05/12/2008, -4/+8...don't knock it until you've tried it.
- Lunarbunny, on 05/12/2008, -3/+4@xerox My last experience was with Ubuntu 7.10 and Wine .97 with Guild Wars (ran reasonably well but at about half the framerate I had in Windows, had terrible texture alpha glitches, and would crash on loads relatively frequently), Joint Operations (didn't run), Peggle Extreme (only ran in software video mode), WarRock [a mediocre free to play FPS] (Wouldn't run but all servers require punkbuster so it was pointless anyway), Steam (runs alright but suffers from a number of annoyances), xfire (runs but the friends list is a bunch of unknown-character blocks), Ventrilo (problems with capturing my fourth mouse button for push-to-talk, basically always needed to be in focus to work properly), Creative Suite 2 (I think most everybody knows how much of a pain in the ass this is to run in Wine), etc.
I think Wine would only be an optimal Linux gaming solution for Starcraft fanatics. The real solution would be native support like id and previous Epic games (***** you Epic about UT3), but in this case it's a chicken-and-egg problem, where the devs want more Linux gamers and the would-be Linux gamers want more devs to address Linux first. - buu700, on 08/26/2008, -2/+1/me watches joke fly harmlessly above Lunarbunny.
- sajchurchey, on 05/12/2008, -7/+2Do not forget Cedega
- bj1989, on 05/12/2008, -2/+3Installing directx9.0 does anything but improving performance and graphical accuracy, for now.
- Unlgued, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Okay, well Zorch can game in Linux. Bumcheekcity and I can't. I've tried and it's just too complex - best-case scenario I can get Wine to change graphics modes and crash the shell.
- wzzrd, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Oh come on. If you can install Cedega, you can game, it's that simple.
- Ki77erB, on 05/12/2008, -9/+14I dont understand why you are being dugg down. He is just giving information about how to use windows applications (such as games) in Linux. Whats the big deal? Are we not here for information?
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -37/+9SHUT UP! TUXRACER! NETHACK! LINUX CAN DO EVERYTHING! NERD RAGE! I'M GOING TO RANT ABOUT THIS IN IRC AND ON SLASHDOT!
- Szandor, on 05/12/2008, -3/+2F.
- WomensUnderwear, on 05/12/2008, -37/+8reactos = crap, linux = crap, emulators such as wine = crap, osx/parallels/bootcamp = crap
nlited xpsp3 = priceless- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -2/+4Linux= awesome.
Wine actually works very well- played most of my games and ran photoshop with minimal configuration.
OSX= excellent graphical development platform and awesome for non-gaming use.
Bootcamp= same as a pc.
research much?
also if you pay for it, nlited xpsp3 has a price. 200-300 depending on how much you spent on your windows license. - Schitso, on 05/12/2008, -4/+5Wine Is Not an Emulator
- tripzero, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5what?? xpsp3 is out? So they fixed the bugs?
- zwaldowski, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Nope. They put it out anyway. Here's your sign.
- neko, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4nLite is for people who have to reinstall every six months to throw out the crap that's accumulated in their OS.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2Wine is not an emulator.
EDIT: nvm Schitso beat me to it
- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -2/+4Linux= awesome.
- arjie, on 05/12/2008, -1/+24Wait, guys, aren't we missing something? The ReactOS and Wine teams were helping each other out loads the last I knew. So if ReactOS ever reaches a state where it can equal the windows API, then Linux will automatically have all that through Wine, no? So where's the Linux vs. ReactOS argument?
- CarzorStelatis, on 05/12/2008, -2/+2The argument is that ReactOS essentially doesn't work, and users would be much better using an ordinary Linux distro with Wine if they want to run Windows programs outside Windows.
- maninalift, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5The argument is not that they the success of one is bad for the other but simply why would you use a less stable version of Windows when you could use a *nix with the implied advantages of that AND run Windows programs under Wine.
- buu700, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1Or use ReactOS with andLinux.
- khyberkitsune, on 05/12/2008, -1/+7You can't game in Linux? What the ***** has id Software been doing all these years, then, huh? And ReactOS doesn't have money because it's a FREE project. Jeeze. Unless you're actually developing for it (which I am) shut your mouth.
- nevermind13, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1Yelling at people for their ignorance does not help. I understand its frustrating always trying to educate them, but perhaps you should accept that people will assume and state things that are untrue.
- TheZorch, on 05/12/2008, -22/+42You have hear of Wine and Crossover Linux, right? Both allow you to run Windows based applications and games in Linux, and now it supports Direct X 9.0c and you can even install DX9.0c in Wine to improve performance and graphical accuracy.
- trumpcard, on 05/12/2008, -21/+6I hope someone creates a new OS ,something with the next generation web 3.0 capabilities and of course it must be open source.
- houndeyex, on 05/12/2008, -2/+17I'm sorry, but you're an idiot. Whatever Microsoft does for Web 3.0, Linux is going to do just as well. Web 3.0 is a bunch of hype anyways, and not the point of this article.
- ToadLeg, on 05/12/2008, -0/+14It will be web 3.0 capable as soon as the tubes are widened to fit the bit of size 3.0 through.
- piesforyou, on 05/12/2008, -1/+12My ass is Web 3.0
- synyster, on 05/12/2008, -0/+9when did you upgrade it?
- MattB123, on 05/12/2008, -0/+23I want ALL the buzzwords in my OS!
- Murdats, on 05/12/2008, -0/+19it must use web 3.0 to produce synergy in the paradigm while using an active matrix to optimise the cloud for social networking.
- rowjimmy, on 05/12/2008, -0/+10yeah right, like that's gonna work without a flux capacitor
- jay019, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1I want to social network cause my real life friends are all deadbeats :P
- Murdats, on 05/12/2008, -0/+19it must use web 3.0 to produce synergy in the paradigm while using an active matrix to optimise the cloud for social networking.
- ljsmithx, on 05/12/2008, -5/+116Over 10 years of work, and they've just released an alpha.
Watch out Microsoft, a new cats in town.- matschig, on 05/12/2008, -1/+15No kidding
- DigitalPioneer, on 05/12/2008, -3/+4Unfortunately, you're right. But give them credit, m$ doesn't make things much faster, they just have more programmers working simultaneously. Think about how long it took how many programmers to write vista? (I forget the numbers, but they're high)
- CarzorStelatis, on 05/12/2008, -3/+7Number of versions of Windows released in past 10 years: 4
Number of versions of ReactOS released in past 10 years: 1
So clearly Microsoft DOES work faster.- cathars1s, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3the profit motive will often produce such results. Microsoft will always have the advantage of worrying about their bottom line. If a piece of completely open source software takes too long, no harm done - it wasn't going to make money anyways.
If a version of Windows takes too long, it hurts Microsoft workers, stockholders, and management. Therefore, more stuff will get done, and it'll get done faster.
/Debian user - cquinnd, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2According to most OSS advocates, the profit motive is no stronger (and to many less effective) than the altruistic intentions of open source projects. The fact remains that MS has had an interest in continuing to develop thier products to both generate growth in new technologies, and to take advantage of those technologies when they mature. That MS tries to direct the computing ecosystem doesn't diminish the fact that it is an ecosystem.
- jay019, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Dont you mean 2, with 2 service packs?
- cathars1s, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3the profit motive will often produce such results. Microsoft will always have the advantage of worrying about their bottom line. If a piece of completely open source software takes too long, no harm done - it wasn't going to make money anyways.
- CarzorStelatis, on 05/12/2008, -3/+7Number of versions of Windows released in past 10 years: 4
- zwaldowski, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6Wine just reached 1.0-rc. After three years, Firefox 3 is still beta. Vista (and NT as whole) is still beta-quality. Sarcasm's fun unless its one-sided.
You are right, though. This article has no sense mentioning ReactOS. I read the headline and description and thought: "Did ReactOS just release or something?"- clickmyface, on 05/13/2008, -1/+3OS X is the biggest threat to Windows now, not Linux. Even Microsoft expects OS X to be at 10 percent in 1-2 years. If Apple continues record growth, it will surpass that number sooner.
The only way ReactOS has a chance is if Google or someone bigger invests. Google is much more likely to go its own direction.
- clickmyface, on 05/13/2008, -1/+3OS X is the biggest threat to Windows now, not Linux. Even Microsoft expects OS X to be at 10 percent in 1-2 years. If Apple continues record growth, it will surpass that number sooner.
- gotamd, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Sorry, I just couldn't help but mention Vista here.
- antoniuk, on 05/12/2008, -16/+39Just like Chris Pirillo, John Dvorak is a blight on the computer industry. These two hacks need to vanish and never again consult, comment, op ed, or in any other way lend they useless information to the masses.
- Realz, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4add Sam Verghese to the list too!!
- MrFrankly, on 05/12/2008, -4/+2Dvorak always reminds me of Phil Hartman - both in looks as the character he plays in News Radio. The celebrity star of the radio station who thinks everyone respects him and his opinion but in reality he's just seen as a bit of a clown.
- aidave, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1I respected Phil Hartman though.
- cawpin, on 05/12/2008, -3/+4Yeah, because Dvorak knows nothing of the industry.
Go outside. - dig1x, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4Add that ***** Walter Mossberg to the list.
- agimat, on 05/12/2008, -3/+4Yeah, because only your opinion matters, right?
- Pogojoe, on 05/12/2008, -10/+43Snorg Tees girls looking good today
- vertexoflife, on 05/12/2008, -3/+7Adblocker Plus.
- arjie, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3Yeah, I disabled it too.
- Pogojoe, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1So you are basically boasting and being proud of the fact you block out images of hot chicks wearing t-shirts one size too small?
- CopyNinja, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4I'm personally a huge fan of Anna from Bustedtees.
- mfingers, on 05/12/2008, -0/+0Exactly!!!
- vertexoflife, on 05/12/2008, -3/+7Adblocker Plus.
- burnstyle, on 05/12/2008, -3/+26http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html
reactOS site- daengbo, on 05/13/2008, -0/+0The best way to see where ReactOS is at is to install the build environment, check out the source code, and build a live CD with all apps. It'll let you know where they are TODAY, not where they were three months ago.
- frostbyt, on 05/12/2008, -12/+29With Wine 1.0 on the way for Linux I hate to say but this is a dead project.
- IphtashuFitz, on 05/12/2008, -17/+15ReactOS and Wine are two totally different things. ReactOS, as the name imples, is a standalone operating system. Wine is a Windows emulator that runs on top of linux/unix. One has no bearing on the other. In fact, if ReactOS is successful it could still prove extremely popular for people who still want to run Windows but don't way to pay the "Microsoft tax".
- Kappa00, on 05/12/2008, -3/+29WINE is not a ***** emulator.
/troll- Nougat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+20Then it would be called WINFE.
- SteveMax, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3s/emulator/compatibility layer/
- haydentech, on 05/12/2008, -1/+21The number of incorrect facts in your comment is amazing. First of all Wine is not an emulator -- in fact that's the name of the project! Wine Is Not an Emulator. Get it? Second, it's laughable to say that Wine and Reactos have no bearing on one another. The majority of Reactos code is Wine code, which is synced constantly. Instead of running Wine in Linux, it's basically running it under the ReactOS Windows-like kernel.
- hadak, on 05/12/2008, -7/+4Wine is not an emulator.
- jabelar, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Also, it does not matter if the approaches are technically different -- if they accomplish a similar result (in this case running Windows-centric applications) then they are in fact competing solutions.
- Kappa00, on 05/12/2008, -3/+29WINE is not a ***** emulator.
- Sheco, on 05/12/2008, -2/+26And you forgot to mention that ReactOS uses Wine and even hacks Wine and submits the patches.
- p0tent1al, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2who the ***** cares? Seriously.
All the people that like Windows, have STAYED and are going to stay with Windows.
All the people who like a cheap and powerful OS are going to stay with the many flavors of Linux.
All the people that like a powerful Unix core along with the best UI in the business (which does come at a price), then your already down with OS X
Linux users would be absolutely stupid to switch, it goes against all the reasons they even made the switch in the first place.. If your a Windows user, you don't care about the intricacies of an OS, you just want it to work with your favorite software. Mac users? Don't make me laugh. So please tell me, which one of those market shares is ReactOS going to get? Like parent poster said, this project is valiant but is dead in the water, and John Dvorak has to be the biggest idiot that people still listen to.
- p0tent1al, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2who the ***** cares? Seriously.
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -8/+1well the two can compliment each other. Some people dont want wine they want windows. They want not just the look and feel but when things go wrong they want to fix it in a highly similar manor. They dont want to have things be different. That is their choice, and since it will be installed on their system, its their right to decide that. I for example do not use windows not because of the technology but because the interface to do things is not in my preference. Others prefer that interface and dislike what I use. So there will always be a demand for things like reactos.
Because reactos is trying to code a lot of the internals of windows, something wine also does to a limited degree, if it were done in a way where there was a library that could be shared between the projects then only 1 set of code needs to be maintained instead of two.
And here is the problem with that same idea. Basically what wine does is translate the public API side of windows to the host operating system its running on (bsd, linux, osx, etc). Reactos provides that API and acts on it directly instead of translating it to native calls. This problem is larger than the benefits and would require another layer in between the two which would provide some freedom for the reactos people, but at a high enough cost it is unlikely to happen.
With all of that said I still think that there are some areas where the two projects compliment each other and code could potentially be shared, but it would probably require a big sit down and reorganization on both sides to make that happen, and that starts to seem less likely. - devophl, on 05/12/2008, -0/+7I think Wine is a bigger threat. The problem is that Microsoft uses so much proprietary technology that trying to replicate the NT kernel would probably hit a ton of patent barriers. Plus, with 10 years of tuning, you'd never be able to replicate what XP and Vista can do. Lets face it, those are very bloated OSs and you need every bit of optimization to make things run fast.
The only area where Wine might hit a snag is with specialized software which might use high end proprietary video and audio. This includes games and video and audio manipulation software. But for 95% of the rest of us, Wine should be OK to run standard Windows apps and run them reasonably fast. I don't care if Quicken runs 30% slower, I'm not trying to get performance out of that software.
Plus, there isn't an area of computing that's dying faster than PC gaming. With low cost game consoles, PC gaming has become almost a thing of the past. Get Word, Excel, Powerpoint, iTunes, Streets, Quicken/MS Money to run on Linux and I'd be all but ready to dump my Windows PC.- maninalift, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Absolutely agree.
Also II have been thinking about where Wine will go after 1.0. With a stability perhaps they could start issuing badges for software saying "runs on Linux under Wine" in return for which the developers of those applications could help to get their apps to run under Wine and in doing so contribute to Wine development.- Twee, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1If a developer is going to tweak their code to work with Wine on Linux, why not just put their effort into building a native Linux binary that runs on its own?
- pyrates, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3First part could be true, you don't know for sure nor can you prove it. Second part, not true at all. The only reason wine is going 1.0 is because they think it will make them look better to have a 1.0 product, and they justify this by saying it's release criteria should be able to run 4 apps very well. 4 apps? I don't call that a 1.0 product, I call it still a beta product. It is not feature complete, not by a long shot.
http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria
As for your last point, how many years has this been said for? This argument is mainly used by Apple or Linux users who want to game but don't want to use windows to do their gaming. They try to justify it by saying exactly this, despite it not being true actually.
http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/index.php/2008/01/911 ...- maninalift, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1"The only reason wine is going 1.0 is because they think it will make them look better to have a 1.0 product"
This is what I thought initially but actually there is going to be a change in development - a larger focus on preventing regressions. I don't know whether there will be a separate stable branch. This of course makes it easier for windows developers to check whether their products work under Wine - which could lead to useful collaborations.
- maninalift, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1"The only reason wine is going 1.0 is because they think it will make them look better to have a 1.0 product"
- maninalift, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Absolutely agree.
- IphtashuFitz, on 05/12/2008, -17/+15ReactOS and Wine are two totally different things. ReactOS, as the name imples, is a standalone operating system. Wine is a Windows emulator that runs on top of linux/unix. One has no bearing on the other. In fact, if ReactOS is successful it could still prove extremely popular for people who still want to run Windows but don't way to pay the "Microsoft tax".
- CodeCobalt, on 05/12/2008, -4/+23Just me, or does everyone else agree that the only thing MS would go "back to work on" would be sueing the pants off of anyone and everyone?
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4its more likely they will do the windows 3 v os/2 stuff at least initially. It would be difficult to sue when you have no cause, although not impossible.
In the windows 3 v os/2 wars, MS kept changing the api to make it incompatible with os/2. In this way IBMs marketing claim that it could run all the windows software wouldnt be as true as they would like it. It forced ibm to constantly figure out what changed, why it changed and how to make it work for successive versions. Of course the pricing model MS had at the time helped, but this was one way they urged people not to spend the extra $99 for os/2.
In short expect things to mysteriously break in reactos, expect some of it to be reactos's fault, but some will probably be MS's since this tactic worked well in the past, and really you cant stop MS from changing its own software. Given that computers are faster now, I would also expect them to put in more crypto, and claim that its there for copy protection so that breaking it causes the DMCA to be a tool.
But then again, probably 90+% of windows desktop users buy prebuilt systems which come with a windows license, and they dont care enough about any of the reasons to switch, so they are unlikely to. And why should they? It works the way they want out of the box, so why mess with it? I can buy a car which works the way I want, and just use that or I can rip the engine out and replace it with a new one for whatever reason, but how many people actually do that?- quantumstatejim, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1You have a major flaw in your argument about the way things may mysteriously break in reactos. This is because unless microsoft manage to get all of the companies that make windows software to patch their applications with reactos incompatibility code then it would only be microsofts own programs which then could possibly break. Also you could easily just buy the software and not patch it in the case of something like office even if microsoft spent the time and effort messing around with their code. So your entire argument for this point is completely flawed.
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4its more likely they will do the windows 3 v os/2 stuff at least initially. It would be difficult to sue when you have no cause, although not impossible.
- FKnight, on 05/12/2008, -23/+14Yet another attack on the "Evil Registry" without an explanation as to why.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -5/+34Because it's poorly designed and difficult to use?
- Nougat, on 05/12/2008, -13/+7If you're not a developer, it doesn't matter whether you need to edit the registry or edit config files. You'll do it, when necessary, based on very explicit instructions from people who are developers. And, frankly, a for-profit company with an official company-driven knowledgebase is always going to have more trustworthy explicit instructions than a user-driven community knowledgebase.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -3/+20So Dad has to supervise me if i want to make real changes? A well commented plaintext config file trumps the documentation hell that is MS any day of the week.
- Nougat, on 05/12/2008, -3/+8And how, may I ask, do you figure out what config file to modify for your issue?
Don't get me wrong; I like Linux and FOSS plenty. But you've got to get out of your own head and into the head of a common user. Common users don't go fixing things very often. The computer is a black box. When something breaks, it's broken, and they go buy a new computer. In the off chance that they do need to fix something with the OS, people who are only users, and who are willing to spend money on new factory computers are going to want official company support, not random wiki posts written by unknown individuals, in widely varying styles and to audiences of widely varying levels of skill.
McDonald's is where it is not because it sells great food. It's because it sells the *same* food, every place, every time. Microsoft serves a customer base that values sameness. *nix serves a customer base that values individual preference. Using and modifying Linux is an adventure. It's one that a lot of people, including myself, enjoy. Vastly more people do not enjoy adventuring with their computers. - MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6The registry isn't meant to be a documented user-editable configation store. Its primary purpose is for storing COM registrations and mysterious system 'stuff'.
Secondary, settings, but generally not settings that the user is supposed to edit. - evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4You keep bringing up support, and my whole point is that you shouldn't NEED third party support. "Lets see, i want to disable this feature, but it's not in the "options" menu. I'll take a peek at the config.
#Comment out the next line if you don't like wacky feature
Instead, you're proposing that i call microsoft (who i very likely don't have support with), who, after phone routing fun, will tell me to change this
HKEY_LOCAL_USERS/LOCAL/USERS/LOCAL/SOFTWARE/MICROSOFT/SOFTWARE/MICROSOFT/OFFICE/MICROSOFT/LOCAL/WORD/USERS/CONFIG/WACKYFEATURE=0
Because *that's* intuitive.
- Nougat, on 05/12/2008, -3/+8And how, may I ask, do you figure out what config file to modify for your issue?
- Balanced, on 05/12/2008, -1/+2However, Not having to make changes at all is even better!
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1Just make them easy and intuitive to change, that's all we ask.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -3/+20So Dad has to supervise me if i want to make real changes? A well commented plaintext config file trumps the documentation hell that is MS any day of the week.
- dig1x, on 05/12/2008, -2/+3Reading and writing to the registry is incredibly easy -- what are you talking about?
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1I think it could also be said that using a keyboard is easy - all you have to do is press letters and they show up on the screen! However, typing words and sentences takes knowledge of typing.
In other words, there's nothing wrong with the tool itself, it's the concept that needs work.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1I think it could also be said that using a keyboard is easy - all you have to do is press letters and they show up on the screen! However, typing words and sentences takes knowledge of typing.
- Nougat, on 05/12/2008, -13/+7If you're not a developer, it doesn't matter whether you need to edit the registry or edit config files. You'll do it, when necessary, based on very explicit instructions from people who are developers. And, frankly, a for-profit company with an official company-driven knowledgebase is always going to have more trustworthy explicit instructions than a user-driven community knowledgebase.
- eddieroger, on 05/12/2008, -2/+9"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. "
Sounds like an explanation to me.- dig1x, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5" The Registry is the bane of the basic Windows architecture and should be unnecessary in our age of infinite storage"
That doesnt even make sense, its a total non sequitor.
"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"
Yeah, that's a great idea. How about we scatter DLLs all over the system? What if a bug-fix is made to some DLL? Is there going to be some sort of global DLL search/replace take place..?
"In that way, you would be able to move the program bundle easily from machine to machine. "
This is a solution in search of a problem, and honestly, I think he reveals a great deal by suggesting this...- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1"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"
That's great for security.
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1"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"
- dig1x, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5" The Registry is the bane of the basic Windows architecture and should be unnecessary in our age of infinite storage"
- neko, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2It's a single point of failure, and it fails, hard.
- evillawngnome, on 05/12/2008, -5/+34Because it's poorly designed and difficult to use?
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -2/+22by fully emulating the functionality though it allows for others to add in the features that they want.
However lets say that today they had something 100% XP compatible. It would be a tough sell to get people en masse to use it, the average person just does not care. Of the ones that do care, many would get a prebuilt system which includes a windows license. MS has an edge in that reactos is trying to clone their operating system, so if MS comes out with new features and all that reactos has to then copy, which will cause them to lag somewhat in this arena.
It is my belief that unless they (anyone who develops for it) add in new features and create a compelling reason to use it it wont be that popular. For most people the ability to get the code is meaningless because most computer users are not developers. Most people in general would rather have real than immitation and that is exactly how it will come across. Remember most computer users are only using it to use a web browser, email client and maybe some games or word processing type apps. They dont care about politics of software, the dont care about licenses, they dont care about who wrote the code, they dont care about many things that geeks may care about or even understand.
Not saying its a bad thing only saying that its not a giant threat to MS.- aladrin, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6I always hear something about Wine's difficulties: They are trying to hit a moving target. ReactOS is in the same basket, there.
Luckily, Vista has slowed that target way down... There's no need to emulate Vista or DX10 yet because there's not really anything being written specifically for them.
You are also correct that the average person does not care how the computer works, or what ideals it is built on. They just want it to work 100% of the time. ReactOS's only hope of 'beating' Microsoft is to create a more stable, usable product... I doubt that's going to happen when their basic plan is to copy imitate MS's work as closely as possible.- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1the largest instability with windows 98 was 3rd party drivers which had too much power. In XP and more so in Vista MS has worked to not allow the drivers the ability to hose the entire system. They still havent gotten this perfect, but its one thing they acknowledged as a problem and started the driver signing stuff and sectioning off drivers a bit more.
Vista has the DRM stuff which I doubt will be easily clonable, given how much money is at stake by all parties over that issue. And cloning it leads towards removing it, especially when its an open source implementation. As a result, I can envision DMCA suits over that issue should they try. Remember the DMCA does not have a fair use provision, and in many ways its quite convoluted to the point that its easy to violate. UK has a similar thing, the EU has pushed many countries in the EU to try to make soemthing more than their mere piracy policy directive, so its quite far reaching, although I think the UK and US so far have the most expansive laws covering this. - supermose, on 05/12/2008, -0/+0I completely agree with you trixterIreland. I do web design and find that people pick Windows servers for their simple sites because it is familiar. Granted some of the blame has to do with how this is marketed with the web host, but the point I'm making is the Brand recognition of Microsoft. People are creatures of habit and for most, things have to get really bad before they decide to change operating systems. Most people here on Digg are completely open to the idea if there desired programs are supported.
So, basically, any challenger for XP or Vista would have to offer something above and beyond what XP or Vista offers, AND make the difficulty to change VERY low.
I think if this project were to have the simplicity and ease of use of Ubuntu (even better would help) with Windows compatibility there is a SLIM chance that it could take traction - but even this would require quite a push from people in the community, great reviews, and good press. Other wise it is useless.
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1the largest instability with windows 98 was 3rd party drivers which had too much power. In XP and more so in Vista MS has worked to not allow the drivers the ability to hose the entire system. They still havent gotten this perfect, but its one thing they acknowledged as a problem and started the driver signing stuff and sectioning off drivers a bit more.
- IphtashuFitz, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4I beg to differ. I think it could quickly make headway among Windows users. I've had to help family members re-install Windows a number of times over the years. After a while many people find their Windows environments acting up and causing all sorts of problems. While helping people to do re-installs they always complain about having to track down the Windows installation key and typing it in. I also know more and more people who have had their Windows registrations fail, requiring them to call the MS 800 number to manually activate it that way. If I could point them to a stable ReactOS that didn't have all those annoying licensing requirements I'm sure many of them would jump at it the next time they had to do a Windows (re) install.
Another thing to think about is the rapidly growing popularity of virtual machines thanks to applications like VMWare and Parallels. If I have a Mac or linux system and I want to run a Windows VM I'd be much more inclined to use a free version of ReactOS in the VM then trying to track down a copy of Windows, an installation key, etc. and going through all the licensing hassle just for the VM.- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2having worked in all the places that I work, having talked to all the people that I talk to, I disagree, but that is fine. For example the vmware argument is a minority, not an overwhemling percentage of users. Most dont need or want that ability, most use 1 operating system only and 1 environment and really dont retask systems all the time.
As for the reinstall issue, I can agree that it may be frustrating, however I know many people that never have had to do that, of the ones that have they generally dont have that big of a problem with finding the key, I havent known anyone that had to call the tollfree. I dont know what percentage it is, but lets look at say 90% will use real windows, maybe 10% will care (that use windows like operating systems) and switch. 10% is still a large figure, but its not a giant threat to MS nor is it even close to a substantial percentage.
If anything the threat would be someone doing a budget system with an xp compatible OS on it. But that is going to be years away, who wants to risk selling systems that end up all being defective in the sense they dont run all the software, thus arent really xp compatible. Companies by in large will want at least a couple years of proven use, so some will be able to be the guinea pigs, get some press about it, etc, then more will adopt and you repeat the same thing. That is the way it was for linux, and that is probably going to be the way for the small percentage of businesses that use reactos. And that is what its going to most likely take (based in history) for vendors to sell reactos systems for basically the same price as linux ones. That will be the only real threat to MS, and that gives them years to change everything and break interopability, which means reactos has to play catch up and isnt a threat ...
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2having worked in all the places that I work, having talked to all the people that I talk to, I disagree, but that is fine. For example the vmware argument is a minority, not an overwhemling percentage of users. Most dont need or want that ability, most use 1 operating system only and 1 environment and really dont retask systems all the time.
- nevermind13, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1You are absolutely correct. This is why wine on linux is a much better solution. You get the benefits of Linux while maintaining Windows compatibility. Why you anybody switch from Windows to go to a different Windows, with no true assurance of their continued support? On a new machine the cost of Windows is negligible and I think most people would opt for Microsoft's support with updates and patches, not a project that while free may have nobody developing for it tomorrow. I don't see it being a success, even though I think it has some noble goals and I have a lot of respect for the programmers giving their effort to it.
- daengbo, on 05/13/2008, -0/+0If ReactOS is 100% XP compatible by 2014, I can see businesses taking ReactOS to run critical applications which won't run on Windows 7 or whatever is out at that time.
- aladrin, on 05/12/2008, -0/+6I always hear something about Wine's difficulties: They are trying to hit a moving target. ReactOS is in the same basket, there.
- mikedoth, on 05/12/2008, -2/+20Just wait for HaikuOS.
- dpcamp, on 05/12/2008, -7/+2I'll wait for SadokuOS thank you very much!
- tnoy, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2I logged in just to digg you up.
- jdepp, on 05/12/2008, -8/+6seems a bit silly to go re-implementing windows when both windows and wine exist. why don't these guys go work for microsoft and get paid for it?
- newwatch51, on 05/12/2008, -1/+2Because Windows isn't free, and Wine doesn't work for everything.
- DigitalPioneer, on 05/12/2008, -2/+4Also because windows sucks, and microsoft doesn't care. ReactOS is attempting to make a windows-compatible OS that actually works, since by modern standards, windows does not really work.
- ArthurSucks, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2Are you high? Competition is good for consumers not bad.
- giskard88, on 05/12/2008, -9/+7A replica turd is no better than the turd itself. ultimately, reactOS will either be as conceptually broker as windows is or it will be insufficiently compatible. Driver support in Linux is getting damn good, so that argument is kinda out. If you need 100% compatibility with windows, use it. otherwise linux will be a better choice than some halfway point that saddles you with the problems of both.
- ErikHarrison, on 05/12/2008, -3/+10A new OS needs a new Microsoft.
- AzureRise, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2I'd prefer no Microsoft. Bill is gone, Ballmer is a douche bag, and I doubt the next guy'll be any better.
- DreadKnight, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0CANONICAL.
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -7/+10reading the article a bit closer I see where dvorak does not understand a few things, even though he speaks loudly about them as if he does.
Case and point:
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.
Copying the dll is silly, and yes it means that you can just copy the directory over to the other machine there is a slight problem with his logic. First if you upgrade that dll you have to then hunt down each and every copy of it and apply the upgrade to them all. Next if you managed to copy over an older copy of the DLL and have issues, do you know why? Is it an incompatibility with that DLL and something else on your system? Debugging and trouble shooting would be more difficult. Any developer would understand the dangers of having multiple copies of the same library all with different versions and getting weird results back from that library.
I do agree that it would be easier to move software around without installing it on each machine, but ya know that already exists. There are several programs that you can literally just copy from machine to machine without having to reinstall them, they are intentionally written this way. So the blame is not so much on the registry, but developers desire to use it (probably because at one point they were taught that is the proper way). For some things you do have to use it, or something that works like it, think about file association - you have to have some updatable database to tell file manager that this new app will work with all these file types.- xutopia, on 05/12/2008, -2/+10On OS X each application checks as it is started (or as I close it) to see if there is an update for it. It is responsible for updating itself and it's libraries. Sure it's not as elegant as sharing libraries across multiple software packages but at least if I want to copy an app to my laptop it's as easy as dragging and dropping.
- sharpie05, on 05/12/2008, -2/+6Nuff said. Os x is Dvorak's dream OS.
- ohplease, on 05/12/2008, -6/+4Microsoft Installer format stores all DLLs in your c:windowsinstaller directory in the original source install MSI. The installed files are checked each time you start your app and MSI will repair them by restoring them from the source if they are missing/corrupted/different. Microsoft has been doing this since Windows 2000 and Dvorak doesn't know ***** about Windows.
- Yarnage, on 05/12/2008, -2/+8Not true. Depending on the DLL it typically installs them into the Application's directory. Do some research / development before commenting on something you don't know anything about.
- ohplease, on 05/12/2008, -5/+3
I've written a commercial MSI install and passed Windows Validation testing with that app. I've used everything from MS Orca dev tools to Installer Studio to develop MSI installs. Re-read what I wrote.- Yarnage, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1So I guess you're just an idiot then?
- jamesLankford, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5so, if a dll is installed from an msi, but then I later updrage the dll,
you're saying the next time I start the app, windows will compare the upgraded dll with what's in the windowsinstaller directory, see that its different, and wipe out my upgrade ?
and what about apps that aren't installed through msi ? like self extracting zip files or rar files?
- ohplease, on 05/12/2008, -5/+3
- Yarnage, on 05/12/2008, -2/+8Not true. Depending on the DLL it typically installs them into the Application's directory. Do some research / development before commenting on something you don't know anything about.
- daengbo, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Yeah, I agree. Dvorak's plan to have DLLs everywhere on the system pretty much defeats the whole idea of a shared library. If we're going to to that, we should just compile everything in. No need to copy anything. Phhhbt!
- xutopia, on 05/12/2008, -2/+10On OS X each application checks as it is started (or as I close it) to see if there is an update for it. It is responsible for updating itself and it's libraries. Sure it's not as elegant as sharing libraries across multiple software packages but at least if I want to copy an app to my laptop it's as easy as dragging and dropping.
- TheZorch, on 05/12/2008, -8/+2Microsoft could very easily develop a new OS that runs on a completely new kernel, a micro kernel for speed, and requires very few resources. Backward compatibility could done the same way Apple does it with Rosetta through virtualization. Microsoft also needs to splinter its home and business operating systems off again. Home users don't need all of the enterprise specific services which current run on Vista Home Premium. They could focus on developing an OS for the home with greater speed, an new UI approach, and user friendliness. Windows Vista, contrary to what most people believe, isn't all that user friendly. In truth is less user friendly than Ubuntu and Mac OS X. This is what Microsoft could do if they really put the effort into it and didn't cut corners.
- Altotus, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5Apple's Rosetta is merely a licensed version of Transitive's QuickTransit (which is also the basis for IBM's Lx86 for their p-Series servers). It's not a virtual machine. QuickTransit identifies object code for one platform, and does an on-the-fly translation of the program from instructions for one platform to another. Essentialy, it loads the binary code, decompiles it to an intermediate state (think assembly), and recompiles it in-place replacing the instructions for one platform with those of another. It's much closer to a JIT compiler than a virtual machine.
Also, microkernels don't buy you speed. They buy you a layer of insulation against the underlying hardware.
I don't think MS has any reason or desire to rework their UI. Vista's is sufficiently similar to XP (and 95/W2K before that) that people are familiar with it. It's the familiarity that keeps people coming back to it. Keep in mind that their ideal user is one that knows nothing about what the computer is doing, and learns basic file operations and how to operate 2-3 applications. Microsoft's products are designed quite specifically to lowest-common-denominator business functions. Everything else is merely icing to make it palatable to those who are familiar with it in that area and care to use it elsewhere. Any changes MS makes to it's UI will rile a customer base that they already feel they are losing for various reasons. UI development is hard, expensive, pisses off the customers when you flub it, and, frankly, doesn't address a business need. Aesthetics and ergonomics are secondary concerns for MS, it's just not their business model.
- Altotus, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5Apple's Rosetta is merely a licensed version of Transitive's QuickTransit (which is also the basis for IBM's Lx86 for their p-Series servers). It's not a virtual machine. QuickTransit identifies object code for one platform, and does an on-the-fly translation of the program from instructions for one platform to another. Essentialy, it loads the binary code, decompiles it to an intermediate state (think assembly), and recompiles it in-place replacing the instructions for one platform with those of another. It's much closer to a JIT compiler than a virtual machine.
- jerryn, on 05/12/2008, -10/+6Hmm.. Linux Rocks! No need to write something else. I guess the guy who wrote this has no clue. I've built Oracle RAC server farms,
I've built Linux Clusters... all I can say is it works and it works well! I've also worked on IBM P6 systems. I've run AIX and Linux on the LPARS.. very cool stuff. And OS/X is great too!- Viriatus2, on 05/12/2008, -1/+9that's cool but what about desktops?
- synyster, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3compiz fusion is cool stuff
- tnoy, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1compiz fusion is nothing but pointless eye candy.
Sure, having the window burst into flames when I close it is cool, but still doesn't let me run the apps I need.
- tnoy, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1compiz fusion is nothing but pointless eye candy.
- synyster, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3compiz fusion is cool stuff
- Viriatus2, on 05/12/2008, -1/+9that's cool but what about desktops?
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 05/12/2008, -2/+12Don't worry. If it gets too good, Microsoft will either sue them or make great effort to break it with future releases.
- Surfrock66, on 05/12/2008, -3/+23The perfect OS needs more cowbell.
- cplusplus, on 05/12/2008, -8/+5It would be really cool to see Mac OS X incorporate WINE and ReactOS. It would be the kind of game-changing thing Jobs likes to do!
- Yarnage, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4Wine already runs fine on OS X. Naturally somehow building it in would be cool but I don't think Apple can do that legally.
- MacParrot, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Plus, Apple still needs little things like...I don't know...Microsoft Office for the Mac. If they added WINE (which yes works OK for what it is, but is not the magic pill needed for Windows software) into the base of the OS and no longer needed Windows to run MS Software, how much co-operation would they receive from Microsoft?
- AmnioticEntity, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1how do you know apple/osX dev guys aren't getting huge bonus' to code for wine - to help it run smoother? are we sure that there are no ex-ms or current ms employees helping this project out? there has to be at least 1 corporate coder out there with a soul...right?
just my lil' conspiracy...if pot were legal i wouldn't have these schizoid dreams...but thats for a different post....
- AmnioticEntity, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1how do you know apple/osX dev guys aren't getting huge bonus' to code for wine - to help it run smoother? are we sure that there are no ex-ms or current ms employees helping this project out? there has to be at least 1 corporate coder out there with a soul...right?
- NJank, on 05/12/2008, -3/+35ReactOS is just bad policy. With ReactOS, you leave yourself vulnerable, and only respond after problems occur. We need: PreemptOS!
- Zippo, on 05/12/2008, -5/+2Does anyone else think Dvorak kinda looks like Kelsey Grammer?
- bumblefoot, on 05/12/2008, -5/+4what a new os needs, is to have the hardware compatibility of windows/linux, but the ease of use and perhaps a similar UI to mac OSX and the software availability and installation system of linux
that way there will be little to none hardware incompatibility, be simple enough for even the most idiotic of people to use and there will be a wealth of free open source software thats downloadable by a nice package manager or something.
but that will never happen -_-, best we can hope for is that apple realise there is a market in licensing osx to run on non-apple systems- TheCoreh, on 05/12/2008, -3/+2The software availability of linux?!
- rowjimmy, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4i think he means every tool you need you can easily find and usually one-click install (via a package manager) or download and install from source. maybe they aren't the same tools you are used to using on windows, but it is certainly easier and cheaper to find and install a FOSS clone (not to mention uninstall or upgrade) than a proprietary windows-based equivalent
- bumblefoot, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2yeah i phrased my original post poorly, ty for clarifying for me
- rowjimmy, on 05/12/2008, -0/+4i think he means every tool you need you can easily find and usually one-click install (via a package manager) or download and install from source. maybe they aren't the same tools you are used to using on windows, but it is certainly easier and cheaper to find and install a FOSS clone (not to mention uninstall or upgrade) than a proprietary windows-based equivalent
- TheCoreh, on 05/12/2008, -3/+2The software availability of linux?!
- Stonekeeper, on 05/12/2008, -1/+10I believe that linux+wine can do more than reactos. I could be wrong of course.
- newwatch51, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1It can...for now.
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Yes, linux+wine+dosbox can do more than reactos. Of course linux can do more than any other OS so far, but that is a different topic.
- Ustanik, on 05/12/2008, -11/+5Buried for being Dvorak.
- Kinnkster, on 05/12/2008, -2/+1I totally agree. Hes cluless, takes on a fake character, and makes uninteresting predictions that never really come true.
- Falldog, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3What an OS needs is a strong developer behind it who actively responds to bug and other issue reports in a timely fashion, continually provides design and user interface improvements, and produces a product that has the ability out of the box to work with all times of file systems, media files, etc.
- leszek, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1only one ?
- JMellissa, on 05/12/2008, -0/+7I whole-heartedly agree with eliminating the system registry. The windows system registry allows so much in the way of machine corruption that its value is no where near the magnitude of its risk.... especially with the lack of complete documentation and deterministic tools.
- vacuum2440, on 05/12/2008, -13/+8oh yea thats really going to happen, look how long linux has been in development and its not near ready to compete with windows in terms of a commercial operating system
go ahead bury me down...oh precious linux- wigren, on 05/12/2008, -5/+3fail troll is fail
- ultraJesus, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1I wasn't going to, but since you asked.
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Yes linux is ready to compete with Windows and Apple. People just need to learn to learn.
- vacuum2440, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1sorry but not everyone is a tech geek who is willing to work for technology, they want something that will work for them
- RSMiller, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1Damn it John you're supposed to be cranky about this kinda stuff
- gllopc, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4The registry stores more than the location of DLLs. As a programmer, I need a location to store data regarding the program I'm working on, and get data regarding other programs. For most applications you can store this in a file, but wasn't that what we were trying to get away from (meaning INIs) before the registry?
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5Why are INI files deprecated in favor of the registry?
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2007/11/ ...
It also points out some problems that XML doesn't solve over INI.- gllopc, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3I think it's just a better idea to keep things in a common location. But I'm not advocating either - I just want a standard, and I'm fine with the registry.
- neko, on 05/12/2008, -2/+5Yah, because plain text configuration files are
a) stored along with the other support files for the program, so you know where to find it, settings are easy to copy across machines, and are easy to backup.
b) commented, documented, so that a moderately competent user can edit the settings. (as opposed to all those hidden registry settings!)
c) searchable. Yes, regedit.exe has a Find option, but that goes over everything everywhere ever.
Compare that to the Registry, which to put it as delicately as possible, is a flaming pile of goat crap.- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3You should read the link I posted in the comment above yours. Yes, plain text config files give you a few nice things, but they can blow up pretty easily. There's a whole list of things there that XML and INI files (And anything common generally means all config files) have problems with that the registry doesn't.
- MioTheGreat, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5Why are INI files deprecated in favor of the registry?
- trixterIreland, on 05/12/2008, -1/+10Remember folks the point of reactos is not so that you can run windows programs like you can with wine+linux, but so that you have a windows operating system. The goals are similar but not identical, and all the comments about how wine+linux is somehow better overlook the fact that some people do not want to use linux in the first place.
The two products are trying to give people choice, a freedom, a simple pleasure of being able to decide what you will run on your own computer, instead of someone else telling you. The fact that some prefer linux as a base and wine to enable windows apps is fine, just as its fine that for a decade someone has been working towards writing a clone of windows. There are differences in how you administer each of those systems, there are differences in how you diagnose and resolve problems. Some may feel more comfortable with one operating system while others with another.
Its not all about conformity, its not all about everyone doing the same thing the same way all the time. People should actually be free to make decisions for themselves and not have one group tell them they are idiots for choosing something different. Oh wait we arent talking about the election in this thread. sorry :P- brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -4/+1THANK YOU! I don't want to use Linux. Linus seems like a nice guy, but he made it so easy for major geeks to be that much more arrogant. "You have the right to choose so you should only choose Linux!" maybe I use Windows as to not conform to the Digg geeks
- Maevirko69, on 05/12/2008, -5/+6Most windows drivers don't work with windows. If this works, then these people are truly programming geniuses.
- brocruit, on 05/12/2008, -3/+1You're an idiot
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Very very true! Getting a driver to work the way you want it to is harder in WIndows than in Linux.
- ohplease, on 05/12/2008, -5/+7Once again Dvorak flaunts is cluelessness as to how Windows works.
Case in point:
"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. "
Any program for Windows that has been certified by Microsoft (Windows Logo Validation Program) since Windows 2000, which essentially includes nearly any program on the market, doesn't share DLLs. Why? It uses the Microsoft Installer (MSI) format. MSI applications don't share DLLs, and is a requirement for Microsoft to validate that your program works on Windows. Windows Logo Validation is a pretty common process for developers as most businesses won't deploy your software unless you've passed validation.
Also, the registry holds a lot more than DLL registration, it's a central repository for configuration and security, and is a far better solution than the mess of INI files we had before.
Please someone take Dvorak out to pasture and shoot him, or at least teach him how a computer works.- neko, on 05/12/2008, -0/+11So modern Windows applications don't share shared libraries?
Hilarious. - stix213, on 05/12/2008, -2/+4I'd take a "mess of INI files" over the all my eggs in one basket solution called the Registry any day. One corruption and it is Install disk time! Ohhh right.... I use Linux so I don't have that problem... Plenty of INI files, but no annoying Registry to corrupt. :)
- cquinnd, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3then you never had to deal with system corruption from a mishandled .ini file, then having to figure out by process of elimination which ini was the culprit.
- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3I have had plenty of experience with that, and far more experience with corrupted Windows registries.
Again, I'll take figuring out a corrupted ini file problem over "Windows XP could not start because the following file is missing or corrupt: \WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\CONFIG\SOFTWARE" every time. Generally it is pretty obvious what ini file is corrupted by whatever error you are running into, and a corrupted ini file is less likely to prevent your computer from booting at all compared to a corrupted registry (which usually results in the previous error message, leaving you F'd in the A unless you know what you are doing).- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Ohhh, and if you get a corrupted registry you can't even boot into "Safe Mode" or "Command Prompt Only" and have to resort to booting from another device to save the day. Yeah that is so much easier that figuring out an ini file corruption...... At least 9 times out of 10 you can still boot your machine!
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1I have had trouble like that before. I have had to reinstall windows 20+ times on the same machine because of a malformed windows update. (microsoft fixes them as soon as the first bug report gets in, but the first couple thousand people are out of luck)
- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3I have had plenty of experience with that, and far more experience with corrupted Windows registries.
- cquinnd, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3then you never had to deal with system corruption from a mishandled .ini file, then having to figure out by process of elimination which ini was the culprit.
- neko, on 05/12/2008, -0/+11So modern Windows applications don't share shared libraries?
- wbeavis, on 05/12/2008, -6/+2Don't bother making suggestions to them. They have their vision and will shoot down any idea you come up with. There is not much debate. I still think they should focus on first putting out a thin client-esque OS. They already have practically everythign they need. A no frills OS to fire up an RDP client. Partner with Dell or HP and get $5-$10 a seat and you have all the funding you need to finish a full OS. I'm sure there is probably a market for a lightweight Win32 OS for cell phones and other embedded systems.
- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Dell & HP are hesitant to start bankrolling another new OS. Dell recently started shipping Ubuntu, but that was only after massive customer requests.... and the fact that Michael Dell himself runs it on his laptop. I have never heard anyone talking about ReactOS in the same light, and I doubt any company would want to put any $$$ behind an OS so early in its development.
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS5149877302.html
- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Dell & HP are hesitant to start bankrolling another new OS. Dell recently started shipping Ubuntu, but that was only after massive customer requests.... and the fact that Michael Dell himself runs it on his laptop. I have never heard anyone talking about ReactOS in the same light, and I doubt any company would want to put any $$$ behind an OS so early in its development.
- aserer511, on 05/12/2008, -6/+3so it's pretty much a modern re-release of WIN2k?
Ugh, even if its quick, it's gonna look like *****- khyberkitsune, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Who cares if it looks like *****? I don't want my resources wasted on the OS when I can have the unused resources free for things that do look good, like GAMES and VIDEO.
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Well said. I couldn't agree more.
- khyberkitsune, on 05/12/2008, -0/+3Who cares if it looks like *****? I don't want my resources wasted on the OS when I can have the unused resources free for things that do look good, like GAMES and VIDEO.
- ignign0kt, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6I've been sort of following ReactOS's progress for years. Although an awesome idea, it's really going nowhere.
- 3leggedHorse, on 05/12/2008, -2/+3 MS do not see it as a threat yet, because they are not suing them.
- ChinezePanda, on 05/12/2008, -2/+4I await the operating system that we all know is being built by google.
Hurry up with that ***** already.- synyster, on 05/12/2008, -2/+2google OS will definitely based on Linux
- duckyinc, on 05/12/2008, -1/+6You need to read "Why there won't be a new OS soon"
- devophl, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3The OS battles in the desktop and server arena have resolved themselves to two areas: NT/XP/Vista and Unix/Linux. The NT realm has won where a computer has one user or is doing one task. The Unix realm has won where the computer needs to manage more than one user doing more than one task. Since in the PC world, we still think of a PC doing a single task and having a specific user, its unlikely Unix will encroach into that environment. In many business applications, servers are purchased to do a single task. Servers have become so cheap that specializing them to a specific task such as a DB backend or file server has become commonplace. So in the business world, many servers run Windows. Its in those special areas where you can't see the computer doing a single task or have the need to manage several distinct users where Unix steps in.
Both of these OSs doing what they do very well. Its unlikely we'll see another OS pop up anytime soon. It would take a decade to get where Windows and Unix are today and who's willing to make that investment.- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -3/+1OS X is the flaw in your logic.... A wildly popular OS used in the "single task" environment you describe, yet it is solidly in the Unix/Linux camp.
- tetsuo29, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Care to provide a link to "Why there won't be a new OS soon"?
- devophl, on 05/12/2008, -1/+3The OS battles in the desktop and server arena have resolved themselves to two areas: NT/XP/Vista and Unix/Linux. The NT realm has won where a computer has one user or is doing one task. The Unix realm has won where the computer needs to manage more than one user doing more than one task. Since in the PC world, we still think of a PC doing a single task and having a specific user, its unlikely Unix will encroach into that environment. In many business applications, servers are purchased to do a single task. Servers have become so cheap that specializing them to a specific task such as a DB backend or file server has become commonplace. So in the business world, many servers run Windows. Its in those special areas where you can't see the computer doing a single task or have the need to manage several distinct users where Unix steps in.
- smegs, on 05/12/2008, -2/+2John Dvorak is a hack and he isn't saying anything that anyone else hasn't. Just a mediocre computing industry figure giving a plug to a good project.
- OneAndOnlySnob, on 05/12/2008, -2/+11Wrong topic... ReactOS is no more Linux than Windows is.
- xamox, on 05/12/2008, -2/+5Why doesn't digg have a snooze button?
- stikkitjim, on 05/12/2008, -0/+5It looks like a cool project - I mean, regardless of whether it will knock Microsoft onto the back foot or whatever Dvorak is rambling on about, this is the point of Free and Open computing - to scratch your own itch. These guys wanted to use windows, but wanted to use open source software, so they did it! Just like Torvalds wanted to use an open version of Minix.
Not my cup of tea, but good luck to these guys if they enjoy using/developing it. - dspirito, on 05/12/2008, -1/+5Are they even allowed to have a start menu with the word "Start" on it??
- Enjia, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1A short sum-up of the ReactOS roadmap, for more information visit our ReactOS roadmap page.
Short-term plan
The next release will be 0.3.5, with an earliest projected release date being May, 2008.
Medium-term plan
The coming 0.4 release series will still stay in alpha stage, and 0.5 release series will be marked as beta, meaning a system which is suitable for every day use.
Long-term plan
N/A at the moment. - trollick, on 05/12/2008, -4/+4"What I'd like to see in a new OS is the elimination of the Registry... The Registry is the bane of the basic Windows architecture..."
Nobody prevents developers from using System.IO.IsolatedStorage instead of the registry in Windows. If they are to lazy to learn about it, it is their fault.- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4System.IO.IsolatedStorage requires the use of .Net Framework (which some people don't like to use), and its contents can be easily viewed by unmanaged code - so don't do anything stupid like storing passwords or encryption keys in it.
- trollick, on 05/12/2008, -3/+1Hmm.. As opposed to registry where saving passwords is just fine???
- techprophet, on 05/13/2008, -1/+0Both are awful methods. The best way is to encrypt the password in a file and then encrypt the file. The only way to decrypt it then is to have the key for it (stored elsewhere, maybe in the app itself). I have done that multiple times and it works great.
- trollick, on 05/12/2008, -3/+1Hmm.. As opposed to registry where saving passwords is just fine???
- stix213, on 05/12/2008, -1/+4System.IO.IsolatedStorage requires the use of .Net Framework (which some people don't like to use), and its contents can be easily viewed by unmanaged code - so don't do anything stupid like storing passwords or encryption keys in it.
-
Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by