ReactOS, a 17-year quest for an open-source Windows, has a new release candidate

Post by orionblastar » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 2:43 AM UTC

yuhong wrote: post #25

giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

This is one OS I've kept my eye on forever, though it feels as though Microsoft will go open source before ReactOS can catch up if anything. I wouldn't mind if certain parts of Windows were open sourced, or replaced by open sourced alternatives at least, not all of Windows. We saw this happen to the Open Live Writer.

Windows is complex enough that I think so. I am thinking of breaking up Microsoft's OS division into a non-profit foundation, funded by hardware vendors like Dell and Intel with no per system licensing fees required anymore for example.

Post by aaronbrethorst » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 2:48 AM UTC

orionblastar wrote: post #41

yuhong wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows is complex enough that I think so. I am thinking of breaking up Microsoft's OS division into a non-profit foundation, funded by hardware vendors like Dell and Intel with no per system licensing fees required anymore for example.

The DOJ wanted to break Microsoft up into different companies like they did to AT&T. They would have been called the Baby Bills, and one would do Windows all by itself, and another would do Internet sites and apps, and another games, and another apps, and another developer tools. But that didn't happen and Microsoft got a slap on the wrist instead. Many people migrated to GNU/Linux or Mac because Microsoft had abused…

    Many people migrated to GNU/Linux or Mac because
    Microsoft had abused their monopoly, some people
    and companies are stuck with Microsoft because
    their business needs Windows to run their custom
    apps.

Post by monochromatic » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 2:58 AM UTC

yuhong wrote: post #42

orionblastar wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ wanted to break Microsoft up into different companies like they did to AT&T. They would have been called the Baby Bills, and one would do Windows all by itself, and another would do Internet sites and apps, and another games, and another apps, and another developer tools. But that didn't happen and Microsoft got a slap on the wrist instead. Many people migrated to GNU/Linux or Mac because Microsoft had abused…

I know, and simply breaking up the OS division the traditional way would not solve the problems anyway. That is why I suggested a better idea this time.

Post by orionblastar » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 3:09 AM UTC

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #43

orionblastar wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ wanted to break Microsoft up into different companies like they did to AT&T. They would have been called the Baby Bills, and one would do Windows all by itself, and another would do Internet sites and apps, and another games, and another apps, and another developer tools. But that didn't happen and Microsoft got a slap on the wrist instead. Many people migrated to GNU/Linux or Mac because Microsoft had abused…

Many people migrated to GNU/Linux or Mac because Microsoft had abused their monopoly, some people and companies are stuck with Microsoft because their business needs Windows to run their custom apps. Citation needed. I migrated to Mac OS X in 2000[1] because it was a Unix-like operating system with a usable UI that worked well on a laptop[2]. Also, there were to be two companies, not five[3]. Of course, I might be bi…

Post by eclipxe » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 3:18 AM UTC

yuhong wrote: post #44

tomcam wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generous of you. What about the effect on pension funds that hold this now worthless stock? Grants to employees? The thousands of job losses?

Yea, it would be complex and have to be planned carefully too.