Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ReactOS

reactos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 141 posts

Re: ReactOS

#91

Post by colinfinck »

curtis3389 wrote: post #40
Jaruzel wrote: post #19

I'm saddened a little bit to see stuff like theming has been built. I was hoping that ReactOS would stick with the Windows 2000 look and feel. I also think that with the limited resources they have, the project team would be better focusing on improving compatibility, over shiny desktop effects. That said... I firmly believe there is a place for ReactOS. Eventually, XP will fail to run on new hardware, and when that…

It's really saddening if you've been following the project for years. They had some good progress back when the Russian government got interested in ReactOS, but lately they seem to just be doing webdev stuff not directly related to improving ReactOS. To the ReactOS devs: what's the deal with the last couple years of GSOC projects? Why is there little to no work going on to improve compatibilty?

ReactOS dev here. As of today, compatibility is primarily hampered by the fact that many applications don't run under Windows XP anymore. We don't want to change the entire OS target to something newer than NT 5.2 (XP/Server 2003) at this point. Let's better stabilize on one target than chasing a moving target forever.

This is why a versioning system is being implemented right now to allow applications targeting NT 6.x to use newer DLLs/APIs not available under Windows XP. Check e.g. this recent PR from a few days ago for details: https://github.com/reactos/reactos/pull/3239

Re: ReactOS

#92

Post by techwizard81 »

babypuncher wrote: post #87
Jaruzel wrote: post #19

I'm saddened a little bit to see stuff like theming has been built. I was hoping that ReactOS would stick with the Windows 2000 look and feel. I also think that with the limited resources they have, the project team would be better focusing on improving compatibility, over shiny desktop effects. That said... I firmly believe there is a place for ReactOS. Eventually, XP will fail to run on new hardware, and when that…

Is there very much Windows XP software that works well in ReactOS but not Wine?

it's not just a matter of software, but also being compatible with drivers. Some old equipment that requires a specific window xp software but also a driver that doesn't work on current versions of windows.

Re: ReactOS

#93

Post by Barrin92 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #54
jupp0r wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> else we'll endlessly repeat ourselves rewriting the same programs over and over again Doing this is ok. We are also rewriting the same books all over again. Knowledge is forgotten and reinvented and rediscovered. You see this in computer science and programming all the time, but also in other fields. Rather than the programs themselves, preserving the concepts and learnings is much more important. Don’t get me wron…

Knowledge being lost and reinvented is a bug, not a feature. Some lessons have been paid-for in blood (like the Therac 25, if you're looking at software development). There is value in understanding how things work and what knowledge came from specific lessons, but starting over again simply invites making the same mistakes all over. I wish we could aspire to be better than that.

>Knowledge being lost and reinvented is a bug

No because most knowledge is tacit in nature. Things needs to be practised to be really understood. We're not living in the matrix where you can upload knowledge into your brain, you need to actually practise something to understand how it works.

Not to mention that all knowledge is contextual and dependent on its environment. Doing the same things over again in a different environment may yield different results, old failures, through tiny changes may turn out to actually work now. That's what makes constant experimentation and repetition necessary to rebuilt robust systems.

that's why markets are more effective than central planning, and why evolution is the most robust mechanism on earth. Having twenty companies build the same product is more wasteful than having one committee do it, but only competition, incremental change, and reinvention really are able to explore the entire space.

Re: ReactOS

#95

Post by R0b0t1 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #38
blendergeek wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The lack of commercial purpose of ReactOS (and Wine) and it's primary goal of interoperability So, if ReactOS ever becomes useful, it will be illegal to use it for commercial purposes?

Not necessarily. It might be problematic for ReactOS to try to market their software commercially, but not for someone downloading it to use it commercially. (The latter of which is governed solely by ReactOS' own license, which takes no issue with that.) The first thing to understand about fair use is that it applies to copyright infringement, so first, someone has to complain about the infringement and then you uti…

Reverse engineering for interoperability is protected with no routes to contest if done with a clean room reimplementation. If you physically own the item and are using it you are even more protected (think fixing your own tractor).

Unfortunately I think some lower courts have some messed up decisions or companies are trying to bully others with threats of suit. For example, some medical coding systems have copyrighted codes that are claimed to require a license and you can not install a system to cooperate with these. Except... this has already been decided, and you can.

Re: ReactOS

#96

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #20
2bitencryption wrote: post #9

I just realized - what does the Google vs Oracle ruling mean for ReactOS, and also Wine?

The lack of commercial purpose of ReactOS (and Wine) and it's primary goal of interoperability, plus the fact that it doesn't really damage the value of the original Windows platform, means it's probably a very easy case of fair use. Android isn't fair use, is a massive commercial endeavour, and has obliterated the value of mobile Java, while breaking interoperability with Java. Oracle winning the case will not be ki…

Oracle purchased Java (and MySQL) 2 years after Google made Android a huge success, specifically for litigation purposes.

It's not like Oracle designed Java, and then Google stole it. Java was supposed to be open. It was designed for this intent. Oracle bought it to destroy everything Java was supposed to be, and to prey on anyone who used Java for what it was designed to do.

When you can no longer innovate, you litigate.

Re: ReactOS

#97

Post by techwizard81 »

beervirus wrote: post #63
Jaruzel wrote: post #19

I'm saddened a little bit to see stuff like theming has been built. I was hoping that ReactOS would stick with the Windows 2000 look and feel. I also think that with the limited resources they have, the project team would be better focusing on improving compatibility, over shiny desktop effects. That said... I firmly believe there is a place for ReactOS. Eventually, XP will fail to run on new hardware, and when that…

> Eventually, XP will fail to run on new hardware, and when that happens a lot of great software will die also. Having ReactOS around means we can continually target new hardware, but still remain XP compatible. Unless you're talking about running it on a computer that's not networked, it's already impossible to run XP safely. But Windows is really good about backwards compatibility--what XP software is there that do…

agreed that most software can be made to run, but not all of them. The other issue is drivers, old drivers won't work on Windows 10 but will on reactOS

Re: ReactOS

#98

Post by rnd0 »

mondoshawan wrote: post #83
grishka wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but we struggle to run 10 year old software Do we? Virtualization and emulation usually sort this out. 8- and 16-bit console games are a good example of this.

As an avid collector of vintage hardware and one who runs a YouTube channel dedicated to teaching people about how the hardware works, and how to actually use it, I can say confidently that yes, we definitely struggle. There are a great number of games that cannot be played by most 16-bit and 8-bit console emulators. The Famicon disk system, for instance, is a real struggle to get working right. 90s machines are dyin…

PCEM[1] and 86Box[2] do an admirable job of emulating 80's and 90's computers ...from the IBM PC up to the amdk6-2 and celeron.

I'm not sure, but I believe that both support the 3DFX Voodoo (not sure if just "VooDoo" or "Voodoo3").

[1]https://pcem-emulator.co.uk/

[2]http://86box.net/

Re: ReactOS

#99

Post by striking »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #90
shrimp_emoji wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this kind of like wishing that we could apply the lessons of the fallen Roman Republic to present-day America? It has the same problems: the historical context is imperfect and very tedious to understand (for those who even try). Reinventing the wheel is always easier, cognitively (perhaps while being vaguely cognizant of how there was a Roman Republic that fell to dictatorship that then fractured into hundreds…

I wish we'd just try to do better. It won't be perfect, and it'll probably never even be good. The worldview that espouses an inevitable loss of the products of human toil fills me with crushing sadness. Why bother doing anything then?

Because we live in the present and not the future?
Post reply on HN