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

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: ReactOS

#31

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #14
rbanffy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think there are any legal issues here Just imagine how many patents Microsoft will be compelled to use against this project if it ever becomes a perceived threat. I am sure all MS's EULAs prohibit you from running Microsoft software on anything other than Windows.

Add this to the list of things you're "sure" about, but shouldn't be. Nowhere in the EULA for Microsoft Office (their most profitable product) do I find text requiring you to run it on Microsoft Windows. I read it top-to-bottom, then searched for "Windows" (which never occurs) and then "operating system" (which occurs only to warn you that they use your operating system to get to the Internet).

[deleted]

Re: ReactOS

#32

Post by jlcgull »

csomar wrote: post #24

So what's the point of this Operating System? Kill Microsoft and the thousands of developers that are working their just because you don't like them or the name of the company? Wouldn't this huge time and effort be spent on something we need but don't have? And yes, charge me for using it. I study medicine, but I won't work as a doctor for free.

You Sir, are a disgrace to the entire healthcare community. Hope you never manage to take the Hippocratic Oath as you will be breaking it at every chance you get. Enjoy your career as scumbag-of-a-doctor.

Yes, that is my opinion alone, but I do hold it strongly.

Re: ReactOS

#33

Post by memoryfault »

dRother wrote: post #25
csomar wrote: post #24

So what's the point of this Operating System? Kill Microsoft and the thousands of developers that are working their just because you don't like them or the name of the company? Wouldn't this huge time and effort be spent on something we need but don't have? And yes, charge me for using it. I study medicine, but I won't work as a doctor for free.

You might want to look into the concept 'open source' and study the phenomenon known as 'linux'. It sounds as if you've never heard of either one.

I think the term you wanted him to look up was 'free software'.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.h...

Re: ReactOS

#34

Post by coderdude »

calcnerd256 wrote: post #23
TomOfTTB wrote: post #21

Kudos to the creators for keeping at it. But in the end I don't see if being of much consequence. If it ever does get out of Alpha and is viable than Microsoft will likely stop at nothing to bury it with lawsuits. They'd have to because it would be a free version of their core product that, by definition, wouldn't be susceptible to all the viruses and malware that Windows is. So the bottom line is it could have a lot…

Why wouldn't it be susceptible to malware? The fact that that question is even worth asking demonstrates that you've abused the phrase "by definition"

I would say it could still be susceptible to malware since a lot of it gets installed on account of user stupidity, but anything that requires exploitation of a specific memory address will fail. Of course though, I think the latest version of Windows has protection against that as well by making it difficult or impossible to determine what addresses will be used when a program is ran. (Maybe, my memory of that is admittedly fuzzy.)

Re: ReactOS

#35

Post by rbanffy »

tptacek wrote: post #14
rbanffy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think there are any legal issues here Just imagine how many patents Microsoft will be compelled to use against this project if it ever becomes a perceived threat. I am sure all MS's EULAs prohibit you from running Microsoft software on anything other than Windows.

Add this to the list of things you're "sure" about, but shouldn't be. Nowhere in the EULA for Microsoft Office (their most profitable product) do I find text requiring you to run it on Microsoft Windows. I read it top-to-bottom, then searched for "Windows" (which never occurs) and then "operating system" (which occurs only to warn you that they use your operating system to get to the Internet).

You are right about Office 2007 (the one license I found), but you are wrong about Internet Explorer. It's license states clearly you can only use IE if you have a license for Windows XP, Vista, Server 2003 or 2008 (the IE8 on my wife's corporate notebook has a Brazilian license that doesn't mention Windows 7)

Re: ReactOS

#36

Post by thebigshane »

Daniel_Newby wrote: post #30
TomOfTTB wrote: post #21

Kudos to the creators for keeping at it. But in the end I don't see if being of much consequence. If it ever does get out of Alpha and is viable than Microsoft will likely stop at nothing to bury it with lawsuits. They'd have to because it would be a free version of their core product that, by definition, wouldn't be susceptible to all the viruses and malware that Windows is. So the bottom line is it could have a lot…

Why would Microsoft care? Their revenue core is the shell, app frameworks, apps, not the kernel and a few system utilities. If by some miracle ReactOS manages to get major public uptake on the strength of kernel superiority, Microsoft can simply share in the fun.

I'm no Microsoft-hater but that really doesn't sound like Microsoft.

Re: ReactOS

#37

Post by LordLandon_ »

VeXocide wrote: post #7
coderdude wrote: post #5

ReactOS is one of those projects that has been on the net for a long time. You see it resurface every now and then and each time it looks better than it did before. I have to hand it to the their team, they have tenacity.

For others like me who are unfamiliar with the word tenacity: "The state or quality of being tenacious", which in turn is "Holding or tending to hold persistently to something, such as a point of view" or "Tending to retain; retentive".

https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/mgijmajocgfcbebo...

I double-click the word, and get "If you have tenacity, you are very determined and do not give up easily."

Re: ReactOS

#38

Post by endtime »

jlcgull wrote: post #32
csomar wrote: post #24

So what's the point of this Operating System? Kill Microsoft and the thousands of developers that are working their just because you don't like them or the name of the company? Wouldn't this huge time and effort be spent on something we need but don't have? And yes, charge me for using it. I study medicine, but I won't work as a doctor for free.

You Sir, are a disgrace to the entire healthcare community. Hope you never manage to take the Hippocratic Oath as you will be breaking it at every chance you get. Enjoy your career as scumbag-of-a-doctor. Yes, that is my opinion alone, but I do hold it strongly.

I don't know what the guy you replied to was going on about with respect to Microsoft, but...seriously? He's a scumbag because he doesn't want to work for free? Do you perform your profession for free?

Re: ReactOS

#39

Post by ComputerGuru »

I reviewed it back in 2006. It has not changed much since, though it has some graphics subsystem and USB improvements: http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/reactos-the-next-windows/

Screenshots of ReactOS (it BSODs too!): http://neosmart.net/gallery/album/view/os/ROS/

I'm surprised not to see mention of this though in the comments here: ReactOS is now "dead" as it is being rewritten to use the wine project as the actual codebase. The aforementioned slowness in development is the primary cause. The new project is codename ARWINSS: http://www.reactos.org/wiki/Arwinss

Re: ReactOS

#40

Post by daeken »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #39

I reviewed it back in 2006. It has not changed much since, though it has some graphics subsystem and USB improvements: http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/reactos-the-next-windows/ Screenshots of ReactOS (it BSODs too!): http://neosmart.net/gallery/album/view/os/ROS/ I'm surprised not to see mention of this though in the comments here: ReactOS is now "dead" as it is being rewritten to use the wine project as the actual cod…

It seems that ARWINSS is purely a replacement for a few userspace components (specifically user32 and gdi32, not that those are small by any means (having written my own implementations, my hat goes off to anyone who attempts it)), not the ROS kernel and all that entails. Am I incorrect here? The reason I follow ROS is that it allows compatibility with existing NT drivers, which is huge in my opinion, so moving away from the ROS kernel would be a Bad Thing (TM) in my eyes.
Post reply on HN