If you want Windows but don't like its proprietary nature, try ReactOS

[Kenny_Strawn]

http://www.reactos.org/

This is basically an open source Windows clone, obviously taking advantage of WINE instead of being a bootleg copy.

[swoll1980]

Lol

[myusername]

wow kenny, just wow...

[clanky]

At last, the OS I've always wanted, games, porn and freedom all in one.

[Tristam Green]

Please bear in mind that ReactOS 0.3.11 is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is not recommended for everyday use.

It's not only "not ready for desktops" but they admit it as such.

Sounds like a winner.

[pwnst*r]

Lol

^^

[Daisuke_Aramaki]

Raging hormones at work again.

[Kenny_Strawn]

Okay, what are these laughs for? This IS a real OS.

[myusername]

yeah just like hannah montana linux IS a real OS

[user1397]

It is a very real OS, and it is trying to accomplish a monumental task. But to say that it is ready for the desktop is like saying Haiku OS is ready for the desktop.

[Kenny_Strawn]

I didn't say that it was ready for everyday use. I said that it had potential as an open source alternative to Windows that was compatible with Windows apps.

[swoll1980]

yeah just like hannah montana linux is a real os

is

[jwbrase]

Okay, what are these laughs for? This IS a real OS.

Yes, but it's still at the testing stage, and the developer says so. It's been around for a while, and there's at least one thread on it every few weeks. People know about it. Also, it does not "take advantage of Wine" (although the two projects to make use of each other's code). Wine is a compatibility layer on top of a real OS, whereas ReactOS, is, as you said, a real OS.

[Giant Speck]

I didn't say that it was ready for everyday use. I said that it had potential as an open source alternative to Windows that was compatible with Windows apps.

You said no such thing. You didn't even say anything remotely close to that:


http://www.reactos.org/

This is basically an open source Windows clone, obviously taking advantage of WINE instead of being a bootleg copy.


Okay, what are these laughs for? This IS a real OS.

[Kenny_Strawn]

is

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8815763&postcount=11

[Kenny_Strawn]

You said no such thing. You didn't even say anything remotely close to that:

Okay, but potential is what I meant.

[falconindy]

Awesome. A windows clone right down to the text based installer from hell. Something they clearly re-engineered themselves and ignored the chance to make the OS's initial impression a positive one.

edit: better yet, you're "greeted" with this monster of a warning message:

http://omploader.org/tM2o1eg (http://omploader.org/vM2o1eg)

Fantastic screen font choice.

Onto the partitioner.
http://omploader.org/tM2o1eA (http://omploader.org/vM2o1eA)
FAT! For all 10GB? So generous. [Turns out, it happily ignores the fact that it's not FAT, but FAT32.]

Default install directory is /ReactOS? Nah, I don't like that. I want to install to /.
http://omploader.org/tM2o1eQ (http://omploader.org/vM2o1eQ)
Wait, what? Not even a second chance. /swoon. It really is the one way Windows installer!!!

Skip some more meaningless garbage... reboot...
http://omploader.org/tM2o2MQ (http://omploader.org/vM2o2MQ)
So many choices! I thought I only installed a single OS!

Registration, hmm....
http://omploader.org/tM2o2NA (http://omploader.org/vM2o2NA)
I'd like to point out that I never once touched my shift key here.

Annnnd this is where I stop. My HHKB, which never not ONCE given me an issue on another operating system (including within VirtualBox) is unusable.

BRB, writing zeroes over the 10gb of disk space I wasted on this endeavour.

[swoll1980]

Let's pretend reactOS is going to be stable one day [chuckles] by the time it were to happen (which it won't) It would only be able to run 15-20 year old software. Not very practical.

[Kenny_Strawn]

Awesome. A windows clone right down to the text based installer from hell. Something they clearly re-engineered themselves and ignored the chance to make the OS's initial impression a positive one.

The OS's goal is compatibility. Ultimately, by making the OS compatible with Windows apps, people who once liked Windows will like ReactOS, because their apps will work with it.

[Tristam Green]

It is a very real OS, and it is trying to accomplish a monumental task. But to say that it is ready for the desktop is like saying Haiku OS is ready for the desktop.

This.


I didn't say that it was ready for everyday use. I said that it had potential as an open source alternative to Windows that was compatible with Windows apps.

That's not what you sai....oh, thanks Speck.

[RiceMonster]

Sweet reccomendation dude!

[falconindy]

The OS's goal is compatibility. Ultimately, by making the OS compatible with Windows apps, people who once liked Windows will like ReactOS, because their apps will work with it.

Compatibility has never meant adhering to the same usability flaws as the medium with which you're attempting to maintain compatibility. Find me a sane person who enjoys the blue screen of installation.

[Sporkman]

Sweet reccomendation dude!

You're just going to use it to eat rice out of, aren't you.

[Psumi]

The only reason(s) you'd use ReactOS instead of Wine on Linux would be the following:

A.) You want a better flash implementation (One that doesn't raise the CPU by 50-60% on one core.

B.) Your hardware doesn't work with linux. (WINE's goal is not to be compatible with hardware.)

This is of course, if reactOS was stable.

[Simian Man]

Awesome! The one thing I don't like about Windows is the fact that it works so well. Thanks for the tip!

[falconindy]

The only reason(s) you'd use ReactOS instead of Wine on Linux would be the following:

A.) You want a better flash implementation (One that doesn't raise the CPU by 50-60% on one core.

B.) Your hardware doesn't work with linux. (WINE's goal is not to be compatible with hardware.)

Hate to say it, but ReactOS is Linux -- just without any of the benefits. If you have hardware issues with a real Linux distro, you're going to have the same issues with React.

[Psumi]

Hate to say it, but ReactOS is Linux -- just without any of the benefits. If you have hardware issues with a real Linux distro, you're going to have the same issues with React.

I meant that the windows drivers for the hardware can be installed in ReactOS.

[Anxious Nut]

for some who don't know

ReactOS® is a free, modern operating system based on the design of Windows® XP/2003. Written completely from scratch
It Has Nothing To Do With Linux!!! Has Nothing To Do With WINE

It would be perhaps important to start by saying what ReactOS -isn't-. It is not another wrapper built on Linux, like WINE.

source (http://http://www.reactos.org/en/about_whatisreactos.html)

bye guys

[Simian Man]

I meant that the windows drivers for the hardware can be installed in ReactOS.

In theory perhaps, but not in practice.

[DeadSuperHero]

for some who don't know

It Has Nothing To Do With Linux!!! Has Nothing To Do With WINE


source (http://http://www.reactos.org/en/about_whatisreactos.html)

bye guys

Actually, not too long ago the ReactOS devs said they were going to base most of their new codebase off of Wine. Read it here (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Nzg4OQ).

[swoll1980]

In theory perhaps, but not in practice.

Yeah you can install the drivers, they just won't work.

[chucky chuckaluck]

is there a winME version?

[RiceMonster]

You're just going to use it to eat rice out of, aren't you.

Indeed!


Awesome! The one thing I don't like about Windows is the fact that it works so well. Thanks for the tip!

I lol'd

[Tristam Green]

is there a winME version?

They call it ReactOS: the Really Good Edition.

[Giant Speck]

Why are we talking about ReactPOS here, anyway? This is a Linux forum!

Misquoted to show hypocrisy.

[blur xc]

Misquoted to show hypocrisy.

I'm a little slow on the up and up sometimes, but when I finally got it- I lol'd- a lot...

BM

[Kenny_Strawn]

They call it ReactOS: the Really Good Edition.

The member you quoted is asking if ReactOS is compatible with WinME apps. The answer is obviously: No!

Not even close. WinME was still a DOS-based Windows version. In contrast, ReactOS is for NT/2000 apps. Use FreeDOS for WinME apps.

[Tibuda]

Misquoted to show hypocrisy.

win

[beetleman64]

I'd like to see someone give ReactOS a big cash injection. That would really have Redmond worried (although they'd probably sue the pants off them first.)

[blur xc]

I'd like to see someone give ReactOS a big cash injection. That would really have Redmond worried (although they'd probably sue the pants off them first.)

Worried about what? That someone might come up w/ a functioning OS based on 10 yr old technology? An OS that breathes fresh life into old now obsolete viruses and malware?

BM

[KiwiNZ]

ReactOS , the last time I looked at it , about a month ago it was like an early Windows 95 Alpha release. Has it changed ?

[Kenny_Strawn]

Try installing the Seven Transformation Pack on ReactOS and see if ReactOS changes.

[sudoer541]

I prefer my original windows rather than a clone that does not even work (wine).
The original windows has more feature its legal and it just works.

[Satoru-san]

The member you quoted is asking if ReactOS is compatible with WinME apps. The answer is obviously: No!

Not even close. WinME was still a DOS-based Windows version. In contrast, ReactOS is for NT/2000 apps. Use FreeDOS for WinME apps.
I can run photoshop 6.0 in wine this came out for windows 2000.

Here I did a QUICK google search, the one that you should have done... and found this


Windows Me was complemented by NT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT)-based Windows 2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2000), which was aimed at professional users. So not DOS based, and WILL run windows 2000 programs, it may even run win 95 programs!!!

Try installing the Seven Transformation Pack on ReactOS and see if ReactOS changes.
I dont think that would work. Its like trying to install a KDE theme on Gnome windows theme on mac.

[blur xc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by beetleman64 http://ubuntuforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8816487#post8816487)
I'd like to see someone give ReactOS a big cash injection. That would really have Redmond worried (although they'd probably sue the pants off them first.)


Worried about what? That someone might come up w/ a functioning OS based on 10 yr old technology? An OS that breathes fresh life into old now obsolete viruses and malware?

BM

Sorry- I can't let this one go.

I just had the realization that Win 95/2000/ME have gone down in history as pretty bad OS's, bugs, BSOD's, security holes - you name it; yet they were developed w/ MS's billions of dollars behind them.

How much money would you need to inject into ReactOS to make it in any way better than today's modern os's?

BM

[pwnst*r]

Sorry- I can't let this one go.

I just had the realization that Win 95/2000/ME have gone down in history as pretty bad OS's, bugs, BSOD's, security holes - you name it; yet they were developed w/ MS's billions of dollars behind them.

How much money would you need to inject into ReactOS to make it in any way better than today's modern os's?

BM

Um...2000 was awesome. Whoever thinks otherwise is a clart.

[Tristam Green]

Um...2000 was awesome. Whoever thinks otherwise is a clart.

Only thing more stable than 2000 was... *cough* UNIX.

[blur xc]

Um...2000 was awesome. Whoever thinks otherwise is a clart.


Was it? I've using xp for so long I hardly remember it...

I just remmber WAY back having lots of problems w/ pre XP windows...

BM

[Regenweald]

Try installing the Seven Transformation Pack on ReactOS and see if ReactOS changes.

But look does not change architecture, does it ? If I so desperately need to use enough apps that it would warrant me using a low budget clone of Windows, I'd pony up and purchase the operating platform they were designed for.

But then, I use Vista, WINE and Lucid. Kudos to the ReactOS team for finding something to do with their time.

[forrestcupp]

@kenny - Another reason we laughed at your thread is because this gets discussed about once a week when some new person who wishes they had better Windows compatibility discovers ReactOS. But you just joined this month, so you couldn't have known that. ;)


Actually, not too long ago the ReactOS devs said they were going to base most of their new codebase off of Wine. Read it here (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Nzg4OQ).
True, but they're modifying it to run on their kernel. It still has nothing to do with Linux. It's been said before that Wine has more in common with ReactOS than it does with Linux.

[Post Monkeh]

never understood the obsession with people wanting an os that isn't windows to be just like windows. just use windows.

i like linux because it's different, when i want to use windows i load up xp and use it.

[forrestcupp]

never understood the obsession with people wanting an os that isn't windows to be just like windows. just use windows.

i like linux because it's different, when i want to use windows i load up xp and use it.

The obsession is that people want Windows, but they don't want to pay a lot of money every time a new version comes out. It's the thought of having a constantly updated Windows clone that is completely and legally free.

I doubt if ReactOS will ever really be able to compete with Windows, though. Even if ReactOS was magically at Windows 7's level, as soon as W8 comes out, they would be 10 years behind.

It's a pipe dream, but it gives some people hope.

[Hwæt]

The obsession is that people want Windows, but they don't want to pay a lot of money every time a new version comes out. It's the thought of having a constantly updated Windows clone that is completely and legally free.

I doubt if ReactOS will ever really be able to compete with Windows, though. Even if ReactOS was magically at Windows 7's level, as soon as W8 comes out, they would be 10 years behind.

It's a pipe dream, but it gives some people hope.

Out of curiosity, how did GNU/Linux manage to get binary compatible with UNIX in such a short time? Was it because the source code was openly available at Berkeley for a while, or is it because the GNU devs are gods when it comes to reverse engineering?

EDIT- Do the POSIX specifications and standards being somewhat open have to do anything with this?

[jwbrase]

Out of curiosity, how did GNU/Linux manage to get binary compatible with UNIX in such a short time? Was it because the source code was openly available at Berkeley for a while, or is it because the GNU devs are gods when it comes to reverse engineering?

EDIT- Do the POSIX specifications and standards being somewhat open have to do anything with this?

Well, this chart seems to indicate that while the original versions of UNIX weren't exactly Open Source, they weren't entirely closed source either. When truly closed source versions appeared they had to compete with the existing versions, and no closed source company ever managed to dominate the market entirely and shut out the competition. Also, UNIX was meant to be fairly portable.

By contrast, MS-DOS was always closed source, and managed to eventually shut out binary compatible competitors like DR-DOS (which were also closed source). There was never anything like a DR-NT, and as far as I know, none of the DOS's were ever really compatible with any platforms other than the x86.

[koenn]

Out of curiosity, how did GNU/Linux manage to get binary compatible with UNIX in such a short time? Was it because the source code was openly available at Berkeley for a while, or is it because the GNU devs are gods when it comes to reverse engineering?

EDIT- Do the POSIX specifications and standards being somewhat open have to do anything with this?

AFAIK, there is no binary compatibility between GNU/Linux and other unix. (There's hardly binary compatibility between Linux distro's).
There is a reasonable level of source code compatibility, i.e. you can (often) re-compile the same source code on the other platform.

What the GNU guys did was write programs that behave like Unix programs, i.e. accept the same input and produce the same output as the corresponding unix program. The actual processing (e.g. whatever happens between input and output) can be completely different, but it would work as a drop-in replacement.
Say you want to implement your version of the unix cp command : all you need is a program that a) accepts all the parameters and options documented in the unix man page, and reacts to them in the described manner b) produces the expected output, i.e. a copy of a file, c) can be compiled or run on Unix, and d) is called 'cp'
It's implementation could be nothing like the original, it could be written in another language altogether, but it would work just the same, and other programs or scripts would never know the difference, cause all they deal with is your program's in- and output.

Likewise, Torvalds wrote a kernel that would behave as much as possible as a Unix kernel, although internally it would probably look very different.

The fact that Unix is a lot about small tools that interact through textual in- and output, probably makes this easier (than, say, a system were all inter-pocess communication goes through binary in/output in undocumented formats).


my 2 cents

[Frak]

Okay, what are these laughs for? This IS a real OS.
Yep, I just played Doom for about 2 minutes. Thanks!

[arnab_das]

wow! thats some serious technology there.

btw just wanted to know: if react OS is building itself from scratch and is open source and windows softwares compatible, why cant wine do the same? there is only a handful of softwares which run properly on wine.

[MooPi]

I'm going to format my Windows 7 test and try ReactOS. This looks to be an interesting Saturday.

[pwnst*r]

I'm going to format my Windows 7 test and try ReactOS. This looks to be an interesting Saturday.

ahahahaha

[Frak]

I'm going to format my Windows 7 test and try ReactOS. This looks to be an interesting Saturday.
I give you an hour, tops.

[The Toxic Mite]

wow kenny, just wow...

++

[arnab_das]

tried it (the virtualbox edition that is). looks very cluttered as of now (obviously, coz its in alpha). but yea, does replicate windows pretty well.

although i couldnt figure out where the browser was :P

[Psumi]

In theory perhaps, but not in practice.

They said that if I wanted my Lexmark X4550 Printer to work in ReactOS, I would need to first:

A.) Create a USB or Wireless and complete network stack.

B.) Install the Windows 2000 or XP drivers for the printer (which exist.)

Doing so will allow the printer to be recognized, but not print/scan because

C.) The printer/scanner stacks are not complete either.

[Frak]

tried it (the virtualbox edition that is). looks very cluttered as of now (obviously, coz its in alpha). but yea, does replicate windows pretty well.

although i couldnt figure out where the browser was :P
It doesn't have one. No browser runs anywhere near well or stable.

[Psumi]

It doesn't have one. No browser runs anywhere near well or stable.

explorer.exe is a web browser in reactOS, but it can only surf reactos.org, and inputting any other URL will cause it to be redirected to reactos.org.

They plan to remove browser functionality with explorer_new.exe

[squilookle]

I just thought I would give it a try, so I downloaded the live cd. The CD boots, but freezes before you get to the desktop. Might try again after the next release. I'm just interested in being able to use my Sega Genesis emulator, which doesnt work in Wine: but I saw it running on ReactOS in one of the screenshots. Interesting.

[forrestcupp]

Out of curiosity, how did GNU/Linux manage to get binary compatible with UNIX in such a short time? Was it because the source code was openly available at Berkeley for a while, or is it because the GNU devs are gods when it comes to reverse engineering?

EDIT- Do the POSIX specifications and standards being somewhat open have to do anything with this?First of all, when Linux was first begun, it was nowhere near as complicated as what Windows is now. Since then, they've been more focused on making Linux better than making it more like Unix. But you're right about POSIX specs. That was a big part of it.


AFAIK, there is no binary compatibility between GNU/Linux and other unix. (There's hardly binary compatibility between Linux distro's).All Linux distros have binary compatibility. That's why you can install some programs to your /home directory with a universal installer and it will work on any distro. Where you get into incompatibilities is with file hierarchies and dependency management, and also for binaries that have been compiled for specific hardware architectures. But you're right about the incompatibilities between Linux and other variations of Unix because they have different kernels.



btw just wanted to know: if react OS is building itself from scratch and is open source and windows softwares compatible, why cant wine do the same? there is only a handful of softwares which run properly on wine.Well, Wine currently is more compatible with Windows software than ReactOS. But the difference is that the ReactOS team is creating a Windows compatible kernel to run everything on instead of trying to do that on top of a Linux kernel that works in a completely different way. It's kind of like converting a factory to manufacture your product vs. converting an office building into a factory to manufacture your product.

[Merk42]

I'm just interested in being able to use my Sega Genesis emulator, which doesnt work in Wine: but I saw it running on ReactOS in one of the screenshots. Interesting.
Why don't you use a Genesis emulator native to Linux? (http://info.sonicretro.org/Gens/GS)