ReactOS Forum

Well with Windows Possibly moving to the ARM platform, the next x86/64 platform is either goin to be Linux or us, if we can get enough publicity, say sponsorship from IBM or Google

Chompjil wrote:Well with Windows Possibly moving to the ARM platform, the next x86/64 platform is either goin to be Linux or us, if we can get enough publicity, say sponsorship from IBM or Google

No.

I would say YES to the publicity. The more publicity, the more who would be interested in it with a possibility of them donating for its support.

I'll just clarify the legal situation, since no one has mentioned it. Software with multiple authors is protected by copyright for 95 years from the date of publication in the U.S. That means that the first version of MS-DOS will enter the public domain in 2076, and Windows 1.0 will enter the public domain in 2080. Windows XP will be PD in 2096 and Windows Server 2003 will be PD in 2098.

Once the software enters the public domain, it can be freely used, but there is no obligation for the source code to be archived or released. There is no obligation for any piece of software to ever become open source. If a copy of the source code to Windows 2003 still exists in 2098, there will be no obligation to release it.

As for the idea that Microsoft might give away or open the source for any of its projects due to going out of business, that's the least likely scenario where they would do something like that. A company that is going out of business will attempt to sell any valuable assets it owns. In the case of a bankruptcy, it would be legally obliged to sell anything of value for as much money as possible in order to pay back as much of its debt as it can. It's highly unlikely that Microsoft would ever close its doors for any reason other than bankruptcy, so it's safe to assume that Microsoft Windows would be sold to the highest bidder if Microsoft ever goes out of business.

There is a chance in hell that Microsoft might open the source to some of its obsolete products for reasons other than going out of business, though. Even then, they would have to hold back anyone else's copyrighted material. Windows is a huge product that incorporates copyrighted code licensed from other companies. They might release any code that belongs to them, but they would have to remove the code that doesn't belong to them. Windows probably wouldn't work without that third-party code, so there would still be significant gaps to fill for any project that hoped to continue development with the open sourced code.

It's also worth noting that this isn't Bill Gates' call. We all know about his philanthropy through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but he can't just say "I'll open the source code to Windows as my gift to the world" by himself. I'm pretty sure that he owns less than 50% of Microsoft, so he can't give anything away without the consent of other shareholders. Those other shareholders are far less rich than he is, and would be less inclined to give anything away that might be worth something.

So, to sum up my response to the OP: not gonna happen.

alexei wrote:Making products we like does not entitle Microsoft to be liked. 1st of all people pay MS, so they are at least even (taking in account MS monopoly de facto, MS rips people off). We all know MS does not work for people, but for its profits. Its policies are often (to say it softly) not good to us. Why shouldn't we bash it

I must second this opinion. While I certainly would not go so far as to say "I hate MS" nevertheless, my interest in this project directly has to do with independence from Microsoft. And just because a person doesn't like Windows Vista, 7 or 8, doesn't mean they shouldn't have any stake in a clone of Windows. One of the incredible things about GNU/Linux is that there are so many different forks, there is something for just about everyone. I believe that once ReactOS is released, there will be many forks as well allowing much more customization than Windows ever had.

All major FOSS OSs are based on a proprietary predecessor, never forget about that. Some kind of UNIX->Linux, Windows->ReactOS, BeOS->Haiku, OS X->elementaryOS (don't take this one too seriously).

tomleem wrote:I think it would be a great opportunity for other companies to come in and fill the void left by Microsoft.

Perhaps IBM could buy Microsofts software?

Why would IBM do that? They learned their lesson after OS/2 failed because of Windows. I hate copyrights and I honesly don't care. Here is what it going to happen in my view and just my view, so please disagre if you do. I honestly think that Windows will thrive untill MS release the new OS they are working on, (yes I know, but can't tell). Windows 8 made many people ether switch to Mac's or Linux (Yeah), and also started the situaction we are in. If this keeps on going Windows will be third, Mac first and Linux a close second. I am gussing most of you have a iphone or Android phone at least and they also count in these numbers. NOw when this happens, and it will happen React OS could fianly have the power and advances to make it a decent OS, as long as it does not do what Chronicle has done to Ubuntu.

IBM's OS/2 Warp isn't entirely dead. It lives on in eComStation. http://www.ecomstation.com eComStation is based on the OS/2 kernel. It is still being developed. They have released 2.0 and working on a newer version of 2.2. If Windows goes away, it would give operating systems like eComStation a greater chance to succeed.

tomleem wrote:If Windows goes away, it would give operating systems like eComStation a greater chance to succeed.

I don't think OS/2 is winning any converts at this point. eComStation is for existing OS/2 users.

DOSGuy wrote:

tomleem wrote:If Windows goes away, it would give operating systems like eComStation a greater chance to succeed.

I don't think OS/2 is winning any converts at this point. eComStation is for existing OS/2 users.

In a way, one could say the same thing for ReactOS. It seems to be in beta for so long that so many think it is going nowhere. At least with eCS they have reached 1.0 and 2.0. When will ReactOS reach 1.0? I have posted different places about ReactOS being an alternative and so many have mentioned that it is still in beta. I believe eCS is more popular in Europe than in the USA. http://www.os2world.com

I am hoping one day that ReactOS will become an alternative to Windows that people will won't say 'Its still in beta'.

ReactOS isn't in beta yet.

The difference, of course, is that eComStation started with the OS/2 source code, so all they've had to do is add features to an existing operating system. I'd be far more impressed about them being at 1.0 and 2.0 if they had to start from scratch like ROS did.

Chompjil wrote:Well with Windows Possibly moving to the ARM platform, the next x86/64 platform is either goin to be Linux or us, if we can get enough publicity, say sponsorship from IBM or Google

Windows moving to the ARM platform does not mean Windows dropping x86 platforms...

Dave3434 wrote:i agree with someguy anyway it's just a thought it's a shame they can't give up windows 2000 or even xp sonce they don't care for those products anymore it's like taking something that still useful and throw it in the trash, just because it's old. i hate microsoft not just because there closed source but because there products are over priced and your able to install the copy of windows on more then one pc. when vista came on the scence i was not impressed and then 7 came along i got the same impression. and now 8 is worse.

Well, for a start, they use the source code for newer version, and they do sell a product that some users might not buy if they have a supported alternative in which their software runs. It wouldn't be smart of them to be the ones providing such alternative. Also, there are several improvements (and I don't mean the aesthetic ones) within Windows 7 and 8, and I'm not talking only about MS advertising, but about my own experience after upgrading from XP to 7 in my sister's laptop.
It being overpriced is highly relative. If it's about demand and supply, I'm pretty sure it's not overpriced. There are free alternatives, if people doesn't use them is because they don't suit their needs and are willing to pay the sum MS asks for. I say this as a Linux user and a free software enthusiast. If it's REALLY overpriced, users would decline some of their more superfluous requirements, like a nice GUI (which Linux do have, if you choose the correct distribution) or some other proprietary software running on it, for a cheaper product. Most proprietary software has a Linux friendly alternative, some even have a Linux version. The biggest exception I know about is CAD software. If users still choose to pay the sum MS asks for, then it's not overpriced. That doesn't mean it's not expensive.
However, if the point is about the costs, I don't know how much does it cost to develop this software, and I bet you don't know either. It's obviously more than the price they sell it to a particular user and less than the total money they get from users. But remember the price is not in the disk they sell to you, but in the design and coding. So "overpriced" depends on how much they pay the devs.
In the other hand, how many copies of Windows you need usually depends on how much money do you have (more computers from a given year means you had more money on that year to spend on computers), and even if it's not inherently good or bad, this does indirectly means you pay more if you have more, and I'm certainly not against that kind of distribution. The same for some artificial limitations put to some versions to make better ones more expensive: the features in those more expensive versions are usually targeted to more expensive machines, and thus it makes sense the ones with those pay the development of these features that would be pointless for the other user. If they made only one version with all the features, everyone would pay for those features even if they don't get any advantage of them. Of course, I'm conveniently assuming they do balance the cost with this limitations and not just increase the price of the featureful version while keeping the other as high as it would be if they didn't artificially distinguished them, which is arguably. But it's a plausible thing.

DOSGuy wrote:ReactOS isn't in beta yet.

The difference, of course, is that eComStation started with the OS/2 source code, so all they've had to do is add features to an existing operating system. I'd be far more impressed about them being at 1.0 and 2.0 if they had to start from scratch like ROS did.

There are those who wants to create a FOSS of OS/2 like ROS is doing with Windows.
OSFree. http://www.osfree.org Like ROS, it is in betta.


There is a place that lists FOSS. http://www.freeos.com There is quite a list there.

We're not in beta.

tomleem wrote:There are those who wants to create a FOSS of OS/2 like ROS is doing with Windows. OSFree.

I've been familiar with osFree for years. I wanted it to be successful, but the last release (0.0.4) was in 2009, and there has only been a handful of commits in the last few years. The forum is dead. At the current rate of progress, osFree will reach ReactOS 0.3.15-like milestones sometime in 3009, with a full v1.0 release expected before 5013.

There are original free and open source operating systems. When it comes to FOS OSes that attempt full compatibility with a closed source OS, there's FreeDOS, Haiku and ReactOS, and a lot of projects that never got off the ground.