Crossover verses ReactOS...

If it doesn't fit anywhere else, drop it in here. (not to be used as a chat/nonsense section)

Moderator: Moderator Team

Locked
nute
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:30 am

Crossover verses ReactOS...

Post by nute » Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:55 pm

Crossover Linux is worked on by paid programmers who clearly benefit from Wine, but
who also appear to work on their company's product as their day job. Why isn't there a
group of programmers working on ReactOS as their day job? I see a web site and an
almost publicly accessible source code repository that will allow commits is available,
but does anyone work on ReactOS as their day job let alone as an employee of a
small company that does so?

I don't know if crossover deserves the hype it's creators give it and I'm admittedly
worried about what the we provide updates till rhetoric is all about, but on the surface
it looks like crossover linux is going to blow past ReactOS in spades.

This should be completed in 1 year, not 2+. I find it hard to believe that that can't be
accomplished given that enough ethical and skilled programmers come on board.

Why is a hobby project good enough to draw people's interest? Nothing against
hobbies, but is this project capable of doing better?

Let's say that Linux is only 15 years old for the sake of argument. It seems to be
doing pretty well compared to this project. Linux was usable 7-10 years ago.
ReactOS isn't even usable today.

If my metric is wrong, say so. I feel I share a lot of people's frustration though that
the date for a stable release of this operating system is so up in the air.

Ftju
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:54 pm

Post by Ftju » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:00 pm

point because it devlopment run`s so slow, is lag off developers.

When you make the product to the beta stages and you make a product that works, you will get atention from other developers, and maybe are intressted in developing for ReactOS. Now there is not really a intrest because there isn`t much to see.

It will happen, only it going slow now, but it will happen.

mikedep333
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:48 am
Location: United States

Post by mikedep333 » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:39 pm

The simple reason why wine has crossover office supporting it but we don't have anybody( making a hacked/GUI'd version of reactos with commercial support) supporting us is that no company has found a working business model for that yet. It is one thing for a company to release a program like crossover office, it is another thing for a company to release an entire operating system. It involves alot more support.

Like Ftju said, our development is going slow because alot of people aren't interested in supporting us until we are in beta stage. Also, don't forget that while Linux may have come out in 1991 or so, it had all the GNU programs and other unix free software at that time to run on top of the kernel. We have to write more than just a kernel, we also have to write our graphical environment and stuff. Furthermore, many people support linux because it was the first OS to truely become free, and then people support BSD because it was the 2nd OS or so to truely become free. People simply aren't interested in supporting us that much because we were not the first - because there is already the well developed linux serving the free software community's OS needs.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:51 pm

CrossOver is WINE with various tweaks and easier management tools. CodeWeavers employs most of the primary WINE developers. CodeWeaver also employs a former ReactOS developer. WINE has existed since 1993 and aims to be a compatibility layer for Windows programs on non-Windows system. They have 14 years of work behind them, and they're only working on supporting applications, not producing a whole operating system. We make use of WINE for parts of win32k, so anything they do to improve the implementation of win32k, we get as well.

CodeWeavers can employ developers because they sell a product. They make money off of funding WINE. ROS has to reach beta status before it becomes worthwhile for any company to invest in it.

CrossOver Linux is the name of their application, not an operating system. They also have a CrossOver Mac to run Windows applications on Macs. This again goes back to the fact that the developers don't want to run Linux, they want to run a Windows-like operating system. They never cared about CrossOver and I doubt they'll start caring about it now.

Linux is just a kernel. If you want a more accurate dating of how long it took for the operating system itself to get to where it's now, it's closer to 24 years. The GNU project, which supplies most of the underlying utilities and tools, took far longer to fully develop. The kernel was announced in 1991, so we're looking at 16 years for how long it took to just get the kernel to where it is now. And quite frankly, the kernel is a small part of an overall operating system.

"Usable" is a matter of opinion. Linux 7-10 years ago was "usable" if you wanted to put the effort into making it work. Whether it was suitable for daily use by non-techies, I'd have to say no.

nute
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:30 am

Windows 1.0, weren't there paid programmers for it...

Post by nute » Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:16 am

Back when version 1.0 of Microsoft Windows was in development, did Microsoft
use volunteers until a Beta quality version evolved? To say that noone will invest
in Alpha software, what is this based on exactly? To say this and yet developers
are going to conferences to supposedly promote ReactOS is confusing to me.
If there is nothing to promote, why not hold back on conferences and pour more
money into development?

Vista was Alpha software at some point where some folks say that it is Beta
software now. Certainly Microsoft paid people to code it.

As far as the ReactOS developers don't want to work on a Linux system
comments, I have to wonder, "why not?" Linux even today tends to be
lighter than XP and Vista and it is well complemented with development
tools. I suppose eventually that ReactOS developers will develop on
ReactOS directly, but it has to become reasonably stable first.

Is it possible to buy information from Microsoft at any price that would be
beneficial to ReactOS developers without compromising ReactOS's GPL
license?

As far as software life cycle, is it any clearer what ReactOS can be concerning
the question of whether or not this project is ultimately worth it? Let's look at 24
years for a moment. ReactOS might not become stable until 2019 or 2020. By
then, who knows what will be going on. There will probably be fewer people
who want to run today's programs. Sure there are people who like 80's
titles, but how many people have ancient software that still works today
compared to the number of people who had it when it came out?

Microsoft essentially took over the software industry in 20 years time.

What would develop more interest in ReactOS is if people who want it could see
a significant way to help and a possibility that ReactOS will become stable sooner
because of their efforts.

In 12 years time, couldn't ReactOS's developers write a lot of Linux software?

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Re: Windows 1.0, weren't there paid programmers for it...

Post by Haos » Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:29 am

nute wrote:Back when version 1.0 of Microsoft Windows was in development, did Microsoft use volunteers until a Beta quality version evolved?
In general theory, Alpha stage software should be restricted to devs only... Beta stage is usually divided into closed beta and open beta testing. Of course, the sheer scale of ROS, as well as licensing forces a bit different, more open approach. The answer is NO. Microsoft, while developping Win 1.0 used only their company`s assets, TILL THE DAY OF ITS RELEASE. But i dont expect you to understand this.

To say that noone will invest in Alpha software, what is this based on exactly? To say this and yet developers are going to conferences to supposedly promote ReactOS is confusing to me.
Again, your lack of knowledge in basic economics, and software history does not makes me wonder, why this is so confusing. Would you like a clue? Opensource and LGPL.

If there is nothing to promote, why not hold back on conferences and pour more money into development?
There are so many ways. methodes as well as objectives of promoting. There is a large part of marketing devoted ONLY to this. Yet you again try to put it into single one-side situation... but this is so obvious... Different products require different promotion tactics. There is also something like cost/effectiveness analysis, that you fail to understand.
Vista was Alpha software at some point where some folks say that it is Beta software now. Certainly Microsoft paid people to code it.
Vista is now in Release stage. When it was tested, that was closed beta stage... When Vista was in alpha stage, no one apart from Vista Dev team and security cleared employees could access Vista (Longhorn project back then), not even short of testing it. Certainly Ms has enough money to pay people to code many different softs. We do not.
As far as the ReactOS developers don't want to work on a Linux system comments, I have to wonder, "why not?"
And we wonder what do you mean by linux system comments?

Linux even today tends to be lighter than XP and Vista and it is well complemented with development tools. I suppose eventually that ReactOS developers will develop on ReactOS directly, but it has to become reasonably stable first.


What is your point? You can EASILY write code in ANY OS. And you dont really wanna test WINDOWS-compatible code under Linux? Or did I misunderstand this crappy and sensless sentences?

Is it possible to buy information from Microsoft at any price that would be beneficial to ReactOS developers without compromising ReactOS's GPL license?
Lol... In theory... if you`d be a Rockefeller... but i suppose it`d be a LOT cheaper to pay for PROFESSIONAL and legal rev-engineering. Wait... lol. Are you really stupid? Or only trying to make such impression? I cannot think that you REALLY believe in what you just have written...

As far as software life cycle, is it any clearer what ReactOS can be
[cutting the crap, cant stand it]
to the number of people who had it when it came out?
Again... You no nothing about product life cycles (how can you know anything about it, if you are an ignorant in basic economics.
Apart from that, you are ignorant if it comes to ROS development pace. Yet you try to predict, without any proper research.

Microsoft essentially took over the software industry in 20 years time. What would develop more interest in ReactOS is if people who want it could see a significant way to help and a possibility that ReactOS will become stable sooner because of their efforts. In 12 years time, couldn't ReactOS's developers write a lot of Linux software?
Please, do not write any more essays/pseudoanalysis like this. Mods are tired of you. You dont think at all on what you write. You mix outright lies, half-truths, false analysis, scraps of random knowledge and pure guesses. You are making people confused. You try to convince us, that despite of years of ROS development, with experience of hundreds of people, by gigabytes of written code, comments, discussions and opinions, WE ARE ALL TOTALLY WRONG, AND YOU ARE RIGHT.

Sorry, mate... Even basic statists`s against you.
So, pls find another project, and try to elighten it with your so precious knowledge and experience. We respectfully decline any use of it.

Phobos
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:50 pm

Re: Windows 1.0, weren't there paid programmers for it...

Post by Phobos » Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:33 am

nute wrote:Back when version 1.0 of Microsoft Windows was in development, did Microsoft
use volunteers until a Beta quality version evolved?
heh, I can assure you, ROS is a "little" harder to code than windows 1.0..... besides the fact that this is not a new OS, but a reimplementation of an existing, closed sourced one

To say that noone will invest in Alpha software, what is this based on exactly?


in the fact that no one wants to put his money at risk with something that may or may not reach it's goals... read "scams" .. even if you (we) love ROS, it's different when money is in between

To say this and yet developers are going to conferences to supposedly promote ReactOS is confusing to me.
If there is nothing to promote, why not hold back on conferences and pour more money into development?
you go to conferences to make the program be known... to add people to it's developers base... and stuff like that

if someone wants to invest after watching it, that's great, but it's not the only/main purpose
Vista was Alpha software at some point where some folks say that it is Beta software now. Certainly Microsoft paid people to code it.
that proves that money doesn't guarantee anything
Is it possible to buy information from Microsoft at any price that would be
beneficial to ReactOS developers without compromising ReactOS's GPL
license?
not really
As far as software life cycle, is it any clearer what ReactOS can be concerning the question of whether or not this project is ultimately worth it? Let's look at 24 years for a moment. ReactOS might not become stable until 2019 or 2020. By then, who knows what will be going on. There will probably be fewer people who want to run today's programs. Sure there are people who like 80's
titles, but how many people have ancient software that still works today
compared to the number of people who had it when it came out?
XP's compatibility will be achieved, hopefully, way before that... and then the developers can go upgrading to vista... maybe a whole new OS in the future, not easy to know...

ROS is not meant to be left at NT4 state

nute
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:30 am

Paid open source software programmers...

Post by nute » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:26 am

If you want to look smarter than someone but can't prove you are, call them stupid,
if it doesn't work, at least it made you feel better :wink

Postfix is an example of IBM paying someone to produce a quality piece of
open source software.

As far as the "you have to be a Rockefeller comment," during the last ReactOS fundraiser, the fundraising goal was exceeded. If every person in the world who
wants an alternative to Microsoft Windows to run their Windows programs on
stably donates $1 US today to the ReactOS foundation, there's more than
enough money to pay full time professional programmers to help advance
the project. If 10 million people donate $1, that is 10 million U.S. dollars gross.
Granted, this figure is misleading until the net amount is figured out after taxes.
Even if taxes eat 50%, 5 million is a lot of money to hire help with.

As far as money not guranteeing anything, if Vista and XP are absolute crap,
why pursue compatibility at all? Yes there are attempts to argue that people
will be able to run Windows based software without paying the Microsoft Tax,
but is Windows so badly hosed that achieving the level of compatability
necessary is more trouble than it's worth? The money doesn't gurantee
anything argument seems disingenuous at best.

So what has it cost to produce ReactOS so far? Anyone have accurate figures?

Phobos
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:50 pm

Post by Phobos » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:32 am

even if vista sucks, the programs it and XP has doesn't... and most people use windows.... that's why you want ROS, an alternative to the original.... a reimplementation means it can be made to not suck... that's why ROS pursue compatibility

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:39 am

I will try harder then.

Do you know Seti@Home project? It`s userbase is thounsands time larger than ours... Over a milion of active users, with almost two milion hosts. This is only active user`s stat, the real number is probably ten`s times bigger.

Seti@home is a lot more widespread and recognizable than us... they could probably be compared to Linux community, if not be even bigger. Yet they struggle with financial problems, with amounts of money not reaching 200k dollars a YEAR. Apart from that, Seti@home is also sponsored by big companies. And you say 10 millions...

Are you mad? Stupid... or again you just unable to think logically over your texts? Sorry, to say, but those proposals of yours do not make you a serious person at all!

nute
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:30 am

Could ReactOS raise more money???

Post by nute » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:54 am

10 million was just an arbituary example. I am not stupid if I am just plain ignorant.
Do we not know the difference between stupidity and ignorance haos? Stupid
people say something can't be done "because they've seen the opposite enough
times to prove their position right," then they are proven wrong but still stand by
their view. No, it's not polite in civil conversation to call someone stupid.

10 million not enough Haos? Fine, convince a population equal to 2/3 the population of
the United States to donate $1 to the ReactOS Foundation and waddya know, $200 million dollars gross. Taxes being possibly 50%, you'll end up with around 100 million dollars. Not 100 thousand dollars, 100 million dollars. From what I've experienced, paypal makes the cost of accepting donations negligible.

Out of 5.1 billion some odd people on the earth, what percentage use computers that
are willing and able to make such a donation? Now, if every person who makes a donation donates $10.00 U.S., the number of donors to raise $100 million, assuming
a 50% tax rate, drops to 20 million.

Consider this, $399 is the price tag on Vista Ultimate. I don't think asking for a $10 donation from someone who will otherwise have to buy Vista and new hardware for
it is unreasonable if it accelerates the production of an alternative.

Realistically,it does cost money to advertise for donations and their will be bank fees. Overall, if you make a lot of money, you should be able to use the bank interest on it alone to absorb some of these costs. One major danger is ending up with the
equivalent of an Enron executive managing the fund. You don't want a greedy or crooked fund manager.

Now then, the more people you expect a donation from the shakier things get. To
guard against this, it's nice to have some help from big business sometimes. How
about a matching donation for every hundred dollars raised? The number of people
you need to raise a significant amount of capital from donations just dropped
significantly.

Aren't the American Presidential candidates raising tens of millions of dollars
already? If there's that much money available to run for President, surely
there's money available for worthwhile projects like this one.

If you are leading the U.S. Justice Department and you really want to bring justice
to the software industry, fine Microsoft for 1% of it's net market value and give
that money to foundations developing OSS further. Yeah, that'd be more than a
million dollars folks.

Okay, another angle on this. IBM decided to give Postfix away because it costs a
company money to maintain a software license database. You sell 20,000 copies
of a software program and have to record licenses in say an oracle database. Oh,
doesn't your database admin get paid $100K U.S. a year approximately??? Oops,
that database is really expensive isn't it? I know, don't require a license to use Postfix
so that you don't have to maintain an expensive database. An advantage of open
source software is that it costs less to distribute it than proprietary programs that
require the user to register their copy.

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4356
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Post by EmuandCo » Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:50 am

Pleease make me a mod. I would do anything for that. I am soo sick of that guy...

I can only join Haos's Opinion/Posts. If you want to write half books of Ideas in here, please do bit of research before. I dont know if you know it, but already became what we Germans call a "Lachnummer" = Guy everyone laughs about. If you continue to talk this absolutely wrong stuff, you will loose your last piece honour in here and your account, I promise. And I'll be the first one laughing about it.

Ged
Developer
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: UK

Post by Ged » Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:30 am

nute, please stop these ridiculous posts!

Haos is right, you are only confusing people with your strange idealisms and causing a bad atmosphere within the forums.

I'm locking this thread.
Please let this be the last we have to lock from you, I would hate to have to take this a step further, we aren't that sort of community.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests