0.4.0

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

eersoy93
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:24 pm
Location: Turkey
Contact:

0.4.0

Post by eersoy93 » Sat Apr 20, 2013 11:43 am

Hi!

Which is 0.4.0 based the NT version's architecture?

Thanks for answers.
Turkish translator of ReactOS.

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Re: 0.4.0

Post by EmuandCo » Sat Apr 20, 2013 12:58 pm

NT 5.2, as 0.3.15, too.
Image
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.

eersoy93
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:24 pm
Location: Turkey
Contact:

Re: 0.4.0

Post by eersoy93 » Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:34 pm

EmuandCo wrote:NT 5.2, as 0.3.15, too.
What will be the build number of this? 3959 or 3790?

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Se ... ice_Pack_2
Turkish translator of ReactOS.

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

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Z98 » Tue Apr 23, 2013 10:04 pm

That build number has no relevance to our roadmap/plans.

eersoy93
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:24 pm
Location: Turkey
Contact:

Re: 0.4.0

Post by eersoy93 » Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:16 pm

Which will the icon set of 0.4.0?
Turkish translator of ReactOS.

gonzoMD
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:49 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: 0.4.0

Post by gonzoMD » Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:37 pm

eersoy93 wrote:Which will the icon set of 0.4.0?
there are no plans for optical design issues (at least maybe lautus but not more) because we have something that works more or less. More manpower is needed to get the system more feature complete and stable (LDR/MM Regressions, Hardware issues, etc).
I think if somebody would offer a complete(!!!!) icon set it could maybe used.
in the past were AFAIK some people, that offered a few icons, but not all so the designs were good but incomplete so they weren't very usefull.

Linuxgamer94
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Linuxgamer94 » Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:06 pm

It needs to work first before it can even reach .4. Even the solitare game is unfineshed. It crashes on me alot and the AI makes the game unplayable. I would think they would try to port over MDM, why reinvent the login screen if it has been done. Why not try to port some of compiz too, I would love to see React OS with the Desktop cube and 3D windows. Oh I also think that React OS can learn a lot from Cinnamon just saying.

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

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Z98 » Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:40 pm

We're not Unix. What makes you think things that were designed from the ground up to run on a Unix platform would work on ReactOS?

fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Re: 0.4.0

Post by fred02 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:16 am

Linuxgamer94 wrote:I would think they would try to port over MDM, why reinvent the login screen if it has been done.
Because the security infrastructure and API are not finished yet?
Linuxgamer94 wrote:Why not try to port some of compiz too, I would love to see React OS with the Desktop cube and 3D windows.
Shells are inherently replaceable, like in Windows, so pick your choice, but the underlying OS have to stable first.

Pesho
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:16 pm

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Pesho » Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:40 am

Don't you hate it when people start making stupid suggestions about implementing linux stuff just because "it's already finished and is thus easier to port"... Why doesn't Linux support the Windows driver architecture and shell yet, i mean, it's already finished - why cant they just port it over! Either that, or it's gimmicky toy features like 3D windows.

Dave3434
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:14 am

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Dave3434 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:52 am

by Pesho » 29 Apr 2013 07:40
Don't you hate it when people start making stupid suggestions about implementing linux stuff just because "it's already finished and is thus easier to port"... Why doesn't Linux support the Windows driver architecture and shell yet, i mean, it's already finished - why cant they just port it over! Either that, or it's gimmicky toy features like 3D windows.
i agree btw any chance of moving to the U.S?? i'm sure you'll get more exposer that way.

fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Re: 0.4.0

Post by fred02 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:48 am

Pesho wrote:Don't you hate it when people start making stupid suggestions about implementing linux stuff just because "it's already finished and is thus easier to port"...
Yep. We could use a better FAQ for ROS(Frequent Annoying Questions :) ) and more importantly have it better exposed on the forum.
Yes, I know, there is a sticky "software usable for ROS" thread with a pretty clear explanation of what can and cannot be included, and this does not preclude people from regularly suggesting Qt, Delphi, VB and other funny stuff.
(and here we go off-topic again :oops: )

Linuxgamer94
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Linuxgamer94 » Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:11 am

This message was deleted by a moderator for violation of code of conduct #1. First warning.

Dave3434
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:14 am

Re: 0.4.0

Post by Dave3434 » Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:43 am

who me?
by Linuxgamer94 » 23 Jun 2013 00:11
This message was deleted by a moderator for violation of code of conduct #1. First warning.

jonaspm
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Mexico
Contact:

Re: 0.4.0

Post by jonaspm » Sun Jun 23, 2013 4:09 am

Pesho wrote:Don't you hate it when people start making stupid suggestions about implementing linux stuff just because "it's already finished and is thus easier to port"... Why doesn't Linux support the Windows driver architecture and shell yet, i mean, it's already finished - why cant they just port it over! Either that, or it's gimmicky toy features like 3D windows.

Don't be that rude man :) he is a bit new so anyone is free to suggest ideas :D
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 29 guests