Page 2 of 3
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 11:25 am
Ged wrote:the worlds most popular, most usable and best designed operating system is 'not-so-good'
A bit nonsese, then: if already exist, why are we cloning it ?
The main difference between an open and a closed OS could be mainly in different implementations/optimizations then in a better debugging.
Exactly what i mean: i think open sourceness could build better Windows not just an "indipendet" clone.
oiaohm wrote:Core design of windows is not exactly bad.
Never said "bad" i claimed "not-so-good", that mean could be better (and/or more efficent, different, ...) keeping the compatibility. Isn't the WINE approach ? A -different- windows implementation.
To be more clear: i really liked the OS/2 approach to windows apps (probably 'cause is the father, of course).
Z98 wrote:Also, we are trying to present users with a familiar environment. We cannot make that claim if we suddenly use a completely different shell the default.
I understand but burelly agree. Just a question: why MicroSoft can change the shell any time they want (and often badly) and we not ? Is microsoft more open than us ?
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 8:34 pm
Let people do what they want.
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:15 am
forart: you dont get anything, do you? Our main objective is to make an OS able to use all windows drivers and run ALL windows apps. To make this task a bit easier, we are cloning the windows, not remaking it...
If we were to redesign NT "how it should be" not "how it is", this would bring *EXTRA* work, *EXTRA* bugs and *EXTRA* compatibility issues...
We have enough of those already? WHEN (i say WHEN deliberately) we catch up with Microsoft, we will be able to think about getting things better than they are. But not now...
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 7:33 pm
Quick thought. Most people use Windows because it is SIMPLE! I accidentally wiped my winXP drive once, and could never get Linux to work. I set up ReactOS, and it booted fast, quick, I knew how to use it, and everything I liked from Windows --JUST WORKED!-- .
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 5:55 pm
Haos wrote:To make this task a bit easier, we are cloning the windows, not remaking it...
Again, i barelly agree: i'm not so sure that cloning Windows is the simplest way. Just an example: VFW works but standalone libraries too, so what is better reimplementing the VFW or provide a -better- working standalone "codec framework" ?
To understand what i mean check out the standalone versions of VideoLAN
too... I mean I really like the "unzip'n'run" (portable) software approach, MicroSoft and many other manufacturers doesn't so mutch instead.
Now, can you get my position ?
hto wrote:Let people do what they want.
Of course hto (i'm not a developer), just my poor opinions...
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 7:10 pm
ReactOS is GPL
than mean anyone are free create own disto if they like or modify reactos code under GPL
But I person do not like see a disto of reactos, instead we devloped a download manger with program we recomdated u can d/l and install
I can think puting in blackbox, geoshell, sharpe in the d/l manger when they working in reactos, at moment they do not working fine at all.
So it will be up to u choice which shell u whant install and use, when they are working, I am trying getting sharpe working fine at moment same time devloping dx for reactos.
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 11:10 pm
I hope I don't kidnap this thread (if you think so, just ignore my post), but I have a question about the ReactOS shell. As far as I know it is currently being rewritten. Are there any cool new things we can look forward to? I've heard about themes. Are there any other notable features?
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:39 pm
Is it going to support MSSTYLES themes?
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 12:14 am
forart wrote:A bit nonsese, then: if already exist, why are we cloning it ?
we're making an open source alternative to it.
We're under no illusions we're going to better it, MS has thousands of the worlds best programmers working for them.
We just want an NT like operating system, without the overhead of the Microsoft Corporation.
I suggest you read up on operating system design, understand the basics and when you have a firm understanding, read Windows Internals 4th edition. It's brilliance will amaze you.
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 2:14 am
score_under wrote:Is it going to support MSSTYLES themes?
yea is it?
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 11:24 am
Ged wrote:we're making an open source alternative to it.
...i mean: open source ALTERNATIVE _is not_ open source CLONE !
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:52 am
i personally hate how MS just "buckshots" folders and files around everywhere.
one of the things i hoped the React project would do is curtail that somewhat. MacOS did a much better job of organizing the system than Windows or even linux. very logical. very easy to find stuff. with MS, it seems like with every new version of IE they put another system related folder in \WINDOWS.
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 9:53 am
Many apps/drivers depend on those settings. We could change them in ROS. Who will then change the software, so it runs on ROS without any unexpected problems?
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:17 am
Haos wrote:Many apps/drivers depend on those settings. We could change them in ROS. Who will then change the software, so it runs on ROS without any unexpected problems?
where a file is place doesn't matter to software (it just has to be told where to look); see my other post about environment variables. it DOES matter to the people (like me), who can't find anything because MS plays "where's the file today" game.
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 1193#31193
Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:54 am
And for me it`s compatibility that does maatter. You`d need to ask dev for details, but it`s because of hardcoded dirs, we are using this layout.
Another thing is that i cant see why you dont like it. It`s clear enough for me.