Microsoft is going too far...

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

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

Microsoft is going too far...

Post by nute »

with Vista, see the following web site:

Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:09 pm
Location: Germany

Post by ROSFan »

The best adress (of course except of ReactOS site ;) ) where you can help to fight Microsoft is:

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

Post by Ftju »

Well can`t it be patched somehow?

Posts: 237
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Fallowfield

Post by counting_pine »

I've seen this article mentioned on other forums (I'm surprised how long it took to make it to this one;) and as far as I can gather, he's actually talking about programs compiled for DOS, rather than Win32.

I don't know what the situation is; I'm not an expert and I don't own Vista, but I just thought I'd mention it before people automatically assume the worst, and start posting lots of words with dollar signs in.

Perhaps someone with a copy of Vista can verify whether or not this is a problem for Win32 apps.

Posts: 326
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:57 pm
Location: Tornado Alley

Post by Reacter »

I can verify this, and, as a tech, I noticed that withing a day, very little that worked with XP still works besides apps for XP and Vista. DOS is very shakey, and half my DOS apps can't run. If Vista asks me whether to allow *HAL.DLL* to access the hard drive again, I am going to say, "no", and watch Vista kill itself. Vista really is dumb when it comes to security and app performance/stability/support :(.
More ReactOS, please!

Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

It only applys to dos apps. What djgpp is a dos complier.

Besides windows XP has default state set to auto but if you know how to set it you can limit it.

It was one of the secuirty flaws in XP that dos could allocation all memory leading to a crash.

The operation is changeable by creating a .pif file even on XP. That has not changed between vista. Even the default is still editable if you know where to go.

Yes Vista dos has other problems.

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

The problems appears real...

Post by nute »

That is a site to download DJGPP for use in any version of Windows ( except Vista ),
dos, and dosemu.

But it's not just DJGPP that apparently has problems in Vista. Evidently all
C compilers, save Visual Studio from Microsoft, have problems with Vista.
It seems likely if you don't like Win32's IO functions that you are going
to have a tough time C/C++ programming in Vista.

Here is a site that google pumped out when I asked for free C compilers.

Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Gcc complier in Ros Build Env is fixed for Vista. All the fix is updating gcc.

Mingw and cygwin could be fixed if they update there gcc against the main gcc at

Djgpp is build for dos work. Using it in windows can be achieved two different ways. Number one run inside dos what required a .pif alteration under Vista to provide the memory it needs. Number two build it as a cross complier inside windows right version gcc is all that is required to build it.

Besides just because it does not say it will run on vista that it won't.

The advantage of Open Source compliers they are fixable. Closed source you are stuffed if there is not a update.

Please note I have Vista. I know djgpp stuff works inside vista dos box after tweaking it. Lot of the ways to fix other open source compliers is documented in the bugzilla.

Yes I know that site well.

You don't have to code for Win32 to run under Vista. It supports posix as well. So avoiding Win32 functions is perfectly achievable.

People trying to stick in the stone age with dos are going to have hell at times. People in the Dino age with Posix are not going to have any problems.

I have only quoted on compliers I use from time to time for different tasks. There are most likely more that support Vista.

I guess you did not try it before posting nute. Not testing stuff and quoting errors does increase the risk of locked threads. Because this is time wasting.

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

oiaohm, back off.

Post by nute »

Geez oiaohm,

"I guess you did not try it before posting nute. Not testing stuff and quoting errors
does increase the risk of locked threads. Because this is time wasting."

Moderator's pet.

What's with you baiting me anyways? Do you have anything better to do than
pick a fight with people on the ReactOS discussion board? You are reaching
anyways, how do you know that I haven't tested what I'm posting in any way?

Actually oiohm, I posted a link to a web site recommended by Keith Lofstrom
from the Linux User's group list in Portland Oregon. He is trying to use free
compilers under Vista to develop software that will work in 98SE, XP,
etcetera as well.

Proprietary compilers won't serve his open source efforts well.

I haven't purchased a copy of Vista for three reasons. First off,
I can't afford to. Second off, I don't have any dual core computers
to run it on. Last but not least, I don't want Vista.

Listen up jerk, what is obvious to you clearly isn't obvious to everyone.
There's a name for people who talk big and menace others, bullies.
Bullies are pathetic. A more appropriate term perhaps is trolls.
By the way, changing a compiler is a big deal. Do you have any
idea how much testing it would take to verify that you won't break
a lot of software in the process?

Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

I am not the Moderator's pet. Z98 has locked threads on me before and so has the Moderator before him. I was giving you some helpful advice to reduce you chance of locked threads. Tone might have been a bit off.

I am using free compliers to build stuff under windows including Vista.

If you think I paid for Vista I did not pay that much for it. $699 AUD total a year for all Microsoft software including servers note that includes 10 installs of Microsoft Office and 10 installs of Vista. So development is simple.

This page simple fact is wrong because the memory limit is not a solid set thing. Now that you mention that person could have been a pure linux person. I now understand why it was not just alter the properties _default.pif so it has memory or create a .pif that starts a shell for doing djgpp work in with the needed memory.

The title is completely misleading. Since gcc runs in win32, posix and dos under Windiws and in future win64. It only restricts dos applications by default but there is a way around it.

Please note Microsoft was part of the reason why gcc was updated for Vista. Posix section of Vista has gcc as a optional install. So its a bit of a joke saying it does not work with Vista when it ships with it.

If a person puts incorrect topics on stuff it does risk flaming.

Please note Reactos will not even run djgpp at moment. No dos support at all.

I really don't know what the kicking and screaming is about. I knew dos was on the way out when 2000 was released. Its now 2007. Besides most of the code in djgpp will directly port the the posix system provided by Microsoft in Vista. Services for Unix is the name of the posix system. Its usable from Windows 2000 threw to Vista.

If people did not start the change over 7 years ago when they were ment to. Should we really feel sorry for them. I know how much testing it will take. In my eyes nothing is more pathetic than a coder who has not protected his clients by either keeping up to date or being cross platform. Then complaining about it when stuff breaks.

Since 2000 all my code runs under posix standard or on top of cross platform librarys. I droped dos completely. So I only have problems when I have to put code under Reactos. I have gone threw the pain to protect my clients interest.

There is a difference between a bullies and someone seeing something as completely stupid thing to be complaining about. There is logic behind my response.

Posts: 326
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:57 pm
Location: Tornado Alley

Post by Reacter »

Ok, I did say some about WinXP too. I just got through a complete system breakdown with Windows Vista, and I was the wireframe that kept the system from needing a A:\DOS\FORMAT C:. Naturally I am not to pleased. I agree that Vista has its flaws, but please don't go overboard, that is a great way to get someone really mad. And I know that Microsoft has helped some things. P.S. What mem limit? 1.25 gigs here, no limit. I paid $139 for my copy, but it is OK. DOS is not dead. FreeDOS is good, but I am still not surprised you say it is dead.
More ReactOS, please!

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

Is DOS really that bad?

Post by nute »

How many people understand how to properly use the so called wonderful security
features available in Windows 2000 and later?

I still can't figure out how to properly install software to 2000 pro for use by multiple
users. 2000 pro is old, but I like using a version of Windows that doesn't phone home
by default. If only Microsoft didn't care about licensing for systems it doesn't support anymore, but I digress.

How do I set up the lower priviledge users start menu so that he/she can't change
certain parts of it without the permission of a higher authority? How do I change the
default for creating new users so that they will get firefox and thunderbird shortcuts?
How can I install a program for one low priviledge user and noone else on the system?

Freedos exists in part because security that people don't know how to use properly
or that gets in the way can be a nuisance and a problem. For real time embedded
applications, a dos environment has major advantages over an environment that
tries to impose "proper" use of memory, etcetera. Offering 0 protection is faster
because it takes a lot less processing to forego checking memory allocations,
etcetera. Where Freedos fails is it's lack of bug free tools in certain important areas,
such as filesystem defragmenters. I've had pot luck with Freedos's memory
managers as well.

I wish Windows came with the equivalent of Novell's directory services. A gui that
simplifies establishing the proper relationships between users and programs would
be really nice.

Posts: 326
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:57 pm
Location: Tornado Alley

Post by Reacter »

[double post, nute, accident?] I have had great luck with FreeDOS. I find that the best way to prevent a user from using the Start Menu is to place a computer-controlled shock mat under them.(Hehe, joke...) . Seriously, if you need one person to have access, give yourself and ONLY THAT PERSON access to the files. A certain set of groups can be created that has limited start menu access, I just haven't had the time yet. Place their desktop on an already created desktop, beautiful, there is the alternative to MSIE and outlook.
More ReactOS, please!

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

Post by Z98 »

Works for XP Pro. Don't have a 2000 machine to try this on. Bring up run. Type in gpedit.exe

User Configuration->Administrative Templates

Never actually bothered to investigate how to get certain icons onto the quicklaunch. I imagine it would have something to do with default accounts.

Double post deleted.

Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Note I said on the way out for dos.

There are clue about this fact lack of sound card support for dos applications in Windows NT-Vista. Windows 2000 was the point Microsoft said it was never going to happen. That was the major one. There are more small clues direct access to hardware was cut off with no way to reactivate it.

A few things people don't see is if you code is done right. You can support Dos Win32 and Linux. Text based applications. For graphical or other like cross platform graphic systems. There are other middle library so you are backing it both or three ways. djgpp provides posix functions. It is completely possible between cross platform libs and posix functions to do everything.

Now being annoying is using win32 binary for dos support

I personally for single user machines I am more likely to use Linux than freedos. X11 is not a requirement for linux. Use something like directfb. I don't mind having the memory protection. More important is that lot of tasks like printing and burning is there. If the machine is pure single user Then with Linux completely encrypted the harddrive user password unlocks the machine.

Only way to avoid proper memory is exploit a feature of the processor allowing flat memory allocation or sticking under 640 kb with dos. There are big performance gains gutting linux almost completely out. While still have the advantage of being able to leave cups for printing or linux network card support in place.

Nute windows server versions do come with something equal to Novell directory services its called the Active Directory. In there is group policys.

Yes not a friendly at times as Novell directory services.

So we do have something in common. I hate windows poor default security settings.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 3 guests