"React16" and "React98" concepts Viable?

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

andrewweb
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Post by andrewweb »

NO NO NO
Did you know reactos started out trying to be free windows 95?
Well, it failed. (98 and 95 aren't that different) When they tried to make an NT-compatible kernel, they succeded. Now this means one big thing:
NO DOS-BASED REACTOSES. NO NO NO. JUST NT BASED(or if nt is replaced, possibly that).

ALL CLEAR?
andrewweb
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by andrewweb »

Wierd wrote:16bit reactos? Eww. No. Not even I will stoop so low.

I am a bit saddened that later version of ROS need a pentium class or better. I REALLY wanted to profile ReactOS on a "Super low end 486" I have sitting around drawing dust against NT4-- and or-- to run Apache Webserver under ROS on same said antique for "extreme torture testing"---

Sadly, this is no longer the case. I will have to look for an antiquated pentium 50, with 32mb of ram, and an ISA video card now. *sigh*.....

I think I have a few such dinosaurs in my shed as well..... but it lacks the mystique and MS bashing potential that using a 486 offers. (Eg-- Microsoft needs a pentium III 500, and 1gb of ram to do this---- but we do it with 32mb of ram and a 486SX 25.....)

But again-- 16bit ReactOS? EWWWW! The line should be drawn at the VDM, and NOPLACE ELSE should ANY 16bit code even be CONSIDERED. (shudders uncontrollably.)
Actually, probably won't. The windows equivalent of the current reactos have higher specs than reactos does. Reactos will always be less of a resource hog as windows.
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Please don't double post andrewweb if you are the last post on a chain edit and append to it.

I see no problem with some Reactos tools being setup to run from dos. The compatibility required that is a split project.

Win9x and Win 3.11 if someone want to document VXD and build a contained system to run them in side ROS. This is possible by NT design. But will not be a simple project.

Note Linux has a relegated 16 bit. http://elks.sourceforge.net/FAQ-English.html If someone really want to do this to Reactos its a independent project. Please note use of elks is dieing out.

Before a project like it could be considered someone would have to have good grounds. When elks started it had good grounds. Elks would most likely not even get a start today.

If its because your applications need VXD's that is not enough grounds to go back to 16 bit.
forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart »

Cristan wrote:It could be fun, but making an Operating System really is a lot of work. So you'll need quite a group of enthusiasts who are willing to spend a lot of time in making it in order to be succesful.
That's the reason I like the Open Sourcing 9x idea: there are *many* enthusiasts that builds "unofficial" service packs for 9x systems (check here) and, IMHO, it's just a waste of energies to work unofficially for a proprietary OS (have you heard about the recent AutoPatcher XP shutdown ?).
On other side, it would be interesting to have a selection of open source Windows components alternatives...

Last, but not least:
patchworks wrote:OK, for those who are interested in, here's the link @ Revolution OS, "a 2001 documentary which traces the history of GNU, Linux, and the open source and free software movements."

The interesting fact is the method that Stallman used to create GNU (start form 12:50th minute): "...a large number of separate programs... replace these programs one-by-one...", that substantially is the same - but with some modernization, such as the "opening manager tool" (an hacked package manager) - that i suggested for open sourcing win9x idea.

:thumbup
EDIT:
silverblade wrote:It seems pointless. 9x is a dying (if not already dead) architecture. The nice thing about the NT architecture is that it allows for a Win32 subsystem which allows all well-behaved 9x applications to function anyway.
.
.
.
In summary:
I don't see a valid reason to resurrect Windows 9x in an open source form.
Check this out: [ external image ] :mrgreen:
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.
forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart »

For those who are -still- interested in "React16" (or my GNUWin idea) here's an interesting find:

OpenWINDOWS
Goal is to build a Windows OS and/or GUI that is fully compatible with Microsoft Windows.
The way to achieve this is very different than similar projects I found so far.
Unlike other projects I make fully use of available software (why recreate when its already freely available?).
To illustrate this: I have used no programming skills whatsoever (until now) to get this far. I have just used my knowledge of existing software.

First of all I choose Windows 3.1 because this OS/GUI seems most suitable.
One of the advantages is that it can run on top of DOS Operating Systems like OpenDOS (free for non-commercial use), DR-DOS, MS-DOS, PC-DOS and possibly FreeDOS (freeware).
Another reason to use this GUI is because there´s plenty of (modern) software available for it (wordprocessors, webbrowsers, e-mail clients, fax-software, multimedia-software, etc.) and it runs on both modern and very old computers (like a 386).

The first version that is available here for download I have named OpenWINDOWS version 3.2a.
After installing you will have a GUI that is identical to Windows 3.1 from Microsoft, only this one has newer files!

Unfortunately you still need some files from the original Windows 3.1 which I haven´t found available for download elsewhere until now.
:wink:
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Not touchable with a ten foot pole in a lot of places.

MS licence does not permit that kind of alteration.

http://www.japheth.de/HX.html would have be the wiser way to start. forart.
Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos »

Nice, the idea of Dos32, compatible with Win32API appeals to me:>
fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Post by fred02 »

EmuandCo wrote:Errr, why in the name of Jesus Christ do you want a Open Win9x????
Retrogaming. :twisted:
User avatar
EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4461
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Post by EmuandCo »

Almost everything runs on XP with some work. ANd if not... VMWare.
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes
Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos »

Not really. The issue is with several 9x games, using some obscure 9x-only code. Some of them will never work with XP. Still, the issue is if we need to implement it.
elhoir
Test Team
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:01 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Post by elhoir »

Haos wrote:Still, the issue is if we need to implement it.
I think we dont need to
z180
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:58 pm

Post by z180 »

WINE has some degree of VXD faking.
In windows 386 to ME a program can call driver
functions and wine emulates or stubs out some of them.
But VXD faking is very incomplete in WINE and VXD drivers
could not be loaded.

It may be much easier to redo 16 bit windows than reactos
but this platform is problematic(not only the obscure multitasking
where a blocked program could hang the whole system),it needs
special compilers and I dont know any opensource compilers
but I used borland c++ 3.1.
forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart »

EmuandCo wrote:Almost everything runs on XP with some work. ANd if not... VMWare.
If this would be true, how do you explain the amount of 3ads, mods and unofficial/exotic upgrade projects @ MSFN, then ?
Haos wrote:the issue is if we need to implement it.
ROS is rightly (and must continue to be) focused on NT platform cloning, but an open source 9x side project could be interesting as much as WINE to exchange knowledge at least, IMHO. 8)
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Like all OS there are some determined people who try to stay with there OS no matter what. None of those projects have gone as far as BEOS lovers. Just patching the old Win9x is making sure of long term death. Reason no new members legally. So all those patches have really been people wasting there time forart. Either they truly work on a project to replace there OS or they die out the question is how long. Old BEOS users took only 4 years to wake upto that then started http://www.haiku-os.org/ .

I still find it funny when people come to wine and are trying to run doom95 thinking there are more than enough open source engines for the game that run on all platforms.

Greatly loved old games really need there engines cloned. Keeping Old api's alive also keep old viruses alive. 9x series of OS's was never designed to be secure.
fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Post by fred02 »

forart wrote:
EmuandCo wrote:Almost everything runs on XP with some work. ANd if not... VMWare.
If this would be true, how do you explain the amount of 3ads, mods and unofficial/exotic upgrade projects @ MSFN, then ?
And all the games listed on http://www.ntcompatible.com/compatlist2.html too, as well as all these unofficial patches
forart wrote:
Haos wrote:the issue is if we need to implement it.
ROS is rightly (and must continue to be) focused on NT platform cloning, but an open source 9x side project could be interesting as much as WINE to exchange knowledge at least, IMHO. 8)
me too
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], DotBot [Crawler], Semrush [Bot] and 1 guest