Page 1 of 2

Why ReactX?

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:38 pm
by Yellow
Hi developers!

Why are you working on ReactX? On every good game cd is a directX installer. It should be possible to install Microsofts DirectX. And you can download it from microsoft for free, too. Is it because DirectX 11 may will be for original Microsoft Windows only? Or does DirectX run on genue Windows only already?

Re: Why ReactX?

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 6:03 pm
by Goplat
Yellow wrote:Hi developers!

Why are you working on ReactX? On every good game cd is a directX installer. It should be possible to install Microsofts DirectX.
Possible, maybe. Legal, no.
DirectX 9.0c EULA wrote:NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP MEDIA CENTER EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 95, WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS NT 4.0 WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (each an "OS Product"),
YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 6:05 pm
by preston
I won't comment possible licence issues 'cos I don't know anything about that. EDIT: OK Goplat was faster

You can install directx with every game you can get but without support in win32k it would be useless. So at least this part of ReactX implementation must be done.. About implementig dlls itself. Having your own implementation (for example ddraw.dll) is priceless for debugging and finding out how things work internally.

Re: Why ReactX?

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:07 pm
by Zael
Goplat wrote: Possible, maybe. Legal, no.
DirectX 9.0c EULA wrote:NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP MEDIA CENTER EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 95, WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS NT 4.0 WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (each an "OS Product"),
YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
Hello. I'm not a lawyer by any means, but this EULA (at least this portion) doesn't specify that the machine requires Windows, merely that you own a license for a valid copy of windows 95 or higher. Given that, couldn't one argue that if any computer has been bought since about 1995 with a copy of windows, that directx can be installed on any computer that person owns?

Anyhow as I said I'm not a lawyer so I don't really know anything about copyright law. I am just a fan that has been watching for the past 2 or so years. Keep up the awesome work devs.

-Zael-

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:29 pm
by Z98
The end user is free to do whatever they want. We hold no liability regarding it, since we offer no warranty, be it from hardware failures or legal issues on what you run on the OS.

Your argument however still depends on having a valid license from MS, for every instance you install MS' DX on ROS. If you already have the license, why would you even need to bother with ROS?

And any arguments about how MS limits your freedoms and whatever are going to fall on deaf ears here, since we're sick and tired of them being brought up. Most of the devs are far too pragmatic to use free software for the sake of using free software.

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:45 pm
by Zael
Not at all. My reason for still wanting to install ReactOS is that 95 doesn't support any recent games or drivers. I realize of course that ReactOS is not yet able to either, but it is in the goals of ReactOS to one day be capable. Also, while I haven't looked too much into it, I believe I am unable to transfer my license of XP to another computer after it has already been installed, but I could install reactOS, then (I think) validly install directX on my next computer. Any arguments about MS limiting freedom would be stupid from me, if I am advocating directX on ReactOS.

Anyhow I'm not saying I disapprove of ReactX. I like the idea of ReactX very much. I would focus more on the core components of ReactOS first myself, but I know that when you program in free time you work on the parts you want to do first. I like seeing all the progress done on ReactOS and its components, and wish I knew enough low level C to help out. Unfortunately most of my programming has been geared towards games that are multi-platform, so I know little about windows internals.

Again keep up the awesome work devs.
-Zael-

Re: Why ReactX?

Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:48 pm
by cppm
Yellow wrote:Hi developers!
Y'know there are many people on the forums (myself included) who are not developers and a merely interested observers. If you want to talk direct to the dev's try the IRC channel...
Yellow wrote:Why are you working on ReactX? On every good game cd is a directX installer. It should be possible to install Microsofts DirectX. And you can download it from microsoft for free, too.
You really haven't got the first clue about why people develop FOSS software, have you?

That aside, you're bringing up an issue that has been mentioned on the forums repeatedly, and one important point is that has been (often) bought up is that directx is tightly integrated with the win32 subsystem, and as such it would mean that it would be v.difficult to get MS directx to run without knowing more about the internal nitty gritty than they want people to know

Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:14 am
by Haos
Troll account, please remove it.

Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:48 am
by EmuandCo
EDIT: OK, sorry. this lock was not of any use. This happens when the first thing I read from someone is a offensive post. /me notes in his brain: "Be more objective!"

Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:49 pm
by Ged
I've removed the lock on this.
This is a perfectly good question which I suspect many people also don't understand.

Yellow, there are many reasons why we need our own DirectX. Excluding the obvious legal problems which I won't go into here, many people don't realise DirectX is tied into Windows itself. Much of DirectX operates in kenrel mode, and is partially tied into Win32K. This isn't provided with the installers and thus must be implemented already.

Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:22 pm
by z180
It is good that devs answered this.Such or similar questions were
asked often from people that wanted to play their games on reactos.
I recommend playing Allegro or SDL games or openGL games for now.

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:13 pm
by Mrkaras
I will assume for the moment that either english is not your native language or that message just didn't come out right, because it did sound very harsh/offensive.

on the speed, I think it was one of the developers once said something along the lines of:
the first step is to make it run, then run stable then run fast
run fast is the last step, it does not yet run stable so it is not time to make it run fast too much yet. also are you comparing OSs with the same drivers installed? windows XP in safe mode (only a generic video driver installed) draws incredibly slowly, I don't think very many drivers work in Reactos yet so I suspect that is the speed you should be comparing it too.

no doubt, Reactos is slow in screen drawing, but there are some reasons behind it, not that the developers don't know what there doing.

(for all I know maybe the developers can't code very good :twisted: )

Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 5:57 am
by lakehousetech
It seems that perhaps Yellow is expecting more than he/she should. ReactOS is still in alpha. I couldn't get it to install on either of my machines, but I am hoping I have better luck when the beta is released.

Re: Why ReactX?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:25 am
by jimtabor
Goplat wrote:
Yellow wrote:Hi developers!

Why are you working on ReactX? On every good game cd is a directX installer. It should be possible to install Microsofts DirectX.
Possible, maybe. Legal, no.
DirectX 9.0c EULA wrote:NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP MEDIA CENTER EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 95, WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS NT 4.0 WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (each an "OS Product"),
YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
It is called Black Boxing as it is known. It is okay to test their driver with our interface. Here in the US we are allowed to access Interfaces and structures that transcend to one type of medium or another. That could be networking too. Long as it is not encrypted. The USDOJ papers state that Microsoft should supply third parties information to access these things. If they do not, it is okay for us to do it ourselves. That is what these assholes on the net do not want you to know. That is why ReactOS gets all these things thrown at it. It's the same thing every time.

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:28 am
by Haos
Can you point us to any legal papers on that?