Talk:ReactOS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ReactOS article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
To-do list for ReactOS: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • ReactOS at WineConf
  • ReactOS Foundation
  • Jason Filby yielding the position of coordinator to Steven Edwards
  • Steven Edwards yielding the position of coordinator to Aleksey Bragin
  • the Alex Ionescu dispute
  • place code audit in the timeline
  • conferences and expos the team has participated in
  • implement the roadmap in the future section
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] On Portal:Free software, ReactOS is currently the selected article

(2006-09-22) Just to let you know. The purpose of selecting an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors. It will remain on the portal for a week or so. The previous selected article was PuTTY. Gronky 11:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The selected article has rotated again and is now Wine. Gronky 22:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ReactOS website down?

The official ReactOS website seems to be unreachable. Does anyone know why it's down? - Cire, Oct, 28 2006

The topic of the #reactos channel on Freenode currently says:
ReactOS server (DNS, svn and website cache) main server is down, sorry for any inconvenience | russian based webhoster cause the downtime, fireball will switch to another hoster probably on monday
-- intgr 16:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
The website works again. Cristan 15:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Audit at 100%

The site currently states that the audit is complete. This is just a bug in the website:

IRC quote:
phoenix64: The audit is done? Woohoo... Very Happy
Christoph_vW: no
phoenix64: no?
phoenix64: "100.0% complete"
Christoph_vW: the progress bar is wrong
phoenix64: Neutral

Cristan 11:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Currently the website states that the audit is at 95.9%, so it seems the progress bar works again. Cristan 12:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh well; hopefully it won't be too long before its at 100% :) -- Limulus 06:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
It's now 100% again though. --Iyeru42 (talk) 19:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Boot screen

There is now a screenshot at the page of the new ReactOS bootscreen. I think this one should be removed for now, because this new bootscreen won't be available until at least 0.3.1. Without an explanation, it will only make the article unclear. When the new bootscreen is available in ReactOS, the image should be uploaded in Wikimedia commons because it is GPL and when hosted there, it is available at other language wikipedia's as well. - Cristan 14:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

This bootscreen is currently available in any post-0.3.0 build which can be downloaded from ReactOS's servers as a binary/ISO or in source form. --74.56.173.109 04:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That's what I meant: it isn't available yet in the current stable version. You can't expect every user in Wikipedia who downloads ReactOS to download an SVN build. I think it's confusing for people to not see this bootscreen after downloading and running ReactOS. The screenshot should either mention that it will be in 0.3.1 or the screenshot should be removed. - Cristan 09:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Still no reaction back. I'm removing the image now. Cristan 11:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ReactOS is not a current event.

According to the information available, the {{current}} is for articles that are undergoing massive changes in traffic due to being a truly current thing. That would imply that it has to be new, popular, etc. Examples of things that were at one point or another current events were things like Hurricane Katrina and Execution of Saddam Hussein—neither of which are current events any longer because they’re “yesterday’s news”.

That having been said, if there is a section that becomes active in this article, it certainly should get the {{current|section}} tag. Perhaps when the next release comes out or whatever. Then it would be appropriate, at least for a short time. —Mike Trausch (fd0man, Talk Page) 21:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latest stable release

Should 0.3.0 really be called stable? This isn't even beta yet. Is it referred to as (relatively) stable within the project? It seems to me that calling any version stable could be misleading, to those who don't know what alpha software is. Jobarts-Talk 06:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right. 0.3.0 is far from stable. We should do it like Beryl. With latest stable version "N/A" and latest preview version (in this case) "0.3.0". Cristan 11:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if this was changed and reverted, but I'm going to make the change. Althepal 02:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Patent issues

If no one has any comments or suggestions, I'm going to add a section about the possible patent infringement in ReactOS. I plan on using [1] for a reference, and likely this quote from that page, "As a rule, patents are fundamentally incompatible with Free Software..." With the multiple acussations leveled from Microsoft against patent infringment in the opensource community I think this deserves at least a mention in the article. --Android Mouse 04:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Error screenshots

All the current screenshots play out the idea that the OS is working fine. This is far from true, with system crashes around every corner. Can there be one screenshot of an error happening? And maybe fewer other screenshots? Althepal 02:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Major errors in ReactOS cause the fated Blue Screen of Death, which--like on Windows--cannot be captured very well. The system shutdown also results in a blue screen of death; although it only says that it is safe to turn off the computer. --76.201.144.238 (talk) 14:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What's the point?

Don't worry, this comment isn't as negative as it looks :-) . I just wanted to suggest that the article would be better with a section discussing why ReactOS is being built. What is the goal of the project, who are the intended users, what is the reason for reimplementing an operating system that's already widely (if not freely) available? PeteVerdon 16:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure this info could be found on their site, but I'm pretty sure it was made to provide a non-unix (completely Windows-compatible) operating system under a free license. Because, not everybody wants to use Linux (and Linux with wine cannot support every program for windows), and it is for people who want a free alternative. Those who can afford windows will probably stick with them for a better guarantee of it working + the ability to run Microsoft software that won't install on anything other than genuine Windows, but this os is for everybody else. Althepal 03:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Another reason AFAIK is the ability to use Windows drivers would enable people to use hardware that isn't supported on *nix on a free OS Nil Einne 20:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep in mind, Windows supports *nix methods to a degree on its own. Since both Windows and MacOS were based off of Unix. --76.201.144.238 (talk) 14:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Which Windows is this supposed to clone?

9x, NT, XP, what? 66.28.178.67 16:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I've heard "NT", "Serve 2003," and "XP" float around the forum. I think it is NT. Althepal 17:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
XP is part of the NT family. I heard they were aiming for the feature level of Windows 2000, though. - Sikon 03:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
"The ReactOS architecture is based on that of Microsoft Windows NT 4.0" and "The original target for ReactOS, with regards to driver and application compatibility, was Microsoft Windows NT 4.0. Since then, Microsoft Windows 2000 and Windows XP have been released. Microsoft Windows 2000 and Windows XP are both descendants of Windows NT. As such we can gradually shift our compatibility target without worrying about the architecture changing too much. In fact, internally, Windows 2000 reports version information as Windows 5.0 and Windows XP as Windows 5.1. The ReactOS team have decided to maintain Windows NT 4.0 as the official compatibility target. This is because most of the resources, articles and books on Windows NT/2000/XP technology are written for Windows NT 4.0. This does not mean that features present in later versions of Windows NT based operating systems will not be implemented in ReactOS."[2] -- Limulus 07:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Its NT4 as SAMBA (on which they will be basing the networking) is based on the NT4 style domain model rather than the newer XP style Active Diretcory model. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.216.130 (talk) 11:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Audit at 100% (again)

62.56.77.93 just made an edit removing:

As of December 2007 the audit is nearly 100% complete,[1] with only 3 files still locked.[2] To date, no suspect code has been uncovered.[citation needed]

commenting "Remove links... - Not relevant audit has moved to being internal"

What does that mean? The audit is still ongoing? I don't see any news on the ReactOS homepage... -- Limulus (talk) 16:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the edit, the change wasn't encyclopedic or accurate. Either the audit is finished (most likely) or the pages aren't up right now. So now it's probably clear, let's just wait for an official word. Althepal (talk) 20:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I've done a huge edit of that section to put things in the actual perspective (kind of what of the edits by 61.56.77.93 meant). It is only an internal developer audit, nothing official or public. It was only done by the developers so they would ensure the project is 100% legit, and they have accomplished this end. I am unsure if there actually was any code that has undergone or needs to undergo re-writing, but that is all being taken care of internally. Althepal (talk) 21:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Is that actually true, from an objective viewpoint? The Wine people are still refusing to re-sync ReactOS-brewed patches on copyright grounds, aren't they? Chris Cunningham (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Some reactOS' dll's have more features which aren't required for wine[3]. With others there is a good cooperation (as far as I've heard). I have never heard about about Wine refusing ReactOS dll's because of copyright claims and I've followed the project for quite some time now. That combined with this post leaves no evidence that Althepal's edits/information is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristan (talk • contribs) 01:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
While I can't find the quote I'm looking for (I'm pretty sure Mike McCormack stated flat-out that wine work wouldn't be merged because its non-taintedness couldn't be confirmed), at the bottom of this section Stephen Edwards says that "The general policy is to no longer accept code from ReactOS". Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roadmap

Future direction isn't encyclopedic commentary. This should be reworked back into prose covering what has actually happened. The ROS site has its own wiki for this kind of thing. Chris Cunningham (talk) 19:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Legality?

Aside from reverse engineering, what is the situation with technology and user interface related patents Microsoft may hold about Windows system insides and the Luna graphics environment? Somehow I think if this project goes anywhere near release, lawyers will pop up and sue them out of existance (an justly so, since Microsoft spent 20+ years developing the whole damn Windows system which these guys are blatantly stealing). 82.131.210.162 (talk) 11:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

ReactOS is entirely legal. Some people review Windows NT and make a list of specifications, and developers do their own work without stealing or even seeing Windows code. Windows doesn't have any copyright claims to GUI elements such as the start menu, taskbar, or windows style, because all these things are seen in Linux. (Even if they make the Luna theme, which I doubt, they would draw it from scratch. I know for a fact they are making their own icon set and not using any Windows icons, though for user transition, many icons will be similar to existing Windows icons. Microsoft, though, does not own rights to icons similar to Windows icons.) Althepal (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Of course it is illegal. Any operating system aside Windows is illegal. They all pirated because Microsoft spent years and billions dollars to develop Windows. The very idea of operating system and mouse interface belongs to Microsoft.--Dojarca (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope you are being sarcastic. Linux is fully legal, and Apple came up with the idea of a GUI before Microsoft. Also, Unix and CP/M were. there even before MS-DOS 23:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.232.7 (talk)
I have to disagree with that illegal comment. Windows may be closed source, but anyone with Windows and Visual Studio/Basic 2005 can view any application's code (Since it can open EXEs.) Using REGedit to show the registry is no different. ReactOS uses a similar registry editing program too. Anyway, this is like if you said OvBB was illegal, which it wasn't. --76.201.144.238 (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Dojarca's statement was sarcasm. (Apple was the first to make an operating system with a GUI and mouse.) Althepal (talk) 01:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
By "Apple" I assume you means "Xerox." 151.197.183.192 (talk) 08:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Made modifications to Version history and roadmap

Release date of version 0.6 was 2008, however the official reactos roadmap page didn't specify any date so i changed it to Unset. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 11:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Touchpad Support

Although I don't know if this has been confirmed by the ReactOS Team itself, but not all touchpads seem to work. Some jerk the mouse to random directions, causing unwanted clicks. I have filed a bug for this, here (3048) --76.201.144.238 (talk) 14:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Achitechture Support

"...which at this point can fit better than a full featured operating system." The intent of this statement is unclear and the grammar is a bit odd. Pocket PCs can fit ReactOS Better? Why wouldn't one have a full-featured OS on a Pocket PC? (TheGZeusNeedsToRegisterAgain) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.33.45 (talk) 18:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

That says they are making a "Windows Mobile" or "Windows CE" equivalent, because PocketPCs have greatly limited to nonexistent expandability ports and a tiny screen, plus they have very limited memory, storage, and processing speeds. That is why such devices are loaded with minimalistic operating systems aimed at the device's intended use: PDA. Althepal (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Version history and development doesn't deserve 'proseline'

I'm not convinced that rewriting a table that outlines the different features in subsequent releases in prose would actually be an improvement. In order to include the same level of detail, one would have to write the sort of disjointed sentences that the anti-proseline guidelines are supposed to prevent.

If it is felt that it's overly dominating the article while not being very relevent, it should be cut down or deleted, rather than rewritten without the structure of the table. Watcher (talk) 17:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I made an effort to do this and believe it paid off. The whole thing was reverted on the dubious grounds that the table was "much easier to understand". I've restored the prode and will work on improving it.
Wikipedia articles on software are not just meant to be huge timelines. Such detail may be suitable for the project's own wiki, but not here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)