Comments on: ReactOS Reviewed: The Next Windows?

By: Greg

Greg — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 12:36:05 +0000

Eric, I did a search on http://www.powerset.com that gave me this:
http://www.powerset.com/explore/semhtml/Genetic_programming?query=What+are+and+how+do+genetic+algorithms+work
So if you want to know what genetic algorithms are go there.
What I meant (after seeing through the fuzziness) about hardware out-pacing software, is that ATM we might be in an inbetween state where hardware is getting so powerful that software like genetic algorithms and AI might be used but the momentum of traditional programming is filling the gap, with features like 3d desktops that look great and may even have some utility but consume a lot of resources.
Genetic algorithms consume a lot of CPU power too, but it would probably only consume most of that on a developers machine and not a lot of AI in comparison be applied on a users machine (different maybe in game playing or simulation)
PrivateSI, I understand your anti globalization which seems to be allowing capitalism to go at an extreme. The original idea behind it I think was to have the world so tied together by trade it would be hard to start a nuclear war. I can also see how AI might be kept in proper balance more easily by open source developers because profit/competition is not the overiding thing as with a big monopoly. A large company could easily see it as favorable to cut out most of its employees if a more efficient machine or process came along or shift its manufacturing to a poor country where wages are low and there is no environmental protection. This affects both the rich and the poor adversely. The rich country loosing some of its own wealth and the poor country gaining wealth, (but concentrated in few persons) and also pollution. This also I think tends to create negative competition for the richer country to lower the wages of its citizens (or at least not improve).
AI/genetic algorithms can be used also to discover laws or at least been tested by rediscovering known laws, so from this point of veiw could be used in reverse engineering an OS

By: PrivateSi

PrivateSi — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 03:53:31 +0000

Well, Eric said it all really. I think I will backtrack on my 1 FREE, easy to use, well supported operating system comment, it’s not really what I meant. As some1 who’s worked in software sales, support & development I see from a USER & IT MANAGER’S POV how the Windows MONOPOLY has helped the learning curve and sped up IT uptake (Business & Home). You could say it’s also aided file-sharing through MS Office (at a considerably fin. cost) – better mention Open Office. Perhaps I should leave out the economics & politics (surfice to say, although I’m anti unchecked globalisation & the EU, I’m pleased they’ve fined MS a few cool billions over the years!!). This is why I promote ReactOS (and donated them 20$ a few times over the last couple of years!).

Comparing software & hardware development is so difficult it’s a job for a COMPUTER. Odd considering they’re so closely linked. So much ’software’/algs. was developed when COMPUTERS WERE STILL HUMAN (the original term ‘computer’ refered to ‘tax calculators’ of all things!). IE. the ancient Sumerians, Greeks etc. In the early days of valves, then large transistors many NEW algs came along that are still used in OSs.

If you take say an OS, then not much has happened development wise, a few varitations but not too disimilar. Obviously software in general can be viewed as an SUPERNOVA, whilst hardware, a mere H-Bomb (I’m ANTI-WAR!). That is, for each bit of kit (talking about personal computers, not task-specific) there are 1000s, millions of pieces of software written…

PC Hardware, currently following Moores Law (so we are told!) pales in comparison but if you add in the task-specific devices the software-hardware ration is lower. All chips are currently used for more than 1 task but this may change with bio-comps that ‘evolve’ or ‘evolve themselves / the next gen’ to do a specific task (better)..

Evo. Algs. just KEEP ON TRYING till they get there. In theory the ReactOS guys will beat an evo. alg. in the reverse engineering process as Windows is a very complex system and evo. alg. theory is in it’s INFANCY!!

Our brains degenerates physically but it ‘prunes’ and improves it’s software to compensate…

I’d give the software development industry 50 years (at a very generous max).

Fundy Christians don’t like me winding them up too much but I have had some success on that front! SAY NO TO COMPULSORY VACCINATION! LOL – n*ts – unless it’s a PC!

By: Eric

Eric — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 01:31:44 +0000

“I am suspecting that hardware resources are out-pacing software progress and this might be the reason for bloat in a lot of operating systems or is it the other way around?”
====================
I suppose it could be argued either way. Computers (or perhaps mainly CPUs) have become a lot more powerful over the years, so a lot more is done in software rather than in hardware. Sound cards are a good example: In the late 80s to the mid 90s, most sound cards did a lot of processing in the hardware, but since CPUs have become more and more powerful, onboard motherboard audio has become pretty much ubiquitous, and onboard audio tends to be fairly basic in that it requires more to be done in software, because it doesn’t do a whole lot in hardware. So, progress was made in hardware, causing the need for progress to be made in software.

“How do they [genetic algorithms] sit with anyone for that matter? What if they completely obliterated the job of a programmer?”
============
I haven’t heard about genetic algorithms, so I don’t know much about them, but I’m a software engineer. A new technology that completely obliterates a job would hurt in the short term, but in the long term, it has usually been a good thing. If there were no longer a need for software developers, then if we have enough advance warning, I’d have to prepare to change fields.

Speaking of genetic algorithms: Maybe I’ve watched too much sci-fi, but the thought of too much progress along the lines of AI and genetics seems a little scary. I always have the thought in the back of my mind that AI machines might outpace us and want to replace us. We invented computers to help us do work. We’re the masters of our tools, and I think it should stay that way. We have the power to control the advancement of our technology, so we can limit how far AI & genetic algorithms are developed so that it doesn’t get out of hand.

By: Greg

Greg — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 00:44:21 +0000

PrivateSI hi, you say you’re an atheist hanging around on fundy-christian sites. Seems disparate but good luck to you. I don’t want to start anything but how does something like genetic algorithms (other name evolutionary algorithms) sit with Christians? How do they sit with anyone for that matter? What if they completely obliterated the job of a programmer? (I don’t think that needs to be or for now may not be entirely possible) but thats what I mean by a revolution. I am suspecting that hardware resources are out-pacing software progress and this might be the reason for bloat in a lot of operating systems or is it the other way around?

By: PrivateSi

PrivateSi — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:48:35 +0000

Yeah, A REVOLUTION!! Seriously, although I’m actually a fairly sound x86 assembly lan. + c programmer I don’t have the time or brain-energy or knowledge to contribute but I would if I did – You need some HARDCORE KNOWLEDGE to help out and I DON’T! My CONTRIBUTION is promoting REACTOS on the fundy-christian sites (who consider GATES king of the EUGENICS / POPULATION CONTROL empire!!) Also the POLITICAL ACTIVISM sites such as INFOWARS. Hopefully some of those guys will DONATE MONEY!! I’m and atheist BTW!! LOL as they say!
PROMOTE, PROMOTE, PROMOTE – What Gates did to the computing world is DESTROY FREEDOM!! This is changing – just. I’m all for 1 FREE, easy to use, well supported operating system. Windows BEAT LINUX due to MONEY, MONEY, MONEY! Now I’m not against money but in this case every poor sod with a computer, every business ended up being EXTORTED BY A MONOPOLY brought about by POLITICAL ‘LOBBYING’ and ECONOMIC WARFARE!!!

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 01:26:11 +0000

Its not only reactOS that is taking a long time. Another OS; Haiku has been in development since 2001. It is also meant to make it very easy to install and use apps for the average person. Off course these apps will not be Windows and it is not Windows compatible. It is also reverse engineering another OS that was excellent in its day (1990’s to 2001): Beos.
What has slowed it up has been lack of hardware support from companies. Even so considering this it has made a lot of progress and even though it is still labeled in alpha releases seems stable in lot of ways for every day use but to have an OS, ie reactos, that could use Windows apps and drivers seems to hold a lot of appeal too.
What is holding all open source OS’s back, seems to be lack of support from companies (except in some instances) and programmers been unpaid. From this perspective a revolution needs to happen if ever going to be real headway. I think AI (artificial intelligence) might be something that could be used for development. It is now totally possible to develop software that is very efficient an bug free using genetic algorithms. I don’t know though if it would be possible to use this to develop drivers because the nature of genetic algorithms requires that the desired end state or outcome be stated for the software to evolve to and that may mean hardware parameters be fully published. (I have not developed software myself except just simple stuff for my own purpose).
This driver problem if it still existed with genetic algorithms wouldn’t matter with reactos though. I know that it is still possible even manually to develop functional drivers without much parameters been available but with much more effort.

By: Eric Baird

Eric Baird — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:42:03 +0000

Linux has made some great advances but it still has some areas where it’s too technical to be considered consumer-friendly.

I’ve just been trying to get a USB digital TV interface running under Ubuntu, and it’s a horrid mess. The tv tuner/recorder applications themselves are probably fine, but most of them don’t know how to find TV channels unless you download and run a separate command-line utility to scan for channels and generate a configuration file with the channel listing, which you then manually copy to the applications’ directories for the programs to read … oh, and did I mention that those command-line utilities have a maze of switches and no proper documentation? Ugh.

This is where the ability to run Windows XP drivers and software would be really useful.

By: Mahmoud Al-Qudsi

Mahmoud Al-Qudsi — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:57:04 +0000

Honestly, all what ReactOS needs to succeed is a corporate sponsor. It needs something like what Canonical was to Ubuntu, Novell to OpenSUSE, and RedHat to Fedora.

A corporate sponsor would guarantee a stable and compatible ReactOS release within a year. It just needs a cash infusion and some TLC – and as you guys so aptly point out, the best NetBook OS on the market would be in the palm of their hands.

By: John Benfield

John Benfield — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:03:37 +0000

True, but it’s a good PoC. With the resources of a vendor behind it, I would think that it wouldn’t be a huge leap to clean it up for a limited set of configurations and apps. It would be interesting to see if a “Windows Compatible” OS would be accepted better that Linux. I’ve heard more that a few people shy away from netbooks running Linux because they felt that they “weren’t technical enough” to deal with something that wasn’t Windows. It’s all about perception

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:01:19 +0000

Yes, I imagine netbook manufacturers would probably consider ReactOS, but only if it is complete and ready for general-purpose use, and right now it isn’t.

By: John Benfield

John Benfield — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 14:45:47 +0000

Hmmm…I wonder if any Netbook manufacturers would consider ReactOS. (see my comments on thin clients about 2 years ago). MS is already hinting pretty strongly at new light versions of XP and/or Windows 7 for that market. ReactOS seems like a logical alternative for people that need or want Windows compatibility.

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:59:34 +0000

I think NTFS would be less of a priority. Software usually doesn’t care what filesystem the OS uses. I think other things like sound, USB, etc. are more important.

By: rajmohan

rajmohan — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:42:45 +0000

support to install ntfs partition. because we all windows xp. the best file system is ntfs. so can you support the file system in you reactos. If reactos is install on ntfs file system. All the users use your system send donate your project

By: Eric Baird

Eric Baird — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 18:35:20 +0000

ReactOS has become more interesting since MS dropped mainstream support for WinXP, and started refusing to sell XP as a stand-alone product to people who want it. If you have kids, you can pick up old second-hand PC’s for about fifty quid that are perfectly fine for wordprocessing or net browsing, but if you want to clean the things out and install from fresh, you either need the original Windows serial number, or you need to buy a fresh copy of Windows. Vista probably won’t run adequately on most of these, and your computer shop can’t sell you a copy of XP, because MS want you to buy Vista.

Most people don’t know enough about Linux to know which version would suit them, so that leaves the option of getting a second-hand copy of Windows, using a “naughty” copy, or … when ReactOS is ready … installing ReactOS.

So if ReactOS was ready NOW, I think it’d be hugely successful. Lots of consumers loathe Vista with a vengeance and are mightily pissed off that they no longer have the option of replacing Vista with a new “bought” copy of XP. They want XP, or an XP-substitute that runs XP programs like XP does. The problem is waiting for all the critical subsystems to be finished.

I installed and had a quick play with ROS v0.3.9 on my old (2002) laptop, and people weren’t kidding when they said that it was small and fast. I got from blank machine to full install (with default drivers) in five minutes flat, as opposed to the 45-minutes-plus that you expect with XP. Trouble was, the manufacturer’s LAN driver then needed to be installed with a particular install application that relied on a function call that ROS hadn’t implemented yet, so without internet access I didn’t play with it for very long.

There are still holes that need to be filled in … but once those are done, the platform could be very interesting indeed.

By: PrivateSi

PrivateSi — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:43:20 +0000

Well pitched review, all questions asked in the comments section pretty much appear in the ReactOS FAQ section & introduction…
Most users (esp. notebook users) will benefit from the faster speed and lighter-weight rewrites. The idea of combining the ReactOS kernel & dlls ontop of a windows install is legally/security-wise you’d need 2 windows licences for 2 installs on the same machine as the hybrid would probably be too unstable to use as your main OS. There is the issue of windows core file protection. I suppose nlite gets around this so it is possible. The main problem is they can’t do anything (else) to give MS reason to attack them. I believe if ReactOS is ever completed (hmm?!) microsoft will attempt to out-date the project by releasing a new OS/windows version that will run legacy win apps / hardware slower than newer hardware / apps. The new hardware / apps won’t run on older windows version (much like the leap from 98′ to NT/2000/XP/Vista). The chances of this happening before completion is very high…BUT WHO CARES? If reactos can beat MS to it, or complete quick enough so hardware manufacturers support ReactOS instead of the new MS Condos then MS would be dead in the water…Once ReactOS is written keeping the kernel uptodate with MS Windows & CPU improvements will be possible at the current development rate…