OSDev.org

Me, I look at Windows, and I look at Linux (especially now, with the KDE environment) and I don't think they have very different things to offer, other than being an mutual alternative to the other.

They both have advatanges, and they both (yes both) could learn from each other. If I was to create an OS, it would have nothing to do with either of them. I say that Windows, and Linux's designs (functionality, GUI design etc) are the reasons they are so popular today, it's also the reason why they're not moving and people are still trying to make the "perfect" OS. Sure it's one heck of a project to take on, not given to everybody to make a pot of coffee and say to himself/herself hey, let's make an OS today. And no I'm not saying I'm one of those that could, I am saying I'm one of those that could either. I don't know, so I won't answer that question. Maybe I can, maybe I can't .

I know what you are trying to do, make the guy stick to his convictions, and test his belief in his own project, that's good in a way. but while you're there testing his faith in his own project, you're also stopping him from moving it forward at the rate it could move forward. To me, any effort to to make an OS is good, but any effort to make an OS totally different than what we all know and use today is even better because as much as some might hate to say it, windows (any version), Linux/Unix (any version and any GUI) and OS/2 aren't perfect. There better than what was available before, but there's much much room for some serious improvements. SOme that can't be implanted simply because of the way the code to these OS's aren't designed to be changed if you get my drift. Linux included.

So that's my opinion, make a 95 clone or an NT clone that works in Linux to, excellent, I'm sure people will want to use it once it's done....but to me, it's high time for something totally different, new, never before seen to start happening.

I know what you are trying to do, make the guy stick to his convictions, and test his belief in his own project, that's good in a way. but while you're there testing his faith in his own project, you're also stopping him from moving it forward at the rate it could move forward.

Did I ? ::)

Well I didn't say you did it voluntarily ....but indeed if everyone spent their time answering questions no project would ever move forward. To me, energy is better spent at development rather than justifying it's been M$'s excuse long enough and I've had enough of it hehehe.

Me, I would glady put any spare minute I have come up with on a new concept rather than making yet another "win98 and family".....something that just doesn't exist ....time for a big change in my book ....maybe I'll start one myself, and yes I'll mention it here so you can question my intents all you want. I have a perfect track record (professionally and personal projects as well) as to getting any and all my projects and if I set my mind to making that OS, I'll make it alright.

And looking at what's out there right now I think I know just how to really revolutionize the industry.

I have nothing against a new project that aims to mimic windows (if waheed wants to continue it then so be it) but the only problem is, cloning projects like this only gain significance once they are functional and working. Not only that, since it is an open source project, you need something to motivate developers to work for you (Starting from scratch is only motivating for the initiator, even then it depends ). I hope you understand the magnitude of the project you want to achieve:

The Windows API alone has thousands of calls and libraries. I attempted to create a Win32 API emulation layer and it took me more than a day just to type the skeleton functions of 20% of the total possible calls (and my API reference manual is only for WIN95 dated in 1994!) and so I ditched it. There hundreds of other libraries, documented or undocumented that you must either emulate or provide functionality for, including OLE, GDI, msvcrt. In fact, in my own opinion, I wish people who try to clone windows a lot of luck (and that includes ReactOS). Microsoft has designed their systems so that it would be difficult to clone and I hope people understand that.

Well, MystikShadows, I didn't complain anything about it, I think it's good, because ReactOS won't boot at all.
And I didn't say anything negative about it. Even not voluntarily as you suggest!
I have seen worse posts like I want your help and something like it.

DennisCGc wrote: Well, MystikShadows, I didn't complain anything about it, I think it's good, because ReactOS won't boot at all.

Hmm... the logical consequence would be to help the ReactOS project, now would it?

Solar wrote:

DennisCGc wrote: Well, MystikShadows, I didn't complain anything about it, I think it's good, because ReactOS won't boot at all.

Hmm... the logical consequence would be to help the ReactOS project, now would it?

ReactOS is only designed to work with Windows apps, this OS is GOING to run Linux AND Windows apps.
I hear you saying: Wine is invented to work with it.
Am I right ?
Wine is just an emulator, this OS is (hopefully) not going to use emulators to run both kind apps.
And LinDash (aka Lindows) WAS designed to work with both, but eventually it turned out to be just a Linux distributions, and it doesn't support Windows programs anymore.

DennisCGc wrote: Wine is just an emulator...

Wine Is Not an Emulator. Just like the Cygwin.dll is not an emulator. I recommend you visit the Wine homepage and read up on the technology behind it.

Now that we cleared that acronym, can you tell me what NIH stands for?