Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: ReactOS May Begin Heavily Using Wine Code

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,224

    Default ReactOS May Begin Heavily Using Wine Code

    Phoronix: ReactOS May Begin Heavily Using Wine Code

    While we don't normally talk much about ReactOS, the free software operating system that was started some twelve years ago to provide binary compatible with Windows NT, there is a new proposal to abandon much of its Win32 subsystem that has built up over the past decade and to create a new Windows subsystem that in large part is derived from Wine code. ReactOS developers have achieved quite a lot in terms of implementing its open-source Win32 subsystem where some applications and device drivers from Windows will run on the React Operating System without any modifications and there is audio support and other areas of the Windows API implemented. With their current Win32 subsystem being far from finished (or even being beta quality), inheriting some architectural problems, and just not progressing as nicely as once envisioned, Aleksey Bragin of ReactOS has proposed a major change. Aleksey has been working on ARWINSS, which is a new Win32 subsystem for ReactOS that reuses as much Wine code as possible...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=Nzg4OQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The intarwebs
    Posts
    385

    Default

    I'm waiting for someone over at the ReactOS project to notice that Ubuntu has more hardware support than any single version of Windows...

    Why not just ship a WINE+GNU/Linux OS? Do you really need Window's crappy drivers?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ethana2 View Post
    I'm waiting for someone over at the ReactOS project to notice that Ubuntu has more hardware support than any single version of Windows...
    Really? Even old webcams and printers?

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Really? Even old webcams and printers?
    Maybe he meant - out of the box.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Think of ReactOS attempting to do to Windows that GNU did to Unix.
    This.

    Unfortunately, Windows is a much larger beast than Unix was back then, so the process will be long and painful (12 years and counting).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Have a good day.
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Maybe he meant - out of the box.
    Hahah, yeah, maybe he did. But still is not a very good argument. When you consider that most people have Windows because it came installed with their systems you have to wonder what 'out of the box' means. Sure, a Windows installation CD may have less drivers than a Linux one (I don't know), but how many people actually has to install Windows this way? Then, it's funny how the very same people that grab code from git repositories and compile the hell out of their drivers to have basic acceleration then complain about downloading Windows drivers off the manufacturer's site. Go figure : )

    As for ReactOS, I see its point, only that I'm not very optimistic about it. I wouldn't personally need it if Wine got better, but I can imagine people that would happily run a Windows compatible environment instead a unixy one.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yotambien View Post
    Hahah, yeah, maybe he did. But still is not a very good argument. When you consider that most people have Windows because it came installed with their systems you have to wonder what 'out of the box' means. Sure, a Windows installation CD may have less drivers than a Linux one (I don't know)
    Yes, Linux now supports more hardware than Windows ever will. The problem is that it's never the question how much hardware your OS supports, but whether it supports the particular hardware that you have.

    Both Windows and Linux are problematic in this area.

    The problem with Windows is that drivers are developed by third parties and then almost never updated. So if you want to run your scanner from 2000 on Windows 7, chances are great that it won't work anymore. You can say that Windows has a stable ABI, but that's not true in practice.

    The problem with Linux is that there is a lot of hardware, and not all of them have a Linux driver. However, once some piece of hardware does have a driver in the kernel, it will be supported indefinitely.

    So what you see is that current hardware on a modern Windows system will usually work better than on Linux. But older hardware will stop working on Windows while it continues to work on Linux.

    And what happens when old hardware doesn't run on Windows? It gets thrown out. It is 'too old'. What happens when hardware doesn't run on Linux? Linux gets thrown out.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    Linux has better hardware support out of the box or in the box or around the box or anything to do with the box then Windows does. It's just that for the personal computing market Windows has much better support then Linux.

    You seee.. the PC desktop is a _small_ segment of the overall computing landscape.

    It's a little bit confusing since Windows XP has been around now for over a decade. It's basically a warmed over version of Windows 2000. So pretty much any sort of desktop, consumer oriented hardware sold in the last 10 years is going to support Windows XP.

    But, of course, not Windows Vista or Windows 7. And newer hardware is dropping support for XP.


    But Linux supports most of the PC junk, and ARM junk, and PowerPC junk, and Sun Sparc junk, etc etc. etc. Linux is all over the place.

    I expect that a surprisingly large number (30-40%) of technologically advanced people have Linux computers running is going to be higher then the numbers of Windows. Blueray players, televisions, routers, microwaves, telephones, planes/trains/automobiles, network storage devices.. All sorts of stuff all over the place.

    Windows wins by perception, simply because that is the 'PC' that people sit in front of comes with Windows installed.

    So yes... if you look at hardware commercially sold for PCs and laptops in the market today, and the last few years, then Windows has superior support.

    But in terms of numbers and scope of hardware support Linux wins.

    That's neither here nor there, of course.

    The only thing that matters is the hardware support for what people actually use.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yotambien View Post
    Hahah, yeah, maybe he did. But still is not a very good argument. When you consider that most people have Windows because it came installed with their systems you have to wonder what 'out of the box' means. Sure, a Windows installation CD may have less drivers than a Linux one (I don't know), but how many people actually has to install Windows this way?
    If I would say Linux supports more hardware 'out of the box' I would meant a CD. Afaik many people install Windows using this way.

    Then, it's funny how the very same people that grab code from git repositories and compile the hell out of their drivers to have basic acceleration then complain about downloading Windows drivers off the manufacturer's site. Go figure : )
    While they install drivers using git, have only basic features and complain about downloading Windows drivers off the manufacturer's site this can be little funny. However, if someone uses repositories to install fully featured drivers (like nvidia, fglrx and intel) or if they're already shipped with CD it's a different situation.

    On topic:

    Does it mean Windows version of Firefox installed in ReactOS will be faster then native one in Linux? Afaik Firefox is much faster in WINE then running native...
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-19-2010 at 06:08 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Really? Even old webcams and printers?
    Wireless cards, ACPI power states, some integrated card readers, laptop docking stations...

    There are a lot a proprietary devices that vendors don't (and won't) publish specs for. Because 2007-8 ushered in an obsession with laptops (even for people who would be better served with a desktop), this is become even more of a problem. Linux supports my desktop perfectly, but that's because I built it myself, and I chose parts I knew would play nicely with Linux (even down to the keyboard and mouse). But just because it works on *our* systems doesn't mean it works on *most* current computers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •