RE: [ros-kernel] Forward: "ReactOS is too limited"

[Frohwalt E. <ma...@fr...>]

> If that is the case, could you spell the thing properly, please? How
> would you like it if the fine people at Microsoft started exclusively
> using the term `Weenux' to describe something so many people put time
> and effort into?

Sorry, old habits die slowly ... and, I still strongly dislike Windows for the
company that stands behind it. And if you'll read the Cryptonomicon, you'll
see that Stevenson spelled Windows "Windows" but Linux "Finux". ;-)

> Yup. Note, however, that (imho) X window as a GUI _implementation_ is
> inferior to Windows NT as a GUI _implementation_ (network transparency
> notwithstanding); and I think this has some relevance to the relative
> proportions of `GUI people' and `command line' people among the two
> camps. 

Just nitpicking: X11 should be compared to GDI, since X11 itself is not
a desktop. The correct "rivals" would be KDE and Gnome - and which one
is better KDE, Gnome or Windows' desktop is even more a matter of personal
taste. I'm truly amazed what the KDE and Gnome people have come up with
in the last few years.

Said that, there is the exception of Window management in Windows. One
thing I find very very annoying is the fact, that an application which crashed
or is busy is hard to move "out of the way" under Windows. (Up to NT4 / Win95 
I would have said "impossible", but now the "show desktop" button often
saves the day ...)

As far as I know, this is due to the fact, that a process has to process
"resize / move / hide" messages itself. I prefer the X11 model where the
window manager moves the window without the associated process having a
chance to object. (However, nowadays there a protocols where an application
can ask the Window manager "Would you please ... ?")


>  > - cmd.exe is REALLY REALLY REALLY weak compared with bash or zsh. I
>  > know bash/zsh do run on Windows, but I'd like something "native"
>  > with the same power (programmable command line completion, good
>  > scripting, etc.) No big issue, just a lot of work to write a really
>  > really cool cmd.exe.
> 
> Zsh runs native in win32; it can be configured to be
> comfortable. Integrating it into the system is worth considering--it's
> X11 licenced, as I recall, and less buggy than bash :-) . 

My main gripe about running a Unix shell in Windows is the "\" and "/"
problem: Unix shells use "\" as an escape character. Some Windows programs
accept "/", others dont. And while I prefer the unix model of the shell
extending wildcards many windows programs do not like this. (For example
they accept exactly one argument - which accepts a wild card.)

So when writing "a new" shell (command interpreter in Winspeak) careful
consideration is needed - what parts of "Unixism" have to be thrown out
to get some consistent result under Windows.

(What I mean is: I want the feel of cmd.exe, since this is Windows not
Unix, but I want programmable completions, working pipes, (nearly)
unlimited command line lengths, scripting, whatever ...)

> I don't think a lack of command line interfaces will really be a
> problem :-) , given that the compiler of the system is gcc, not VC++. 

I don't think so either, just because Reactos includes source :-)


Cheers,
   Froh