reactos-kernel

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

[KJK::Hyperion <no...@li...>]

my dear friend, klan-mate, and silent ReactOS advocate Juliet forwards me 
some criticism to our project from the sunny land of Usenet:

IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to the 
NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become a vague menace 
to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits, the true alternative 
would rather be building a new user-friendly frontend to 
Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time the frontend must be 
made open source, and errors such as the scattering of resources happening 
with Gnome vs. KDE must be avoided this time

Comments?

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

[Steven E. <Ste...@ya...>]

> IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to the 
> NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become 
> a vague menace 
> to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits, the true 
> alternative 
> would rather be building a new user-friendly frontend to 
> Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time the 
> frontend must be 
> made open source, and errors such as the scattering of 
> resources happening 
> with Gnome vs. KDE must be avoided this time

Limited? Tell her to go look at the design of linux/unix kernels and
then come look at ReactOS. Unix is 30 years old and good I'm not
knocking it, I'm just saying NT is a newer better design in "some"
areas. NT would be the shit if it wasn't for M$.

As for scattering of resources waste, what a joke, there are 6 billion
people on this mud ball. If someone is worried about resources then take
the time to do what I do and SPREED THE WORD TO THE CODERS. How many
programmer come in the US on H1B visa's a year? The coders are out
there, but it is part of our duty to this project to help spreed the
word.

Steven

"Every revolution was once a thought in one man's mind"
- Ralph Waldo Emerson 

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

[KJK::Hyperion <no...@li...>]

At 08.08 26/05/2002, you wrote:
>Limited? Tell her

the message was from some guy that noticed Juliet's signature. BTW, here's 
her signature:

  < http://www.reactos.com/ >  Open source clone of Windows NT. Current
      Don't stand, REACT!      version 0.0.19. C, C++ and ASM developers
                               and beta testers are welcome!

>to go look at the design of linux/unix kernels and
>then come look at ReactOS. Unix is 30 years old and good I'm not
>knocking it, I'm just saying NT is a newer better design in "some"
>areas. NT would be the shit if it wasn't for M$.

while I perfectly agree, I don't want to start a flame ;-) you know or may 
have heard of how "flammable" Usenet is

I liked Juliet's reply:

 > the true alternative would rather be building a new user-friendly
 > frontend to Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd

horror. I wish it will never happen, probably it could be what will make
me quit with computers and go back to drawing comics. The fact that Apple
did it and accomplished it (very debatably) doesn't mean it's easy, or
the best thing, or even that it works

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

[Jason F. <jas...@ya...>]

Your OS can only run on machines and with components that there are
drivers for. NT has an overwhelming amount of drivers out there - and
I gave up on Slackware after two video cards didn't work because of
driver problems. Detected the right drivers.. but they just didn't
work.

Legal suits: ok something similar to this came up on the discussion
board of reactos.com. Simply ReactOS is going to be more than a
battle of code. The ReactOS Foundation - which is still coming - will
be a big shield for individual developers. Commercial companies based
off of projects like ReactOS have financial resources to back legal
battles. Look at Lindows based off of WINE - they're willing to even
fight over the Windows trademark!

Besides, we like ReactOS - working on it, seeing it grow and take
shape - and it's not going to go away.

- Jason

--- "KJK::Hyperion" <no...@li...> wrote:
>my dear friend, klan-mate, and silent ReactOS advocate Juliet
>forwards me some criticism to our project from the sunny land of
>Usenet:
>IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to
>the NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become a
>vague menace to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits,
>the true alternative would rather be building a new user-friendly
>frontend to Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time the
>frontend must be  made open source, and errors such as the
>scattering of resources happening with Gnome vs. KDE must be
>avoided this time
> 
>Comments?
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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

[Robert K. <ro...@ko...>]

Jason, have you already thought about talking to AOL?
I don't like their umpf rrrk program, but it seems to be a mighty company.

Since they are in battle with M$, now. It would make sense to them
to support a different Windows.

I just thought that.

Jason Filby schrieb:

> Your OS can only run on machines and with components that there are
> drivers for. NT has an overwhelming amount of drivers out there - and
> I gave up on Slackware after two video cards didn't work because of
> driver problems. Detected the right drivers.. but they just didn't
> work.
>
> Legal suits: ok something similar to this came up on the discussion
> board of reactos.com. Simply ReactOS is going to be more than a
> battle of code. The ReactOS Foundation - which is still coming - will
> be a big shield for individual developers. Commercial companies based
> off of projects like ReactOS have financial resources to back legal
> battles. Look at Lindows based off of WINE - they're willing to even
> fight over the Windows trademark!
>
> Besides, we like ReactOS - working on it, seeing it grow and take
> shape - and it's not going to go away.
>
> - Jason
>
> --- "KJK::Hyperion" <no...@li...> wrote:
> >my dear friend, klan-mate, and silent ReactOS advocate Juliet
> >forwards me some criticism to our project from the sunny land of
> >Usenet:
> >IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to
> >the NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become a
> >vague menace to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits,
> >the true alternative would rather be building a new user-friendly
> >frontend to Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time the
> >frontend must be  made open source, and errors such as the
> >scattering of resources happening with Gnome vs. KDE must be
> >avoided this time
> >
> >Comments?
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
>
> _______________________________________________
> reactos-kernel mailing list
> rea...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel

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

[Jason F. <jas...@ya...>]

Yes, I have considered that. IBM is another company, Oracle too.

- Jason

--- "Robert K." <ro...@ko...> wrote:
> Jason, have you already thought about talking to AOL?
> I don't like their umpf rrrk program, but it seems to be a mighty
> company.
> 
> Since they are in battle with M$, now. It would make sense to them
> to support a different Windows.
> 
> I just thought that.
> 
> Jason Filby schrieb:
> 
> > Your OS can only run on machines and with components that there
> are
> > drivers for. NT has an overwhelming amount of drivers out there -
> and
> > I gave up on Slackware after two video cards didn't work because
> of
> > driver problems. Detected the right drivers.. but they just
> didn't
> > work.
> >
> > Legal suits: ok something similar to this came up on the
> discussion
> > board of reactos.com. Simply ReactOS is going to be more than a
> > battle of code. The ReactOS Foundation - which is still coming -
> will
> > be a big shield for individual developers. Commercial companies
> based
> > off of projects like ReactOS have financial resources to back
> legal
> > battles. Look at Lindows based off of WINE - they're willing to
> even
> > fight over the Windows trademark!
> >
> > Besides, we like ReactOS - working on it, seeing it grow and take
> > shape - and it's not going to go away.
> >
> > - Jason
> >
> > --- "KJK::Hyperion" <no...@li...> wrote:
> > >my dear friend, klan-mate, and silent ReactOS advocate Juliet
> > >forwards me some criticism to our project from the sunny land of
> > >Usenet:
> > >IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit
> to
> > >the NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become
> a
> > >vague menace to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits,
> > >the true alternative would rather be building a new
> user-friendly
> > >frontend to Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time
> the
> > >frontend must be  made open source, and errors such as the
> > >scattering of resources happening with Gnome vs. KDE must be
> > >avoided this time
> > >
> > >Comments?
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________
> >
> > Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> > August 25-28 in Las Vegas --
> http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > reactos-kernel mailing list
> > rea...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas --
> http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> reactos-kernel mailing list
> rea...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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

[Nick D. <nic...@ya...>]

Hi Hyperion,

----- Original Message -----
From: "KJK::Hyperion" <no...@li...>
To: "ReactOS-Kernel" <rea...@li...>
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 3:53 AM
Subject: [ros-kernel] Forward: "ReactOS is too limited"


> my dear friend, klan-mate, and silent ReactOS advocate Juliet forwards me
> some criticism to our project from the sunny land of Usenet:

[Juliet wrote ...]

> IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to the
> NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become a vague
menace

So NT is a limitation but Linux/Un*x isn't? I envisage the ROS kernel to be
NT compatible with a good POSIX subsystem to start with. Later on there will
always be room for additional subsystems (a feature that I believe many
developers will take full advantage of).

My experience of installing and using Linux includes Linux/X/one of the 5
million window managers or whatever; not recognising three different
graphics cards, and the one time I managed to get X to run with one of my
graphics cards it tried to break my monitor. Nice.

After looking through reams of unhelpful (and sometimes contradictory) Linux
FAQs and other DOCs, I ventured onto some Linux forums where I was told to
"RTFM" (by people with 5 inch thick glasses, a permanent hunch and acne that
would make a leopard feel jealous, I have no doubt).

The Linux command line is unhelpful, unfriendly and unforgiving. Maybe it
was useful in the past (to save disk space, processor power, memory, etc.)
to use an OS with a minimal amount of messages, but times have changed. We
live in an age where the minimum spec processor you can buy (at least in the
UK) is 1 GHz and systems come with 512MB RAM standard.

Linux may be good as a web server. Apache is an excellent program, but
people will be able to run the win32 version on ReactOS soon so what
possible use will Linux have then? (except maybe as a firewall - wow!).

> to M$, it would be badly put down with legal suits, the true alternative

How? Microsoft are an American company, and what holds up in a US court
would be thrown out in another country. Even looking at the Microsoft
license agreement raises big questions as to how legal it is and a
click-through contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. Offer and
acceptance? You can't accept something you haven't read.

Added to this, Bill Gates is probably the richest man in the world. He
brings in millions and millions of US dollars into the States every year, so
the chances are that the US government quite likes him (who wouldn't?).
Certainly over here the courts would see his company as a foreign capitalist
trying to destroy small local businesses or/and developers trying to make a
fair income.

The legality of the M$ EULA is about to be investigated by the EU, so watch
out Bill. No captialism in my back garden, thank you very much.

> would rather be building a new user-friendly frontend to
> Linux/FreeBSD/Hurd, like Apple did, only this time the frontend must be
> made open source, and errors such as the scattering of resources happening
> with Gnome vs. KDE must be avoided this time

Why? It's true that at best these window managers (? - why have more than
one in the first place?) can emulate a Mac/Win32 interface. At worst you
don't know what's going on with them half the time. A new wm would mean that
it wouldn't be complete (at least the "user-friendly" bit wouldn't be) for
quite some time so you'd have the added confusion of "yet another X wm"
(yaxwm - there you go. it's already sounding very Linux).

> Comments?

Sorry mate, but I had to say my piece. I have some serious issues regarding
the use of a clone of a 30 (?) year old operating system for anything other
than simple tasks. Live in the now, guys.

Regards,

Nick.

--
Nick Date
Bath, England, UK




---
Outgoing mail is certified virus free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.363 / Virus Database: 201 - Release Date: 21/05/2002


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

[Patrick M. <ox...@st...>]

On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 01:10:38PM +0100, Nick Date wrote:

let's see this:
> > IMHO Reactos is too limited, it's doomed to an eternal pursuit to the
> > NT-based kernel functionalities, and whenever it will become a vague menace

vs. this:
> My experience of installing and using Linux includes Linux/X/one of the 5
> million window managers or whatever; not recognising three different
> graphics cards, and the one time I managed to get X to run with one of my
> graphics cards it tried to break my monitor. Nice.
> 
> After looking through reams of unhelpful (and sometimes contradictory) Linux
> FAQs and other DOCs, I ventured onto some Linux forums where I was told to
> "RTFM" (by people with 5 inch thick glasses, a permanent hunch and acne that
> would make a leopard feel jealous, I have no doubt).
> 
> The Linux command line is unhelpful, unfriendly and unforgiving. Maybe it
> was useful in the past (to save disk space, processor power, memory, etc.)
> to use an OS with a minimal amount of messages, but times have changed. We
> live in an age where the minimum spec processor you can buy (at least in the
> UK) is 1 GHz and systems come with 512MB RAM standard.
> 
> Linux may be good as a web server. Apache is an excellent program, but
> people will be able to run the win32 version on ReactOS soon so what
> possible use will Linux have then? (except maybe as a firewall - wow!).

with what right do you think you're allowed to bash his system (linux) and
on the other hand want to disallow him to bash yours (win32)?

with what right do you insult "the linux community" ("people with 5 inc thick
glasses etcpp) who you don't pay but expect them to wipe of your ass?

with what right do you argue about how I want to use my 1gb ram and 1.3ghz
cpu?

with what right do you think that the ia32-architecture is the only one around?



and how do you come to the idea that linux is the only command line oriented
OS around?

<irc class="people from linux forums">
/me wonders
</irc>

patrick mauritz
-- 
,------------------------------------------------------------------------.
>   In the Beginning there was nothing, which exploded - Yeah right...   <
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>       The Forthcoming OpenBIOS | www.freiburg.linux.de/openbios        <
`------------------------------------------------------------------------'
 If you gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewr..
                         Hey! that's the internet!

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

[Nick D. <nic...@ya...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Mauritz" <ox...@st...>
To: <rea...@li...>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: [ros-kernel] Forward: "ReactOS is too limited"


> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 01:10:38PM +0100, Nick Date wrote:

> with what right do you think you're allowed to bash his system (linux) and
> on the other hand want to disallow him to bash yours (win32)?

I was reacting. The reason ReactOS was being slated was, I suspect, because
Linux people see ROS as a threat rather than an ally. They see a potentially
superior and more mainstream-compatible kernel and they poo their pants.

> with what right do you insult "the linux community" ("people with 5 inc
thick
> glasses etcpp) who you don't pay but expect them to wipe of your ass?

I went to the forum with no preconception and I was flamed by about 3 people
who blatantly spent their entire lives with their eyes glued to a "VDU".

> with what right do you argue about how I want to use my 1gb ram and 1.3ghz
> cpu?

You can do what you want with it, mate, but don't expect everyone else
appreciate not knowing what the hell is wrong with their machines.

Maybe ROS is too "Windozey" for Linux users? I don't know, but I don't think
you should have to have a degree in Computer Science to install an OS (which
is why I use Win XP).

> with what right do you think that the ia32-architecture is the only one
around?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I said I did. I'd love to port
ROS to the Amiga one day. AMD/Intel is the most commonly used, though.

> and how do you come to the idea that linux is the only command line
oriented
> OS around?

It's the most frequently used. Unless you're running FreeDOS which is fine
for certain applications.

> <irc class="people from linux forums">
> /me wonders
> </irc>

Hehe. Sorry if I offended you, I didn't mean to stereotype all Linux users,
I've just had some bad experiences getting help. I suppose at the end of the
day it's personal preference. Don't get me wrong, Linux has it's uses (I
seem to remember hearing embedded Linux is taking off at the moment), but as
a desktop OS (which is what I need) it's no good for me.

Regards,

Nick.

--
Nick Date
Bath, England, UK




---
Outgoing mail is certified virus free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.365 / Virus Database: 202 - Release Date: 24/05/2002


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

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

[Jason F. <jas...@ya...>]

--- Nick Date <nic...@ya...> wrote:
>I was reacting. The reason ReactOS was being slated was, I suspect,
>because Linux people see ROS as a threat rather than an ally. They
>see a potentially superior and more mainstream-compatible kernel
>and they poo their pants.

I don't know how all Linux people perceive ReactOS, generally I think
a lot of them don't know everything about what we're doing. At
wineconf it was surprising how many people didn't know much about
what we were doing. However, they were very interested to listen. It
doesn't really matter if some (and you can't generalize about all of
them) people in the Linux community see us as a threat (_if_ they
do). I think we should just focus on promoting ourselves as an ally
with them.

>I went to the forum with no preconception and I was flamed by about
>3 people who blatantly spent their entire lives with their eyes
>glued to a "VDU".

Well, that's their lose, and we know that. But I'm very sure not all
people who use Linux are flamers.

>Maybe ROS is too "Windozey" for Linux users? I don't know, but I
>don't think you should have to have a degree in Computer Science to
>install an OS (which is why I use Win XP).

Well that's where the Linux distro companies come in - they focus on
hiring people to make it easy to use (among other things). Of course,
I'm sure ReactOS will be a lot easier to use than most Linux distros
because Windows (which we're mostly trying to clone) was designed
with the user in mind from the start.

>Hehe. Sorry if I offended you, I didn't mean to stereotype all
>Linux users, I've just had some bad experiences getting help. I
>suppose at the end of the day it's personal preference. Don't get
>me wrong, Linux has it's uses (I seem to remember hearing embedded
>Linux is taking off at the moment), but as a desktop OS (which is
>what I need) it's no good for me.

It's cool, but remember that flames go both ways. It's not good for
us to flame Linux and the Linux community, no matter if some of us
have had a bad experience or two. A linux user on the list that reads
that flame would feel the same way about us - that they've been
insulted. It's best that we all just try and get along - after all
ReactOS is about reacting to the Microsoft monopoly, certainly
__not__ reacting against Linux!

- Jason







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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

[Robert K. <ro...@ko...>]

Some years ago I was also a flamer. But I went tired. Remember: you can't
change one others mind
- at least not with agression. So come to our "higher" non-flamer level
and let the others live.

> It's cool, but remember that flames go both ways. It's not good for
> us to flame Linux and the Linux community, no matter if some of us
> have had a bad experience or two. A linux user on the list that reads
> that flame would feel the same way about us - that they've been
> insulted. It's best that we all just try and get along - after all
> ReactOS is about reacting to the Microsoft monopoly, certainly
> __not__ reacting against Linux!
>
> - Jason

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

[Joachim B. <jmb...@gm...>]

Now I will pipe in here...

Jason Filby <jas...@ya...> writes:

> --- Nick Date <nic...@ya...> wrote:
>>I was reacting. The reason ReactOS was being slated was, I suspect,
>>because Linux people see ROS as a threat rather than an ally. They
>>see a potentially superior and more mainstream-compatible kernel
>>and they poo their pants.
>
> I don't know how all Linux people perceive ReactOS, generally I think
> a lot of them don't know everything about what we're doing. At
> wineconf it was surprising how many people didn't know much about
> what we were doing. However, they were very interested to listen. It
> doesn't really matter if some (and you can't generalize about all of
> them) people in the Linux community see us as a threat (_if_ they
> do). I think we should just focus on promoting ourselves as an ally
> with them.

I am an "ardent" linux user. And I also have to support Win(mostly 2k)
boxen in my "commercial" life (icky administration stuff).

>>I went to the forum with no preconception and I was flamed by about
>>3 people who blatantly spent their entire lives with their eyes
>>glued to a "VDU".
>
> Well, that's their lose, and we know that. But I'm very sure not all
> people who use Linux are flamers.
>
>>Maybe ROS is too "Windozey" for Linux users? I don't know, but I
>>don't think you should have to have a degree in Computer Science to
>>install an OS (which is why I use Win XP).

Looking at the neighbouring thread about the Posix subsystem, I will
try a guess at the reasons the hostile attitude might come from.

Linux *administrators* got used to powerful features of the command
line; my administrating of said winboxen would take at least twice as
long without cygwin available (copy all files meeting certain criteria
from here to there *keeping their relative pathnames* is something cmd
and the explorer are not really good at - ideas welcome).

Cygwin would *almost* be an solution if win's console werent utterly
broken (by design). Please do not try to argue with me on that, repeat
after me, win's console (as it is implemented today in 2k) is UNUSABLE
for a command line power user. (Selection behaviour, size change
restrictions are the major showstoppers). OK so maybe I can run the
cygwin shell in an XTerm with it all sitting on 55+ compatibility
layers, but the fact remains that the not-worked-around basic OS
concept in that area is broken.

So the last thing 'we unix administrators' would like to see created
is a compatible alternative to windows which is improved in enough
areas to be interesting to end users/decision makers (price, maybe?);
but still completely lacks usability in 'our' sense. That's why 'we'
(I, at least) would like to see reactos go in the usable (for us)
direction. [There is no we].

With that in mind, people like me with an admittedly limited
understanding of the inner workings of either reactos or NT get a
little edgy when people say things that sound like "let's not overdo
this posix thing, if windows apps ( can interact with posix apps / see
the posix namespace / may use posix semantics with syscalls ) that
will break compatibility of apps written to that concept with the
original windows".

I certainly wouldn't mind an open OS that can run M$-Ware, but if in
that OS the concious design decision is made that all apps developable
for that OS must also run under Windows - i.e. it is conciously
limited in certain areas - I certainly wonder about its usefulness. A
"windows compatibility certification mode" (or just "win32ss visible
only mode"), maybe per-process, would certainly be useful - but if I
want to do "cmd.exe -c type diskimage > \dev\fd0" why won't you let
me?

I wrote about similar aspects of that frustration before - I *know*
the OS can do it (rename/delete open files, kill services, ...); but
the UI/API just won't let me. Sometimes it does by making you bend
over backwards (in the resource kit ISTR a service killer which does
what it does by introducing an RPC interface to the relevant functions
- which is also open to the network...), but not through the standard
path. I don't mind a "Yes I'll shoot myself in the foot now, do it
anyway" '--really-do-this-against-the-specs' flag, but being forbidden
to do things at all is, indeed, limiting.


If something in here could be interpreted as a flame please note that
it is not intended as such and probably a result of English not being
my mother tongue.

BTW: If anyone feels like seriously thinking abouth some of these
'limitations' I could certainly flesh out a wishlist for 'doze from an
unix administrator's point of view.


So long,
   Joe

-- 
"I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear
 word processor."
-- Neal Stephenson, "In the beginning... was the command line"

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

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

Hi everybody & Joe in special ...


   we should all lose a bit of hostility here - by leaving out the words "we" and "them".

Coming from a "pure" Linux world, I have soleley been using Windows for the last three years and - what I would never have
expected - I really like some parts of Windoze. (While I still utterly despise other parts ...)

In these three years there was something very enlightening: My coworkers - who are mostly really skilled software developers - like
to use the GUI. And they are amazed that I always use the command line.

The bottom line is - there are "command line" people and there are "GUI" people. What interface is superior is a matter of personal
taste. So we should all stop flaming each other and get constructive.



To start with, here is my personal list of "What I don't like about Windows and how Reactos could make it better".

- Even if you are administrator you are not allowed to do everything by default. (Opposed to "root" in Unix, who normally may do
everything). For example Administrator can not kill all processes in Task manager. This is a *major* annoyance to Unix power users
working on Windows - and probably a minor issue to fix. (It can even be configured in normal Windows by adding the needed
priviledges to the administrator account.)

- The console window on Windows is really weak. Unix has gained a lot from being able to write "terminal emulators" as normal user
mode programs. It is not too difficult to write a new terminal emulator, so on Unix we nowadays have a plethora of really great
terminal emulators. Considering to do something "interesting" for Windows I didn't find any good point to start, in NT the Console
seems to deeply interwoven with the rest of the system. Reactos could improve on this by taking the "Unix Idea" of being able to
write "Terminal Emulators" in user mode. And whoops we'd have a Win32 Reactos console, maybe one for X11 like xterm or whatever.

- 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.

- Many things do not have a command line interface. For example, the "disk defragmenter", a bundled version of DiskKeeper can not be
started via command line. This makes sense if you want to sell commercial versions of DiskKeeper, but it recently annoyed the hell
out of Joe (*) who tried to add a defragmentation run to his unattended install routine.

- I can't remember much more right now. When I'm on the phone with Joe he always gripes about not being able to delete open files in
Windows.



And this is to Joe: Compile your wishlist. I do not believe you will state _any_ point for "more features" that cripples
compatibility with Windows. Nobody is coding following a "Windows spec". There are applications and people that are trying to make
these applications run. Expressing our wishes might get exactly the people who do the coding understand us. I do not believe
somebody will remember this email and implement the console window I dream of when he gets around hacking on the console (**). But
if people get to implement something they might think "What might some command line person want from my app?" "How might someone
like to schedule this?"  Say what you want from Reactos, but do not flame it because of some email of a mailing list reader that is
not among the most active developers.


Cheers,
   Froh



*= The same Joe who I am replying to. We're personal friends.

**= By the way, if he does, I'll vow to send him/her a barrel of bavarian beer :-)

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

[Aidan K. <ke...@pa...>]

 Ar an 30ú lá de mí 5, scríobh Frohwalt Egerer :

 > Coming from a "pure" Linux world, I have soleley been using Windows
 > for the last three years and - what I would never have expected - I
 > really like some parts of Windoze. 

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?

 > (While I still utterly despise other parts ...)
 > 
 > In these three years there was something very enlightening: My
 > coworkers - who are mostly really skilled software developers -
 > like to use the GUI. And they are amazed that I always use the
 > command line.
 > 
 > The bottom line is - there are "command line" people and there are
 > "GUI" people. What interface is superior is a matter of personal
 > taste. So we should all stop flaming each other and get
 > constructive.

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. 

 > To start with, here is my personal list of "What I don't like about
 > Windows and how Reactos could make it better".
 > 
 > - Even if you are administrator you are not allowed to do
 > everything by default. (Opposed to "root" in Unix, who normally may
 > do everything). For example Administrator can not kill all
 > processes in Task manager. This is a *major* annoyance to Unix
 > power users working on Windows - and probably a minor issue to
 > fix. (It can even be configured in normal Windows by adding the
 > needed priviledges to the administrator account.)

Yes, absolutely. Also in this area of annoying niggles are `security'
measures like offering the administrator the option of disabling the
Display control panel, while leaving the programmatic interface to the
thing unchecked.

 > - The console window on Windows is really weak. Unix has gained a
 > lot from being able to write "terminal emulators" as normal user
 > mode programs. It is not too difficult to write a new terminal
 > emulator, so on Unix we nowadays have a plethora of really great
 > terminal emulators. Considering to do something "interesting" for
 > Windows I didn't find any good point to start, in NT the Console
 > seems to deeply interwoven with the rest of the system. Reactos
 > could improve on this by taking the "Unix Idea" of being able to
 > write "Terminal Emulators" in user mode. And whoops we'd have a
 > Win32 Reactos console, maybe one for X11 like xterm or whatever.

I honestly think that the DOS console model is too limited and broken
to make a decent terminal emulator program possible. The way to do it
would be to wrap it around the (greatly extended) POSIX subsystem, and
ignore the console entirely. 

 > - 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 :-) . 

 > - Many things do not have a command line interface. For example,
 > the "disk defragmenter", a bundled version of DiskKeeper can not be
 > started via command line. This makes sense if you want to sell
 > commercial versions of DiskKeeper, but it recently annoyed the hell
 > out of Joe (*) who tried to add a defragmentation run to his
 > unattended install routine.

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 can't remember much more right now. When I'm on the phone with
 > Joe he always gripes about not being able to delete open files in
 > Windows.

Programs written for win32 rely on this; it's not something that
should be taken out. 

I'm only an observer at the moment, so I won't comment on the politics
and motivational factors :-) . 

-- 
I'm not a pheasant plucker / I'm a pheasant plucker's son.
I'm just a'plucking pheasants / 'Til the pheasant plucker comes.

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

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

[Steven E. <ste...@ya...>]

> 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.

We have the best shell in the world. Its called
rosapps/cmd. We have some of the best from Windows and
UNIX in our cmd.exe and if you think it needs more
then please send a diff and I will apply it.

 The fact that Microsoft cannot make a decent cli
should tell you how well they write software =P

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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

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

Steven Edwards:
>
> We have the best shell in the world. Its called
> rosapps/cmd. We have some of the best from Windows and
> UNIX in our cmd.exe and if you think it needs more
> then please send a diff and I will apply it.
>
>  The fact that Microsoft cannot make a decent cli
> should tell you how well they write software =P


Hmm, you're making my mouth water :-)

Has anybody used rosapps/cmd on a Windows XP box, yet? If it is possible to run it on XP (with a bit of hacking and tweaking I won't
mind), I'd probably come up with some wishes for rosapps/cmd and maybe some patches, too :-)

Cheers,
  Froh

P.S.: Sorry if you see this twice, the first time I got a bounce message because my ISP was blackholed. (One of Puretec's mail
server is open to spammers ... ts ts ts) I assume my mail was never distributed on the list.

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

[Eric K. <ek...@rz...>]

"Frohwalt Egerer" <ma...@fr...> wrote:


> Has anybody used rosapps/cmd on a Windows XP box, yet? If it is possible
to run it on XP (with a bit of hacking and tweaking I won't
> mind), I'd probably come up with some wishes for rosapps/cmd and maybe
some patches, too :-)

I'm using it on Win 9x, Win NT4 and Win 2000 for 'ages'. It works without
causing any major problems.


Eric

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

[Jason F. <jas...@ya...>]

For what its worth, it's fine on XP too.

- Jason

--- Eric Kohl <ek...@rz...> wrote:
> 
> "Frohwalt Egerer" <ma...@fr...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Has anybody used rosapps/cmd on a Windows XP box, yet? If it is
> possible
> to run it on XP (with a bit of hacking and tweaking I won't
> > mind), I'd probably come up with some wishes for rosapps/cmd and
> maybe
> some patches, too :-)
> 
> I'm using it on Win 9x, Win NT4 and Win 2000 for 'ages'. It works
> without
> causing any major problems.
> 
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas --
> http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> reactos-kernel mailing list
> rea...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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

[KJK::Hyperion <no...@li...>]

At 03.17 31/05/2002, you wrote:
>Also in this area of annoying niggles are `security' measures like 
>offering the administrator the option of disabling the Display control 
>panel, while leaving the programmatic interface to the thing unchecked.

I think we all agree that this sucks. It's because ACLs and objects (two 
building blocks of NT) haven't been used consistently by Microsoft. They 
preferred the registry-based advisory restrictions, the policies

>I honestly think that the DOS console model is too limited and broken to 
>make a decent terminal emulator program possible. The way to do it would 
>be to wrap it around the (greatly extended) POSIX subsystem, and ignore 
>the console entirely.

My idea, exactly. I'd even go as far as writing a kernel mode tty driver

>Zsh runs native in win32; it can be configured to be comfortable.

Win32 zsh is extremely buggy. It really suffers from the lack of an 
underlying POSIX runtime

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

[Joachim B. <jmb...@gm...>]

Aidan Kehoe <ke...@pa...> writes:

>  Ar an 30=FA l=E1 de m=ED 5, scr=EDobh Frohwalt Egerer :
>
>  > - I can't remember much more right now. When I'm on the phone with
>  > Joe he always gripes about not being able to delete open files in
>  > Windows.
>
> Programs written for win32 rely on this; it's not something that
> should be taken out.=20

I do want "break" the programs in that case - the "normal" delete
(command and syscall) should not do it, but 'del /fo locked_file' (or
whatever) should do away with it. (This mostly pertains to 'misloaded'
drivers and locked log files).

It would require the underlying fs being able to hold open a file
descriptor to an unnamed file, and free the file when closing the
descriptor. Sorry, handle. As far as I know the Win2k kernel already
can do this.

Same thing for rename/move.

Same thing for reading open files while they're written, something
like 'tail' or 'less' should be possible no matter what the other
app tells us we may do to the file. At least for the administrator.

Extensive wishlist will follow... ;-)


So long,
   Joe


P.S.: Further up in the thread it was said that the administrator can
gain 'kill services' rights through some setting - anyone knows from
the top of their head which setting that is? Thanks!

--=20
"I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear
 word processor."
-- Neal Stephenson, "In the beginning... was the command line"

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

[KJK::Hyperion <no...@li...>]

At 06.11 31/05/2002, you wrote:
>P.S.: Further up in the thread it was said that the administrator can gain 
>'kill services' rights through some setting - anyone knows from the top of 
>their head which setting that is? Thanks!

the short answer: you need the SeDebug privilege
the long answer: NT security has the concept of capabilities/privileges. 
The Unix root user would be an user account with all privileges granted 
*and* enabled, while the NT Administrator merely has most privileges 
granted, but not enabled. Security-aware programs will enable the needed 
privileges first. Task manager, for example, doesn't. Good for normal 
users, bad for an admin. BTW, here are the privileges an Unix root user needs:

Privilege             Effect when enabled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SeBackup              bypass file and registry ACLs when writing data
SeRestore             bypass file and registry ACLs when reading data
SeDebug               bypass process and thread ACLs
SeTakeOwnership       bypass checks when taking ownership of an object
SeAssignPrimaryToken  ability to assign a process's primary token (Unix
                       "real user id" and "real group id")
SeLockMemory          ability to lock memory (i.e. make memory non-pageable)
SeSystemTime          ability to set system time
SeShutdown            ability to shutdown the local system
SeLoadDriver          ability to load device drivers
SeTcb                 ability to act as an operating system component

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

[Patrick M. <ox...@st...>]

On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 02:17:00AM +0100, Aidan Kehoe wrote:
> 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. 
<irony>
well... that's completely new for... I already wonder why there
are "What's there to replace X"-questions on slashdot twice per year?
</irony>

seriously, in the unix world X has its uses ("it's there") but it should
be shot ASAP none-the-less - if you run into your favourite X advocate next
time, try some of the following:
 - antialiased fonts _without API changes_ ?
 - transparency _without serious API changes_ ? (of course there needs to be
   something like setAlpha and getAlpha...)

but I'm getting off-topic...

the win32 GDI is only partially better, it still lacks:
 - resolution independence (you know, that hack with changing the resolution
   gives you a larger/smaller desktop)
 - network transparency (please in a better, more highlevel way than this
   X mess)
 - really "common controls" - so where's the tree widget, the "cool bar", the...
   ah, they are in the explorer-.dlls? _now_ I know why it's supposed to be
   an "integral part" of the system...

ok - enough rant for now...

patrick mauritz

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

[Casper H. <ch...@us...>]

This thread is turning into a flamewar. Jason, how about setting up
os...@re... mailing list for these discussions? They pop up once
in a while, and as the number of subscribers increase, I expect we'll
see them more often. I would subscribe to this list, but then I can
automagically route them to the not-so-important-reactos-stuff folder
;o)

- Casper

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

[Jason F. <jas...@ya...>]

Heh, I tried to douse the flames - seems it didn't work! I think
ros-general is where the flames belong, but that's down right now. It
could be back next week though.

- Jason

--- Casper Hornstrup <ch...@us...> wrote:
> This thread is turning into a flamewar. Jason, how about setting up
> os...@re... mailing list for these discussions? They pop up
> once
> in a while, and as the number of subscribers increase, I expect
> we'll
> see them more often. I would subscribe to this list, but then I can
> automagically route them to the not-so-important-reactos-stuff
> folder
> ;o)
> 
> - Casper
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas --
> http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> reactos-kernel mailing list
> rea...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reactos-kernel


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com