How long until it kills Windows?

Same year as "year of linux"

The comments are really mean
ReactOS has top tier Jow Forums quality nerds working on it that are probably really proud of what they've done

Attached: 1532355102203.jpg (250x250, 19K)

Microsoft is going to open source windows. The'yre already moving in this direction, see them open sourcing components like .net and so on. Because their business model is moving towards * As A Service & Cloud memes.

Yeah, but only to stdout

Soon™

No they wont.

In the year of the Linux desktop

Well, to do that, it has to get up to at least Windows 7 functionality for people to actually consider using it. That'll be another 10 years.

mills you dirty shit wash ur hair

So why can't we just crowd funding a few million and buy the right and source code for XP and xp64, then just open sores that shit?

Because nobody really gives a shit

Been going since 1995, so i assume never

Windows will be dead soon and this will be useless.

Never. You can just use wine on an OS that's not complete trash.

They just released a neat video with 0.4.10-dev installed on a btrfs partition.
At least it now supports better filesystems than windows

>License
>GNU GPL v2+ with parts under LGPL and BSD licenses

Never. It would have a fighting chance with BSD-only license, but not with copyleft. Otherwise some Linux distro had smacked MS out of business two decades ago.

GPLv3 introduced copyleft.

I don't think M$ would sell it, especially for a few million.

>wine
It's faaaaaaaaaar from perfect.

Why do you hate freedom?

ReactOS is just wine which they turned into a complete OS

>gpl
>free

Yes, that's what it is all about. It ensures that software remains free with copyleft.

Explain to me the point of ReactOS.
It makes more sense to use Linux for most stuff and Wine for whatever you can't replace.

There is no market for this meme OS.

I don't, I love it, and you should understand GPL does not give freedom to humans, but it gives freedom for software to be shared like whore.

It's a software licence, so yes, it is about free software. Good observation.

I think ReactOS is a great thing.
I was dreaming about similar project since Lindows announced their similar ambition (i.e. to replace Windows with a free OS).

Yup. Problem is that braindead Stallman cultists always make it sound as if GPL = freedom and thus if you hate GPL you hate freedom including all kinds of freedoms. Thus, "do you hate freedom huh user huh???". Irritates me a lot. I have decided that people like that need a succint destiny not shared by the living.

You can't pick and choose what freedom you like. It's all freedom. If you dislike copyleft you dislike freedom.

Attached: 1532635214150.jpg (1000x898, 149K)

Around the time proton decay kills the universe... it will enter beta.

All he is saying is that you should have the four freedoms of free software. If you don't have that, then you are not free. It's as simple as that.

TempleOS will take over before ReactOS does. Which is still never.

Attached: terry.webm (1469x1102, 202K)

All I am saying that you should bow down and worship Windows 10. If you don't do that, you're a satanic paedophile that eats children. It's as simple as that.

>Which is still never.
A man of little faith you are.

I'm not a knight of the Templar

Attached: terry_art.webm (350x350, 50K)

I really like the idea of ReactOS but
>try use it
>keeps freezing
>random errors
Windows 2000 still works better than this

>ReactOS has top tier Jow Forums quality nerds working on it
I agree.
>that are probably really proud of what they've done
They should be. Reverse engineering an operating system is hard.
Unfortunately it is still no good and dev moves really slow.

It's about halfway to NT 3.1, both in features and stability. Check out its source, especially if you like reading
void function()
{
// stub
return;
}

over and over again.

Windows is a fucking mess.
No company wants shitty source code attached to them.

>Explain to me the point of ReactOS.
Unix architecture is not perfect and NT has some good concepts going on.
>There is no market for this meme OS.
Well, yes besides the hacking community.
Having alternatives is nice.

>NT has some good concepts going on.

Attached: 1527805749619.gif (499x375, 486K)

>Microsoft is going to open source windows
I wish, then we could fork it and fix everything that's wrong with it.

>67153660
Yes, it does. To suggest otherwise demonstrates a blinkered, ideologically-driven viewpoint, that will be immediately discarded by anybody with even the slightest standards of intellectual rigour. As such, you don't even deserve the (You).

Windows will stay because government and big business likes it.

No need for personal computers to run windows tho. we need something new and we needed it yesterday.

Attached: 1532158631089.gif (640x480, 1001K)

t. webdev

I think the only way to do that is to rm -rf everything.

While you're at it, get the Illuminati to release the source code for cancer. Then you could take it down to your molbio lab staffed with F-cup tittied nympho professors and cure it. Then you could get back to genetically engineering those rainbow-farting unicorns.

Attached: 2122676455156358.jpg (400x400, 86K)

It's certainly the only way Linux will ever have more than 1% market share.

they should have gone for windows 7 look

>let's reimplement Aero
>while we don't have a complete filesystem RTL

Attached: 1523333204496.gif (400x262, 1.93M)

>ReactOS has top tier Jow Forums quality nerds working on it that are probably really proud of what they've done
Then why is their logo that shitty?

When M$ kills win32

Why would Jow Forums quality people care about being able to use wangblows shitware?

For that exact reason, it has top tier men on the job. Logos are for the dullards.

I am not a geek so IDK what you were talking about I just want a better looking GUI

Attached: 09d.jpg (400x400, 15K)

It's ZorinOS part two: can't print shit Boogaloo.

I'd say somewhere between hell freezing over and never.

but this isnt linux like Zorin so this isnt a larp

It doesn't over Unix but even if it did ntfs is complete garbage. Especially file transport and ram limitations

How is Zorin anything like React?

>How long until it kills Windows?
Eternity

24 eons with its current progression rate

...

It'll never happen.

Attached: animals.webm (640x360, 1.97M)

Shit, I messed up my trip.

>software remains free
Oh no, poor imprisoned software.
Are you retarded?

>It doesn't over Unix
It does. Stop being a fanboy.
>ntfs is complete garbage
True but an operating system should be installable over any filesystem.
ReactOS cannot even be installed on NTFS right now.

Stupid yankee.

>yankee
You can't be further from truth.

Brazilian?

When Steam and its entire library is compatible.

Ah, doth mine eyes spot ein fellow epic gamer?

Miss again.
Russian, currently living in Germany.

So you're one of Putin's trolls. That explains a lot.

>So you're one of Putin's trolls.
You are just terrible at guessing and generalising, aren't you?

Strike a nerve, did I?

Be glad they have a logo at all.

What's with the idea that every programming language, operating system, and soon every fucking utility have to have a logo? Idiotic crap.

Same way your previous wrong guesses did: not really.

But anyway, your regurgitated concept of software "freedom" is retarded. Software can't be in any way or form imprisoned. It's either open source or not.

Tihs

No, it's either free or not. Open source misses the point.

Well that's what they are trying in the long game.
I understand them - the API is absolutely shit and hacked to pieces trying to keep compatibility.

Shouldn't you be eating something off your foot?

xDDD ebin 4 teh win

>free or not.
Free from what? Once again, it's software. It's lines of code. It has no right, no feelings, no nothing. It's merely a file.
You either have access to the contents (open source) or you don't (closed source).

Any imposition of "freedom" is akin to the idiotic insistence of Americans on bringing gender and identity politics in fields that have nothing to do with it (see CoCs and all that).

>Free from what?
Restrictions on how it can be used.
>It has no right, no feelings, no nothing.
So it has everything? I didn't realise feelings and rights were a prerequisite for being FREE of restrictions.
>You either have access to the contents (open source) or you don't (closed source)
No, there are other freedoms that are required for free software.

>NT has some good concepts going on.
And these are are..?

>Restrictions on how it can be used.
Present even in GPL.
But all those restrictions are once again imposed by silly people. If it's open-source you can always study how it works and reimplement. (Or just use it as is)
In ideal world, you could just use it any way you want, but current "capitalism" wouldn't allow it.
Personally, I'd go the patent route. Implementation is restricted to the author for 5 years. After that the code is public domain.
>So it has everything? I didn't realise feelings and rights were a prerequisite for being FREE of restrictions.
You can't be restricted from something you don't have, can you? Files have no rights, so they can't lack them. Same way files have no freedom to be restricted.
At worst YOU (or, more realistically, someone that can actually use the source code) are restricted from some actions and not "the software", so, once again, it's not the question of "software freedom" but of your rights as a consumer.
>No, there are other freedoms that are required for free software.
Imagined by one crazy person. This in no way changes any of my arguments. Hell, you can right now imagine the "freedom" to print the code and shove it up your ass. That wouldn't make "the software" any more or less "free" just because you said that. Same way Stallmann can (and did) come up with some silly unfounded stuff and tries to convince everyone that it actually makes sense.

>Present even in GPL
The GPL only prevents it from being less free.
>(Or just use it as is)
Potentially illegal.
>You can't be restricted from something you don't have, can you? Files have no rights, so they can't lack them. Same way files have no freedom to be restricted.
It's part of the licence, retard. Don't be stupid. This has never been a matter of rights. Either stop playing dumb or stop posting.
>At worst YOU (or, more realistically, someone that can actually use the source code) are restricted from some actions and not "the software", so, once again, it's not the question of "software freedom" but of your rights as a consumer.
No, the freedom comes with the software. It is part of the software based on its licence. Seriously, are you trolling? You are extremely stupid if you aren't. It's user, not consumer.
>Imagined by one crazy person. This in no way changes any of my arguments. Hell, you can right now imagine the "freedom" to print the code and shove it up your ass. That wouldn't make "the software" any more or less "free" just because you said that. Same way Stallmann can (and did) come up with some silly unfounded stuff and tries to convince everyone that it actually makes sense.
We get it. You think everything you are too stupid to understand is "silly".

Is it so hard searching for "NT strengths"?
>object-based
>modularity
>client-server model
>everything is an API
>interface boundaries
et al
The about 350K LOC NT source code has been shared by Microsoft for academic use and can be found (leaked since it was provided only to institutions) in:
github.com/markjandrews/wrk-v1.2/base/ntos
You can compile it and run Win XP and Server 2003 on it.
If anyone wishes to contribute to ReactOS kernel development DON'T look.

>The GPL only prevents it from being less free.
It literally has (I quote)
>Restrictions on how it can be used.
Which by your own account somehow make "the software" "not free".
>Potentially illegal.
Sure, because laws are silly. Doesn't stop you from pirating content, does it?
>It's part of the licence
Great, so? Licence restricts YOU (or, once again, someone that may use the source code) from performing some actions. It in no way imposes some imaginary "software freedom".
>This has never been a matter of rights.
It is quite literally the matter of rights as all it does is restrict your (you know the drill) right for some actions with the code that you are going to publish/sell. Nothing less, nothing more.
>No, the freedom comes with the software.
Elaborate how some file on the internet grants some freedom. I'd like a good laughs on this rather sad day.
>It is part of the software based on its licence.
What is part of the Software? Your silly notion of "freedom"? Once again, I don't feel particularly sad for that poop imprisoned file. I do wish it all the best in the software heaven, though, where all its hardships will be repaid
>It's user, not consumer.
What's the difference? If you want to be pedantic(?) it restricts some actions by the user. Once again, it's a question of user's rights.
Same way GPL restricts user from publishing closed-sourced modifications.
>We get it.
Queen Elizabeth? What are you doing on Jow Forums?
> You think everything you are too stupid to understand is "silly".
Right now you have provided 0 arguments except "you are stupid". That's pretty bad even for an underage and this is supposedly an 18+ Imageboard