Hi,
I switched ReactOS Wiki to readonly state, to be able to export and
transfer data to the new MediaWiki.
Thanks for your patience!
Regards,
Aleksey Bragin
im sure you have already talked about this, but let me ask....
have you thought about including some kind of "apport" application into
ReactOS? this would allow users to automatically send bug reports when
executing a non-running app, way more precise than manually reporting....
what do you think about this?
Hi All,
Before I reach the point where I am thinking the same way as everyone else,
which will inevitably happen (The Borg - resistance is futile), I wanted to
get some thoughts out:
A question that many have asked is, "Why not port ReactOS to ARM?"
The answer is usually something like, "We cannot afford the resources to
port to ARM."
I think on the contrary, the opposite might be true:
1. There is a hoard of developers over on the Raspberry Pi site right
now who would enjoy seeing ReactOS on the RaspPi.
2. There are device manufacturers who would like to free themselves
from the Apple/Google/Microsoft triumvirate and iOS/Android/Windows Phone 8
lock-in. Samsung recently announced its intent to explore other operating
systems.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57455054-94/would-samsung-ever-leave-androi
d-new-ceo-drops-hints/
3. The operating systems are not exactly easy to develop for. I have
read credible articles that Android is a mess from a development
perspective. ReactOS would be the operating system of choice for
straightforward development.
4. There are embedded systems companies who struggled in vain to get
Windows CE to behave like "Big Windows", but were unsuccessful because
restrictions in the Windows CE kernel. Many of them switch to Linux, but
quite a few still use some form of embedded Windows, and would welcome an
open-source Windows-like OS.
5. The United States Military has very large base of software that
they would like to put on lower-power systems (ARM) that is written for
Windows/i386. They are currently trying to port this software to Linux, with
varying degrees of success, not because they like Linux, but because they
need as much of the software to be open as possible. They would be
particularly attracted by the open-source nature of ReactOS, because the USA
national security vetting process requires that certain classes of software
be reviewed, line by line, by a certain US security agency. The singular,
totally exposed nature of ReactOS makes it attractive in this regard.
6. ReactOS.ORG would likely receive real money from device
manufacturers. Even a few dollars per-device would add-up very quickly.
7. There is NO mobile platform right now, among the Big Three, that
allows true, native, C/C++ development. Each of these platform plays a game
where the native code is invoked by some shell, even in the case of Windows
Phone 8, despite Microsoft's claim that Windows Phone 8 supports native
development. [It depends on what your interpretation of native development
is.]
ARM device manufacturers are all stuck in the same boat. Most of these
companies are actually not very good at OS design. Think about it: Nokia was
a multi-billion-$US company that was using an operating system (Symbian)
that was so broken and toxic to innovation that it almost drowned their
company. What did they do to fix this problem? They adopted a closed OS from
Microsoft. Manufacturers, actually, do not like having closed software. It
eliminates their opportunity for differentiation. If ReactOS were made to
run on a single manufacturer's device, the other manufacturers would become
nervous, and insist on having the same access as does their competitor.
There is nothing wrong with making these manufacturers pay a small fee to
support the ReactOS Foundation, and they would gladly pay it, if we
developed killer applications for their devices.
Of course, because most of ReactOS, in theory, should be portable, software
working on ARM is software working on x86_32/x86_64. I would also like to
mention here that there are a lot of developers who would much rather have a
stable kernel, and a paucity of user-mode applications, versus an unstable
kernel, and a plethora of user-mode applications. User mode applications
will be created by the hoard, *if* the kernel is stable. If the kernel is
not stable, the incentive to do anything else is greatly reduced.
This is the opportunity I see. My biological clock is telling me that 2013
is the year to pursue this effort. The market is waiting. But an effort like
porting to ARM should not be done haphazardly or opportunistically. It
should be done with deliberation and intent.
Just my opinion.
-John
Hi,
I had forgotten all about BOCHS. It is amazing how many emulators there are on the market these days.
I think that, for mass appeal, we should try to get ReactOS to run natively. The problem is that there are basically two types of users of ReactOS:
1. Those who enjoy OS development.
2. Those who do not enjoy OS development. :)
#1 is the type that might run ReactOS inside an emulator.
#2 is the type that would probably never run ReactOS inside an emulator, even if ReactOS were stable.
Unfortunately, for all the people who might run ReactOS someday [millions and millions of people] the ratio #1/#2 is probably less than 1/100, conservatively speaking.
Therefore, it makes sense to get ReactOS to run on as many of the devices that users of type #2 would use. That leads to the following reasoning:
There are several popular CPU's on the market. X86_32/x86_64 rules the desktop. ARM is 90% of mobile devices. And there is the "other" category, which is less than 10% of all new devices, including mobile.
Since it is not (yet) likely that a user of type #2 will remove Microsoft Windows from an existing device and replace it with ReactOS, even if ReactOS were stable, one must conclude that the best way to get ReactOS onto as many devices as possible is to make ReactOS the first OS on the device before any other OS has a chance to be on the device. That means new devices.
New devices come with Microsoft Windows, iOS, or Android. Getting HP, Dell, ASUS, Acer, etc..to start using ReactOS instead of Microsoft Windows on their hardware is an up-hill battle and not likely to succeed. Apple hardware, of course, is out of the question. That leaves Android hardware, which is more vulnerable, IMO, than people might think. Google does not own these devices. As Timo showed, there are manufacturers in China/Taiwan/Korea, etc. that make Android hardware very cheaply. Those manufacturers choose Android, but they could choose whatever they desire.
So I think that getting ReactOS to run on just one, commonly-available, mobile device, like an ARM-based SmartPhone, that is made by a hardware manufacturer who is not committed to Android or any other OS, would open the flood-gates.
I would not worry about the number of available "apps" on ReactOS on ARM, because there are many, many developers who know how to write applications for Microsoft Windows on x86_32/x86_64, and therefore, for ReactOS on ARM, and they will be immediately attracted by the open nature of ReactOS. Also, I suspect that the following technique for converting Windows-on-x86_32 applications to ReactOS-on-ARM will work:
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12262
Cheers!
-John
-----Original Message-----
From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of HeChi-Lau
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 10:20 AM
To: ros-dev(a)reactos.org
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Ros-dev Digest, Vol 101, Issue 30
Hey,Do you know the BOCHS?An x86 emulator.Its android version works fine through the JNI library.Reactos also runs okay.But I configured the net card in conf file,nothing effected.
In my opinion if anyone could develop a similar,but advanced software:it included full hardward support and released with reactos.Or just add the x86 vm or in reactos's kernel,and then reactos can work with arm cpus.After one of I said above done,I believe more people will know reactos and use it.
reactos has some advantages that other os can't compared with.such as free,fully opensource,pe compatible,low memory usage and fast boot and shutdown.If application experience be better,it will be finer.
Hey,Do you know the BOCHS?An x86 emulator.Its android version works fine through the JNI library.Reactos also runs okay.But I configured the net card in conf file,nothing effected.
In my opinion if anyone could develop a similar,but advanced software:it included full hardward support and released with reactos.Or just add the x86 vm or in reactos's kernel,and then reactos can work with arm cpus.After one of I said above done,I believe more people will know reactos and use it.
reactos has some advantages that other os can't compared with.such as free,fully opensource,pe compatible,low memory usage and fast boot and shutdown.If application experience be better,it will be finer.
ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org wrote:
Send Ros-dev mailing list submissions to
ros-dev(a)reactos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
ros-dev-owner(a)reactos.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ros-dev digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Status of ARM Development (J. C. Jones)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:23:50 -0600
From: "J. C. Jones" <jaibuduvin(a)gmail.com>
To: "'ReactOS Development List'" <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Status of ARM Development
Message-ID: <00af01cdf5e3$a37f1b50$ea7d51f0$(a)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi RMS,
What happen to your port?
-John
From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of rms(a)velocitylimitless.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:04 PM
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Status of ARM Development
I actually did get a simple port of freeloader and reactos working on my iPod touch a while ago. :P
On Dec 25, 2012, at 4:55 AM, Herm?s B?LUSCA - MA?TO <hermes.belusca(a)sfr.fr> wrote:
Well, I fear Igor is right.
Herm?s.
De : ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.org] De la part de Igor Paliychuk
Envoy? : mardi 25 d?cembre 2012 07:16
? : ReactOS Development List
Objet : Re: [ros-dev] Status of ARM Development
If you want to help, go ahead. If you are just asking, the answer is: "There is no work on ARM port going on because there are no human resources for doing that". Well, at least afaik.
2012/12/25 J. C. Jones <jaibuduvin(a)gmail.com>
Hi All,
Newbie here (2 days). I would like to know the who-is-doing-what for the ARM port. It seems that, with the current lock-down of all three major mobile platforms (iOS/Android/Windows Phone 8), as well as the impending surge in 2013 of ultra-cheap mobile devices like tablets based on ARM, and of course, the loveable Raspberry Pi, a truly open Windows-oriented platform is more needed than ever.
J.C.
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/5987 - Release Date: 12/25/12
Hi All,
Newbie here (2 days). I would like to know the who-is-doing-what for the ARM
port. It seems that, with the current lock-down of all three major mobile
platforms (iOS/Android/Windows Phone 8), as well as the impending surge in
2013 of ultra-cheap mobile devices like tablets based on ARM, and of course,
the loveable Raspberry Pi, a truly open Windows-oriented platform is more
needed than ever.
J.C.
Hi All,
I had quick chat with Amine and others, and for the time being, I will pick
up where I let off in creating a Visual Studio ReactOS.sln with the
following features:
1. A single ReactOS.sln file that is interchangeable between Visual
Studio 2010 and Visual Studio 2012.
2. A single ReactOS.sln file that incorporates all 800+ .vcxproj files
and allows all 800+ project to be viewable within a single session of Visual
Studio.
3. No (serious) performance problems with load of the ReactOS.sln file
or .vcxproj files.
4. An arrangement in the Solution Workspace that mirrors the structure
of the ReactOS repository on disk.
5. The ability to build all applications or drivers by right-clicking,
within Solution Workspace, on the folder named applications or drivers and
doing clicking Build.
6. Visibility of the lang directories in the Solution Workspace.
7. Visibility of all SVN files in the Solution Workspace, including
CMakeLists.txt files.
8. Support for Debug and Release project configurations.
9. Support for x86_32, x86_64, ARM platform configurations.
10. Self-relative paths for all .h's and .libs's so that solution can be
moved by the developer on his/her local hard disk without consequence.
11. No need to download any extraneous tools. User should be able to type
in SVN URL, either from within Visual Studio, or with Windows Explorer, pull
ReactOS repository, load ReactOS.sln, and start editing/compiling/linking,
debugging.
With the CMakeLists.txt files, the information needed is already present.
With Amine's latest work of actually generating the .vcxproj files, things
become even easier. However, as I have two other moderate projects going
concurrently, one of which I just started, this will take some time. I will
provide updates as I go along.
Cheers,
-John
Hi All,
Some of you might have seen my recent on the post regarding the build
process:
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12240&start=15
As I mentioned, it would help greatly to lower the barrier-to-entry to
less-experienced developers, as well as more experienced developers who
might have limited time budgets [Who among us does not have a limited time
budget?].
I wanted to send out this message to let everyone know that I intend to use
what bit of time that I available right now, at the beginning of January, to
tackle this issue head-on. Again, my purpose here is not to step on anyone's
toes, but make certain that we never turn away a potentially-valuable
contributor simply because they are unnecessarily removed from their
development comfort zone. I do realize that there is already on-going work
on the build process, and I have no intention of interfering with that.
I will wait 24-hours for any objections/reservations from now before making
a hard commitment, but frankly, we really to get this done, like right now.
Happy New Year. :)
-JC