20 Jan
2010
20 Jan
'10
12:40 a.m.
performance, and probably compatibility
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Sir Gallantmon <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Anyway, you didn't give a reason to NOT use arwinss as the official win32
subsystem...
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:11 PM, James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
The same thing with the kernel, we can use Linux
instead! Create a
distribution with it and call it Lindows! Oh wait! That ship has set
sail and moved on~!
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Sir Gallantmon <ngompa13(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
I don't see any real reason for maintaining both branches of win32
subsystem. Arwinss still aims to be driver compatible, right? So, what
do we
gain by fully replicating the Win32 subsystem as
Microsoft Windows does
it?
The idea of using Wine code to further the levels
of compatibility in
ReactOS is a good idea, and it has potential to make ReactOS a good
choice
for "thin-client" and terminal server
systems because of the X11 driver.
I
personally prefer X11 SSH tunneling over VNC/RDP,
because I don't need
to
see the entire remote desktop, just the
applications I want to run from
there. Additionally, Linux distros might include ReactOS and use their
virtualization solutions to integrate apps installed to ReactOS into the
overall Linux desktop. Nobody would ever really see the ReactOS desktop,
but
ReactOS would ensure more complete compatibility
with Windows apps and
games.
I think Arwinss should be the new official win32 subsystem, but meh...
No
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev