http://security.openwares.org/
it stops people from faking a website to get you credit info or personal information, and it was done by an open source firm hehe
Someday ROS will be a stable alternative to using M$
windows- and I have some questions.
I personally think ROS would be extremely attractive
to small system builders and retailers, since M$'s
business model is EXTREMELY restrictive to such
ventures- (your local computer shop, who cannot afford
a massive licensing scheme like what M$ perfers.)
It is extremely difficult for a computer entrepreneur
to become a legitimate "Microsoft certified system
builder", and get their deployment kits, and get
licensed redistribution packages at reasonable prices
that such an entrepreneur can afford. (one must go
through a bunch of hoops and 'certification exams', as
well as practically signing away your firstborn child
in order to be eligable.)
Because of these limitations, ROS would be VERY VERY
appealing to small system builders in this marketing
venue- I am just curious what the legalese would be
for somebody considering it. (To be honest, I have
been considering starting up such a venture, but the
licensing model from M$ is too prohibitive.)
So, Say if this person were to have ROS installed
stock, with various other Open Source packages, like
OpenOffice (there is a win32 port), and perhaps some
open sourced entertainment packages, as well as a
collection of the sources for such applications
distributed on CD-Rom media (to maintain compliance
with GPL), and the associated ReadMe's with each
package, indicating where to go for more information
about individual packages- Would this strategy be on
the "Up and up"?
The reason being, that the most costly part of any
modern 'win32' based computer is its operating system.
By eliminating a Windoze license, you EASILY shave off
300$ from the computer's price. So, your 500$
cheapskate computer is now a 200$ cheapskate
computer--
(A common gripe from the Linux Community is that
commercial PCs ship with a Windows license, that linux
users dont want or need. There have been petitions to
major system builders to provide refunds for these
windows licenses. However, because these large
providers have practically sold their souls to M$,
they cannot sell computers without that license, and
are quite unwilling to refund the license. Small
retailers however, are not encumbered by such
restrictions, and would in fact, PROFIT by not being
FORCED into such licensing models.)
>From an entrepreneur's viewpoint, this means an
increase in potential sales, so long as win32
compatability is stable and reliable. From an ROS
point of view, it is a potential means of releasing
the OS on a public venue. Especially if such systems
are released at a heavy consumer shopping month, like
the Christmas season. Linux doesnt seem to perform
well in the normal 'home end user' category, but I
suspect ROS *will*.
I realise that it will be some time before ROS is
ready for distribution in this form, but I am a
patient person- I am just wanting the full scoop, so
I can get all my ducks in a row.
So far, this is what I understand must be done if I
were to build and sell computers preloaded with ROS,
and other OpenSource software:
1) The system should not have buyware installed, but
may come bundled with buyware on a second CD that the
User may install at their whim. Such a CD should be
carefully and CLEARLY marked, so it is not confused
with Open Source software.
2) The GPL license, and all other licenses pertaining
to ROS, and any other OpenSource software packages
must be supplied in plain view to the user of ROS and
such packages. (like, putting the licenses and the
package's readme's in the start menu along with same
said applications, and placing a link on the desktop
of the ROS installed machine to ROS's license and
readme, where it is in plain and unobstructed view.)
3) The source code to such products must be made
available, and contact information for project
maintaners should be provided. Media with authentic
installers, and full documentation should also be
provided. (So that the user can re-install any
software later, including a ROS install CD. The user
should be made aware that it is perfectly legal for
them to use that CD to install ROS on any machine they
own, and feel it is needed on, and that the same
applies to all other Open source software bundled with
the unit.)
4) ROS, and any/all other open sourced products must
not be 'sold', but reimbursement charges (copying, or
other expenses for making products and sources
available) are applicable within reason.
I also understand that you are attempting to create an
ROS SDK- Since many mid-level businesses purchase
systems from local retailers to reduce overhead, would
it be legitimate to provide the ROS SDK along with
corporate purchased system units? Providing a 'free'
SDK would be very attractive to some organisations
seeking to do in-house software development, and could
be a potential selling point. (especially if programs
produced using the ROS SDK work fine under existing
windows platforms, which may allready be in service at
said corporation.)
I would really like this information. Any and all
feedback will be very much welcome.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Hello,
I have had some limited luck loading Quake2 under ReactOS. There are a
few bugs in that it renders backwards or upside down. Also I cant seem
to find my copy of the Quake2 CD so I cant test game play.
If you want to try and test set your video mode to software and
window'd and copy your config.cfg to your ReactOS Quake2.
http://mail.gleneagle.net/sedwards/images/Quake2.jpghttp://mail.gleneagle.net/sedwards/images/Quake2-1.jpg
Happy Fragging and Marry Christmas
Thanks
Steven
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Hallo,
I tried to boot up ReactOS 1.0.5 using VMware. I tell VMware to use the
ReactOS ISO as an image for the CDROM device. When I boot the virtual
machine, the freeloader on the ISO CD ROM is started, but it crashes
immediately. How is possible to run ReactOS on VMware? (Bochs is toooo
slow...)
Thank you,
Lorenzo
>
What is the legal status of HPFS- I know it was
designed by microsoft, but from what I understand, IBM
owns IP rights-- Is the patent on it still valid, and
enforceable? If not, then it might be something to
look at. You might be able to take HPFS, and modify
it to store DOS short names, for the benefit of the
DOS subsystem later on. I think IBM would be less
eager to sue our pants off for using an HPFS variant,
than MS would be for using a FAT or NTFS variant.
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Vizzini wrote:
>> On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 19:17, Rick Parrish wrote:
>> > Waldo Alvarez wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >Let's keep with NTFS and FAT and with time
>design a new patent free
>> > >filesystem. If M$ complaints then we take away
>the drivers and ppl will be able to get them >from
.previous releases. The FSF did that with XMMS >and
patents with MP3s.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > Works for me. Sort of like limping along on MP3s
>and GIFs until
>> > patent/license free OGG and PNG support is ready.
>>
>> In the United States, liability for patent
>infringement exists whether
>> or not you've been notified by the patent holder of
>such infringement.
>> In other words, if you accidentally step on someone
>else's IP, they will
>> be able to sue you for royalties whether or not it
>was your "fault".
>> It's a pure liability - no fault is required.
>In any case the law is already broken.
>> Furthermore, courts have a history of stiffer
>penalites (i.e. higher
>> royalty payments) for infringers who *knew* they
>were infringing.
>> That's why you see "patent pending" on lots of
>manufactured items.
>Bad. That means distributing NTFS and FAT in another
>release is asking for
>more trouble.
>> Finally, as I said before, both developers and end
>users are liable for
>> patent infringement.
>>
>> With these points in mind, I think we need an
>official policy of
>> avoiding patents as much as we possibly can while
>retaining Windows
>> system compatibility. If this means (for example)
>defaulting to a
>> non-FAT, non-NTFS filesystem, that's what we have
>to do.
>True. You are totally right!
>I was thinking this yesterday. What about using an
>NTFS a little bit
>modified. In a way you can reuse the code written for
>the drivers already
>written and make the conversion easier. It won't be
>NTFS. I don't like
>too much this but could be a solution.
>The other choice I was thinking. What about finding
>some company that
>already have the license to use the patents and put
>them in charge of the
>drivers in exchange for some advising in ROS. They
>will not have to spend
>a cent for it (except for the lawyer maybe) and will
>not have to write a
>single line of code. I'm sure many will like the
>deal, even if there is
>trouble in the future because getting in trouble
>could give them more money.
>I prefer this choice as there will be not need to
>invent yet another
>filesystem, ReactOS will be more compatible and
>everything can continue
>the way it is.
>The question is, How legal would it be?
>Best Regards
>Waldo Alvarez
>> -Vizzini
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ros-general mailing list
>> ros-general at reactos.com
>> http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
>>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Change boot.bat to read the following:
loadros system32\ntoskrnl.exe system32\hal.dll /DEBUGPORT=COM1 bootc.lst
Under freeldr you'd add a ReactOS Debug entry to freeldr.ini with the
following settings:
[Operating Systems]
ROS_Debug="ReactOS Debug"
[ROS_Debug]
BootType=ReactOS
SystemPath=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\ReactOS
Options=/DEBUGPORT=COM1
if it still doesn't work, it's likely a hardware configuration issue,
for instance, don't use COM1 if you have a serial mouse or other device
on COM3. or don't use COM2 if COM4 is in use, etc. and vice versa.
This is a limitation of the PC architecture. Also make sure your serial
ports are setup properly and enabled in your system's BIOS.
Hope this helps,
Richard
Tom Bitsky, Jr wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'm working on the maximize button for GDI32. I noticed from one of
> your emails that you send debug info out of the COM port. The tutorial
> is vauge on this. I've tried to set the switches up to send out COM1
> by editing the boot.bat and boota.bat files, but I'm not getting
> anything.
>
> Can you talk me through it?
>
> Thanks!
> Tom
>
>
> Automated Design Corporation
> http://www.automateddesign.com
>
> P: (630) 783-1150 F: (630) 783-1159
>
> Featuring:
> ADC COMPRESSION. Consistent
> Ball/Core compression testing.
>
This is as far as i get, anyone else getting farther? This is using the
dlls from alldlls2.zip
--------------------
Written in Mozilla Thunderbird 0.4
<A HREF="http://www.mozilla.org">Get it today!</A>
--- Mike Hearn <mike(a)theoretic.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 19:25, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> > What is the situation on Wine. can widl or any other tool produce a
>
> > proper .TLB structure?
>
> No, not as far as I know :( We really need this, for many years now
> Wine
> has been shipping OLE that is nearly non-functional for some
> important
> tasks because we lack stdole32.tlb
Someone submitted source/binarys for a repleacement stdole32.tlb a year
or so ago but I think it required MS_VC to build.
Thanks
Steven
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
In which case, how exactly would sony's "floppy
diskette" based digital camera be licensed? It uses
FAT filesystem to store the image data. This means it
actively utilizes the filesystem, and as such, is both
'client' and 'server'... How would such a device be licensed?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
