Issue 2. [Re: [ros-general] ROS-User-Issues]

Thanks Lyrical
Not bad for a demented old timer though, just one mistake?
I think this ros-general list  is good for me.
I can't have only got that much wrong, I guessed most of it?
The point I am trying to make is this: Gossip is great but it doesn't cut in court.
Rule of Evidence and Rules the the Court are all a Judge rules on.
The Judge in on our Case is  the ordinary person in the street.
Statements like ReactOS is still an Alpha release is not necessary.
Microsoft has made the eternal Alpha release it's fortune.
Now Red Hat has too, and most other Linux releases.
Copy Cat Industrialised production cannot be trusted.
I get mixed messages from ReactOS Users.
Is this an issue worth pursuing?

Cheers and rosuccess

Justin

---- Lyrical Nanoha [e-mail] wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, [e-mail] wrote:
> > Jobs takes his payout after being dumped from Apple, takes the bit he missed from Xerox Smalltalk80 and builds NeXT computers, the ferrari of Computers.
> > He brings it back to Apple again put it on a Linux kernel and calles it NextStep.
> > Together (AIM group Apple, IBM and Motorolla) they build the "G" series.
> > Microsofts decides to catch up by applying it to his own hardware base i.e.  Intel.
> > It is called the Wintel group.
>
> NeXT was always based on BSD - OSX still is based on BSD, not Linux.
>
> -uso.
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general

[Derek Hinchliffe]

Justin wrote:
<snip>
> Statements like ReactOS is still an Alpha release is not necessary.
> Microsoft has made the eternal Alpha release it's fortune.
> Now Red Hat has too, and most other Linux releases.
> Copy Cat Industrialised production cannot be trusted.
> I get mixed messages from ReactOS Users.
> Is this an issue worth pursuing?

I don't think it is right to compare ReactOS stating that it is an alpha
release to Microsoft and Redhat (or other Linux distro) releases.  Sure,
there is undoubtably a history of Microsoft releasing software that it has
been best to steer clear of until at least SP1, but I don't think you can
say that ReactOS is anywhere near any previous Windows release in terms of
functionality relevant to the average user.

And nobody at this stage can expect it to be, hence the 'alpha' releases. 
I think maybe it would be more appropriate to say that Microsoft and Linux
distros have made beta releases, rather than alpha.  Beta releases will
generally contain the functionality expected, but may contain bugs in the
way that functionality is implemented, whereas alpha releases are
generally lacking in expected functionality.

So I believe it is correct to term ReactOS as 'Alpha' (and to make this
clear to users, there is no point in hiding the truth) for the time being.
People are then more likely to be impressed with the progress so far (as
they should be) rather than disappointed because they expected a usable
system.

Cheers
Derek