Freeware Windows based on Microsoft Hyper-V Server

[dizt3mp3r]

No-one is going to read the EULA, you have to do that. Interpret it how you will. MS lawyers are sure to do the same. You should hope they don't get involved.

[Lotusisrael]

My hope is some developers will get into my idea and try to do something in this sense. So, if they are afraid of anything, they can read the Eula for themselves, I already did it for myself. I see some people in here are really afraid of some things. It is ok to be cautious, but not to overreact. Meanwhile, I shall wait for a response on the Microsoft forums.

[Konata]

My hope is some developers will get into my idea and try to do something in this sense. So, if they are afraid of anything, they can read the Eula for themselves, I already did it for myself. I see some people in here are really afraid of some things. It is ok to be cautious, but not to overreact. Meanwhile, I shall wait for a response on the Microsoft forums.

We have to be overly-cautious because ReactOS is really sitting on the line of legality and we've had our legal status and practices questioned in the past.

But, maybe you can clarify, what exactly is it you're trying to do? What specific drivers / services / libraries / executables do you want to replace? We're just being cautious about the legality of this because you're not saying what you want to do specifically. So, naturally, our response is "we don't know what you want to do, but whatever it is, make sure it's not against the EULA or we aren't comfortable talking about it."

[middings]

Reading a forum's rules then heeding them is always recommended. It is especially recommended for people who arrive ready to spill their world-beating great idea. LotusIsrael won't be the last visitor to overlook Rule 6.

Go here: viewforum.php?f=13. Choose the Code of Conduct topic. It is in the top portion of the list of topics under "Announcements". Scroll down to "6. Do not double/triple/etc post."

[peter007]

No-one is going to read the EULA, you have to do that. Interpret it how you will. MS lawyers are sure to do the same. You should hope they don't get involved.

Absolutely agreed. EULA is full of legal terminologies and is not for layman. One should be very concise, clear and simple otherwise no body would dare to read it.
TreatmentTherapy

[Konata]

No-one is going to read the EULA, you have to do that. Interpret it how you will. MS lawyers are sure to do the same. You should hope they don't get involved.

Absolutely agreed. EULA is full of legal terminologies and is not for layman. One should be very concise, clear and simple otherwise no body would dare to read it.

In that case, don't do anything you assume might break the EULA.
I don't even get the point of this post? "Oh yeah OP I don't know what the EULA says but I'm too lazy to read it so I have nothing to really add to this discussion." ????

[dizt3mp3r]

Shall we invite this thread to the closure banquet...

[Lotusisrael]

Shall we invite this thread to the closure banquet...

I am really sad. So much lack of enthusiasm... People in here are really afraid, I am really surprised to see this. ReactOS was a great initiative, but we all see there is little hope for it and the reason is already stated by me: Windows is a proprietary closed source software, we can not reproduce it completely, it takes too much. ReactOS will probably die, if it can not reach beta very, very soon. The standards of Windows XP/Server 2003 are getting more and more obsolete as tine passes, and ReactOS will remain fixed in them, making it just a footnote in a history book. This would have been a way to save it, at least half of it. If I were a developer or at least being able in becoming a developer, I would have done it myself, but I can not. So please, do not close this thread and read carefully what I said. Read the Eula of the software. Do not hack it, you do not have to. Just save a part of ReactOS and put it on top of this Windows kernel. Guys, Microsoft will do an important part of the job, for you! So, if you think that I might be right on this, please read the Eula and then think it really seriously. You can save ReactOS like this.
Please, read the Eula and think about it. If this topic is closed soon, with more negative comments, that means, in my opinion, that, probably, ReactOS will be lost soon. It was a wonderful idea that, unfortunatly, failed. As a whole, ReactOS is already, more or less, a failure, wether you admit it or not. The only to save ReactOS would be for Microsoft to stop realising and maintaining Windows, and the community to step up, clone the last Windows and move on. That could happen if Microsoft disappears completely or something. But even then it will not go on, because, most likely, Unix-like OSs like GnuLinux and macOS will take over the PC world. In my idea, at least something of all this effort, enthusiasm and dedication that kept ReactOS going for years would be saved and move on.

[dizt3mp3r]

?

Just because we don't support your idea...

[Konata]

Shall we invite this thread to the closure banquet...

I am really sad. So much lack of enthusiasm... People in here are really afraid, I am really surprised to see this. ReactOS was a great initiative, but we all see there is little hope for it and the reason is already stated by me: Windows is a proprietary closed source software, we can not reproduce it completely, it takes too much. ReactOS will probably die, if it can not reach beta very, very soon. The standards of Windows XP/Server 2003 are getting more and more obsolete as tine passes, and ReactOS will remain fixed in them, making it just a footnote in a history book. This would have been a way to save it, at least half of it. If I were a developer or at least being able in becoming a developer, I would have done it myself, but I can not. So please, do not close this thread and read carefully what I said. Read the Eula of the software. Do not hack it, you do not have to. Just save a part of ReactOS and put it on top of this Windows kernel. Guys, Microsoft will do an important part of the job, for you! So, if you think that I might be right on this, please read the Eula and then think it really seriously. You can save ReactOS like this.
Please, read the Eula and think about it. If this topic is closed soon, with more negative comments, that means, in my opinion, that, probably, ReactOS will be lost soon. It was a wonderful idea that, unfortunatly, failed. As a whole, ReactOS is already, more or less, a failure, wether you admit it or not. The only to save ReactOS would be for Microsoft to stop realising and maintaining Windows, and the community to step up, clone the last Windows and move on. That could happen if Microsoft disappears completely or something. But even then it will not go on, because, most likely, Unix-like OSs like GnuLinux and macOS will take over the PC world. In my idea, at least something of all this effort, enthusiasm and dedication that kept ReactOS going for years would be saved and move on.

You are both extremely pessimistic and somewhat uninformed.
ReactOS is making amazing progress. Go download an ISO of a few versions ago and you'll see it'll be lucky to boot, never mind running any software (even it's own pre-installed software). It's making progress every day.
Second, ReactOS is targeting Server 2003 for the express reason of getting done in a timely fashion. If the devs chased every single Windows version that ever got released they would never finish. They locked into Server 2003 for the time being for stability. ReactOS has moved from versions in the past, it used to target Service Pack 1 but now targets Service Pack 2, and I might not be remembering this right, but I think it originally started targeting Windows 2000 as well. Could be wrong, though. And, additionally, ReactOS implements some few things from future Windows versions, like the restructured kernel layout (MinWin) and a few additional APIs.
Third, why is ReactOS going to be "lost soon"? The project is decades old and as healthy and active as it's ever been, it's not going anywhere anytime soon, you don't have to worry about that. And Microsoft and Windows aren't going anywhere either. You can go ahead and believe UNIX-likes will take over if you'd like, but that directly contradicts Windows' universal 91% desktop market share. And, honestly, thinking OS X will take over the world is pretty laughable, I have to admit. I don't have anything against Macs, but, really?

You're one of those new users we get every so often, who, from a few hours after discovering ReactOS, go from "this is amazing! I can replace Windows!" to "This doesn't work! I'm sad now, this will never work!" I'll reiterate, ReactOS is made monumental progress from a few years ago, if you've been with the project that long you'd feel the opposite of how you do right now. I'm extremely optimistic for the project. If you want to help the project, but cannot program, you can still help a lot. You can donate, and you can tell people about ReactOS so other people can donate, or even attract developers. You can also bug test, try out software and hardware and send debug logs to the developers in the JIRA. There's plenty of things you can do that doesn't involve programming. And, I'll tell you right now, dumping some parts of ReactOS on a butchered version of Windows isn't one of them. What you're asking for is a bandaid, and it directly contradicts the goal of ReactOS. We want a free-as-in-freedom Windows, a Windows that will never die or be obsolete, a Windows that won't turn into the MS-DOS of today. We're the FreeDOS of Windows NT. So relax.

[Lotusisrael]

You are both extremely pessimistic and somewhat uninformed.
ReactOS is making amazing progress. Go download an ISO of a few versions ago and you'll see it'll be lucky to boot, never mind running any software (even it's own pre-installed software). It's making progress every day.
Second, ReactOS is targeting Server 2003 for the express reason of getting done in a timely fashion. If the devs chased every single Windows version that ever got released they would never finish. They locked into Server 2003 for the time being for stability. ReactOS has moved from versions in the past, it used to target Service Pack 1 but now targets Service Pack 2, and I might not be remembering this right, but I think it originally started targeting Windows 2000 as well. Could be wrong, though. And, additionally, ReactOS implements some few things from future Windows versions, like the restructured kernel layout (MinWin) and a few additional APIs.
Third, why is ReactOS going to be "lost soon"? The project is decades old and as healthy and active as it's ever been, it's not going anywhere anytime soon, you don't have to worry about that. And Microsoft and Windows aren't going anywhere either. You can go ahead and believe UNIX-likes will take over if you'd like, but that directly contradicts Windows' universal 91% desktop market share. And, honestly, thinking OS X will take over the world is pretty laughable, I have to admit. I don't have anything against Macs, but, really?

You're one of those new users we get every so often, who, from a few hours after discovering ReactOS, go from "this is amazing! I can replace Windows!" to "This doesn't work! I'm sad now, this will never work!" I'll reiterate, ReactOS is made monumental progress from a few years ago, if you've been with the project that long you'd feel the opposite of how you do right now. I'm extremely optimistic for the project. If you want to help the project, but cannot program, you can still help a lot. You can donate, and you can tell people about ReactOS so other people can donate, or even attract developers. You can also bug test, try out software and hardware and send debug logs to the developers in the JIRA. There's plenty of things you can do that doesn't involve programming. And, I'll tell you right now, dumping some parts of ReactOS on a butchered version of Windows isn't one of them. What you're asking for is a bandaid, and it directly contradicts the goal of ReactOS. We want a free-as-in-freedom Windows, a Windows that will never die or be obsolete, a Windows that won't turn into the MS-DOS of today. We're the FreeDOS of Windows NT. So relax.

I knew about ReactOS for years, even tested it several times. This idea of mine is a few months old in itself. I am using Windows Server OSs for workstation purposes for years. Far better than standard Windows versions, that I truly disregard.
Pretty fond of Unix-like things. Linux has already taken over much of the world. Most servers, including Google and Facebook run on GnuLinux. Android, the number one OS of the world, runs on the Linux kernel (altough it is not GnuLinux). In recent years, Hackintosh has really taken off as well and, since macOS is Unix, like Linux, the world looks more and more Unix-like and less and less Dec-like. And, besides, what is Windows NT? A type of Dec OS, descendent from another Dec OS, VMS, when the Dec OS team, headed by Dave Cutler, moved from Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) to Microsoft. Dec OS was made from Unix parts, from its building bricks, but re-arragend in a non-Unix manner. ReactOS is an open source Dec OS. For me (You are free to disagree, if you want, of course.), Dec OS including Windows NT is perversion of Unix that was never suppose to exist. Windows NT is number one today due to historical inertia, from the times of the 1990ties, when Microsoft dominated the PC world with their MS DOS os called Windows. That was the real Windows, what we call now Windows it is not Windows. It was not suppose to be here. I am forced to run Windows on one of my machines due to the lack of drivers for any Unix-like OSs.
My hope is that at least I can find the interest of a developer to port at least the sound component of ReactOS to the Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2016 os. Other people could take care the rest. I would use such an OS and show other people they can get legal. I would be really fun, in my opinion.

[Konata]

I knew about ReactOS for years, even tested it several times. This idea of mine is a few months old in itself. I am using Windows Server OSs for workstation purposes for years. Far better than standard Windows versions, that I truly disregard.
Pretty fond of Unix-like things. Linux has already taken over much of the world. Most servers, including Google and Facebook run on GnuLinux. Android, the number one OS of the world, runs on the Linux kernel (altough it is not GnuLinux). In recent years, Hackintosh has really taken off as well and, since macOS is Unix, like Linux, the world looks more and more Unix-like and less and less Dec-like. And, besides, what is Windows NT? A type of Dec OS, descendent from another Dec OS, VMS, when the Dec OS team, headed by Dave Cutler, moved from Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) to Microsoft. Dec OS was made from Unix parts, from its building bricks, but re-arragend in a non-Unix manner. ReactOS is an open source Dec OS. For me (You are free to disagree, if you want, of course.), Dec OS including Windows NT is perversion of Unix that was never suppose to exist. Windows NT is number one today due to historical inertia, from the times of the 1990ties, when Microsoft dominated the PC world with their MS DOS os called Windows. That was the real Windows, what we call now Windows it is not Windows. It was not suppose to be here. I am forced to run Windows on one of my machines due to the lack of drivers for any Unix-like OSs.
My hope is that at least I can find the interest of a developer to port at least the sound component of ReactOS to the Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2016 os. Other people could take care the rest. I would use such an OS and show other people they can get legal. I would be really fun, in my opinion.

You've managed to say a lot of words that don't actually mean anything. I'm not even sure what half of this says, and the other half I can read but doesn't actually make a point.
Why is NT a perversion of Unix? NT was built and designed from the ground up to be as sophisticated and modular as possible while overcoming the many shortcomings of UNIX/POSIX. Also "Unix drivers" is kind of an oxymoron, Unix/POSIX doesn't specify any kind of driver model unlike NT. NT has had a few solid driver frameworks for decades.
Also Linux is not Unix, if it were Unix then Unix software would work on it. Too bad FreeBSD, a real Unix, has to use so much compatibility software just to use any Linux software. Linux is a lovecraftian horror that was not designed but grew in the darkness like a fungus and now is weighted down by decades of legacy software that can't be removed or replaced. Thankfully Google is making a new OS to finally kill it. And it's not a Unix-like, just like NT. Unix/POSIX is an ancient beast that needs to die, made in a time before computers were good.

So, what does this all boil down to? You need drivers? If you love Unix so much just get a Mac or something. Nobody really has any interest in butchering some obscure edition of Windows, we just want to work with ReactOS.
I don't see a real point to this discussion anymore, I feel dumb enough for writing this. I made my point. You have an interesting idea, but nobody has the want nor need to execute it. That's all. I'm done.

[Lotusisrael]

Regarding the origin of Windows NT, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVMS
C and C++ were created for Unix, by the people who made Unix and maintain it. Dec OS was build around Dave Cutler, who hated Unix, but used C and C++ to develop Dec OS, especially VMS. He reproduced many Unix features in his OS. Now he is working at Xbox, it seems. VMS, in late period of the presence of Dave Cutler on DEC, it even ran X Window System, that is the display server on most GnuLinux versions. It seems weird why Dave Cutler admitted that, in the early period of the design of Windows NT, that he aimed for Posix compatibility. I admit, I am a fanatic of Unix-like things. Why? I do not know exactly. Perhaps that I like seeing order, heyrachy and I find intuitive that C and its derivates to be part of a Unix-like system, not a Dec-like system, since they were developed as a whole, and Dec OS and its modern form, Windows NT, seem like something illogical in itself, according to this perspective. There is, still, one Unix-like OS I truly hate, and that is Android, especially due to the Java factor in it.

[dizt3mp3r]

We all know about VMS. Calling him Dave Cutlet though...

[Lotusisrael]

We all know about VMS. Calling him Dave Cutlet though...

Better then Dave Outlet, yet...