why not make win9X clone?

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

richard
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: england
Contact:

why not make win9X clone?

Post by richard » Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:10 pm

why are you makeing a nt clone? if you made a win 9X clone, you wouldnt need to make a intire os, just a program. this would mean that half the work would already be done by freedos.org!
we could be on reactOS 0.05.00 now! :roll

Elledan
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Post by Elledan » Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:23 pm


MadRat
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 8:29 am
Contact:

Post by MadRat » Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:53 pm

Better to look and act like XP HOME than 98SE for stability reasons. I agree that the Win98SE look and feel was better than 2000 or XP with the default settings, but with a little work you can make it look and feel alot like 98SE. Plus you do have RUN AS to use your old 9x programs.
*************************************
Go Huskers!

Harcalion
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:25 pm

Post by Harcalion » Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:16 pm

Win98SE looking better than WinXP? In what parallel dimension?

BrandonTurner
Developer
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:42 am

Post by BrandonTurner » Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:38 pm

Harcalion wrote:Win98SE looking better than WinXP? In what parallel dimension?
i was just thinking the same thing. though i run xp on classic theme and not the bubbly one. it is still way better then any win9x.

uniQ
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 8:58 am

Post by uniQ » Fri Feb 11, 2005 3:43 am

Because Windows 9x is DEAD (Well, dying off fast). Microsoft has finished the Windows 9x line with ME (Which was a crap release (Like 98SE SP1)) and driver makers are going to try and stop manking drivers for 9x as soon as they can do so without loosing significant customers.

Not to metion it's unstable as [CS] compared to all the other modern OSes (NT, Linux, etc).

-uniQ
Coming on, coming up, let me help ROS and I'll be able to look @ a life well used.

Floyd
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:45 am
Location: The frozen part of the USA

Post by Floyd » Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:20 am

9x, while better than anything before it, when compared to the NT kernel, SUCKS ...

- poor stability
- poor memory model
- sacrificed stability for increased compatibility
- allowed programs to directly access hardware (and thus programs could easily crash the whole system)
- poor multitasking abilities

(just my opinion, though)

:-)
pax mei amici amorque et Iesus sacret omnia

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:01 am

Because Windows 9x is DEAD
Yes, for MicroSoft.

98 fans can still upgrade it thanks to Alper Coskun of exuberant software

Image

;)
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

HUMA2000
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:06 pm
Location: España, al sur con el solecito
Contact:

Post by HUMA2000 » Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:18 am

For me, Win98 was dead same day it born. Is an ugly OS, unestable, and unsecure, no dual machines support, memory hungry...
User interface is ugly and have no power (like winnt, 2k and xp UI). If you wanted to customize the GUI you must to fight whit registry and some programs doesn't work...
NT desing is far better, doesn't crash as often (it only crash some times for me and was for a bad driver), has a good memory management system (can be improved), is more secure (not as secure as linux but secure) and programs work faster and smothly.
I doesn't know any reason to support win9x series under ROS as a priority, maybe when ROS reaches version 1 could be the moment to think abaout a win98 subsystem... but atm the win32k must be the prioritary one, followed by posix, dos, os/2, and them win9x

nothin2g
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:42 pm
Location: Zeil in Bayern

Post by nothin2g » Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:59 pm

The Windows 2000 GUI has enough "power".
Ring 0 provides this :)

(kill me if i'm wrong)
Wir sind die Borg. Widerstand ist Spannung durch Stromstärke.
www.wakka.de

HUMA2000
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:06 pm
Location: España, al sur con el solecito
Contact:

Post by HUMA2000 » Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:57 pm

nothin2g: I mean you cannot put UI at your way, add menus and thing like the one you can do with LS, bb4win or other shells.

Phalanx
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 12:42 am
Location: Australia

Post by Phalanx » Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:12 pm

HUMA2000 wrote:nothin2g: I mean you cannot put UI at your way, add menus and thing like the one you can do with LS, bb4win or other shells.
That has to do with explorer (the shell), not the UI (GUI).

uniQ
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 8:58 am

Post by uniQ » Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:22 pm

patchworks wrote:98 fans can still upgrade it thanks to Alper Coskun of exuberant software
You know what he did? Downloaded every 98SE hotfix from Windows Update, a few 3rd party updates and tweaks and slapped them together into one installer. And they STILL doesn't fix the problems of it's terrible stability, memory map, driver system, etc, etc.

I can understand ppl wanting a free 9x, but NT is soo much more worth the time and effort.

-uniQ
Coming on, coming up, let me help ROS and I'll be able to look @ a life well used.

Pentiumforever
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Contact:

Post by Pentiumforever » Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:52 pm

I cant* belibe that will all patches the security systems and the memory systems are better becaus they are really hard in the core!

Phalanx
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 12:42 am
Location: Australia

Post by Phalanx » Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:14 am

DOS does not stand for Dirty Operating System for no reason. Just like 9x does not stand for out of 1990's for no reason.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests