5 ms·

Does this have anything to do with ReactJS or React Native?

by nym 10y ago

bluejekyll 10y ago
No.
rpeden 10y ago
No, and ReactOS has been around for much longer than React and React Native. Its first released was 13 years ago.
- alexdoma 10y ago
  There's also myReact, an obscure (+obfuscated) Dutch forum application written in php sirca 2005, if not earlier.
nxc18 10y ago
I can't quite put it to words, but there's something about this statement that makes me very sad.
- JED3 10y ago
  Perhaps: "My neck beard hurts"??? The guy had an honest question, no point in shunning him.
  - mbrumlow 10y ago
    What's wrong with a neck beard?
    - patates 10y ago
      It runs on a million-year-old (or more) technology which is not developed agile (evolution is the opposite of agile, I would cautiously say?) and most importantly doesn't have a react.js renderer. Sorry, I know this type of comments are shunned but I couldn't help myself at this point.
      - jcbrand 10y ago
        Evolution is incredibly agile, while intelligent design follows the waterfall model. Since intelligent design presupposes that a design was in place before implementation, you'd need a watertight specification to know what you'll need to design. This is pretty much the definition of the waterfall model. Once you've started with the implementation, you'd not be able to deviate from the spec. If you're God you'd never make an incomplete or incorrect spec, right? By definition that'd be impossible. With evolution change is introduced iteratively. Each generation contains tweaks and updates, is exposed to a barrage of tests and if it's less adapted to the requirements it's disposed of unceremoniously in favor of a version more suitable. Due to its iterative nature evolution is also able to adapt quickly to changing requirements and good/beneficial features are taken over into the next iteration.
        patates 10y ago
        That makes perfect sense! Thank you very much for your thoughtful response!
        fgGAMI 10y ago
        Maybe evolution is an emergent phenomenon of the spec.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    That doesn't have to be taken as derogatory or insulting. I can relate, I too find it somewhat sad. I don't think that's a problem with the people who don't know, but a systemic problem where cool and noteworthy things of the past are overshadowed by popular current things that share a similar name. Relevant or interesting history is all too quickly forgotten by the general populace. As an aside, the most recent example of that I've come across, and much more relevant to current events (to US Americans, at least), was during the most recent Hardcore History podcast. It was pointed out that JFK won after he got a bunch of free press because of how photogenic his family was (which whether it was the reason he won or not probably helped quite a bit). Parallels weren't drawn to current events, but it's not like you need a political science degree to see them, which I found really interesting.
- BuuQu9hu 10y ago
  I will try to help: The first feeling that washes over you is a kind of despair that this question was asked at all, as even a cursory view of the information available in the OP, let alone a Google search, would immediately show the project is not related to ReactJS. You find it difficult to imagine the kind of mind that chooses to seek trivial answers from others rather than attempt to answer them on its own. This mind thinks nothing of wasting the time of others to satisfy its own meager curiosities. Surely, in this case, the time taken to ask the question takes almost as long as the research required to answer it. However, you can't help but notice a deeper level of sadness swelling from below... It's not merely that the question was trivial. For example, the question "What is this project for?" doesn't seem nearly as sad. Moreover, we notice that if ReactJS was an obscure or unpopular project then this user's question seems rather innocuous. We see that your deeper sadness stems from the realization that this user is consumed and infatuated with the present trend in software development, whatever that may be. If he knew, he would not care that ReactOS predates ReactJS by nearly two decades. To this user, what exists now is better than what has ever existed before. After all, he imagines, every good idea and enlightened thinking in the history of computing has been brought to the present; these qualities are easily recognized by everyone and they naturally persist and become popular. Therefore, the popular projects are the best humanity has to offer both technically and philosophically. Likewise, obscure, small, or old projects have the opposite quality. Learning of ReactOS for the first time, he is skeptical of how much of a "good idea" it could really be (surely he would have heard of it by now if it was worth knowing about). So, he attempts to establish the project's merit using the only method available to him: an appeal to popularity. Does this project relate to the current pinnacle of computing achievement, ReactJS? Being a React aficionado, he doesn't suspect it is related but decides to ask anyway just in case he missed something. He wants to know the answer, but ReactOS appears sufficiently unpopular (ie. irrelevant) as to not be worth any appreciable time or effort to discover it for himself. Besides, it is far more agreeable to his psyche that the crowd provide the answer. There is a subtlety to the user's phrasing that enhances your sadness further. He does not wonder "is it related?" but rather "does this have anything to do with?". One gets the feeling that if only there were just the tiniest bit of relation to ReactJS then this user would be satisfied that ReactOS is indeed a worthy project. There is a sense that this brand of thinking is 'shallow' or 'myopic'. That it is a brand of thinking that is destined to bring the industry to a state of perpetual mediocrity caused by the incessant following of trends instead of truth. That it is a brand of thinking that causes those under its influence to ignore the search for truth altogether as they are assured that truth is always provided for them, right here, in the present. And when real truth does arrive in those rare moments, it is a brand of thinking that renders it unrecognizable. This is troubling but it's not the sole cause of your depression now. You are saddened because you know he is one of many.
marvy 10y ago
Just the name is similar; these folks are just trying to rewrite Windows, no JS involved.
- jontro 10y ago
  I would say the branding is similar too, an nucleus with electrons around it.
- gspetr 10y ago
  To play devil's advocate: JS is involved, Microsoft's JScript[0] can be found in ReactOS: https://doxygen.reactos.org/dir_2f81209855df6dbf8ef5ef665906f7a9.html https://doxygen.reactos.org/dir_2f81209855df6dbf8ef5ef665906... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JScript https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JScript
- jug 10y ago
  WinJS, on the other hand... You may just have given the Javascript folks an idea!
- nym 10y ago
  Thank you.
  - marvy 10y ago
    you're welcome :)
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
dmitrygr 10y ago
One is a serious, impressive undertaking and the other is a pile of javascript
- patates 10y ago
  So you are suggesting that React.js is not a serious, impressive undertaking?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - rpcope1 10y ago
    Not in the same way ReactOS is.
    - patates 10y ago
      What?! React.js has 8180 commits from 942 contributors now. I respect ReactOS guys probably more than most people but come on! Think about the value created! How do you define serious? Being an operating system automatically puts a project automatically on a different level or do you have a thing against JavaScript?
delerio 10y ago
I feel sad that someone would think this. I don't blame you for writing it, many people are ignorant of not too distant software, but still bothers me somehow.

Does this have anything to do with ReactJS or React Native?

by nym 10y ago

Does this have anything to do with ReactJS or React Native?

bluejekyll 10y ago

No.

rpeden 10y ago

No, and ReactOS has been around for much longer than React and React Native. Its first released was 13 years ago.

alexdoma 10y ago
There's also myReact, an obscure (+obfuscated) Dutch forum application written in php sirca 2005, if not earlier.

nxc18 10y ago

I can't quite put it to words, but there's something about this statement that makes me very sad.

JED3 10y ago
Perhaps: "My neck beard hurts"??? The guy had an honest question, no point in shunning him.
- mbrumlow 10y ago
  What's wrong with a neck beard?
  - patates 10y ago
    It runs on a million-year-old (or more) technology which is not developed agile (evolution is the opposite of agile, I would cautiously say?) and most importantly doesn't have a react.js renderer. Sorry, I know this type of comments are shunned but I couldn't help myself at this point.
    - jcbrand 10y ago
      Evolution is incredibly agile, while intelligent design follows the waterfall model. Since intelligent design presupposes that a design was in place before implementation, you'd need a watertight specification to know what you'll need to design. This is pretty much the definition of the waterfall model. Once you've started with the implementation, you'd not be able to deviate from the spec. If you're God you'd never make an incomplete or incorrect spec, right? By definition that'd be impossible. With evolution change is introduced iteratively. Each generation contains tweaks and updates, is exposed to a barrage of tests and if it's less adapted to the requirements it's disposed of unceremoniously in favor of a version more suitable. Due to its iterative nature evolution is also able to adapt quickly to changing requirements and good/beneficial features are taken over into the next iteration.
      - patates 10y ago
        That makes perfect sense! Thank you very much for your thoughtful response!
      - fgGAMI 10y ago
        Maybe evolution is an emergent phenomenon of the spec.
- kbenson 10y ago
  That doesn't have to be taken as derogatory or insulting. I can relate, I too find it somewhat sad. I don't think that's a problem with the people who don't know, but a systemic problem where cool and noteworthy things of the past are overshadowed by popular current things that share a similar name. Relevant or interesting history is all too quickly forgotten by the general populace. As an aside, the most recent example of that I've come across, and much more relevant to current events (to US Americans, at least), was during the most recent Hardcore History podcast. It was pointed out that JFK won after he got a bunch of free press because of how photogenic his family was (which whether it was the reason he won or not probably helped quite a bit). Parallels weren't drawn to current events, but it's not like you need a political science degree to see them, which I found really interesting.
BuuQu9hu 10y ago
I will try to help: The first feeling that washes over you is a kind of despair that this question was asked at all, as even a cursory view of the information available in the OP, let alone a Google search, would immediately show the project is not related to ReactJS. You find it difficult to imagine the kind of mind that chooses to seek trivial answers from others rather than attempt to answer them on its own. This mind thinks nothing of wasting the time of others to satisfy its own meager curiosities. Surely, in this case, the time taken to ask the question takes almost as long as the research required to answer it. However, you can't help but notice a deeper level of sadness swelling from below... It's not merely that the question was trivial. For example, the question "What is this project for?" doesn't seem nearly as sad. Moreover, we notice that if ReactJS was an obscure or unpopular project then this user's question seems rather innocuous. We see that your deeper sadness stems from the realization that this user is consumed and infatuated with the present trend in software development, whatever that may be. If he knew, he would not care that ReactOS predates ReactJS by nearly two decades. To this user, what exists now is better than what has ever existed before. After all, he imagines, every good idea and enlightened thinking in the history of computing has been brought to the present; these qualities are easily recognized by everyone and they naturally persist and become popular. Therefore, the popular projects are the best humanity has to offer both technically and philosophically. Likewise, obscure, small, or old projects have the opposite quality. Learning of ReactOS for the first time, he is skeptical of how much of a "good idea" it could really be (surely he would have heard of it by now if it was worth knowing about). So, he attempts to establish the project's merit using the only method available to him: an appeal to popularity. Does this project relate to the current pinnacle of computing achievement, ReactJS? Being a React aficionado, he doesn't suspect it is related but decides to ask anyway just in case he missed something. He wants to know the answer, but ReactOS appears sufficiently unpopular (ie. irrelevant) as to not be worth any appreciable time or effort to discover it for himself. Besides, it is far more agreeable to his psyche that the crowd provide the answer. There is a subtlety to the user's phrasing that enhances your sadness further. He does not wonder "is it related?" but rather "does this have anything to do with?". One gets the feeling that if only there were just the tiniest bit of relation to ReactJS then this user would be satisfied that ReactOS is indeed a worthy project. There is a sense that this brand of thinking is 'shallow' or 'myopic'. That it is a brand of thinking that is destined to bring the industry to a state of perpetual mediocrity caused by the incessant following of trends instead of truth. That it is a brand of thinking that causes those under its influence to ignore the search for truth altogether as they are assured that truth is always provided for them, right here, in the present. And when real truth does arrive in those rare moments, it is a brand of thinking that renders it unrecognizable. This is troubling but it's not the sole cause of your depression now. You are saddened because you know he is one of many.

marvy 10y ago

Just the name is similar; these folks are just trying to rewrite Windows, no JS involved.

jontro 10y ago
I would say the branding is similar too, an nucleus with electrons around it.
gspetr 10y ago
To play devil's advocate: JS is involved, Microsoft's JScript[0] can be found in ReactOS: https://doxygen.reactos.org/dir_2f81209855df6dbf8ef5ef665906f7a9.html https://doxygen.reactos.org/dir_2f81209855df6dbf8ef5ef665906... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JScript https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JScript
jug 10y ago
WinJS, on the other hand... You may just have given the Javascript folks an idea!
nym 10y ago
Thank you.
- marvy 10y ago
  you're welcome :)

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

dmitrygr 10y ago

One is a serious, impressive undertaking and the other is a pile of javascript

patates 10y ago
So you are suggesting that React.js is not a serious, impressive undertaking?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- rpcope1 10y ago
  Not in the same way ReactOS is.
  - patates 10y ago
    What?! React.js has 8180 commits from 942 contributors now. I respect ReactOS guys probably more than most people but come on! Think about the value created! How do you define serious? Being an operating system automatically puts a project automatically on a different level or do you have a thing against JavaScript?

delerio 10y ago

I feel sad that someone would think this. I don't blame you for writing it, many people are ignorant of not too distant software, but still bothers me somehow.