4 ms·

Windows subsystem stagnated since 2006. Win32 is on a standstill. All new efforts (Silverlight, UniversalRuntime, etc) are not very successful (and based on Win

by frik 10y ago

Windows subsystem stagnated since 2006. Win32 is on a standstill. All new efforts (Silverlight, UniversalRuntime, etc) are not very successful (and based on Win32 subsystem as well) and like a niche compared to the vast amount of WinAPI based applications. So Windows like Office are not a moving target like they used to be. ReactOS aims for WinNT series compatibility including hardware drivers. And those driver APIs haven't changed for a decade or more.

laumars 10y ago
From an end user perspective Windows 10 might not appear any more advanced than it's predecessors, but the NT subsystem has still changed quite considerably since 2006 (that date range covers Vista, Windows 7, 8.* and 10). There have also been massive changes to the way Windows handles networking and authentication protocols (Active directory, SMB, etc), changes to the the driver model, changes to the way POSIX support is handled, etc. As much as you might dismiss some subsequent Microsoft technologies to be "not very successful", the fact remains that Microsoft are still always pushing new technologies and a not so insignificant number of developers do sometimes use these technologies which means, at some point, the ReactOS developers will either need to reverse engineer those technologies as well (assuming those libraries can't run natively on ReactOS already _and_ there's no legal restrictions preventing them from running on non-Microsoft endorsed platforms) or accept a lack of parity with Windows.
- userulluipeste 10y ago
  "Microsoft are still always pushing new technologies" And how much of it is actually needed? Considering only the actually useful parts of an OS, my impression is that Windows got saturated a long ago and the parts in later versions were just forced along in new versions due to reasons that have nothing to do with technological advance. My point is, ReactOS has only to become stable and reasonably good on real hardware to be successful. There is a lot of parts in the later Windows versions that only serve niches, thus being cruft for the bulk of users. Microsoft had to evolve this way due to its commercial nature, whereas ReactOS doesn't have to.
  - laumars 10y ago
    It doesn't matter how much of the new tech is needed in Windows. It doesn't even matter if the tech is any good or not. What matters is if it's used by applications. If it is then ReactOS has to reverse engineer it if they want parity with Windows. I don't get why people are pushing back on this point. It isn't a criticism of ReactOS. It's just a pragmatic result of writing a clone of another project that itself is constantly undergoing development. This is why people more often talk about ReactOS being exciting in terms of supporting older software rather than new. Obviously if it ever got to the stage that it had parity with the latest releases of Windows then that would be amazing but the chances of that happening are miniscule.
    - userulluipeste 10y ago
      "It doesn't even matter if the tech is any good or not. ReactOS has to reverse engineer it if they want parity with Windows. It's just a pragmatic result of writing a clone of another project that itself is constantly undergoing development." I think this is where you're making wrong assumptions. ReactOS is free and open-source, and from this comes choice. Even if the main project chooses to work on reimplementing marginal or even unwanted things, a fork is always an option. (A fork from an immature project like it still is doesn't make sense for now.) After all, it's known that people don't appreciate bloat. ReactOS wants parity with Windows 2003 and that is a manageable target. Bits from later Windows versions may be added for important applications but it hasn't have to be nor is necessarily wanted all that Microsoft pushed from Vista hitherto. ReactOS doesn't have to cover all that much, really. Also, an important nitpeek: ReactOS doesn't reverse-engineer. It employs clean-room engineering.
      - laumars 10y ago
        ReactOS is aiming for 2003 at the moment. A few years back it was 2000. Then previous versions of Windows before then. It's target has been upgraded every few years. I've been following and using ReactOS for about 15 years now. Trust me when I say I'm familiar with the project and what it's aims are and have been in the past. Yeah you're right it's not reverse engineering in the technical sense. It's a lazy term to use because it sounds like the approximation of the process even though it's technically inaccurate. I should get out of that habit. :)
- chris_wot 10y ago
  Those changes didn't change the fundamental architectural basis of Windows. There are quite a few subsystems in the NT architecture, let's look at them in turn, but first have a look at the following diagram which I created years ago and hasn't changed terribly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#/media/File:Windows_2000_architecture.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#/me... * the HAL - there have been changes here, but nothing so fundamental that can't be built upon * kernel mode drivers - these have changed and new models keep getting released by Microsoft, but these rely on well defined interfaces and a lot of it is in the kernel mode driver framework (KMDF). A detailed history can be found here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/wdf/kmdf-version-history https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/wdf/kmdf... The user mode driver framework is similar. I'm not going to go through the rest of the subsystems, you might want to review this document: https://web.archive.org/web/20160113113554/http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/events/wincore2010/Dave_Probert_1.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160113113554/http://research.m... So... sure, things have changed over the years but they most certainly aren't radical enough to stall development of ReactOS.
  - laumars 10y ago
    I didn't say stall the development of ReactOS. I said Windows is a moving target. And I also listed a bunch of interfaces that had changed specification in subsequent releases of Windows.
    - chris_wot 10y ago
      And I didn't say you said to stall development of ReactOS, I said that I don't think it would actually stall development :-) ReactOS has a target of Windows Server 2003. If they decide to upgrade to a later operating system, I'm not quite sure I see that as a huge issue.
      - laumars 10y ago
        It's not a huge issue. It's exactly what they've done already for the last 20 odd years. Hence why I say they're chasing a moving target ;)

by frik 10y ago

laumars 10y ago

From an end user perspective Windows 10 might not appear any more advanced than it's predecessors, but the NT subsystem has still changed quite considerably since 2006 (that date range covers Vista, Windows 7, 8.* and 10). There have also been massive changes to the way Windows handles networking and authentication protocols (Active directory, SMB, etc), changes to the the driver model, changes to the way POSIX support is handled, etc. As much as you might dismiss some subsequent Microsoft technologies to be "not very successful", the fact remains that Microsoft are still always pushing new technologies and a not so insignificant number of developers do sometimes use these technologies which means, at some point, the ReactOS developers will either need to reverse engineer those technologies as well (assuming those libraries can't run natively on ReactOS already _and_ there's no legal restrictions preventing them from running on non-Microsoft endorsed platforms) or accept a lack of parity with Windows.

userulluipeste 10y ago
"Microsoft are still always pushing new technologies" And how much of it is actually needed? Considering only the actually useful parts of an OS, my impression is that Windows got saturated a long ago and the parts in later versions were just forced along in new versions due to reasons that have nothing to do with technological advance. My point is, ReactOS has only to become stable and reasonably good on real hardware to be successful. There is a lot of parts in the later Windows versions that only serve niches, thus being cruft for the bulk of users. Microsoft had to evolve this way due to its commercial nature, whereas ReactOS doesn't have to.
- laumars 10y ago
  It doesn't matter how much of the new tech is needed in Windows. It doesn't even matter if the tech is any good or not. What matters is if it's used by applications. If it is then ReactOS has to reverse engineer it if they want parity with Windows. I don't get why people are pushing back on this point. It isn't a criticism of ReactOS. It's just a pragmatic result of writing a clone of another project that itself is constantly undergoing development. This is why people more often talk about ReactOS being exciting in terms of supporting older software rather than new. Obviously if it ever got to the stage that it had parity with the latest releases of Windows then that would be amazing but the chances of that happening are miniscule.
  - userulluipeste 10y ago
    "It doesn't even matter if the tech is any good or not. ReactOS has to reverse engineer it if they want parity with Windows. It's just a pragmatic result of writing a clone of another project that itself is constantly undergoing development." I think this is where you're making wrong assumptions. ReactOS is free and open-source, and from this comes choice. Even if the main project chooses to work on reimplementing marginal or even unwanted things, a fork is always an option. (A fork from an immature project like it still is doesn't make sense for now.) After all, it's known that people don't appreciate bloat. ReactOS wants parity with Windows 2003 and that is a manageable target. Bits from later Windows versions may be added for important applications but it hasn't have to be nor is necessarily wanted all that Microsoft pushed from Vista hitherto. ReactOS doesn't have to cover all that much, really. Also, an important nitpeek: ReactOS doesn't reverse-engineer. It employs clean-room engineering.
    - laumars 10y ago
      ReactOS is aiming for 2003 at the moment. A few years back it was 2000. Then previous versions of Windows before then. It's target has been upgraded every few years. I've been following and using ReactOS for about 15 years now. Trust me when I say I'm familiar with the project and what it's aims are and have been in the past. Yeah you're right it's not reverse engineering in the technical sense. It's a lazy term to use because it sounds like the approximation of the process even though it's technically inaccurate. I should get out of that habit. :)
chris_wot 10y ago
Those changes didn't change the fundamental architectural basis of Windows. There are quite a few subsystems in the NT architecture, let's look at them in turn, but first have a look at the following diagram which I created years ago and hasn't changed terribly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#/media/File:Windows_2000_architecture.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture_of_Windows_NT#/me... * the HAL - there have been changes here, but nothing so fundamental that can't be built upon * kernel mode drivers - these have changed and new models keep getting released by Microsoft, but these rely on well defined interfaces and a lot of it is in the kernel mode driver framework (KMDF). A detailed history can be found here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/wdf/kmdf-version-history https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/wdf/kmdf... The user mode driver framework is similar. I'm not going to go through the rest of the subsystems, you might want to review this document: https://web.archive.org/web/20160113113554/http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/events/wincore2010/Dave_Probert_1.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160113113554/http://research.m... So... sure, things have changed over the years but they most certainly aren't radical enough to stall development of ReactOS.
- laumars 10y ago
  I didn't say stall the development of ReactOS. I said Windows is a moving target. And I also listed a bunch of interfaces that had changed specification in subsequent releases of Windows.
  - chris_wot 10y ago
    And I didn't say you said to stall development of ReactOS, I said that I don't think it would actually stall development :-) ReactOS has a target of Windows Server 2003. If they decide to upgrade to a later operating system, I'm not quite sure I see that as a huge issue.
    - laumars 10y ago
      It's not a huge issue. It's exactly what they've done already for the last 20 odd years. Hence why I say they're chasing a moving target ;)