Hacker News Reader

Comment by etal | Hacker News Reader

It's handy for the same reason FreeDOS is handy -- eventually Microsoft will EOL the platform, but there will still be programs that you need to run (for whatever reason) that require that platform.

You're right that there's no point in chasing the most recent Windows version.

View on HN

> but there will still be programs that you need to run (for whatever reason) that require that platform.

But why would that be better, or even preferable, over Wine on top of a Unix-like OS with current programs to run sde by side with your legacy app?

It's they project, their motivation, but I can't share it or understand why not devote these resources to make Wine better (or a better Wine, BTW). It's pretty obvious they are fairly bright guys.

I have to agree with the Unix zealot (I am probably one myself - Unix is a local maximum in the OS space, as eloquently illustrated by the failure of, for instance, Plan 9): of all OS concepts (and with so many exciting ones - like Plan 9) there are to be reinterpreted/reimplemented, why Windows?

I'm quite sure that there are some software that is impossible to run on Wine. Drivers and other stuff that touches the kernel comes to mind.

And ReactOS does make Wine better as they share some code:

"ReactOS works with the WINE project to share as much programming effort as possible. ReactOS depends on Wine mainly for user mode DLLs. Where appropriate, patches to Wine are also submitted by the development team, and patch contributors are often directed to Wine if it is felt that the patches would benefit them." <http://www.reactos.org/wiki/WINE>;

You are right, of course.

I remember having read about the ReactOS/Wine cooperation, but I completely forgot about it while making my comment.

Still, it's not the kernel side of the driver that requires a bare OS, but the hardware side that requires the OS not to interfere. The foreign kernel can be emulated. A Windows-like OS can help you use hardware that has no drivers for other OSs but I never had this issue, nor know anyone who needs to run legacy hardware that can't also run a legacy OS.

Devotion of resource arguments are detrimental to the spirit of liberty in OSS. I think of these works more like exploration than some effort ultimately asymptotic to a goal. Exploration is hardly ever an unrewarding pursuit. And it has beneficial externalities. In this case more than most even!

From http://www.winehq.org/site/acknowledgement: "Wine is at the heart of ReactOS' Win32 support. Initial work improved Wine's portability by cleaning things up so MinGW could compile it. From there, a considerable amount of effort was spent improving Wine's shell32 infrastructure and various controls. The ReactOS team is also responsible for the regedit and task manager utilities." More details are in http://www.reactos.org/wiki/WINE

I understand your point, still, exploring the Windows-like OS space is not what I would consider fun. I even happen to use some of the beneficial externalities of their exploration and I am glad they explore it and devote their resources to the side-effects I enjoy.

And those are their resources. I respect their decision, even if I cannot agree with their taste for OSs ;-)

It's simpler, if all you're running is windows programs? The third world has been a windows fiefdom for ages, and they have to rely on legacy hardware where any spurious processes running mean slowdown.

Speak for your part of the third world. ;-)

If you rely on legacy hardware, it's a given you will prefer to rely on legacy software too for the whole stack.

It's not like someone will run air-traffic or medical equipment on an OS different from the one the machine was certified for.

Actually, the WINE and ReactOS teams share a lot of code.

ORLY.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com