Re: IT OS need Versus Machine tool need
I remember being intrigued with ReactOS when I first heard about it in the late 90s.
Solves a problem that doesn't exist really. Lots of old hardware around. Do you really think companies would be comfortable running their mission critical stuff on something like ReactOS? No, they'd rather just run the old windows. Looks like some companies are still making new embedded 486 systems today. Used hardware for XP will be around for a long time.
Sure it has security issues but so does/will anything especially something as complex as ReactOS has tried to replicate over the years. At least with the old windows you know there aren't any updates coming that will break stuff. In some cases you can probably even run it in a VM. If you care about security you'll design the network in a way which minimizes exposure, though I bet most won't bother.
By the time ReactOS replicates a real XP system that 40 year time frame you mention will have passed already. I admire the effort, they just don't have enough resources to do that complex of a job.
Thought one bit of the article was funny at the start it says the devs say "this is a work in progress and not yet in the trunk", the same can obviously be said for the entire project as the article later notes "It(the ReactOS product) remains in a resolutely alpha state."
Could almost say Hurd is the ReactOS of the linux world, and that too has gone pretty much nowhere in the last 20 years either. Though at least with Hurd they have full source for all the user land components so have made more progress(I assume, haven't tracked their progress) but still from a market perspective almost nobody is asking for what Hurd can deliver so nobody uses it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
