performance, and probably compatibility On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Sir Gallantmon <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Anyway, you didn't give a reason to NOT use arwinss as the official win32 > subsystem... > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:11 PM, James Tabor <jimtabor.ros...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> The same thing with the kernel, we can use Linux instead! Create a >> distribution with it and call it Lindows! Oh wait! That ship has set >> sail and moved on~! >> >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Sir Gallantmon <ngomp...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > I don't see any real reason for maintaining both branches of win32 >> > subsystem. Arwinss still aims to be driver compatible, right? So, what >> do we >> > gain by fully replicating the Win32 subsystem as Microsoft Windows does >> it? >> > The idea of using Wine code to further the levels of compatibility in >> > ReactOS is a good idea, and it has potential to make ReactOS a good >> choice >> > for "thin-client" and terminal server systems because of the X11 driver. >> I >> > personally prefer X11 SSH tunneling over VNC/RDP, because I don't need >> to >> > see the entire remote desktop, just the applications I want to run from >> > there. Additionally, Linux distros might include ReactOS and use their >> > virtualization solutions to integrate apps installed to ReactOS into the >> > overall Linux desktop. Nobody would ever really see the ReactOS desktop, >> but >> > ReactOS would ensure more complete compatibility with Windows apps and >> > games. >> > I think Arwinss should be the new official win32 subsystem, but meh... >> >> No >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ros-dev mailing list >> Ros-dev@reactos.org >> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > Ros-dev@reactos.org > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >
_______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
