I didnt know where to post this topic, but I hope its not too Offtopic to read.

I have been wondering why nobody made a copy of Windows XP, just in open source??

I am a big fan of Linux, and have been using it on my computer too.. (Fedora Core 2 and Red Hat).

The reason I stopped using these great OS's was:

1. Lonelyness (lets fase it, Almost all games and programs only support Windows, when I used Linux, I was real lonely) sad.gif

2. Not so friendly ( it took me almost 1 month to get my CD-Rom Drive to work, okay I am not the sharpest person in the world, but it was hard. Linux is not easy to use for the avarge user)

Okay.. I cant find any other reasons to stop using Linux, but if the list was for Windows, It would be much longer.

So I have been thinking.. why is the reason nobody ever made a copy of Windows XP? I mean a total clone.. just open source? Is this because nobody knows how to create it?

I know it would be Illigal to do, but in this big world, I dont understand why no "Pirats" have done it yet (even though it would not be a "good" thing to do)?

Can anyone tell me that? Maybe I am missing something? I mean.. if we could have a (Linux) Open source Windows XP, that was totally free to the public, and the only thing stopping us in using it, was the law.. wouldnt that be great?

I look forward to see some replys on this topic.

Thanks

1. I suppose it would be reallly easy if you just ask bill for his source code. But I think he'll have a problem with that.

2. The word CLONE means exact copy. I really don't think we need another operating system with that many bugs, security flaws, and Blue Screens of Death.

First off, try Knoppix. It's easier than Red Hat (and crashes less often than Red Hat 9 ).

It's also more Windows-y.


Linux has ports of the stuff I use and some better stuff than Windows in the same area. Also, the games I played in Windows work with Wine or were already cross-platform. I lost nothing switching to Linux.


Red Hat 9 is a bitch IMO. Try Knoppix and see if you still think Linux is too hard. Knoppix was pretty much the only thing that got me to prefer Linux over Win XP.



That's most likely it exactly: programmers don't know how to make a clone of XP. Wine is very imperfect, which shows us that we aren't entirely sure how Windows ticks. Decompilers only work so far.

Pirates do have Cracks and Serialz versions of Windows XP, but pirates are pirates: trust worthy they arn't.

Also, Windows XP has a large list of bugs, glitches and malfuctions that we wouldn't want to repeat.

Thanks for the reply.

This is exactly my point. If we had an open source XP, we would be able to fix all these bugs very fast. Almost everybody is using Windows, and I think if someone created a Free version, with much less bugs and more useful updates (SP2 ), M$ would either loose there monopole on the marked, or have to do some very big (nice) changes to there software.

I mean there must be some people who know how to create a copy of Windows, somebody build it?

I think P2P would be an excellent way to publish this version of XP.

I think many people agree with this, and I think most people would get them self this copy if it was possible. I also do believe I am not the first one to think about this, so there must be a reason (without counting the law as one) that nobody ever did this before.

So my question will remain the same.. why Didn’t anybody create this XP yet?

EDIT:
Btw, I will download Knoppix and give it a try..

THere are some attempts at an open source windows. I think atheos has that goal in mind. In some ways the linux/wine project is an attempt at an open source windows api...

Any attempt at a windows copy tends to start with a different foundation as nobody has any real interest in the windows foundation, which is not exactly that great. The main thing is to make a useable platform that will run win apps and maybe a win style gui, though there are plenty of gui copies already.

AtheOS...Is that name an allusion to something? 'Cos atheos means 'without god'. Huh.

Also I would like to add another thing, people who love linux wont like it, which is bad for linux itself. Look at Linspire, most of the linux users hate it because it took an easy approach to attract new users to linux. And now people hate it coz its easy and say its a disgrace to linux community. Why? They dont look at the positive side. Linspire is attracting windows users to linux base. Dont you think its a positive thing? Most of the working peple dont have time to learn everything. New versions of different distros are easy, but console has to be used sometimes no matter what. And people are scared of that coz there is nothing like that in windows. So why would they enter the linux world if they are comfortable using windows.

No amount of praising linux's easiness will get them to use it. We actually need an easy to use linux that a kid can learn and people aged more than 40-50 can learn and by learn I mean they should be able to use it without asking for stuff like how do i install this and that, how do i log on to net etc etc. The people in between like us teens have enough time to try to learn it. But they dont. We think if its easy for us to learn and that they can. Some people aged 30 above have learnt how to use it, thats sheer luck or they had time at hand.

So we need a distro that doesnt try to imitate windows but is incredibly easy to use( easier than windows). It will be easy to make it if people try.

ReactOS is supposed to be a rebuild of NT from scratch.
And atheOS is (from what I can tell) a whole new OS, not based on Windows or Unix.

Yes, sorry, ReactOS was what I was refering to...

Why not just building a (perfect) windows theme and graphical setups to compile programs (like the installer of Apollon)? Combine this with a very good version of wine (with a decent graphical interface) and I'm pretty sure Windows users would at least take a serious look at it.

More graphical interfaces are all what Linux need to make it popular for the great mass. Command-line interfaces don't have to disappear. For people who don't like them, they just shouldn't be the primary tools on the OS.

Just my 2cents

Moved: This thread is more suitable in General and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

JUST??? hahaha....

why doesn't someone just invent a cure for cancer?
why don't we just fly to the sun?
why can't i just live until i'm 400 years old?

why? because it's not a "just" kind of thing... it's insanely hard. I guess you don't really know what you're asking. could you, for example, just make an exact copy of your car by looking at it? Sure, you could make a big red metal box with windows that can look the same, but that whole internal combustion engine ain't no walk in the park. especially when you can't see how it works because the bonnet, (sorry "hood") is locked down.

The kind of demands that people are putting on the open source community is ridiculous.

Why don't you customers of Microsoft spend the same time and energy in demanding that they put an end to all the ridiculous number of security holes and flaws in their OS?

If a significant proportion of their customers protested, Microsoft might sit up and take notice. But nobody does.

This is because, I assume, nobody can contact MS in any reasonable manner, like we can contact FOSS developers. For instance, a week or so ago, I submitted a bug report fo Slack-current. Pat got back to me within 2 days. Even sick, he took the time out to email me back and say thanks for the heads up.
This can't, doesn't, and won't happen with Microsoft. End of story.

Then people must just stop using Microsoft products and switch to Linux. Full stop. Halfway measures like asking for a FOSS Windows version is a dream.

Microsoft will not allow its OS to be copied and I can see patent and copyright issues when developers try to get Windows apps to work in a new OpenSource Windows.