Why in the world would you even want to make linux anything like windows? Linux is Unix. Windows is not in any way a system capable of replacing Unix. If you want windows, then just use it, it's already available and probably came on your computer. It would be like reinventing the wheel, and having the same old bent rim.

Linux is developed by computer users who have their own interests in mind, instead of making money. I'm sure when the whole project started to develope there were solid reasons for the OS to be base on Unix. It is the best. In my opinion noone would even consider using something like windows as a starting point for something like Linux. If they did it would be called something like lindows I guess. Oh wait someone did. Oh well that proves my point.

Windows has better support of most software because the software was written for windows. Some of it's good, most of it is crap that is only written to make money. Hardware is built and drivers are developed for windows. It's the manufacturer that has decided not to suport Linux or even to release the information needed to build drivers. This is why it takes time for someone to build a driver that works.

That last post should be the last really because I couldn't have said it better!

well to be 100 % honest i dislike windows.

why should we make linux like windows?, there are similar distros to windows out there, but windows is just so.... windows.

windows cant really do anything that linux cant, its not linux's responsibility to make itself all windows orientated just so windows users can move over.

There just so many things wrong with this.. its hard to know where to start. To phrase this gently, alot of the questions are rhetorical.

Alot them are equivalent to asking "why can't boys be girls?" or vice versa.

Or downright deamining.

You would'nt ask a musician "well why don't you play more like musician x?" and certainly don't tell or imply the programmers of the faster growing open source project in the world that their programs suck because it is'nt windows.

compatibility?


You've cause and effect completely mixed around

software is compatible with the OS, NOT the other way around.

Windows is successful because of its market dominating strategies and well designed gui(subjective ofcourse) which people oooh'd and ahhhh'd over at the time. Right place. Right time. Right hardware.
It did'nt just fall out of the sky and was successful because it was compatible with existing software. It was successful because it run on exceptionally cheap hardware but still be functional. It was the first to achieve this goal and now its standard.

Ease of use? You want Microsoft's ease of use plan? Here it is.

Copy as much as legally possible from the mac gui.

Make things square. Users like bold angle.

Get as much hardware vendor support as possible.

Let other companies handle innovation. Buy them out if useful.

Create standards from the companies you bought that will be conviently easy to use on your system but be nearly impossible on others.

Discourage portability in programs. Encourage binary protocols and propietary conventions.

Wizards, dialogue boxes, clippy.

Advertise. Advertise. Advertise.

Change colors in the widgets every 3-5 years. Innovation. W00T!

Presto.

Some people may disagree with you.
reactos is windows .exe compatible.
And lindows CAN run many .exe BTW.
The original poster wants reactos and doesn't know what linux is.

Brainnnnnsssssss. This thread has been revived by some sort of nerd necromancy - before today, the last entry was around 2 years ago.

Carry on.

Do they not get sued for that?

it depends on how many people would be happy to see them get sued ...


//btw ... seems that they got a live cd of their work ... cool ...


.

I ment by Microsoft, as it basically is a blatent ripoff of Windows.

There is, it's called a Mac, and you still have to pay $$$ for it.

Ok, maybe it's not linux but BSD, but close enough.

You know, it's probably a great big myth to suppose that most of the serious proponents of Linux are somehow "counter-culture" .. or even that this supposedly evil notion of "making money" is a pariah to these folks.

There is actually an enormous purely-commercial installed base of Linux. Supercomputers of all sizes, web servers by the thousands, transaction processing, you name it! There's an excellent chance that your cell-phone is running some version of it. Sure, it's easily the most adaptable and approachable system out there, precisely because of its open-source nature. That's what enables all of that commercial activity to take place.

"Open source" is also why Apple has been able to crank out a new OS/X every year while we are "still waiting" for LongH.. uh, Vista. It's also how they were able to move their system to an entirely new hardware architecture ... on time, and on budget ... with nary a hiccup. (Still .. waiting .. for .. vista .. .. ..)

So maybe it's time to set-aside this "Us versus the World" posturing. This is a world of commerce, and Linux happens to now be a very fundamental part of it.

I don't even know why I keep reading these threads. It's so pointless.
If you want a faster, more secure version of windows, learn how to use windows. It's as hard as learning linux, with the only difference that you can do without knowing windows - with the downside that it will get slower and more insecure until you have to reinstall.