ReactOS has become a bit of a joke, with Linux becoming more popular every day ReactOS is taking too long to develop and it will be obsolete by the time it's finished..Iv'e been watching them for a few years now waiting, waiting, I couldn't wait any longer so i made the switch from Windows to Linux Mint... a very friendly and easy to use Linux OS.. I won't go back to Windows or bother to wait for ReactOS.

@jam tangan: non of these have a linux base fyi

They all look like LINUX base. At least from the first impression, I just see the simple graphic effect, not like vista or seven.

The computer is just a fancy toy in a home setting. Game console systems are unfortunately the future they already have web browsers, media players and text messaging clients. Admit it other than a few misc tasks you use your computer %80 of the time for games, web browsing, playing movies/music and texting. The OS as we know it may be just the outdated thing in the computing world. Just wait in 10 years we will mostlikely be talikng about "10 amazingly alternative Firmwares and what they could mean for the future" and the ps8 and the xbox980 fans will still be fighting each other. =P

I was surprised to see so many OSes on the market. What it says to me is that it is not that hard to create an operating system. Like Bill Gates did, they started it out of their garage. Yet for some reason we have allowed a two party system with some minor independents on the side. As a kid, I would use an Amiga 500 and had many great times on it. Their graphical UI is just as good or better than another operating system. The Amiga was actually a superior graphics system but was dominated by IBM, Microsoft, and Apple. Xerox created the whole thing and they don't seem to get any credit. The first thing I thought of was that I don't need to spend $90-200 dollars (I buy OEM) for a Windows operating system that comes pre-installed with bugs and viruses and only forces you to buy more from companies whos only job is to create viruses so that they can sell their anti-virus programs. I could get all the free OSes I want and I could install as many OSes as I pleased on any computer that needed it. Especially old ones that could still be used as emulators and internet machines without having the RESOURCE HOG of the WINDOWS or APPLE systems that FORCE people to upgrade their computers. Especially for people in developing countries who can't afford an overpriced Apple or their only other alternative a Windows operating computer. Do they sell pre-made Linux computers? I don't even understand the concept really. I speak from an average person's point of view.

Lol, I think some of the idiots that commented need to realise that NONE of these OS's are mainstream, and probably never will be - THATS NOT THE POINT!!! The point is that in their owns rights they may offer features etc that make them 'interesting' to the hobbiest who is sick to death of backwards craparse Windoze and the 4 million different "almost compatible" spaghetti distros of linux! I myself use an X86 pc with Ubuntu (easiest to keep under control and up to date) and windows Vista (which takes it up the tailpipe) for any 'work', but when I want to play around with some FUN computing, I use my Amiga One with OS4.0, my Pegasos 2 with Morphos 2.3, my efika or my Aros X86. These systems are efficient, fast, elegant and fun to use, unlike Windoze. Wake up to yourself guys, no one pays $1000.00 aud for a motherboard (Amiga One / Pegasos 2) in this day and age unless they really enjoy computing, and whilst people like that exist, so will 'fun' OS's.

I'm an old man, 72, who not only missed the boat but did not know that a boat existed. Here are my non-knower comments: When technology is good I don't see it or think about it. I do recognize new technology. New technology does not work very well. Once upon a time I could not start my car in cold weather. I had to move that throttle thing-a-ma-jig in and out. I never did learn how an automobile works. Now I have an OS that constantly needs to be updated. Every company in the world asks me to give my privacy to them, and they promise to take good care of it. Vandals are putting viruses onto my computer. My keyboard works just like the ones that the girls learned how to use in high school. Here is the future that I want: I want the OS to disappear. I want the keyboard to disappear. I want the mouse to disappear. I want to talk to the computer. I want to use my computer without something or other that I have to twiddle with. It's like wanting the throttle to disappear. Do any of these operating systems point towards what I want? I hope that some of them do because I want to be included in our future society.

What about g_asOS? It asks the question: Did you ever fart so hard you ended up in another zip code?

Most people are forgetting the real reason why people choose an operating system: to run a specific program or type of programs. If the applications you want to run aren't available on a particular OS, then you don't choose that OS, unless you're an accomplished programmer that likes to write their own applications and has the time to debug them as well. Most people certainly don't fit into that category. It's like a graphic designer wanting to run Photoshop and Quark, choosing a Linux or Amiga-based OS; it's just not gonna work, no matter the "advantages" the said OS has. Said designer is either going to choose Windows or Mac OS, because they are the only choices he/she has. The operating systems in this article are simply not going to be accepted outside a select few enthusiasts because there simply isn't the wide array of software available as for Mac or Windows. My office hasn't upgraded from Win 2000 because it runs their software well.

It is a shame that I only use windows, and have no idea even about linux. The interface of the 10 OS you mentioned are really cool.

The criticisms of the article are for the most part valid; it really doesn't say enough, but it is a good starting point if you're interested in researching operating systems. I found the subsequent comments to be as valuable as the article itself. Overall this has been a fascinating read. Many thanks for this information.

My predictions for the future of operating systems is 1.operating systems and information management tools will grow top-down. 2.should make life simpler 3.future operating systems will be a very simple and lightweight software that could even be offered in a way of a “firmware” to desktop and laptop computers. Cheers, Shack Nickzam

DexOS ROCKS!!!!

Thanks for the information, was needed!

hello,can i translate this post to chinese??I want to post the translation on my blog....

My view of the future of operating systems is that most will become open source and possibly that GNU/Linux based operating systems will become mainstream to a very large scale and possibly (not saying definitely) could beat out Microsoft because of the fact that many *nix operating systems are better quality all around than Windows (most people admit that).

Windows 7 will beat out any of these operating systems. The BETA looks like the king. In terms of SIZE : the V2OS 32 bit OpSys in 37 KB takes the gravy.

What about Windows 7? This is the revolutionary OS. Beats out Vista and the basic version is scalable for 1GB pc's.

there are those of us who prefer to compute 'off the grid' - in a wireless world it is sometimes comforting, safe, and a bit more secure at times to avoid connecting this is why i prefer a self-reliant system that is not dependent on the 'net to function...

from my point of view we will have the taskbar, the dock and linux distros for a long time to come. the OS that will make a noticed impact on curent market is the one that will run windows games and softwares nativily without using emulators. let's face it and get real, the big software commpanys will stick with these 3 giants (especially with windows). a better aproach for re-inventing OS is to re-invent software programming (for ex. what is with these folders and lots of files? isn't time for softwares and games to be made up in a single file?)

Ehh.. different OS has purpose for different tasks; pick the OS best for the task or for what ever one are comfi with; heck I still make use of OS/2 here at my side for client mixed together with Debian for server and as well OS2 Warp Server. Of course a unit with XP as media server integrated with the audio system, etc. While OS2 is considered dead by the most and while it still struggles with keeping up with latest hardware; it still does and works. Suggestion to browse into http://www.os2world.com

No Reactos is dead, here is why: All real developers left in 2005 between Reactos 0.2.3 and 0.2.8 releases. As a consequence: A) Reactos have now lot of regressions: It doesn't run anymore on real hardware. B) Nobody worked on the driver model which is currently based on 15 years old NT 3.5 while Microsoft switched to new models (NT4 then Win2K WDM in 1999 and then Vista K/UMDF in 2005). C) No new drivers even based on the old NT 3.5 were introduced since 2005, no NTFS, no protection, no USB, no accelerated 3D graphics, no WIFI, no Bluetooth. This in a situation where existing GPL drivers for Windows 3.5 and Windows 4 exist (c.f. Alter.org, Zhiming's USB, and existing closely related softwares such as Captive NTFS, NTFS3G, NDISWrapper etc..) D) Why bother to develop on Reactos now when you can even look at Windows 2003 kernel, completly legally on Microsoft web site? Reactos is *not* what it is claimed currently, it's not a Windows XP/Vista/Server 2003 clone, it's a very very buggy clone of Windows 95.

You forgot to add eComStation. It is an updated version of OS/2. eCS is to OS/2 what Win95 was to Win3.1. http://www.ecomstation.com

Some time ago, my friend David Goemans recommended the Eye OS. He is correct in saying that it has a future. This system is designed to be run on an intranet system within a school or business. It won't be affected by Windows malware. It is heavy on different types of messages, is easy to use, and includes enough pro0grams to serve an organization's communication needs. They post a working demo (I have beaten their chess game two out of four times) that loads slowly, but you can run the full demo easily, without requiring a partition. Go to http://demo.eyeos.org/# and be prepared to reload the page if it tells you that it doesn't exist. Remember that the demo is very slow-loading, and you have to give the apps extra time to get running.

Excellent post. I'm going to have to try at least one of these out. I am getting sick of Windows. I have an insane amount of security on my computer but somehow my wife always seems to get a virus or malware on it...this time I can't get rid of it. I'm going to have to format and reinstall. I'm going to try one of these out. Thanks again! Seth http://fun-dad.blogspot.com/

I've been able to get four of the alternate operating systems on this page to run so far on my Windows XP machine. While I'm having a lot of fun, all of them are hampered by a lack of programs, except for React. Humorously enough, I was able to correct a Windows problem through React, which a very anti-Bill Gates OS.

Wow I didn't realize there are that many different operating systems being marketed. Does the PC need more than 3 (Microsoft, Linux, Ubuntu)? It would be crazy if one person can manage to use more than 2 at a time. Switching between MS and Mac is already hard enough.

Alistair Moir I agree with you. There is a new wave of computing coming, both in the low levels and UIs, that will make the past 20 years of computing feel trivial. Best of luck to in your future, I'm sorry others here don't see it or are set on pestering you.

The mere existence of an alternative OS doesn't necessarily make it "interesting". Yes, the AmigaOS was great, but it's been horribly mismanaged over the last, well, 14 years since Commodore failed. Their decision to support the failing PowerPC platform -- a decision I repeated tried to get SOMEONE there to question -- was a religious one, not a good engineering or marketing decision... and based on a dead religion at that. The OS4Depot is not a testament to the life of AmigaOS 4.1, but to it's death... there are 2096 FILEs there, not programs. These include skins for things, plug-ins, and a few ports of Linux and Windows programs. Nothing at all compelling here. In this day, when one can buy a Quad-Core x86 system for under $500, any OS claiming to be for desktops that cannot support this hardware is not relevant, and never will be. With that said, I'd really like to see Haiku move forward... we really do need a well designed break from Windows and Linux inspired OSs, and that's about the only one on the list with a real potential as a general purpose OS that fits that bill. As for some of the others.. if you're still in Alpha after 10+ years of development, I hope you're having fun, because there's no reason to believe other people will be using your OS. -Dave Haynie

What is an OS ? I have built kind of boot loaders for simple computers of only one chip. The smallest OS I ever built was 256 bytes for Z80. Was it a boot loader or an OS ? I don't know.

With the possible exception of AmigaOS and Haiku, all these operating systems suck. They cannot even compare with the elegence and simplicity of truly revolutionary operating systems, such as Genera, Plan9, and NeXTSTEP (in that order).

This looks like a great list. Thanks for posting it. I use Mac and Ubuntu and I have been wanting to look at other operating systems. I hope to try some of the os that you mentioned.

People who criticize ReactOS are very shortsighted. One should not feel threatened by an open source and free implementation of one of the most used family of programs, ever. Religious linux fanatics need to get over their "holier than thou" attitude. Seriously, the linux "community" is so completely full of hate, it makes Westboro Baptist Church envious. Just look at the comments in any topic related to linux. When they aren't attacking windows or other linux distro's that are 98% the same as their own, they are telling everyone how their distro is the best and how their distro is so user friendly that even their grandma can use it. Bullshit. Mind you, that is not to say that there are not very intelligent and nice people that offer great help (I've met and appreciated many), but they are like Majestic Galleons moving over a raging ocean of piss. Why ReactOS is worth our time: ReactOS offers a free and open way of using the hundreds of thousands of legacy programs, many of which were quite expensive, and are still in use by companies. Where I work, we still have Pentium I's that run Windows NT. Upgrading would cost money we don't have, and introduce lots of problems we don't have time to fix, everyone knows how to use windows, no one has the time or patience to get linux working or try to find or program an application to replace our current ones that are specifically tailored to the work we do. Also, GAMES. That in an of itself is good enough reason for why ReactOS is worth every effort put into it. Also, some of us *audible gasp* prefer windows to linux. I myself prefer windows, even though I agree there is a lot of bullshit. But I dislike what linux is today even more. I could tell you the reasons, but then someone would just come along and, point by point, attempt to prove why the linux way is better. Except I've heard all sorts of arguments, and none of them have convinced me. The only distro I like is GoboLinux, which is a big step in the right direction. There is a reason programs like ScummVM and DOSbox exist. I hear no one saying "jeez what a waste of time, I can't believe someone would copy something made by ~evil corporations~, they should work on linux instead" about them. But somehow the NT kernel from which many more programs are written for is just not worthy. Also, feel free to replace any reference to linux in my post with amigaOS or any operating system of your choice. Religious OS fundamentalist act the same no matter what logo is on their shirt.

04OCT08 An OS should not even be noticeable to the user. It should merely provide a stable platform for software to interface flawlessly with the hardware. An OS should provide enough code information to software developers to allow them to develop software that will not crash the OS. An OS should be concerned with: 1) Distributing workload across multi-core processors, allowing software developers to concentrate on innovative software instead of CPU management. 2) Providing tools to protect the users most valuable part of the computer...namely data, represented by man-hours of scanning and saving old photos, creating databases, spreadhseets, and documents, as well as protecting digital images since we are becoming a filmless society. Such tools include: a. built in back-up, everyone has external drives now, let the OS help people back up data...lost data is the fault of a poorly designed OS which fails to anticipate the disorganization of most computer users. b. a dual pane viewer to make it easy for users to copy, move, and back up data from on device to another...PCTools v7 had a dual pane viewer back in the mid 1990s when the only external device was A:, and 2Xexplorer has offered dual pane viewing capability for nearly 8 years. 3. PCs are nearly 20 years old now, but are no smarter than my IBM Selectric typewriter was in 1979. If a user opens a file browser and immediately browses to C:\data 80 percent of the time, why can't the OS ask the user if this should be the default directory to open when opening the browser? Sure, I can edit the registry to accomplish this and increase my productivity, but where is the AI we all feared that would take over our lives? Craig Knapp craig.knapp1@yahoo.com

Unless someone can show me an operating that doesn't crash,load spyware,thinks it can control what I try to get it to do,works when it wants to,thinks it knows exactly what I want installed and what I don't,etc,etc,then I'll have to stick with sorry,dumb Microsoft windows who just told me I could not use my WINXP PRO number because I had used it one time to many...and why was that? Because I had to keep reformatting to fix error after error after error and spending hours,sometimes all night trying to figure out what I did wrong. I had to teach myself how to even use a computer and I find that so many disagree on whats best. But I've also found that those on forums and blogs such as this site are a total lifeline to people such as I who need the sincere help of combined minds who have done their homework...and I am grateful!!!

@LemmeGuess You're wrong:-) At least AmigaOS4.1 is not Beta anymore, is certainly NOT* a windows wannabe and does not require any special knowledge for disk mounting etc. *AmigaOS is more than 20 years old, how could that make it a windows wannabe? Where was windows in 1985 ;-)

Let me guess, They are all Windows wannabes They are all ßeta They all require C/Perl/Bash knowledge for simple tasks like "mounting an external disk" Sir, sorry, real world NEVER uses these fellas. Not even Ubuntu is suitable for office use.

google's new OS Android might transform from a handheld OS to a desktop OS... Keep an eye on Android!!!

I'm happy MorphOS 2.1 user. It's the nicest, fastest and greatest OS ever made! Multiple multiresolution screens, 3D accelerated desktop and nice graphics, micro kernel, low memory/CPU footprint, AmigaOS 68k/PPC binary(!) compatible (f.e. Lightwave runs on MorphOS and other great software), etc. - MorphOS Team did awesome job! MorphOS is #1 for me.

This is a joke right? These suck! I'd rather run windows 98 than an Amiga wanna be OS. Yeah I loved my Amiga... 15 years ago! Get a clue people. Linux MAYBE... half ass crap, no way.

One great OS they forgot to mention is FreeDOS. Mark my words, thats the future :) . Seriously though..... @Terry A. Davis Are you even serious when you say price doesn't matter?? If it didn't, there wouldn't be something called piracy and something evil called DRM created against it. I bet most people here have never done OS developing. I have, and except for Morphos and AmigaOS, I have used all the the listed operating systems. I have even used Plan9 and GNU/Hurd some mentioned. I also have tinkered a lot with GNU Mach's(used in GNU/Hurd) memory manager. So what I am telling is from experience. Most people here are completely missing the point this article, each OS is good in its own respect and its desired goals. Thinking an OS *useless* because it doesn't meet your goals is just crazy. And you have no idea how much it pisses off the developers when someone says "xxx OS is useless and has no future beacause [insert some reason here]". Its not at all helping to anyone. Though I will accept that the title of this article is misleading. The terms "amazingly alternative" should be replaced with "promising".

Alternative also implies at least parity with the features of major operating systems. BeOS 5 in my experience is the only option that provided superior driver, software and multitasking support. All of the "alternatives" fail to provide a full selection of fully functional software. Good luck on end-user installation of drivers too. Want your old data or smooth integration with Windows networking? Good luck! Not dogging the poor things, just, alternative not equal better experience.

I am happy MorphOS user. MorphOS 2.1 is the best system of this list. :) Screenshot isn't presentable. Typical desktop and windows in MorphOS 2.1 looks better.

Just go by a Mac. They can multi-task much better these days, and support Microsoft documents for people still using Word and such. Macbook Pro has a multi-touch pad like the iTouch. Welcome to the future.

The problem is they're trying to be like Windows. Even Linux is trying to be like Windows. They need to focus on a niche. LoseThos is for programming as entertainment. Unlike Linux, it's code is easy to understand. Linux is to complicated. You need a reason to be. A cheap Windows has no market because nobody cares about price that much.

I've tried the Amiga1000 once playing some kung fu game and even got to mess around with workbench and stuff. But Xepol is right, most of these operating systems are no longer relevant in today's world. But we can also look at the positive, many people have claimed that the Amiga and BeOS were some of the powerful operating systems during it's time. I liked Amiga's lightwight kernel, I also like it's centralized structure supporting datatype. Maybe we can implement that on Linux? And these are hobbyist OS, yet they are simple to use and don't require configuration to install compatible software, something linux can take note of.

V2OS 32 bit OpSys in 37 KB :)

hey! nice list. Loved ReactOS.

Hi Good info, Nice post, I never hurt about some of thoose Operating Systems