[S-99]

I just discovered this happened a while ago in 2004 when i was randomly googling "decompiling windows" to see if anyone had ever tried for ****s and giggles.

The main report here, and a rough examination of the code here.

Not much was learned, microsoft worries a lot, and some rather big statements were made that i find can't be proven since only 15% of windows 2000 source was leaked.

Everyone knows that microsoft has made big sacrifices for backwards compatibility (didn't need to examine source code to see that). Backwards compatibility is not a bad thing to strive for, they could do it better. Microsoft does rely on security through obscurity as part of their security model. That based on how secret microsoft source code is and how much they were worrying when windows 2000 source code got leaked.

Thirdly, maybe microsoft did this on purpose. This particular code being made public isn't very damaging for microsoft to have released. People who examined the code noticed no links back to linux. The only link to a form of unix was when microsoft used some bsd code in the tcp/ip stack in windows (the bsd tcp/ip stack was legal though based on what the bsd license lets you do).

In which i find all too convenient for some random windows source code to be leaked that's sort of useless to have. A great public showing of how microsoft doesn't steal code or ideas from linux and unix. That's a bold statement to be having with only 15% of windows 2000 source code that was released. A statement that was only 15% proven. Microsoft makes bold unproven statements all the time. They are the boy who constantly cries wolf in patent infringement and intellectual property, just that there never will be any wolf. I think they did this whole thing on purpose. After all, the juiciest 85% of the rest of it with all of the application data for big things like internet explorer, mspaint, and notepad, etc are not included; no one gets to see that portion of the code and hold it up against the bold statement microsoft made that they didn't steal code.

[BloodEagle]

But where do the Illuminati fit into all of this?

[The E]

Oh, a random conspiracy theory about an event that noone really cared about.

[NGTM-1R]

Oh, a random conspiracy theory about an event that noone really cared about.

That's about par for the course for the poster...

[S-99]

Oh ok
It's still interesting though, when do you ever get to view microsoft source code? And it is just as likely that someone distributed it without consent.

I'm not posting it for the conspiracy theory. Just how valuable is windows source code? I know it's a trade secret, but would any coder want to touch it? As for 15% of the source being available, this was back in 2004. The total source code size for windows 2000 was 20gigabytes, when 40-80gb hard drives were in use, maybe no one had the disk space to allocate for it (even the distributor). So releasing a compressed archive that decompresses to about 600mb was more doable.

I just find it funny that it doesn't include any source code for windows programs like internet explorer and so on (something microsoft really wouldn't like to be distributed). Not to mention microsofts crooked ways of doing business and their slander.

But where do the Illuminati fit into all of this?

I hear they fit into some dark stinky orifice on your body. There's a big conspiracy about flinging poo.

Oh, a random conspiracy theory about an event that noone really cared about.

That about sums it up. The people who use windows don't care about the quality of the OS they use. Why are you paying for it again?

[The E]

From a developer's perspective, the source code release probably did more harm than good.

One of the common fallacies in Windows application development is that bad developers keep calling undocumented functions buried within Windows. The reason for why these functions are undocumented is because Microsoft wants to get developers to use the official APIs, as those are the only ones where they can guarantee consistency. A developer using undocumented, internal functions invites failures when those internal functions get changed (which is why you see tons of breakages whenever MS releases a new version of Windows).
The source code leak exposed tons of internal functions that were internal for a very good reason.

I just find it funny that it doesn't include any source code for windows programs like internet explorer and so on (something microsoft really wouldn't like to be distributed). Not to mention microsofts crooked ways of doing business and their slander

This may surprise you, but MS isn't a monolithic corporation. The various teams are actually rather isolated from one another. A leak in one area does not necessitate a leak in another.

[flamebait]
Also, MS is not as bad as Apple.
[/flamebait]

That about sums it up. The people who use windows don't care about the quality of the OS they use. Why are you paying for it again?

Even if I had to pay for Win 7 (I didn't, MSDNAA FTW), I would have done so gladly. Because Windows does everything I want it to do, while staying out of the way most of the time (and allowing me access to the important bits when I need to).

[Nuke]

everything is a conspiracy. im sure that pigs would find me and my mom evil conspirators for deciding to have pork chops for dinner. thats because all a conspiracy means is to plan something in private. which we did.

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

[S-99]

It's not that ms isn't open source. Just how is the quality of their source code. They utilized a lot of hacks in windows 2000 and xp to maintain backward compatibility. In windows 7 backward compatibility is a little different. They're in the process of doing it differently/dropping it. So says the whole xp mode on windows 7 which is a virtual machine.

[Topgun]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

[Nuke]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

i used wine, i didnt like it. linux takes too much time to use. id rather just not. the core of windows is fairly sound. its all the software that comes with it that sucks. if ie wasnt so deeply embedded in the os then that would probibly make the os 10 times more secure. of course i pulled that number out of my ass. still ie is virus bait and simply not using it drastically improves your security. if thats not enough, ive also improved my security by not using windows media player/center, windows messenger, and all the other windows ________ applications that come with the os. when i buy an operating system i want an operating system, not an applications suite. i want to pick programs of my choice to use on my computer, i dont want the os developer deciding for me (i hate linux for it as much as windows, and probibly reactos and its distros for the same reason). i also prefer the windows way of doing things better than i like the *nix way of doing things. dont get me wrong i hate microsoft with all of the wrath i can muster, but when it comes right down to it, i dont know what to do without windows. sorry if i cant dedicate 15 years of my life to master linux as i have windows, id rather just use the os that is familiar.

you are also kinda missing the point. an open windows will have all the benefits of using say, linux instead of unix. the operating system still works the same, its directly compatable with windows applications, instead of using some middleware to translate all the windows function calls to their linux equivalent. open windows means bugs can be found and fixed by the user base much faster than ms can release service packs and other updates. it allows various distros of reactos to be tailored to whatever purpose you need. all the benefits of open source with something that works and feels like windows is something i could really learn to live with, unlike linux, which has been nothing but frustrating for me.

[Topgun]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

you are also kinda missing the point. an open windows will have all the benefits of using say, linux instead of unix. the operating system still works the same, its directly compatable with windows applications, instead of using some middleware to translate all the windows function calls to their linux equivalent. open windows means bugs can be found and fixed by the user base much faster than ms can release service packs and other updates. it allows various distros of reactos to be tailored to whatever purpose you need. all the benefits of open source with something that works and feels like windows is something i could really learn to live with, unlike linux, which has been nothing but frustrating for me.

that is the point.
what Im saying is that the windows way is fundamentally flawed. I get that you don't want to learn another OS, thats fine, keep using windows then, I just don't want a lot of talented people dedicating all their time to reverse engineering a flawed design.
basically, all reactos is, or rather, trying to be, is a free windows. that's great and all, but I, for one, would rather have a better linux than yet another OS.

also what you say about linux choosing the applications for you isn't really a problem with linux, its a problem with the distro you are trying.  if you want a basic distro with only the minimum installed by default, try Arch Linux.

[achtung]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

you are also kinda missing the point. an open windows will have all the benefits of using say, linux instead of unix. the operating system still works the same, its directly compatable with windows applications, instead of using some middleware to translate all the windows function calls to their linux equivalent. open windows means bugs can be found and fixed by the user base much faster than ms can release service packs and other updates. it allows various distros of reactos to be tailored to whatever purpose you need. all the benefits of open source with something that works and feels like windows is something i could really learn to live with, unlike linux, which has been nothing but frustrating for me.

that is the point.
what Im saying is that the windows way is fundamentally flawed. I get that you don't want to learn another OS, thats fine, keep using windows then, I just don't want a lot of talented people dedicating all their time to reverse engineering a flawed design.
basically, all reactos is, or rather, trying to be, is a free windows. that's great and all, but I, for one, would rather have a better linux than yet another OS.

also what you say about linux choosing the applications for you isn't really a problem with linux, its a problem with the distro you are trying.  if you want a basic distro with only the minimum installed by default, try Arch Linux.

Arch? Who would drive an Arch? Everyone knows one of those Gentoo ricers is best.

[Topgun]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

you are also kinda missing the point. an open windows will have all the benefits of using say, linux instead of unix. the operating system still works the same, its directly compatable with windows applications, instead of using some middleware to translate all the windows function calls to their linux equivalent. open windows means bugs can be found and fixed by the user base much faster than ms can release service packs and other updates. it allows various distros of reactos to be tailored to whatever purpose you need. all the benefits of open source with something that works and feels like windows is something i could really learn to live with, unlike linux, which has been nothing but frustrating for me.

that is the point.
what Im saying is that the windows way is fundamentally flawed. I get that you don't want to learn another OS, thats fine, keep using windows then, I just don't want a lot of talented people dedicating all their time to reverse engineering a flawed design.
basically, all reactos is, or rather, trying to be, is a free windows. that's great and all, but I, for one, would rather have a better linux than yet another OS.

also what you say about linux choosing the applications for you isn't really a problem with linux, its a problem with the distro you are trying.  if you want a basic distro with only the minimum installed by default, try Arch Linux.

Arch? Who would drive an Arch? Everyone knows one of those Gentoo ricers is best.

flamebait lol.

[Nuke]

your best hope for open windows is probably reactos, which i keep an eye on for progress. when that goes beta, im sure i will use it. i like the idea of having an open windows. i seldom use more than 10% of the operating system, so i think it should cost $20 instead of $200. so i really like the concept of a windows compatible os.

meh, WINE on linux > an open source reverse engineering of a bad product.

you are also kinda missing the point. an open windows will have all the benefits of using say, linux instead of unix. the operating system still works the same, its directly compatable with windows applications, instead of using some middleware to translate all the windows function calls to their linux equivalent. open windows means bugs can be found and fixed by the user base much faster than ms can release service packs and other updates. it allows various distros of reactos to be tailored to whatever purpose you need. all the benefits of open source with something that works and feels like windows is something i could really learn to live with, unlike linux, which has been nothing but frustrating for me.

that is the point.
what Im saying is that the windows way is fundamentally flawed. I get that you don't want to learn another OS, thats fine, keep using windows then, I just don't want a lot of talented people dedicating all their time to reverse engineering a flawed design.
basically, all reactos is, or rather, trying to be, is a free windows. that's great and all, but I, for one, would rather have a better linux than yet another OS.

also what you say about linux choosing the applications for you isn't really a problem with linux, its a problem with the distro you are trying.  if you want a basic distro with only the minimum installed by default, try Arch Linux.

i didnt ask you to reccomend a linux distro. i have a cd case full of various distros that i have tried, i didnt like any of them. dont try to say linux is flawless. its not, no piece of software is.

[S-99]

I'm waiting for reactos to enter beta too. That looks like a fun os to mess around with.

[Nuke]

i tried running the alpha with little success of course that was about a couple years ago. i have more computers to test it on now. maybe i might give it another go.

[Bobboau]

what exactly do you not like about Linux? other than that you are not accustomed to it.

[Nuke]

its filesystem for one. ive had it go tits up several times, while ntfs has never corrupted any file that was important to me. its excessively tight security. im not designing nuclear weapons or am i  , so i dont need thick security. setup time is too much. hardware compatibility is not 100%. you kinda have to build a computer specifically for linux, picking hardware with good linux drivers. it takes a long time to configure. you have to compile everything, you cant just download a piece of software and run it. my list of reasons for perfering windows over linux is long. but my main reason for not likeing linux is i have 15 years of experience with windows and only about a year with linux. if you grow up with linux i can see how that would work for some people, but i did not. if i were to put the time into learning linux that i have put into windows, id be 44 before i mastered it to the same extent (assuming the learning curve is comparable, which i think is not).

[Topgun]

its filesystem for one. ive had it go tits up several times, while ntfs has never corrupted any file that was important to me. its excessively tight security. im not designing nuclear weapons or am i   , so i dont need thick security. setup time is too much. hardware compatibility is not 100%. you kinda have to build a computer specifically for linux, picking hardware with good linux drivers. it takes a long time to configure. you have to compile everything, you cant just download a piece of software and run it. my list of reasons for perfering windows over linux is long. but my main reason for not likeing linux is i have 15 years of experience with windows and only about a year with linux. if you grow up with linux i can see how that would work for some people, but i did not. if i were to put the time into learning linux that i have put into windows, id be 44 before i mastered it to the same extent (assuming the learning curve is comparable, which i think is not).

Is gentoo the only thing you tried? I never compile anything.


if you use windows because that's what you know, thats fine. don't feel like im trying to force out of windows or anything. Its just from an engineering standpoint, linux is just better.

[Kosh]

you have to compile everything, you cant just download a piece of software and run it.

Granted my knowledge of linux is limited but I do believe that hasn't been true for like 10+ years.