Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows 2000 Source Code

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bascule
    replied
    Originally posted by Qu|rk
    Wouldn't call it open source, open source stuff is written by coders who can code
    I'm sorry, but hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ...

    find bugs-not hide them, and not release a hunk of junk software that fails unless perfect conditions are met.
    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha...

    Wow, *someone* is looking through rose colored glasses.

    I'm sorry, but the majority of "open source stuff" is utter shit. Software engineering mainstays such as unit/regression testing (hoping to get at least 70% branch coverage) is simply not performed on the majority of open source projects, and the actual testing process is usually left up to "the community".

    Certainly the mainstay projects aren't like this (and many are seeing unit/regression testing), but try using anything else, especially the pro app knock off projects, and you'll begin to appreciate formal software testing.

    jesse was joking... I hope you were too

    Leave a comment:


  • ck3k
    replied
    I was just shocked to learn this, If your charging that much for software I want to see some clean stuff, but this was not delievered. MS also trys to have this nice clean image, this was a bit throw off by what appeared in the code. As for what Grifter said, when I do something for public consumption or peer evaluation I try to be as professinal as possible when using comments and I would expect the same from a company who's lifeblood is this piece of software, of course it hasn't been said if this was an early dev. version or was this one of the programmer's that put in all the comments for himself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Floydr47
    replied
    Originally posted by Grifter
    I don't see the use of swear words in the code as any further proof of shortcomings. Honestly, look at some of your own code and tell me that a comment here or there doesn't have a swear or two in them. Does that make you a poor coder? No, it makes you a potty mouth.

    They never expected anyone to see it. And even so, I would expect a few to slip through.
    I agree with Grifter, the use of swear words doesn't make the code less professional. After all, the code wasn't hacked or cracked, it was simply stolen, by a common thief. A thief I might add that also stole the victory away from the the hacker who would have eventually mastered the code. It doesn't take intelligence to simply steal...

    Leave a comment:


  • Qu|rk
    replied
    Wouldn't call it open source, open source stuff is written by coders who can code, find bugs-not hide them, and not release a hunk of junk software that fails unless perfect conditions are met. From the file sizes of what got released, it's definately not all there unless someone's sitting on it and holding out on the rest of us. I'd much rather deal with an OS I know that works as it should, but I'm sure there's all kinds of funny comments in the code, would almost bet on finding something to the effect of:

    // we don't know why this is here, but it compiles so lets leave it



    Qu|rk-

    Leave a comment:


  • jesse
    replied
    windows is now my favorite open source OS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey2cool
    replied
    My personal favorites -

    private/windows/media/avi/msrle/rle.c: // lets do some majic shit so the compiler generates "good" code.
    private/shell/shell32/copy.c: // Whoever wrote this code needs to come to my office for a good old ass-kicking.
    private/shell/comdlg32/fileopen.c: // this way we can assert that we have covered our ass.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gadsden
    replied
    Originally posted by skroo
    Also, we've all heard the rumours of Digital's intellectual property from VMS appearing in NT and 2000; if this is indeed the case and proved by the source, could Compaq end up suing MS into the stone age along the lines of what SCO hopes to accomplish with IBM? Are MS' lawyers deliberately not bringing legal action to avoid drawing attention to their own company's unethical and illegal actions?

    That is an interesting point I did not think about.. I wonder how many copyright violations and GPL'ed code is in there? Of course, MS can just say they code is "tainted" since being in the wild, and anyone could have added that. It will be interesting to see what the total fallout from this will be..

    Leave a comment:


  • skroo
    replied
    Originally posted by che
    I agree.. that would be VERY nice..
    Especially for the undocumented parts. It'd be really nice to, say, be able to run Exchange on fBSD.

    BUT I can see microsoft using the DMCA in every way possible to smash that. You think SCO bitched a fit because their "code" ended up in linux, wait until that happens to M$.
    Agreed, and I'd expect them to freak. But remember how Compaq built the first clone PC BIOS: there were two teams, working separately. One team did the disassembly and natural-language documentation of each function; another team wrote the code to implement those functions but was never allowed to see the disassembly - they could only read the plain-English description of how it worked.

    It seems reasonable that a similar approach could be taken, thus avoiding the whole 'code replication' issue (thinking about it, I could see IBM going for a project like this and having the resources to do it - ah, the irony, given their past OS development relationships with Microsoft). Option two: the source is already available, so rewrite it using the original as a guideline - of course, you then run into the code replication issue.

    One other thing to consider is that the API has been at least partly-documented in print in the past, and that tools for monitoring and playing with the API have been around forever. It'd have to be proven that if a libntapi.so did surface sometime in the future that it was created from the leaked source directly, and not as a part of a from-scratch implementation based on available documentation and methodologies.

    I figure they already have the lawyers in the bullpen warming up. I am supprised they have not gone after the P2P networks already to try to stop it..
    I'm guessing that whatever was leaked was probably of sufficiently minimal concern: NT4 is about to EOL; SP1 for Win2K is obsolete and probably doesn't give enough away about the OS itself to warrant enforcement since we already know what the fixes were. Besides, MS can see how successful the RIAA were in trying to prosecute people downloading music; it's a pointless fight, and even with as much money as they have they don't want to throw it down a sinkhole.

    What they may end up doing is going directly after the company that facilitated the leak, and suing the hell out of them. It wouldn't be surprising to see them negotiate a complete buyout in favour of legal action, either.

    Also, we've all heard the rumours of Digital's intellectual property from VMS appearing in NT and 2000; if this is indeed the case and proved by the source, could Compaq end up suing MS into the stone age along the lines of what SCO hopes to accomplish with IBM? Are MS' lawyers deliberately not bringing legal action to avoid drawing attention to their own company's unethical and illegal actions?
    Last edited by skroo; February 15, 2004, 12:45.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gadsden
    replied
    Originally posted by skroo
    What I'd like to see come of this would be someone creating a *nix library for the NT API - the idea of being able to run critical Windows apps on a stable *nix platform is very appealing.
    I agree.. that would be VERY nice.. BUT I can see microsoft using the DMCA in every way possible to smash that. You think SCO bitched a fit because their "code" ended up in linux, wait until that happens to M$. I figure they already have the lawyers in the bullpen warming up. I am supprised they have not gone after the P2P networks already to try to stop it..

    Leave a comment:


  • skroo
    replied
    Originally posted by IcEbLAze
    Think about it, Windows 2000 and NT 4 have been out for quite a while... sure they may find some exploits, but honestly, I think there more worried about there precious "Intellectual property" being used to make free OS's or porting stuff over completely to other OS's.
    What I'd like to see come of this would be someone creating a *nix library for the NT API - the idea of being able to run critical Windows apps on a stable *nix platform is very appealing.

    Leave a comment:


  • IcEbLAze
    replied
    Think about it, Windows 2000 and NT 4 have been out for quite a while... sure they may find some exploits, but honestly, I think there more worried about there precious "Intellectual property" being used to make free OS's or porting stuff over completely to other OS's.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grifter
    replied
    Originally posted by astcell
    We all whine that Windows code is bloated, I wonder how much of it is this sort of language.
    None.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • astcell
    replied
    We all whine that Windows code is bloated, I wonder how much of it is this sort of language.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grifter
    replied
    Originally posted by ck3k
    further proof of microsoft's short commings. I find it quiet funny that this pro. level code that goes into the worlds most widly used os is filled with this stuff.
    I don't see the use of swear words in the code as any further proof of shortcomings. Honestly, look at some of your own code and tell me that a comment here or there doesn't have a swear or two in them. Does that make you a poor coder? No, it makes you a potty mouth.

    They never expected anyone to see it. And even so, I would expect a few to slip through.

    Leave a comment:


  • ck3k
    replied
    further proof of microsoft's short commings. I find it quiet funny that this pro. level code that goes into the worlds most widly used os is filled with this stuff.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X