• Microsoft says open source Windows is "definitely possible"
    101 replies, posted
[IMG]http://4d663a369f9f03c3c61e-870e77779efd63f7bd6c2ee08d8cfae6.r2.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/L4msKLoTYH7g.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE]Mark Russinovich, the CTO of Microsoft Azure, acknowledged at the three-day [URL="https://www.chef.io/chefconf/"]ChefConf 2015[/URL] that "it's definitely possible" that Microsoft could one day make Windows open source. "It's a new Microsoft," he said. "Every conversation you can imagine about what should we do with our software—open versus not-open versus services—has happened." Having conversations is a long way from actively planning to make the change, but simply acknowledging that somebody, somewhere, has discussed the possibility is a big change in attitude: As Facebook engineer Phil Dibowitz told [URL="http://www.wired.com/2015/04/microsoft-open-source-windows-definitely-possible/"]Wired[/URL], "This wouldn't have happened two years ago." And let us not forget that owners of Windows 7 and 8 will be able to upgrade to Windows 10 [URL="http://www.pcgamer.com/windows-10-upgrade-free-for-owners-of-windows-7-and-81/"]at no charge[/URL] for up to a year after its release; that too would have been unthinkable in the past (and pretty much right up to the moment that Microsoft announced it.) [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/microsoft-says-open-source-windows-is-definitely-possible/[/url] [url]http://www.wired.com/2015/04/microsoft-open-source-windows-definitely-possible/[/url]
Make it happen, Microsoft.
snip
Microsoft is pretty much the king of telling people what they want to hear then not doing a damn thing
[QUOTE=hrak;47451995]Microsoft is pretty much the king of telling people what they want to hear then not doing a damn thing[/QUOTE] I don't know, they made .NET completely [url=http://www.dotnetfoundation.org/projects]open source[/url], for one. It's certainly not unthinkable.
[QUOTE=hrak;47451995]Microsoft is pretty much the king of telling people what they want to hear then not doing a damn thing[/QUOTE] Exactly, like that time they said they'd open-source C#! Oh wait... [url]https://github.com/dotnet/corefx[/url] [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] bloody ninjas running around. What about that time they said they'd open source Roslyn, the C#/VB compiler platform? Yeah they did that too [url]https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn[/url]
A big issue with open sourcing big software like this is that there is a lot of contractor and licensed code that Microsoft doesn't have the right to open up. They would have to rewrite all those parts or release the open source version of Windows without them.
Nadella would be truly crazy to make Windows open-source. In a good way, that is. But Gates might probably be opposed, and he'd be more vocal now that he bumped up his Gates Foundation/Microsoft time split to something like 70/30 after Nadella became CEO. If anything, they'll pull an Apple: they'll make parts of it free, but the stuff that makes Windows Windows would be closed/shared with trusted parties like they already do. Apple made the core of OS X open-source (Darwin, because it's based on BSD stuff), but what makes OS X OS X isn't. But the improvements that would be able to be made by making all of Windows open-source would be so damn awesome after Microsoft cleared any legal hurdles.
I really get the feeling now Microsoft is going to become much more about services in the next few years than making actual stuff but back on topic holy fuck that would be good if they open sourced it if only for the possibility of moving over to Linux completely and keeping absolutely everything going.
If Microsoft made Windows open source (and useable when built wholly from source), I might actually end up using Windows more than the bare minimum I am forced to.
I'm not one for using this term much, but as the kids say: Microsoft has been acting very "based" lately.
Mark Russinovich is a cool guy and probably knows as much about Windows as any one person can.
Open source Windows? Hmm. Color me intrigued.
Maybe this is me being a paranoid tin-foil-clad pessimist, but this sounds like the first step of MS's way of solving a problem: [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish]embracing[/URL] (as cliche as that's been whenever this subject's brought up). Maybe to attract those starting to get their feet wet with the whole open-source gig because they don't quite understand the free/libre concept over free/gratis. :tinfoil: [editline]e[/editline] [QUOTE=wickedplayer494;47452138] If anything, they'll pull an Apple: they'll make parts of it free, but the stuff that makes Windows Windows would be closed/shared with trusted parties like they already do. Apple made the core of OS X open-source (Darwin, because it's based on BSD stuff), but what makes OS X OS X isn't.[/QUOTE] The day that they finally do it and parts of it are POSIX-compliant [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem]again[/URL], I'll finally take that skiing trip I've been saving up for in Hell.
An open source Windows would be amazing, but I think it would also potentially cause some issues as well. That being said, the pros obviously outweigh the cons, so I'd be all for it. Windows going open source pretty much means the end of desktop Linux though, which is a shame considering the awesome strides many Linux distros have made over the past decade. Granted, there are much better things from a tech perspective in the current Linux codebase, but most people don't really care what OS they're using as long as it and the shit they want and have on it works. Of course, open source is slightly different than free software, so I'm sure Stallman will have a heyday with this if it ever comes true.
[QUOTE=]Of course, open source is slightly different than free software, so I'm sure Stallman will have a heyday with this if it ever comes true.[/QUOTE] If it isn't 'free', then no one can fork it, but that doesn't mean people wont be able to learn from microsofts code. Stallman will throw a fit over anything
I have one problem. Fixing prebuilds will probably have touchwiz-like shit, meaning its annoying to work with. So, I want it, but also hate it since I know companies will do that shit.
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;47452444]I bet the codebase is complete and utter shit.[/QUOTE] I dont think so.... remember the windows 2000 leak? the code was gorgeous, really beautiful [QUOTE]Comments like "UGLY TERRIBLE HACK" tend to indicate good code rather than bad: in bad code ugly terrible hacks are considered par for the course. It would therefore be both hypocritical and meaningless to go through the comments looking for embarrassments. But also fun, so let's go. Curse words: there are a dozen or so "fucks" and "shits", and hundreds of "craps". Some dissatisfaction with the compiler is expressed in private\shell\shell32\util.cpp: // the fucking alpha cpp compiler seems to fuck up the goddam type "LPITEMIDLIST", so to work // around the fucking peice of shit compiler we pass the last param as an void *instead of a LPITEMIDLIST Some insight into Microsoft's famous daily build process is given in private\windows\media\avi\verinfo.16\verinfo.h: * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * !!!!!!!IF YOU CHANGE TABS TO SPACES, YOU WILL BE KILLED!!!!!!! * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!DOING SO FUCKS THE BUILD PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There are also various references to idiots and morons, some external, some within Microsoft. The file private\ntos\rtl\heap.c, which dates from 1989, tells us// The specific idiot in this case is Office95, which likes // to free a random pointer when you start Word95 from a desktop // shortcut. [/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795[/URL] [URL]http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-windows-2000-source-code-analysed[/URL]
[QUOTE=hrak;47451995]Microsoft is pretty much the king of telling people what they want to hear then not doing a damn thing[/QUOTE] remember how they wanted to focus on pc gaming?
Its just the CTO saying theirs a chance down the road. Its not Microsoft releasing a statement that they are considering it. It isn't gonna happen
[QUOTE=Andre Gomes;47452568]I dont think so.... remember the windows 2000 leak? the code was gorgeous, really beautiful [URL]http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795[/URL] [URL]http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1030335/leaked-windows-2000-source-code-analysed[/URL][/QUOTE] Reminds me of some of the comments I make on my stuff. :v:
From having a monopoly, to playing catch up. Do it Microsoft. You know it's good for everyone.
If they also released the source of win 3.1/9x, it'd be an interesting read through.
[QUOTE=Sombrero;47452834]If they also released the source of win 3.1/9x, it'd be an interesting read through.[/QUOTE] Or this, making the old stuff open source. That'd definitely be fun to work with.
what about malware and shit like that? wouldn't this make it a whole lot easier for malware developers to find exploits and whatnot?
[QUOTE=mitterdoo;47452877]what about malware and shit like that? wouldn't this make it a whole lot easier for malware developers to find exploits and whatnot?[/QUOTE] It'd probably be cancelled out a bit by the people making patches for said exploits.
Windows going open source would honestly be a nightmare, imagine the tons and tons of malware that would be created seeing as it's such a huge target, the extremely large amount of businesses and organisations using Windows Server, fuck that
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;47452911]Windows going open source would honestly be a nightmare, imagine the tons and tons of malware that would be created seeing as it's such a huge target[/QUOTE] Its easier to find exploits, but that goes for both the people who want to do evil and the ones who want to do right. And also the people who just happen to read the code.
[QUOTE=mitterdoo;47452877]what about malware and shit like that? wouldn't this make it a whole lot easier for malware developers to find exploits and whatnot?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Rixxz2;47452911]Windows going open source would honestly be a nightmare, imagine the tons and tons of malware that would be created seeing as it's such a huge target[/QUOTE] It would probablly be a LOT safer and Strong OS, just imagine, how many security issues Windows may have now and no one knows, how do we know if Microsoft ain't spying on us? How do we know if there isnt any security flaw than only a small little snow flake knows and it's exploiting right now? How do you know if you is sick if you don't go to the doctor and make exams? By making the code open-source thousands and thousands of developers would see flaws and thus patches for those flaws would get released. So in the end, the system gets more robust
and thousands and thousands of others would do the exact opposite I can pretty much assure you that most serious organisations would look for alternative systems seeing as it's not worth the risk
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.