Rather* grim. I hate autocorrect. czw., 26 wrz 2019, 16:15 użytkownik R Moog <moog...@gmail.com> napisał:
> I agree but here's a reality check. The outlook is father grim and we > won't live until the copyright expires. From copyright.gov, works created > after 1978 have their copyright expired 70 years after the death of its > author. In case of Windows ME, we're looking at all the devs croaking, > Microsoft dissolving and then 70 years of waiting unless we're in for a > near future apocalypse scenario. > > Amiga scene pretty much showcases the nightmarish hellscape of copyright > law. There is always someone somewhere out there that owns a piece of the > whole thing and will sue for lulz. > > czw., 26 wrz 2019, 16:04 użytkownik Michael C Robinson < > mich...@robinson-west.com> napisał: > >> >> Quoting andrew fabbro <and...@fabbro.org>: >> >> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:36 AM Michael C Robinson < >> > mich...@robinson-west.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since >> >> Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore? >> >> One would want to get the source code and then open source it of >> >> course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely, >> >> Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't hurt Microsoft at >> >> all since Windows >> >> is squarely NT based now where many modern systems won't even support >> >> DOS let alone DOS based Windows. I realize it would probably be very >> >> expensive to get Microsoft to cough up the source code, but has anyone >> >> even looked into this? >> >> >> > >> > "It wouldn't hurt Microsoft" is not exactly a true statement. >> > >> > Major reasons MSFT won't be releasing source code like that: >> > >> > (1) Some components are still in use. Microsoft does not rewrite their >> OS >> > from scratch with each new version and while Windows 10 is very >> different >> > than Windows Me, it's still an x86 OS. >> > >> > (2) There may be pieces they licensed or are under others' copyrights. >> > Sorting that out is non-trivial. This is true especially of things like >> > drivers. >> > >> > (3) Source code often reveals the inner workings of companies and >> > products. It's not unusual to see things like "we put this in because >> our >> > other product has a bug and we have to compensate" and comments like >> that. >> > Not to mention profanity :-) >> > >> > (4) Many times old source code hides other embarrassing (or >> > semi-embarrassing) secrets. There was a leak of Windows 2000 many years >> > ago and I read that it had comments such as "(some app) breaks here so >> we >> > put in this workaround to maintain compatibility with previous >> versions". >> > This would inevitably lead to all kinds of press about favoring >> different >> > vendors, etc. >> > >> > (5) And the big one...where's the money in releasing old source code? >> It >> > takes lawyers, tech people, etc. and likely would cost a fair amount of >> > money just to package it up. >> > >> > BTW, Microsoft has (or at least at one time had) various programs where >> > universities had access to the source code, but that was under NDA. >> > >> > -- >> > andrew fabbro >> > and...@fabbro.org >> >> ReactOS won't replace Windows 9x/ME because it is not dos based. >> Originally the target was 9x, but they gave up on that :-( For stuff >> that isn't supported anymore but should be, surely all the players >> could come together and release source code. Frankly, I think it >> should be the law that you have to release source code if you stop >> supporting a popular OS. Aren't some of the licenses pushing 20 years >> now? >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Freedos-user mailing list >> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user >> >
_______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
