Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Possible Windows source code leak
#1
If this is true it could be potentially devasting to Microsoft, story here: http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=17...egory=main and here: http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/art...hp/3312451

For the interested, here is a list of the files that are supossedly contained in the leaked archives: http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~mortehu/files.txt. Its difficult to determine whether or not its the operating system code just by looking at the file names. Heres some of the more interesting filenames though:
Code:
win2k/private/inet/urlmon/iapp/gnumakefile
win2k/private/inet/xml/xml/tokenizer/dll/words of wisdom from dennis.eml
win2k/private/inet/xml/xml/dso/letter to children - 2.eml
win2k/private/ntos/w32/ntuser/kernel/
win2k/private/shell/wontfix.txt
win2k/private/shell/docs/leak.txt
win2k/private/shell/shdocvw/ofbugs.txt
win2k/private/shell/cpls/appwiz/todo
win2k/private/windows/shell/games/sol/sol.c

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out.
esus saves.... Passes to Moses, shoots, he scores!
Reply
#2
I hope this is true. If it is, we'll have sometime soon an Open Source Windows Big Grin
SCUMM (the band) on Myspace!
ComputerEmuzone Games Studio
underBASIC, homegrown musicians
[img]http://www.ojodepez-fanzine.net/almacen/yoghourtslover.png[/i
Reply
#3
I sure hope this is a hoax. If not, then, like they said, this would be absolutely devastating. In fact, it would perhaps be the end of Microsoft's reputation as the leading OS-maker.
f only life let you press CTRL-Z.
--------------------------------------
Freebasic is like QB, except it doesn't suck.
Reply
#4
The disadvantages may outweight the advantages:

Different methodologies.
Peace cannot be obtained without war. Why? If there is already peace, it is unnecessary for war. If there is no peace, there is already war."

Visit www.neobasic.net to see rubbish in all its finest.
Reply
#5
Quote:I hope this is true. If it is, we'll have sometime soon an Open Source Windows

Theres a huge downside to this. If the source has been leaked and Microsoft openly admit it and then they claim that developers on open source projects such as Linux and Wine are "stealing" the leaked code to improve their projects it could crush open source developement. Linux is under scrutiny from SCO, who claim that the Linux kernel contains code that was leaked from SCO's Unix.
esus saves.... Passes to Moses, shoots, he scores!
Reply
#6
SCO doesn't have a leg to stand on, that's why they had to revise their original claim to be less full of shyte. Their only minor advantage is in the fact that Microsoft is supporting them, so they won't run out of funds for lawyer's fees. Unfortunately for SCO, they don't stand a snowball's chance in hell, even with Microsoft's backing. Everyone knows that Microsoft's only in on it to take yet another stab at the open source community...only this time, they're really gonna kitten up their PR if they keep supporting these idiots.
I'd knock on wood, but my desk is particle board.
Reply
#7
Quote:SCO doesn't have a leg to stand on,

Yeah, the case has been quite funny to watch. One of the segments of code that SCO claimed that Linux had stolen was a piece of public domain code for a malloc routine that first appeared in one Knuth's book somewhere in the early 60's.

The problem with the SCO case (and potentially if Microsoft claimed that OSS stole from leaked Windows code) is not whether its true or not, its the damage that is done from the allegations. Comapanies that were looking to switch to Linux when SCO first started making claims, shyed away because the outcome was unclear then. SCO are still putting out enough propaganda to scare away some potential Linux customers.
esus saves.... Passes to Moses, shoots, he scores!
Reply
#8
As morally wrong as the whole thing is, one thing people tend to forget is that business is business. It would be difficult to bring libel charges against Microsoft and SCO in tihs case, simply because one of the key factors of open source isn't profit, so under libel laws, no one's being hurt. If Linux was represented by a profitable company, Microsoft and SCO would be hit with libel charges so fast their heads would spin. Really sucks that nothing can be done about it, but that's one of the risks of being not-for-profit.
I'd knock on wood, but my desk is particle board.
Reply
#9
Quote:If Linux was represented by a profitable company, Microsoft and SCO would be hit with libel charges so fast their heads would spin. Really sucks that nothing can be done about it, but that's one of the risks of being not-for-profit.

There are two parts to SCOs case, one is that Linux contains code that has been lifted from SCO Unix. The second is that IBM has put code into the Linux kernel that is derived from SCO Unix. IBM licences SCOs Unix technology to develop AIX. The license disallows derived works to be released to the public. SCO are claiming that code that IBM has made available for Linux, such as JFS and NUMA are derived works of AIX and in turn, SCO Unix. IBM are of course counter-sueing SCO for being complete dum-dums. IIRC RedHat also counter-sued SCO for damaging its legimate business practice through propaganda without proof.
esus saves.... Passes to Moses, shoots, he scores!
Reply
#10
In the IBM case, SCO really doesn't have a prayer. I am still laughing at SCO for this whole thing. And as far as I can remember...wasn't the Red Hat case settled? I didn't see much about it when I was reading the OSI's paper...
I'd knock on wood, but my desk is particle board.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)