Printable View
So far both Bill Gates and Allchin state that release of Microsoft source code would destroy Windows security because the realease of the code would reveal the serious software flaws to hackers.
Personally, it scares me when computer security is based on keeping a flaw secret vs correcting the software and making is secure.
To read more on this from e-week go to:
http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,...a=25876,00.asp
http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,...a=26434,00.asp
Ok. This leads to the obvious question what the heck hasn't been found yet on MS? And why wait for it to be found rather than fix it before then?Quote:
Originally posted here by jehnx
So far both Bill Gates and Allchin state that release of Microsoft source code would destroy Windows security because the realease of the code would reveal the serious software flaws to hackers.
Security through obscrurity, when will MS learn that this tactic doesn't work? :)
I can understand MS wanting to protect it's commercial interests, but why doesn't it go down the road that Linux companies have done, open source and make your products free, and then charge for consultancy/installation services? Or do what IBM does - it may spend $1 billion promoting Linux but it will get that back when it sells a couple of servers.
hmm Billy ol boy needs some more spanking.. *does an evil laugh...*
Oh come on! It took how long for the Doom-like game in Word/Excel to be found?!? Then
there was the "flight simulator" in one of those... there's been oodles and oodles of stuff that's
been found in M$ bloatware over the years. There's no telling what some bored developer has
put in to an unsuspecting "about" page with their sh*t.
Any idea of how big an embarassment that would be to them if the code suddenly got out
and it was widely public about just had poor their QA process is?!?! I mean... some companies
go through pains to "exercise every line of code" in their tests... MS obviously leaves complete
sections completely untested, else that stuff would never get out in the first place.
At the start Windows would probably suffer a barrage of exploits but over time these would get fixed. But I guess, Windows is commercial so it is debatable on how long they could last...
As much as I hate Microsoft's business practices and general stupidity, I would never want to see Windows source code in the open. I would have to immediately wipe the windows partitions on all my computers and hide in a bunker until the world stopped exploding. There are way too many people that rely on Windows software, and as Jethro said, it would get ugly real fast.
heya jehnx yes i know i was inactive again but we havent around #CPC for some time come around...and about the MS source i believe a couple colleges were givin the sourse it was on the Cyberarmy Windows board under some law they were forsced to give it up i might go look for the link and post it here if i get time
emrys: Yeh, it was on CA-OSI webpage, and it was the source for the .NET encryption or some crap. I don't know, I got confused and just said screw it. I'll come to #cpc and talk to you guys. I missed the meeting the other day, sadly. :( PM me with any important info that went on besides the brigade breakup, please. Thanks, nice to hear from ya again. :)
ok will do give me a sec to get somethimg t odrink ot keep me awake...hmm coffeee :)
if i were billy boy, and mind you im not agreeing with him, id move m$ out of the us to a country that would be more receptive to him and the revenue and jobs he would create and say Fµ¢K ya'll !
well u are not and he hasnt so for now we can tell to fusk 0ff
Well they could start with older versions of windows that are less common now days. Windows 3.1 would be a start. Maybe Windows 95, not used for servers and was almost totally replaced by 98SE, ME and XP. Maybe they could release the source for 98 in a year or two once most people switch to XP. I do how ever think that the NT and 2000 sources should remain a secret. Organizations have old NT boxes that work just fine and there’s no need to replace them so they’ll be around for a long time. One example of a company that managed to protect its profits and still give programmers something to play with would be ID. After there was no profit to be made from linceing the game engine they release the source code. Of course there’s another option they could release the source to just part of the OS or some of the smaller applications that are included with it. How about releasing the source to some of the dll's or minesweeper no one will care but it would be a step in the right direction.
Oh one last thing they should release the source code to ME. Yes lots people still use it but anything that encourages people to stop using ME is ok in my books. :)
heh. Forget, that a lot of other countries are now embracing Open Source? I spose Australia would be receptive to MS. Which other countries would be?Quote:
Originally posted here by Tedob1
if i were billy boy, and mind you im not agreeing with him, id move m$ out of the us to a country that would be more receptive to him and the revenue and jobs he would create and say Fµ¢K ya'll !
Isn't that why OS-X is such a great OS? And just think... I used to despise macs!
I bought WinME when it first came out and it crashed two times in a row while I was trying to install it. I had a ritual "fire" in my back yard, purged myself of unclean spirits, and then moved on to FreeBSD. That was two years ago.
MS will be getting some serious competition with the way projects like WINE are coming... Their only hope is that they get their problems fixed. However they decide to do so is up to them... but if they wait too much longer (ie. if they don't cough it up), they're not going to be able to dig themselves out of their hole (and it's a big hole!).
It's not that I hate MS or anything. I still use it sometimes (98SE). I just don't like being told with each new version, "The bugs are fixed and the security is better." and then, "No really! They're fixed this time!" If people would start suing them for false advertisement, maybe it would step things up (or at least get them to be more careful of what they say).
In the end, I can't say I care too much either way... Sure it easy to use, but I've become rather comfortable with what I have (it's nice to have something that doesn't crash). It's their choice. They'll get what they deserve either way. Empires rise and empires fall...
As for so many people being dependant on MS... Well... It's not a good thing to build castles in the sand, is it? :)
Rev
lol no truer stament ever i actually had ME with my pc when i bought it and it sucked i tried 2k but my modem didnt liek it so i tried full linux but it hates my winmodem also besides my ISP doesnt like linux either so i am now on XP in one partition and Corel linux on the otehr just without inet connection for linux which renders it useless to me :(
I don't understand the point of WinModems... Why would anyone want to do that to their beloved computer, anyway? Geez... Get a real modem and don't play with MS anymore... "Foosball is the devil! " :) (j/k)
How many operating systems are out there that don't release their source code? I've never really thought about that very much. The *NIX world has always been open about it, haven't they (or at least, you could get the code if you bought the license for it)? Maybe that's why the *NIX world is so much farther ahead.
Just curious...
Rev
lol...Mac isnt open sourse and we all know MS isnt and the point of my modem is that it came with my PC.....and i dont feel like going out and buying a 40 buck modem that will suck anyway nd d/l at the sam
For $40 you get another WinModem I believe. You should buy an external modem, but that would be like $90 - $100.
agreed....I just loe this st!
hanks for al the info...I got aot to learn!
Meehowski ::hide-beh
for that **** i might as well just get mandrake 8.1 which is good and supports winmodems!...nough said
Maybe....Just maybe...MS won't release the code because they have left another back door (for themselves) Remember the MS back door in NT 4 - which they denied vehemently.
emrys,
Check out this link...
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/ma...21/darwin.html
OS-X is based on Darwin (FreeBSD with a "twist"). It's open source.
If Microsoft chose to do the same, most of the problems that people have with their MS "operating" systems would be non existant. Of course, that's unless MS can't even get an engine/GUI to work without crashing... Then again... It wouldn't be the whole operating system that goes down... It would just be the GUI, which can easily be restarted without hitting the reset button.
Hope that makes more sense.
Rev
BTW... It wouldn't surprise me about a "backdoor." That's just another reason not to connect a doze box to anything at all. "What good is a Windows if you can't shut it? "