M$ will offer Windows Server source code - no kidding - [Archive]

Kurtnoise

25th January 2006, 17:10

Doom9

25th January 2006, 17:22

so where can we download to create Windows 2006 Doom9 edition? ;) And how about Vista Server Doom9 edition, THE OS for DVD backups, an OS which doesn't give a hoot about DRM, protected video path, region codecs, doesn't support TPM modules and generally does what you want rather than what the MPAA/RIAA/BSA want you to.

Sirber

25th January 2006, 17:23

I am Canadian, can I get the source too? :D

arch_angel16

25th January 2006, 17:31

Zarxrax

25th January 2006, 19:11

Here's a quesiton Doom9 - if you don't like the product's packaging why buy it? Voting w/your wallet & encouraging others to do so as well is pretty much the only way to convince the industry to reconsider.

This argument comes up all the time, and it's honestly a rather foolish argument in my opinion. Microsoft isn't going to lose any sleep if me or my friends don't buy their products. The ONLY THINGS that can tear microsoft down are governments and competing products.

Cite one example where voting with your wallet actually caused a change.

Doom9

25th January 2006, 19:56

if you don't like the product's packaging why buy it? In a monopoly situation there's no such thing as voting with your wallet.. there's simply not alternative. If I were just to edit DV and create DVDs, Mac OS X would be a viable alternative, but as you may have realized I run a site that is all about video processing in ways only possible on a single operating system. And I have a whole book of reasons why Linux isn't fit for the desktop and likely never will be (for my desktop that is.. the winword crowd could probably migrate)
We have similar situations with our local DSL providers (plenty but they're all resellers so I have to get the line from a virtual monopoly provider and there's no way to just get DSL without phone service), there's not really any alternative to music (you can buy from iTunes or in the store but it's the same label nontheless), movies, etc. I'd say we're in a lucky situation with what we do here.. you'll hardly find as many userfriendly and powerful free (and often open source) tools.

arch_angel16

25th January 2006, 20:23

I dunno...if a company were to sell me a product and say "oh by the way, we will only let you use the product in this fashion, and if you want to use it anywhere else, you have to pay more" I'd tell them where they can get off, and then go use it how I saw fit. If the company tried to stop me, well...I just wouldn't buy from them. If that means not watching Hollywood movies, eh, no huge loss.

Also, playing around with codecs and converting dvds into mpeg4 is entirely possible on a Mac, it's just that few people own them ;)

Also, in a monopoly, there IS such thing as voting with your wallet - you simply don't buy. It's an amazingly subversive concept in our consumer society, but it's definitely viable. Alternatives for spending your time watching movies are vast and varied ;)

I suppose the crux of the matter is, when a company says "buy my item, and use it how I see fit" and I disagree, I either subvert the company's wishes, or not bother buying their product. There's really no point in whining about how unfair it is.

shevegen

26th January 2006, 01:38

foxyshadis

26th January 2006, 01:50

Microsoft Goes Beyond EU Decision by Offering Windows Source Code

Announcement underscores Microsoft’s commitment to resolve compliance issues by giving licensees access to its source code.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/jan06/01-25EUSourceCodePR.mspx

:D
[Now somewhat OT.] I'm confused, what's the difference to Shared Source? I think this is only another step in that direction, with opportunistic timing... Microsoft's motto seems to be "if you can't crush them, buy them; if you can't buy them, assimilate their tactics" and now OSS is getting that treatment.

DigitAl56K

26th January 2006, 03:28

And in the weather: Those of you living in hell had better wrap up warm today...

Shinigami-Sama

26th January 2006, 04:49

And in the weather: Those of you living in hell had better wrap up warm today...
I was wondering why it was so cold today...

Doobie

26th January 2006, 07:15

Also, in a monopoly, there IS such thing as voting with your wallet - you simply don't buy. It's an amazingly subversive concept in our consumer society, but it's definitely viable. Alternatives for spending your time watching movies are vast and varied ;)

Windows rules because it's not viable for most people to use nothing (which alternatives practically are). The next-gen players will be loaded with DRM because people would prefer high-definition with DRM than no high-definition at all.

You can only do so much with your dollars. When Microsoft murdered OS/2, GEM, and other potential competing operating systems, Microsoft took away our choices. We won't have the DVD vs. DIVX choice with the next-gen players. It's heavy DRM vs. heavy DRM.

Inventive Software

26th January 2006, 08:33

Windows Server source code.

Has anybody found the license so we can see what restrictions are imposed?

There's bound to be a catch, I just know it.

Saying that, it's bad news for those who have Windows Server operating systems, because with the code out in the open (sort of) it gives hackers more chance of exploiting it.

Wilbert

26th January 2006, 10:40

Has anybody found the license so we can see what restrictions are imposed?

There's bound to be a catch, I just know it.
Microsoft did something nobody asked. To quote Groklaw:

Let me get this straight. The EU Commission orders Microsoft to hand over clear documentation. They hand over documentation, but it's incomprehensible, so no one can follow it. The EU Commission threatens to fine Microsoft $2.4 million every day until it complies, so instead of complying, Microsoft throws some code on the table and says, figure it out yourself. No documentation. For a fee. Have I got that right?

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060125103545406

Licenses:

http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/legal/eudecision/

I haven't read the licenses.

The royalities are described in "(a) all intellectual property" -> "Exhibit B". Apperently you can choose between four payment methods. If I understand it correctly, in all four cases, you have to pre-pay 'Prepaid Royalties' which is 50000 euros. On top of that you have to pay regular royalties.

Inventive Software

26th January 2006, 12:14

Apparantly, the source code allows people to: view the Windows source code in order to better understand how to develop products that interoperate with Windows, but not to copy Microsoft’s source code.

So I guess the Windows Doom9 edition is out of the question then. :D

Shinigami-Sama

26th January 2006, 17:29

well, you could always make a shell and other such improvements so that you create ways around 'bottlenecks' such as restrictive features in the code :O

arch_angel16

26th January 2006, 20:37

Windows rules because it's not viable for most people to use nothing (which alternatives practically are). The next-gen players will be loaded with DRM because people would prefer high-definition with DRM than no high-definition at all.

You can only do so much with your dollars. When Microsoft murdered OS/2, GEM, and other potential competing operating systems, Microsoft took away our choices. We won't have the DVD vs. DIVX choice with the next-gen players. It's heavy DRM vs. heavy DRM.

Ah but there's a difference here. For a good many people, computers are a necessity - we simply couldn't get by without them.

Who can say that about movies?

Doom9

26th January 2006, 20:42

I wouldn't call dumping code that's only meant to screw us as copying.. how could discarding be copying? I'd even pay Microsoft more for the license to use an unrestricted os..

Chainmax

26th January 2006, 21:53

http://img472.imageshack.us/img472/9149/m1ms.gif (http://imageshack.us)

Neo Neko

26th January 2006, 22:09

"The ONLY THINGS that can tear microsoft down are governments and competing products."
Governments and their decisions can be a big burden.

I dont think that competing products are such a big factor though. For example, MS or any other big company can arrange with other companies (buy off, go to law, arrange by making agreements, and so on), as long as the unique goal is still the same - drag money out the customer's wallet.

Traditionally that is true. But it is also why OSS specifically GPL type stuff has had such staying power. It "can't" be bought. And it's not strictly about the money. It can be about the money. But money isn't the core value. Which is why it is about the only competing product in all areas for Microsoft. Ultimatly you can't count on the governement for anything though. They are almost all paid men.

Neo Neko

26th January 2006, 22:18

[Now somewhat OT.] I'm confused, what's the difference to Shared Source? I think this is only another step in that direction, with opportunistic timing... Microsoft's motto seems to be "if you can't crush them, buy them; if you can't buy them, assimilate their tactics" and now OSS is getting that treatment.

It may be no different than the shared source scheme Microsoft has tried. This ultimatly may come down to the license which I have not read. But it could be worded in such a way that anyone who partakes of the source aiming for better interoperability; may preclude thamselves from ever being able to legally work on an OSS project for fear of microsoft initiating litigation pertaining to pattented/protected technologies and methods. In the end this may just turn out to be a giant trojan horse to cripple the competition. No matter how it turns out Microsoft will spin it as compliance.

MrWizard

26th January 2006, 22:18

I wonder if this will help out the ReactOS project. With more insights into the underlying code, they might be able to make progress with theirs faster...

Neo Neko

26th January 2006, 22:24

Saying that, it's bad news for those who have Windows Server operating systems, because with the code out in the open (sort of) it gives hackers more chance of exploiting it.

That is only true if you fall into the tiny camp of those that believe in security through obscurity. Being tiny because it does not work. Flaws in Windows do exist before Microsoft acknowledges them. That being said it may lead to more and faster vulnerability discovery and exploitation. But this should ultimatly lead to the product also being fixed and patched faster making the product better. Hey it has worked for OSS. It could work for MS.

Neo Neko

26th January 2006, 22:34

I wonder if this will help out the ReactOS project. With more insights into the underlying code, they might be able to make progress with theirs faster...

Actually it probably will not help much. They already joined up with the WINE crew. Once they integrate it a large part of the Windows API will fall suddenly into place. Meaning that they should only have to focus on driver support and loading. And projects like NDISwrapper may help with that. :) But that is still a ways off.

Check the front page though. :(

Accusations have been made by some of ReactOS' own developers about certain parts of ReactOS code. The project is suspending development pending legal council. The project will resume once the issue has been rectified.