Page 1 of 1

Open Source Windows. What do you think?

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:11 am
by Trenchant
I was just reading up on how there should be two main categories for operating systems. Open source and not. Then I started thinking of how if Windows was open source there would probably be less bugs. Sure at the start a few more security wholes would probably found but I figure it would be better for the future.

What do you guys think? I know it probably won't happen but with the right security measures it might just give linux a little more competition in the future for stability.

I hate to say it but I'm personally a Windows fan and would love to see it more stable. The best of linux in Windows.

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:45 am
by Ambush Commander
Releasing the source code for Windows will not suddenly make it "secure", in my opinion. Open source does not solve code complexity, and there is nothing more complex than an operating system. It'll take years for a developer to come up to terms with the architectural decisions made internally. :P

Besides the fact that it will never happen. Oh well, we can go back to our theorizing...

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:53 am
by Trenchant
Ambush Commander wrote:Releasing the source code for Windows will not suddenly make it "secure". Open source does not solve code complexity, and there is nothing more complex than an operating system. It'll take years for a developer to come up to terms with the architectural decisions made internally.
I know it won't make it secure right away. Infact it would probably make it less secure for the first little while.

I think in the long run microsoft would benefit a lot more.

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:41 am
by pickle
If Windows went open source, I imagine the code base would be thrown out in the first month, and a new project started. I can't imagine the code being all that pretty.

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:53 am
by feyd
A massive amount of the code is there are legacy reasons (being able to run old windows apps without issue).. there's a huge compatibility layer that alters behaviour of the internal API when certain applications are detected as running.. There's also a lot of VB in there too.. :roll:

Last I saw, it took a mere (haha) 17 hours to build Windows CE, so I can only imagine how long it takes to build Windows itself.. 8O

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:33 pm
by alvinphp
pickle wrote:If Windows went open source, I imagine the code base would be thrown out in the first month, and a new project started. I can't imagine the code being all that pretty.
I agree, I heard the code is pretty nast y looking.

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:20 pm
by Trenchant
If you think about it they probably throw around programmers just like EA Games does. Would make sense to me if the code was all messed up. They are probably not planning on it being open source so they wouldn't consider it a priority to keep the code tidy.

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:43 pm
by Deemo
maybe do what linus tarvolds did and make a windows clone thats open source :D

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:00 pm
by Jenk
The windows source, as pointed out by feyd, is a big mish mash of compat layer stuff.

In other words, a lot of the old stuff is still in there, even for DOS.

So add to that they advances in source engines etc. you will also see a CRAP load of Assembly code in there (Oh joy) and you'll also see a lot of it in completely different styles simply because it isn't one person who has created everything that is Windows :P

A Friend of mine who runs a server provider was contacted by Microsoft and to his surprise they were requesting that one of his clients be disconnected and their server blitzed due to the client storing Windows 2000 source code.

My friend then also learnt that MS had launched something in the region of 250+ legal cases against people all round the globe who had shared and/or looked at the Win2k source code within 2 weeks of the code leak.