Slashdot Mirror
MS Proposes Disclosing Windows Source To India
raghuram writes "Interesting news from Economic Times of India, I found an interesting story, Microsoft Planning to Share Code with India." He excerpts from that article: "Microsoft has already made a proposal to the ministry of information technology (of India) for sharing the Windows source code with one government body. The nature of the body has not been spelt out; it will presumably be worked out after discussions between the company and the government officials. Interestingly, the offer comes at a time when state governments are showing interest in rival Linux operating system as the latter's source code is free and downloadable from the internet."
One wonders if this is a precedent being set, or if this is just a bid to get into the good graces of what is arguably the current largest current producer of software developers (and cheap ones, too)?
Cynical, I know...
I give them 6 hours before the source is leaked and we can peruse (and be horrified) at our leisure.
Dyolf Knip
Does this remind anyone else of the girl behind the bushes who'd promise to show you hers if you let her see yours, but never quite followed through?
Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
It sounds like Microsoft is running scared now. They realise that India is a powerhose because it has way more people (population) than the United States.
India seems to be tilted toward linux right now and if the linux movement there gets into full swing, the momentum will be very, very hard for Microsoft to stop.
I hope the Indians look to the long terms effects of the windows and linux paths, as opposed to short terms benefits.
I do not feel that this is a smart move for a company that cares about protecting it's source. Piracy and illegal computer activity are densest in asia, and india is close to china, the piracy capital of the world. Microsoft's NT code and interface code would be gold in the hands of one of their rivals, such as Apple, and that could give the competition quite a boost.
I feel MS should be more careful with their products, free software would deffinately be more appropriate for piracy-rampant asia. go linux!
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
Bah! I didn't notice that there were two links in the story, one with the correct link already present. Sorry!
Sweet: If Windows source is made available in India and becomes available worldwide.
Sour: If Windows source is already available to selected developers right here at home, why hasn't someone leaked it?
My understanding of "Shared Source" was that Microsoft shows you theirs if you promise not to tell what it looks like. I naturally assumed that with the code being such a closely held secret, that it would be on the newsgroups before you could say groups-dot-google-dot-com.
But then, it may just be my ignorance showing... I'm just a VB coder staying away from the bleeding edge -- in order to provide my clients with code that works the same way each time.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Don't fall for that MS crap-trap. They might give you the source, but with a shit-load of draconian circumstances and catches that will make it unuseable.
Even if they do give India the source, it'll only be temporary -- for now, to prevent them from switching to Linux. Once India is dependant on MS, it'll be no more source and no more cheap-deals for them.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
It's important to use the "free software" expression instead of "open source".
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
... it could be Windows 3.11 that they're gonna release the source for.
I would not be surprised one bit if M$ follows this tactic with India and any other large industrialized nation seeking a computer implementation that isn't already under their control. It makes those countries think that they are being helped by a corporation that is only doing it to gain marketshare.
----- I want my LART.
So, Microsoft is offering show the Windows source to India, potentially tainting a 15% of the world's population with their intellectual property?
I can't think of a better way to manufacture thousands of Windows developers while at the same time denying Open Source access to a billion people.
"Einstein argued that [...] God is not capricious or arbitrary. No such faith comforts the software engineer." ~ Brooks
Microsoft shares code with the US government as well as some research institutions. It's not like M$s code is super-secret or anything, it's just that they don't want anybody to be able to see how it works for whatever reason.
I'm sure if you put enough money on the table M$ would let you look at the code. And I'm sure M$ sees a lot of money in getting it's hooks in india's growing IT world.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
... they aren't willing to share source code in the U.S. for "security" reasons, but they are willing to pass on the source code to a country in the midst of a volatile conflict with a growing nuclear weapons program ...
...
and so now it's friday the 13th per GMT. maybe this is a fitting time to run the story
when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
The real reason is to make sure that developers who see their source code can't later work on open-source projects without "polluting" the open-source project. I will never look at M$ source code, for that, among other, reasons.
But could you imagine the damage if M$ was successful in claiming that their code ended up in a linux kernel? Or apache? or php? or perl? or gcc?
Why has the Windows Source Code, arguably the most valuable piece of source code in history, never been leaked? Certainly, as others have said, people have it. Or parts of it. The distribution methods are out there (Gnutella, Freenet, Overseas servers). Once this genie gets out of the bottle, it couldn't ever be stoppered back in. So why has there been ten or fifteen years of Windows with no source leaks?
I mean, if the atom bomb got out, which has only a fraction of the destructive power of Windows (just kidding), then why not Windows?
Has it been:
- People are too scared of Microsoft to do it, even with anonymizing technology?
- Microsoft's security is just that good?
- ???
I'm not at all clear why India would care at all about MicroSoft's source code. It would seem that MS's offer to show it amounts to nothing more than a perk in the deal -- a bite of forbiden fruit.
India's hangups over making a deal with MS w/r/t their educational programs have much more to do with MS's rabid interest in dominating the hearts and minds of the next generation of computer users.
As such, India should be asking to see MS's internal business model, not their source code...
My other
Today, Indian government officials examined the Microsoft Windows source code and realized that 99% of the code, when printed in landscape, formed an image that faintly represented a fat, sweaty, balding man screaming around a stage like a monkey.
IGB: More fun than eating oatmeal!
http://in.news.yahoo.com/021212/43/1z0mv.html
I think IBM realizes what's at stake here and is willing to put more $$ where it's mouth is. That's gotta piss Bill and Steve off.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
These are all for good reason. Not only will one massive lost market initate several others, but India also represents a leading software high-tech zone that Microsoft does not want to lose. Think of the number of Linux programmers that would be learning to work on a real platform in five year if the government does not 'sell out' to this US monopoly.
I can't disclose really any more than this, but expect more concessions from the Redmond Giant before all is said and done. Hopefully India's Linux initiatives have not been just to facilitate dealing with M$.
Microsoft's dike is springing many holes. Thiy might fill this one, but products like the one below will be taking serious bites out of MSFT in the coming months...
http://www.distrowatch.com/review-xandros.php
Hunger is the best sauce.
if this may be related somehow to this recent announcement regarding IBM's recent software initiatives in India. On a slightly related question, how would any of this relate to the recent rumors of both IBM and MS vying to purchase Rational and Borland? My take is this: IBM may be the number 2 software vendor, but as a company MS knows they could be choked on for breakfast in terms of sheer scale as reflected in US dollars. Upon reading about the recent sentiments in India, my vote goes with Big Blue.
C|N>K
You can kiss my GPL code writing ass!
Got Code?
If it is a precedent being set, then it could very well be how the population of an entire country operates.
Most people think that 'operating systems' are something that are confined to the workings of computers. History, however, would point out that the term 'computer' used to refer to a person, whose job was to compute (with an abacus or something). Similarly, an 'operating system' also affects how people perform their jobs... Have you ever had somebody tell you something like 'OK, so click Start, Programs, Office, Word' And without thinking, you go through a set of motions that are nearly instinctual? That's an example of how people use operating systems to communicate information and tasks to other people.
I digress a bit. The way I see it, the United States has sort of a 'protective ward' or 'shield' against this kind of stuff, because the USA has a 250+ year old operating system which the federal government uses. The code? Written down in the US Constitution.
Anyhow, the way I see it, you are right, sharing the source code of their OS with a government does seem like its setting a bit of an odd precedent. As far as I can tell, it's sort of like saying, 'OK, we'll organize your billion people just like we organize our files on a supercomputer.' And every person gets a profile, access, authority, and authentication to certain network resources (can you say access control lists (ACLS)?). Hmmm.
It seems to me that it's suggesting a rather Brave-New-World-esque operating system for India. Very, very weird precedent.
A year or so ago, hackers broke into M$ and stole the NT source code. I'm sure that it's floating around somewhere if you really want it.
There are also other people with the source. If a company really needs to see the windows sorce, they could probably place a corporate spy into M$ to get it.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
-India
I'm .... off to feed the trolls, the wonderful trolls of /.
I'm here to feed the microsoft serfs because bill gates software sux,
if ever there was a troll, this was, because, because, because...
Ok, nice piece of irony, dude! I'm willing to bet that people bite, 'cause it's late in the day.
If you want to look at the source to ensure yourself that there is no NSA/CIA/M$ malware or trojans there, how do you know you are looking at the right thing? Will M$ actually let you USE the source and create your own certified Win distribution? Using your own trusted compiler?
Don't think so.
)9TSS
Unless microsoft plans on releasing the source code for every windows update patch as well, they will still be able to maintain as much control as they have always had (re: too much)
/* Source Code Windows XP */ //if // if //while //if /* printf("Welcome to Windows 3.1"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows 3.11"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows 95"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows NT 3.0"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows 98"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows NT 4.0"); */ // while // main
#include "win31.h"
#include "win95.h"
#include "win98.h"
#include "workst~1.h"
#include "evenmore.h"
#include "oldstuff.h"
#include "billrulz.h"
#include "monopoly.h"
#include "backdoor.h"
#define INSTALL = HARD
char make_prog_look_big(16000000);
void main()
{
while(!CRASHED)
{
display_copyright_message();
display_bill_rules_message();
do_nothing_loop();
if (first_time_installation)
{
make_100_megabyte_swapfile();
do_nothing_loop();
totally_screw_up_HPFS_file_system();
search_and_destroy_the_rest_of-OS2();
make_futile_attempt_to_damage_Linux();
disable_Netscape();
disable_RealPlayer();
disable_Lotus_Products();
hang_system();
}
write_something(anything);
display_copyright_message();
do_nothing_loop();
do_some_stuff();
if (still_not_crashed)
{
display_copyright_message();
do_nothing_loop();
basically_run_windows_31();
do_nothing_loop();
}
}
if (detect_cache())
disable_cache();
if (fast_cpu())
{
set_wait_states(lots);
set_mouse(speed,very_slow);
set_mouse(action,jumpy);
set_mouse(reaction,sometimes);
}
printf("Welcome to Windows 2000");
if (system_ok())
crash(to_dos_prompt)
else
system_memory = open("a:\swp0001.swp",O_CREATE);
while(something)
{
sleep(5);
get_user_input();
sleep(5);
act_on_user_input();
sleep(5);
}
create_general_protection_fault();
}
(Hehe. Code courtesy of this funny site and reproduced here for your enjoyment.)
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
and set by Linux. Whether MS likes it or not, and whoever acknowledges it or not, the effective price of a functioning OS, complete with bundled office suite, is now $0. The effective method of delivery is with full source code.
The genie is out of the bottle. MS is the follower.
MS is running a slow retreat. It will do so as slowly as it can, as seldom as it can.
That is why it's offering the code to India but fought the DoJ tooth and nail. The *Indian* government's interest in Linux is one that MS believes is serious. It does not yet take the American govenments *use* of Linux seriously. When it does the American *government* will get code, but just exactly that least amount of code that will "seal the deal."
Rinse and repeat.
This is always the case when a business is based on "secret knowledge." Once someone else learns the knowledge they undercut the orginal seller. Once the knowledge is ubiquitous the knowledge has no commercial value per se and the "price" of the knowledge becomes the price of the labor to impliment it.
So it has been. So it is. So it shall be.
Eventually Windows and MS Office will sell, together, for about $40, about the price of a boxed Red Hat distro, and come with a certain amount of user readable and modifiable code.
It's where the market is already, it's just going to take a bit of time for it to overcome it's inertia and readjust to the current state of affairs.
With MS kicking and screaming all the way.
Because of this Linux *will never win.* At least in the sense of being the one true OS that dominates the world. It will eventually have too much competition *at it's own level.*
But that will be because its *principles* carried the day.
Somewhere in its heart MS realizes this. This is why it's so willing to aggresively seek various means of forcing Windows usage. It's the only tactic it has left.
Which is a clear indication that the game is already lost.
KFG
Ricky, you went off the medication again, didn't you?
Astroturfers regularly assert that open source projects are less secure because there's security in obscurity. A lot of people would call that bullshit, but that's the argument.
What are they going to say when it's not just industrial spies, but a whopping big subcontinent that can find holes to exploit by code review? And we still can't patch it ourselves?
Ugh - frozen software, whose every flaw is there for the reader.
The only plus I see here is that only very obfuscated MS trojans will surivive.
I'm sure that India already knew about the availability of Windows source code. But the fact is that Linux is free while Windows cost money, so there choice was obvious.
Fwiw, (sorry I dont have an online reference), there was a very recent (like last week) article in the WSJ that went into detail about GatesCo's efforts to address uses of opensource. In fact, once instance was where the the Pentagon commisioned a research project on OpenSource (from Mitre) that basically concluded that open source is a good thing. MS came in and requested/demanded the conclusion be watered down. There have been other cases, such as india, where the govt decides to use open source apps for some educational project, then MS (unrelated of course) shows up the next day with big donation of "free" windows software, office, etc. How can a cash strapped gov't turn that down?
"Hey kid, the first one is free."
30 GB, so going to take a litle longer than 6 hours for it to be leaked (unless a T3 is involved)
Babel Fish Translation, In English:
Blah blah blah M$. Blah blah blah evil. Blah blah blah? Monopoly! Blah blah blah only to screw you later blah blah blah. Don't trust blah blah blah blah. Microsoft blah blah crap and blah blah blah.
Hah! Well, he's got a point. Few comments so far have been much more intriguing than that.
"Derp de derp."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstech nology/134594397_microsoft12m.html
I remember reading an open letter from the Indian government (I think. It might have been a south american country.) to MS stating the reasons they wanted to go with linux rather than a windows platform. Basically, they realized (to the cheers of many many slashdotters) that no matter what discounts MS may offer them, providing their schools with MS software would allow MS to jack up the price or impose any other restrictions later on when everyone would be used to the windows environment, making a switch to linux costly and difficult.
Hopefully they'll remember their position and realize that opening the source code is just another piece of bait. There's no guarantee it will stay open and availabe, just like there's no guarantee of continued MS price breaks after the first one. It looks like they've got a pretty good handle on the "The first one's free" concept.
India I hope has more sense than to buy into this obvious MS ploy. I'm not trying to sound like a typical anti-microsoft /.er, but this reeks of Microsoft's typical weasely business practice.
What guarantee does India have that when Windows 2004 comes out, it won't be a total re-write of the code that Microsoft doesnt want to share? Then their investment in MS code today will be useless tomorrow. Not to mention the myriad of overbearing restrictions that MS is bound to place on the use of their code.
If India wants to excel in the software development field, I think it's in their best interest to go with an Open solution e.g. Linux or some flavor of BSD. This is what will benefit them the most in the long run.
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
If you buy proprietary software, it should work without having source code access. Insist on well-documented APIs and preferably conformance to standards. For a proprietary vendor to give you source code access under a restrictive license is only an excuse for poor testing and quality control and an attempt to bind you to them further. Don't touch someone else's source code unless it comes with an open source compliant license or is in the public domain.
I am just wondering what are the proofs that the given source code is the very same one used to compile the binaries I can find in the stores?
I mean, even at m$, nobody as a view at the entire source. What are the proofs that backdoors aren't added just after the programmers labs by NSA or even... Al-Quaida?
And don't tell me Indian government will be allowed to compile their own versions for their whole staff!
Maybe I'm paranoid, but NO, I don't trust m$...
MS does that in an attempt to persude india Government Open Source is a non-issue when they can look at their code.
:)
Shared source may help india Government to address the concern on hidden security issues, but it doesn't address the problem associated with vendor-lockup.
A Government officer(not US Govt) once told me they regret to chose Unisys for a satalite system few year back because Unisys just sold all the exclusive rights of this proprietary system to another company, and that company charges them outragous maintenance fee. They system is too critical and expensive to replace so they've to stuck with it. This year they've to cut a lot of resource to pay up the fee.
MS only grants right for them to look at the source code but this doesn't grant them right to distribute it to others, so they still need to rely on one vendor and fall into same vendor-lock hell.
I don't think India Government would be fooled by their deception. In view of their previous action I believe that they've more smart people in their Government then any other countries.
By this gesture MS is acknowledging that the source code is important. Hopefully India is smart enough to see that MS offers the source as a last resort where as Linux offers the source code (plain and simple).
...is why they should settle for a half-hearted attempt to please, when they can get the real thing for free, along with support by a comparable international corporation? To anyone not already in bed with Microsoft (and thus not yet beholden to Office or Exchange), there's simply no contest. And I think this is what's scaring the source code out of Microsoft.
[ home ]
There are 3 sources bases which can plausibly be called the windows source. The original source based which started with DOS and windows 1 and went on up to windows 95 and Windows Millenium. The 'portable windows' CE which is its own code base. And the NT code base which is the one people would want.
It might make a lot of sense for MS to give out the source to the windows 95 codebase, as it is old and decrepit and would cost more to understand than to reimplement.
Windows CE has a very small market and giving out the source base might be its last gasp.
I am an Indian. I believe after a certain stage, there will be no stopping Linux (or *BSDs). The momentum for Linux is currently very weak, but is gathering speed every day. Why?
...)
- Sooner or later India will grow strong enough to challenge US. Then Windows will be viewed with the kind of suspicion that the Chinese/Europeans do now.
- It is simply not attractive (market size) for MS to "Indianize" Windows, the way we Indians can do to Linux (eg All Native Languages, etc)
- I already see a trend that very IT savvy Indians tend to dislike MS for various reasons (trustworthiness, price-gouging,
- Pride. With MS & its software, you can only do sweatshop style jobs. With Linux, we can turn our programmers into reputable contributors, recognised the world over.
it doesn't matter as long as it works in the real world
this is one place where i think capitalism really shines
people won't stand for something ineffecient just because so and so would like to keep it that way so they can get rich, and the market will kill off companies that can't adapt as needed
Some are actually easier and faster to install. I installed a distro called Lycoris the other week that has a similar approach to Lindows. I'm not saying this is the way to go, but it was really fast and simple to install, and the PC looks and reacts similar to Windows XP, but costs $0.
In other words, my computer illiterate Dad could use it.
If Windows didn't already come pre-installed (due to the monopoly factor) then people like my Dad probably would be considering the free alternative if he was made aware of it. Fact is that I don't know ANYONE that has purchased Windows at full price, for personal use. It's always bundled or corporate.
when Indian programmers start dying of laughter after reading windows source code?
tcboo
Shared Source Licensing Programs: Availability by Country
Interesting bits from the shared source philosophy:
The commercial software model is built on five key elements:
- Community. A strong support community of developers.
- Standards. Promote collaboration and interoperability while supporting innovation and healthy competition.
- Business model: Promote the growth of a profitable business.
- Investment. Level of research and development investment drives resources for future innovation.
- Licensing model. Provide product and source access without jeopardizing the intellectual property rights of those who create or use the software.
[...] The source licensing programs and licenses are tailored to the diverse needs of Microsoft's customer and partner communities.Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
Perhaps I did not look close enough, I didn't actually handle them, but the NT source cd's I saw looked mass produced, factory pressed and silk screened. The source was licensed to a university research project. Locked rooms and NDAs were required.
#include ba_doom_ching.h
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
if a guy named dh003i can make a difference, you can too!!!
I'd argue Windows has done far far more damage than the Atomic bomb....
Quite Seriously.
For those who are worried about DOS attacks flooding the internet when people see the bug ridden code, don't worry about it, any significant backbone on the net is running *nix anyway.
That's because there are no stats to publish. Nobody bothers to publish zero since it is really just a place holder and not a number.
I've worked at MS competitors for years, and this kind of thing looks like an old, old pattern repeating itself. Basically they take a great concept, like open source, and they manipulate its meaning until they can own and then destroy the basic concept that threatened them in the first place. Remember, Microsoft invented "embrace and extend" and FUD.
>MS Proposes Disclosing Windows Source To India
India plans nuclear retaliation any minute now!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
It appears that all Microsoft were doing (.Net this .Net that) was to distruct competition from what they really wanted - introduce more anti-competitive practices through discount deals for SMEs, taking over Borland, bribing Indian govt, Palladium...If that wasn't the case they could have made .Net server released perhaps.
Is full-blown war with OpenSource/Linux/IBM/Sun... just starting?
As I said before, please read this before jerking the knee:
v er sity/NTSrcLicInfo.aspx
http://research.microsoft.com/collaboration/uni
This may be the first time they've done this with a government, but it isn't the first time they've liscenced out their source.
you just know that's what they're offering. and if you've ever drank beer in India, there are mainly 2 varieties, regular or strong.
watch out for the strong it will set you down pretty quick.
anyhow, the freedom isn't about free beer anyhow, and the Indians won't be fooled by this "shared source initiative"
There's an expression in Khatmandu, just north of India, "Namaste" (someone with a clue let me know if I spelled that wrong, and perhaps expand on the meaning of that phrase and the relevance in this situation.)
Anyhow Bill, the good guys always win when the people have a clue about who the good guys aren't... Open source controlled by someone else has almost no value, other than being able to contribute code to Microsoft, while not being on the payroll. 500 Million dollars didn't buy your way in, free server software wouldn't do it either, and this also isn't going to fly. I wish the US government was as clued in as some other nations are.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
I mean, whos going to start up the pool where we can bet how long between the source code is sent to India and it is all over the Internet?
Put me down for 34 hours.
The Internet is generally stupid
Windows CE has a very small market and giving out the source base might be its last gasp.
The Windows CE source is already available to the public.
NO CARRIER
1) Build Nuke
2) Prove that you may be crazy enough to use it
3) Threaten M$ that your going open source
4) M$ gives you source code
5) ???
6) Profit
Life moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it. -FB
Seriously, Microsoft is making a big mistake by over-reacting and fighting the world.
They (Microsoft) would be much better off if they just STFU, fixed their bugs (if possible), opened up and inter-operated, and were just happy with their market share they already have.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Damn those richie developed countries like disposing industrial wastage to developing countries....oh wait, disclosing not disposing?...nevermind then
It might make a lot of sense for MS to give out the source to the windows 95 codebase, as it is old and decrepit and would cost more to understand than to reimplement.
Tell that to the WINE folks. I'm sure they will be pleased with this trivialization of their years of hard work.
of business would be to send them a copy of the Windows source code. They would go bankrupt figuring out how such a heaping pile ever worked.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
Well, there's two separate issues here. MS cannot own the copyright on its source code, because it's never been published -- copyright more or less requires publication (of course, they could publish it, all well and copyrighted, and then hope that someone screws up and uses it). However, the Windows source code probably does constitute trade secrets -- if we ever came to a situation where code in the Linux kernel was identical to some code in Windows, then there would be a few possibilities.
1. A Linux kernel dev had seen Windows source, and copied it. If this really happened, it should be easy for MS to prove -- via watermarked code, trace back to whoever leaked it, and sue them. Whether you could go after the developer depends on whether you could prove that he knew he was copying trade secrets. Presumably this would never happen, since anyone smart enough to be able to work on the kernel (or even approve code for inclusion) would also be smart enough to never want or need to copy MS code.
2. MS looked at the Linux kernel source, then modified some of its code to be identical, and then claims that it was copied. This would be nearly impossible to prove.
Just musing, really, but I don't think there's a serious issue here, at least not on first glance.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
If that code is as bad formatted as it works it would make any man without nuclear goggles blind.
I mean, ohh the horror!
HTTP/1.1 400
From what I understand, MS has copyrighted Windows binaries, but kept the source as a trade secret.
Well, if I got that right, all that needs happen is for someone not covered by a non-disclosure agreement to come across the source & its out of the bag. Say some Indian govt employee loses a laptop with the source on it & someone else finds it, or say some worker throws a CD out, thinking its fucked when its not, & those people who go through the garbage find it, or what ever. If my understanding is correct, once that happens then anyone would be be able to use the source on any project, for example WINE could use it to perfect their compatibility. & quite legally too, well that is if I'm correct in my understanding of trade secrets.
Only problem is, wasn't CSS a trade secret, so why's DeCSS banned? Surelly once Xing 'accidently' exposed CSS, MoRE was free to use it?
to which the US is now a signatory, all original works are automatically copyrighted at the time of creation. No special filing is required.
The code is copyright protected and the property of MS.
DeCSS is a slightly different case as it broke certain provisions of the *US's* DMCA regarding *encryption* of digital files. Adobe is now trying to claim those provisions even apply to works in the *public domain.* The provisions of the law are NOT part of the international code, but poor Jan is in court anyway.
KFG
microsoft's biggest nightmare in six words
India becomes a free software country
why : free software's history has mostly been in the 'developed' world - here it is flourishing in spite of the fact that it is playing from a catch-up position
in these countries most of the places where it makes sense to use computers are already doing so and have been for a while - and most of these are using proprietary society
despite this, free software is making significant inroads
now factor in the world's (soon to be) most populous country turning down the free software path much earlier in it's computerisation process than the countries it is following - moreover a country where english is (fairly widely) known and which has a culture possibly unrivalled in it's ability to deal with abstract thought (witness the highly sophisticated ancient vedic and dravidian cultures and the contemporary reputation of indian programmers)
result : the free software movement - steady and stable and resolutely making progress gets a massive shot in the arm - india becomes an example to all other 'devloping countries' - the microsoft pyramid scheme starts to develop massive cracks in it's base
free software in india - well worth while keeping a watching brief on
>MS is already in talks with the government to work out the modalities of sharing the source code
"Modalities"!!! Wtf is that supposed to mean?
From Merriam-Webster (cheers guys):
------------
One entry found for modality.
Main Entry: modality
Pronunciation: mO-'da-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Date: circa 1617
1 a : the quality or state of being modal b : a modal quality or attribute : FORM
2 : the classification of logical propositions according to their asserting or denying the possibility, impossibility, contingency, or necessity of their content
3 : one of the main avenues of sensation (as vision)
4 : a usually physical therapeutic agency
------------
So, it's either some strange Indian method of healing, or M$ are asserting their own impossibility!
Skiing? Check out The Independant Skiers Portal
We once insisted on source for a OS and the company agreed --- and supplied it on microfiche. It met the letter of the contract without actually being any use.
In addition, having the source is pointless unless you also have all the necessary build tools. I very much doubt that XP is built by running configure; make; make install.
Finally, although access to the source may be of some limited use to speciallist developers, I very much doubt that most programmers could learn anything useful that could not be learnt elsewhere from books and open sources.
Which is a clear indication that the game is already lost.
Other, heavier, indications that Microsoft is out of the race for good are the prohibition against publishing benchmark results and that they seem to be running heavy losses in except for the two products which the collect monopoly rents on...Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
I just ate. :-)
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Wonder how this affects any of the current cases against microsoft. If their argument that they can't disclose source in the interests of national security then how can they give it away to another nation which has the potential to be an unfriendly nuclear power ?
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
So AFAIK this is what you should have typed:
I am very curious. How do they manage to maintain it ? how much spaghetti the code is ? what is the internal coding style ? what design patterns do they follow ? how componentized really is ? how much is it tied to the 80x86 architecture ? how much does the API resemble the APIs of MacOS ? what pieces are left from the original Windows ? is it only asm and C/C++ or there is Pascal in there is well ? How well does it compare to Linux when it comes to coding techniques ? what versioning system do they use ? how much of it is hacks ?
Of course, this is my scientific interest as a programmer to other people's work, and since Windows is a very important piece of software, I would like to see the internals of it. I don't care of repackaging and selling it, because I already have a working O/S that's fine for me: Linux. And I don't think that the open source Linux would gain anything from the Windows source code...
Which say,
Part 1:
US company X patents somthing that Indian company Y is already doing.
Company X then uses wipo so stop company Y infringing it's patent.
Part 2:
US company X patents a drug for an illness that is rife in India.
Althought the drug costs $0.001 per hit to manufacture the company charges $50 per hit.
And you wander why India doesn't bow down to the US patent system.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
The third pararagraph clearly shows that micorosft has Extra terestrial relations [satan maybe]
"When contacted by ET, Microsoft India president Rajiv Nair was somewhat cagey. Although he didn't deny the move, he merely said, "We are evaluating the idea (of sharing the source code)." However, sources in the company said that MS is already in talks with the government to work out the modalities of sharing the source code. It's learnt that MS worldwide program manager for shared source program, Jason Matusow, was recently in India to work out the modalities."
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
M$ sees the real handwriting on the wall.
They're losing the developer war to open-source, (Its a bug in the OS. [An easy call for a developper to make.] I can't fix it, you'll have to live with it!) Not fuckin' likely. Since most of the development is shifting to India, that's where they'll open the code to with draconian penalties. They'd open to China but they're already going Linux.
They're losing the education war to open source (yeah, go to school and NOT be able to study OSs? [you could be busted under the DMCA {you can be busted for revealing a store's price list!}])
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
ummm, where did you get the information that i am american, much less racist? besides, i'd say the exact same thing if Bill & Co. wanted to share the source code with Israel. and it really needs to be shared with countries that don't just happen to have an incredible emerging market and a legion of software engineers - why leave out the U.K., Latin America, and South Africa? economics must not overrule prudence, lest we descend into the disasterous downward spiral of letting corporations make decisions without recompense.
...
besides, you'd be just as incensed if your premier consulting firm suddenly decided to share their project code with North Korea, who has been shipping nuclear delivery methods and materials to many countries, including your beloved neighbors in Paktistan. keep it in perspective here
when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
And while we're all saying how it's great that India.gov can decide whether to go with Windows based on analysing the source, Microsoft passes sackfulls of bribes to key officials under the table. India is even more systematically corrupt than the USA. This is just a smokescreen.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
It would seem that this 'open source' move is an attempt to silence the remaining critics who say that access to the source is more important than the $$$ that MS is throwing at them.
The sad thing is that this isn't comparable to having the Linux source. Very few will have access to it and those that do will only be able to look at it, rather than being able to modify the OS itself and redistribut it.
Basically the only benefit you get is the ability to look for bugs and trojans to make sure that you aren't being spied on. That is certainly reasonable for a government to want to do, but it is only one of the many benefits of true 'open source'.
Lasers Controlled Games!
Ok, so Bill gets all friendly and hands you a big pile of code (CD's? Big reams of paper delivered by truck?)... I'm having a hard-time not seeing the scene from the South Park movie "Hey, relax guy!"
Thing is, how can you be sure it's really the actual production windows source code? Sure it will probably compile and even run, but he could leave certain bits out and it would take YEARS to discover that fact if it's a subtle deficiency.
No thanks, getting the source to Windows is like getting those low-interest rate checks from your credit card company. It sounds good on the surface, but when you really read it, you realize what a load it is....
[By all means correct me if i'm wrong on any of this...]
/. story, or possibly a story somewhere else, quote that the Indian government was embracing Linux because of ability to access some portion of the networking code that they couldn't access in windows because of its closed nature?
Well if i'm not mistaken, didn't an earlier
Appears to be just another Salvo in Operation Vindaloo (tm) (Bills wooing away of Indian developers from non MS projects...or attempt at any rate). First he donates a massive amount of money to fight AIDS while at the same time offering to give away windows (or was that sell at a reduced cost). Now, its sharing source code. Anyone want to place bets on what hes going to do next?
--- I was far from home, and the spell of the Eastern sea was upon me. -Lovecraft-
1) All Indian programmers will be unable to work on Open Source projects, because they "might be pirating Microsoft Intellectual Property".
2) India may/will have the code that some MS exec told the judge was "so buggy we can't open the source for fear of bringing down Civilisation".
3) Corrolary to #1 is that all programmers are deemed tainted by access to Microsoft IP as soon as MS can prove that the source 'escaped' from India. This will probably happen 30 seconds after they hand over the CD set, thereby effectively shutting down all Open Source projects.
Don't give them any more ideas. The astroturf campaign was bad enough. :-)
Do you feel ripped off when you buy a 25 cent pack of Wrigley's gum? Is that price totally fucking you over, at 5 cents a stick? What about when you pay less than 5 cents a stick when you buy a Plen-T-Pak? Is that a shitty value?
A good value would be the cost of production. By definition, companies have to make money -- that means fucking someone else over. Its a zero sum game: if they get, you give; they win, you lose. Or vica versa.
Operating systems are not food. Nobody *has* to buy an operating system, people *choose* to buy the operating system. The consumers know what they are buying, if they pay too much for too little, they are fucking themselves over.
Actually, yes people do have to buy MS' OS' because MS creates dependencies on them. For example, the word document format. MS has done everything they can to make sure that their 90% of the market finds it impossible to switch over to any other OS.
And finally, what evidence do you have that Microsoft will do what you say they will do?
Ever heard the parable about the scorpion and the fox? Its in Microsoft's nature to fuck everyone else over: the consumer, competitors, the government, anyone. Its what they do. That's the nature of an illegal monopoly. It's been shown that they have illegally used their power as a monopoly to find unfair and anti-competitive ways to crush their competition. They're showing us here in the US that they'll fuck every other business over (look at their new forced upgrade model, which will cost business' much more money).
That's evidence enough that they'll do what I say. They have a history of doing it.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Honestly, what good is the source code to a Microsoft product anyhow? You'll just open it up, look at it, shake your head and say "Man, that's fucked up". I guess it might be good for a laugh or two...
So... taking a profit on a transaction equals "fucking the customer over?" 'Cause, you know, I'm just trying to add new entries into my English-dh003i, dh003i-English dictionary over here.
I write in my journal
I'm not even remotely confused about the difference between patents, trademarks, and copyrights.
Patents last for about 20 years, and require full publication of the method, process, or device patented. You do not lose your patent if you do not defend every incursion against it; you can be as selective as you like. Patents must, in theory, be novel in order to be granted -- things that were already done or created in the past cannot be patented. (Of course, we all know how well the USPTO actually handles this, which is to say, ass-fucking poorly.)
Trademarks cover names, logos, images (i.e. "marks") and must be defended continuously, or you risk losing the right to the mark. Names like "Microsoft", "IBM", "Windows", "Apple", "Slim Jims", "The Club", and so on are all trademarked. "Aspirin" and "Escalator" are words that were formerly trademarked, but are no longer ("Aspirin" was voluntarily surrendered by Bayer around World War I, and I believe Escalator fell into the public domain due to lack of adequate litigation by its original holder). Trademarks last forever as long as you protect them.
Copyright grants, more or less, the right to the creation and distribution of copies of a work. You don't lose your copyright if you don't litigate every violation, and copyright has a (theoretically) fixed duration (although our lovely Congress is doing its best to kowtow to entertainment interests and keeps extending copyright durations for no good reason). Copyright protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. The work generally has to be fixed in a tangible medium, and publication is emphatically not required.
I misstated myself in the previous post. I didn't mean to say that unpublished works are uncopyrightable; I meant that unpublished works are unlitigatible. If you write a novel, but never show it to anyone, and then I write a novel that is nearly identical and publish it, you can't sue me for infringement, because you can't prove that I infringed. Hence, there's no problem for me. The same situation applies with Microsoft: If MS-similar code shows up in the Linux kernel (and I would be amazed if there were not already many segments that were quite similar, merely by chance, or duplication of function), there's similarly no problem, since unless MS can prove that the kernel dev saw their code (which shouldn't theoretically be possible, due to NDAs and its generally unpublished nature), they couldn't prove that infringement took place. Since nobody smart enough to work on the Linux kernel would be dumb enough to look at MS code anyway, there's no real chance of a problem.
Sorry for misstating things, but I'd watch your hyperbole in the future, you coward.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Like I said, its a zero sum game.
In most transactions that occur, one party gets fucked over, unless by chance its an exactly equal transaction. Either the customer pays more than something's worth or the producer gets less than its worth.
If businesses weren't maintaining a net gain in their area, they wouldn't be in business (or at least, not for long). If the business has a net gain -- accounting for the cost of production and R&D -- then that means the consumer has a net loss.
Of course, there is always the Pareto-Superior outcome to consider. The customer has money, but values the product more than his money (because of what the product can do for the customer); the company has the product, but values the money more than the product (because it has millions of copies of this product). Thus, in a transaction both parties are getting what they want.
However, that still doesn't negate the basic facts of transaction. In any transaction, one party is trying to fuck the other party over as much as possible. Equilibrium (thus, a transaction) is achieved when each party believes they've fucked the other party over enough.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
*as it currently is* a "trade secret" is simply a protected original work which you have not published.
I'm sorry, but there's simply no issue here. The so called "incompatibility" with trade secret law is not one of contradiction, but rather one where the legal ramifications of trade secret law * no longer apply.*
You are perhaps thinking of patents rather than copyrights. For a patent to be valid it is required to make a *public revelation* of the invention. Thus some companies choose *not* to patent and rely on trade secret "law" ( which is case, not code).
*No such pulic revelation* is required for a work to be copyrighted. Hence the lack of conflict with trade secret law.
KFG
even more seriously than it does Linux. What do you think the real point of the "browser wars" was?
One can write a complete system, GUI and apps, in java that runs in any browser.
Three quarters of the ".NET" idea is simply to subvert this possibility and lock people in to a Microsoft version before someone else impliments it.
Personally, I don't like Java. I think the code is clunky and ugly, but that's because I'm mathmatically trained and *prefer* "arcane" code notations that look like scribbles on the blackboard.
But for the most part Java works and with every iteration of Moore's law becomes more viable as a main system language.
KFG
Both parties can win. Let's say that I'm good at making furniture and you're not. I can make a chair for $20 (parts and labour), you'd put that much into parts alone (wastage) and then much extra time, trying to come up to speed. If I sell you the chair for $30 it's still less than it would cost you to make it, but I profit from it as well.
Not all profit is a "fucking over". If I don't make more than $20 per chair, I starve (or rather, quit making chairs and start farming). Even "profit" over and above expenses often goes towards future expenses (retirement) and everyone has the right to self-enrichment, as long as they don't do it at the expense of others.
The "fucking over" comes when I make a chair for $10, and sell it for $90, keeping you from undercutting me by telling my suppliers that if they sell supplies to you I'll stop dealing with them, thus causing them (as I'm the biggest customer) to go bankrupt. Additional fucking over comes when the chair has a "license agreement" printed on the bottom saying that only one person is ever allowed to sit in a chair, other people need other chairs, even if there're empty chairs available.
You're right that economics (in the long run) is zero-sum. In a closed system, more value can't be invented, but the world is a long way from being a closed system and with potential space industry, etc, it may never be. Have you heard the phrase "A rising tide floats all boats"? In a non-closed economy it's true. If I make my customers wealthy, they'll have more money to spend, hopefully to spend on my products.
You're right that economics (in the long run) is zero-sum.
Oops. That's not true. Economics is the textbook example of a non-zero-sum game. Consider Van Gogh's "Sunflowers." He took some paint, some wood, and some canvas and made something that is worth millions upon millions of dollars. Another person given the exact same tools and materials might produce a work that's worth a hundred bucks. Another person might produce something that's actually worth less than the value of the materials that went into it.
Or consider another example: food. A meal in a restaurant costs $X. The exact same set of ingredients, prepared poorly, can result in an inedible mess, value $0.
Value is created and destroyed every day. The economy is about as non-zero-sum as it gets.
I write in my journal
Okay. So long as I understand your meaning. When you say "fuck the customer over," what you mean is "take a profit." Check.
I write in my journal
Yep, if you've taken a profit off of a transaction, that means the other person somehow took a loss: in other words, (s)he got fucked over.
Of course, that's the whole principal behind a capitalistic system: its what keeps the system going, and its worked pretty well so far (observe the US' high standard of living).
Of course, MS goes the extra mile to fuck over their customers and everyone else both on the transaction and in any other way MS can come up with.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
What will happen is that Microsoft will craft some cosmetically tasty deal that pays lip service to open source but with hidden strings that will make the overall package fall far short of the utility of truly free software. These hidden strings will completely escape the notice of the government officials who are unlikely to be sufficiently paranoid about Microsoft's intentions and insufficiently knowledgeable about software in general.
Anyway this apparently tasty deal will be offered under the condition that it has to be agreed to within a very short time frame - possibly with extra conditions of secrecy - but in any event the overall effect will be to render it impossible for the terms to be subjected to any kind of informed public scrutiny at least until the deal has been signed.
Note that the foregoing makes no damning assumptions about the probity of the individuals concerned. It could all take place just as I've outlined with no dirty money changing hands.
We all know that the Indian mnisters & civil servants involved would much rather be seen to have cut an apparently great deal with nice, shiny, modern rich Western Microsoft than be seen to have to settle for the cheap option. After all that's the way it is: it's all about how it will seem to them, how they think they will be seen by others of their own clique, than it is about the substance of such a deal or how it will appear to a bunch of troublesome leftist intellectuals and geeky engineer types.
The problem is a fundamental one, too big to be overcome in a single small issue like this one. It is all about how societies allow themselves to be governed. It is about where we allow ministers to make grand decisions and civil servants to implement them, without adequate public accountability every step of the way.
The alarming reality is that most modern governments (even in the US, the UK and Australia and very probably in India too) are in practice no more democratic nor less high-handed and patrician now than their forebears of the early 19th Century were. This will not change anywhere until the people demand it en masse. i.e. it will require more than the geekiest 2% of the population to make a stand before anything can happen.