top 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 79 points 6 months ago (10 children)

This is a very ass-kissy M$ article. Love the "m$ continues to embrace open source". Yeah you can tell because they open the code to their software many decades after it is completely obsolete.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    What exactly were you expecting? Should they opensource Windows 11?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Yes, unironically. It'd eliminate most security risks currently inherent to Windows while allowing for decent customization. It would also greatly accelerate WINE and ReactOS, giving legacy software a smooth offramp from insecure older versions of windows to Linux.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago (13 children)

    A spokesperson said that the only reason they didn’t open source Windows 3.0 and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups at the same time was that it was still in use for some highly critical systems.

    /s //Probably

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I bet there's a not insignificant chunk of Win3.11 code still lurking at the heart of Windows even now. Patched and recompiled for 64 bits, but still there.

    Though most of it is probably for backwards compatibility by this point. Or so we should hope.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    An interesting assertion. A full install of 3.11 was about 8 MB or so, and all of the 8086 / -186 / -286 / -386 code will have been thrown away a long time ago. I doubt there's much of PROGMAN left, and all the fonts and art assets are long superseded. So in terms of total code, it can't be much. But on the other hand, the code that you write for an event loop or to handle driver interrupts hasn't changed conceptually very much in that time. Most programmers would reimplement the basics in a very similar way, so there's not much point in redoing it.

    When I used to work in the water industry, we still had programmable logic controllers (PLCs) controlling pumpsets from the 1950s. The last person that could have modified them had retired and since died more than 30 years before. But deciding which pumps to run in order to best fill a reservoir is not logic that needs updating every day, not even every decade. Still working fine, don't touch it. So I still laugh at my colleagues that can't touch code that was written a few years ago in an unfashionable library. That's not tech debt. Try, written by your grandparents for CPUs that had stopped being made before you were born.

    And I remember 3.11 being perfectly good enough at the time, anyway. Wasn't any Linux at that point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Nah. Having worked in the industry - we built (the) Unix and a Linux distro, and I helped secure it - I can absolutely confirm older OSes are being used for very crucial stuff in an ironic mix of risk and safety that is bizarre.

    Hint: Big grey-blue boats with numbers and famous names on the side.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    Inside a janitors closet, behind 24 firewalls, is a single SPARCStation serving the internal financial information for GE.

    A single chair is in the converted closet for Hank to sit when they (it could be one person, or three working in shifts, no one is really sure. But they respond to "Hank") aren't putting out the most recent fire. The pile of used extinguishers are replaced daily. Hank likes his job. Hank doesn't like you. If you're lucky enough and get access through the 7 biometrically locked doors to exchange the extinguishers, it's been said you can hear mumblings from inside the closet about "uptime".

    On September 30th, 2018, John Flannery, the CEO at the time, asked why this was all necessary and considered replacing this system with something more modern.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago

    "I joke with people and say it's the Air Force's oldest IT system. But it's the age that provides that security,” Rossi said in an October interview. "You can't hack something that doesn't have an IP address. It's a very unique system — it is old and it is very good."

    In 2016, the Government Accountability Office wrote that SACCS runs on an IBM Series/1 computer dating from the 1970s and that the Defense Department planned “to update its data storage solutions, port expansion processors, portable terminals and desktop terminals by the end of fiscal year 2017,” but it’s unclear whether those upgrades have occurred.

    https://www.c4isrnet.com/air/2019/10/17/the-us-nuclear-forces-dr-strangelove-era-messaging-system-finally-got-rid-of-its-floppy-disks/

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    I've got equipment in the field thats from the early 90s. I imagine there's plenty of computer driven shit that just works so never gets replaced.

    The best part about shit that age is you can easily fix shit with some electronics or engineering skills.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago

    I owned a copy of MS-DOS 1.0. The source code listing was included in the back of the manual.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    "Bic Pen" just released the dark secrets of the medieval "quill".

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    Microsoft explained, "These materials aren't just operating system releases in the traditional sense. In several cases, the listings represent point‑in‑time working states and hand-written notes, preserved by Tim Paterson himself. Think of them as a printed commit history of a Git repository."

  • source
  • 1 comment in c/technology@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    “These materials aren't just operating system releases in the traditional sense. In several cases, the listings represent point‑in‑time working states and hand-written notes, preserved by Tim Paterson himself. Think of them as a printed commit history of a Git repository."

    No one's going to be using these releases for real work. However, they're still remarkably instructive for anyone who wants to understand how operating systems were structured on first‑generation 8086 hardware. DOS 1.0's small size and feature limitations make it a comprehensible codebase that can be understood almost end‑to‑end, especially compared to today's sprawling operating systems. 

    As Microsoft stated, "The listings include sources to the 86-DOS 1.00 kernel, several development snapshots of the PC-DOS 1.00 kernel, and some well-known utilities such as CHKDSK. Not only were these assembler listings, but there were also listings of the assembler itself! This work offers rare insight into how MS-DOS/PC-DOS came to be, and how operating system development was done at the time, not as it was later reconstructed."

  • source