Miscellaneous > Applications
Why not open source old stuff?
anphanax:
I don't understand why companies wont release code for projects that are no longer being worked on because of their obsoleteness. If the code still exists, it would be nice for hobbyists to able to tinker with .
If you're a profit-driven company, what's the big deal of releasing code that wont make you or anyone else any money (release it /w license terms prohibiting commercial usage /wout written consent).
I mean, if the code's crap or is basically stolen and poorly commented with no real structure, I can understand a company not wanting to embaress themselves.. but what other reason is there? From my experience, It doesn't take a lot of effort to make source code availible for the community, after you spend about 30 minutes digging it up.
IE: What would be the harm in Microsoft releasing code for Windows 3.0 (Not 3.1, 3.0. Yes, 3.0 exists)? It's a "16-bit" operating system built over a decade ago. Has windows changed so little that by releasing this code, it could actually harm Microsoft?
Aaron Ni:
Even if a company no longer makes money off software because it's not available that fact remains that it's their choice to release it, they may not be hiding anything, they may just choose to not bother with it.
EDIT: To simplify.
Business "It's our code and we'll do what we damn well want with it!"
Dork "Well then why dont you release the code?"
Business "We wont because we dont have to, tough shit!"
And besides, it's MS we're talking about, they're just plain greedy while other companies just dont give a shit.
[ December 05, 2003: Message edited by: Aaron-V4.0 ]
suselinux:
If Microsoft Opensourced NT wich is old, you would have the base of Windows XP wich is recent.
free competion would pop up all over the place!
WMD:
quote:Originally posted by anphanax:
IE: What would be the harm in Microsoft releasing code for Windows 3.0 (Not 3.1, 3.0. Yes, 3.0 exists)? It's a "16-bit" operating system built over a decade ago. Has windows changed so little that by releasing this code, it could actually harm Microsoft?
--- End quote ---
In a HUGE fact of irony....
YES!!! \o/ :D :D :D
Not to mention, I know someone who disassembled some Windows code recently. He said it was such a huge, giantic mess, that fixing it up wouldn't be worth the gain in knowledge you'd get. :D
jtpenrod:
quote:
I don't understand why companies wont release code for projects that are no longer being worked on because of their obsoleteness. If the code still exists, it would be nice for hobbyists to able to tinker with .
If you're a profit-driven company, what's the big deal of releasing code that wont make you or anyone else any money (release it /w license terms prohibiting commercial usage /wout written consent). [...] but what other reason is there?
--- End quote ---
Suppose that Microsoft did that, by Open Sourcing Win 95, which they don't have any further interest in. As with Linux, a hacker community would grow up around it. They would continue to code for it, and they'd fix all the bugs. What happens when there are not only new, free apps for it, but its quality rockets past Win XP?
People who want Windows will take the free, Open Source, quality old one over the crappy, expensive, bloated new one.
Ain't gonna happen!
______________________________________
Live Free or Die: Linux
If software can be free, why can't dolphins?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version