On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, Ralf Quint wrote:
interest to open source ANY part of ANY windows. Even Windows 1.x and
2.x, which are on GitHub now, are still copyrighted. So it all comes
Copyright has nothing to do with how "open" something is.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
I'm not aware that Microsoft has put Windows 1 or 2 on Github yet. They have
put DOS 1 and 2 on Github. As for Windows components, they have Winfile on
Github, as well as the old Windows console and the new terminal they just
released. All of these are made available under the MIT license, so
Quoting Ralf Quint :
On 9/26/2019 6:35 AM, Michael C Robinson wrote:
Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
No.
One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is
On 9/26/2019 6:35 AM, Michael C Robinson wrote:
Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
No.
One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely,
Ok so, I just decided to go ahead and format my drive that it is the hp
pavilion and reinstall freeDOS. After installing, I selected option (1) at
boot, to use JEMMEX. Well, long story short... PROGS is there now! I wonder why
it wasnt there before?
On Sep 26 2019, at 2:55 pm, OMGdaDPS wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 02:03:06PM +, Michael C Robinson wrote:
> ReactOS won't replace Windows 9x/ME because it is not dos based.
Try WINE under Linux ( https://www.winehq.org/ )
--
regards,
Zbigniew
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Did you see the FreeDOS name come up on the screen when you booted the
USB fob drive? The SHELLHIGH line in FDCONFIG.SYS points to a
different COMMAND.COM execution line:
SHELLHIGH=\FDSetup\BIN\COMMAND.COM \FDSetup\BIN /E:2048 /P=\AUTOEXEC.BAT
But I'll suggest this:
Try entering A:\COMMAND.COM
On Thursday, September 26, 2019 12:07 PM, Jon Brase wrote:
> ...
> But as someone said upthread, finding someone properly placed to advocate for
> such a thing internally would likely be very helpful in such an effort.
Perhaps Theodore Ts'o or Ky Srinivasan? According to
There was a rumour that Microsoft lost the source code to Visual Source Safe.
Oh the irony. I know our admin claimed it corrupted itself many times.
Source code getting lost, I'd buy that.
From: R Moog
Sent: Friday, 27 September 2019 12:01 AM
To: Discussion
When I worked for a very large American tech giant in Japan we had one machine
which had a VPN that was only used for accessing source code in Redmond. I was
trying to figure out why a patch to Windows Server was calling release multiple
times (and thus blue screening) on our device driver on a
Thank you for your help, both of you.
all the best,
Chris
On Sep 26 2019, at 1:26 pm, andrew fabbro wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:17 AM dps
As far as DOS being out of the loop, I was young and not yet interested in the
technical details when Win9x (including ME) was still a going concern, but my
understanding in more recent years as to why Win9x was so unstable has been
that whether or not DOS proper was in control of the system,
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:17 AM dps
wrote:
> Ok so when I installed FREEMACS via FDIMPLES, I tabbed down to the info
> panel and it shows a ton of different directories in which I'm guessing
> that the program itself and it dependencies are located.
> I see that there is a .exe file titled
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:47 PM OMGdaDPS
wrote:
>
> My drive doesnt even contain the directory C:\FDOS\DOC\PROGS. It does have
> down to \DOC, but there isnt a \PROGS in that directory. I also noticed that
> my drive isnt labeled as yours is... maybe I did something wrong during the
>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 8:37 AM Michael C Robinson
wrote:
>
> Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
> Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
> One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
> course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:22 AM Michael C Robinson
wrote:
>
> I don't have a few million, but a group able to cobble together a few
> million is more realistic to put together.
Where "realistic" is "extremely unlikely" instead of "totally impossible"
> Question is, how much would membership
If I were to ask Microsoft nicely about open sourcing their code, I'd suggest
that they calculate what it will likely cost them (buying rights for externally
licensed code, erasing embarrassing comments, trying to find copies of missing
code, etc.) and then crowdfund that. It wouldn't so much
From their recent behavior, I think it's quite likely that there is at least a
faction within the company that thinks the hassle is worth it, and that is
quite possibly the settled internal doctrine of the company. From what I've
heard about Microsoft's revenue from Windows, they are mostly
I don't have a few million, but a group able to cobble together a few
million is more realistic to put together.
Question is, how much would membership cost in a group whose goal is
to GPL Windows 16 and 32 bit be? Say such a group came into existence
and a million people joined for
If you can cut a check for a few million, Microsoft might sell you the rights
(to the components that they created themselves, of course, not anything they
licensed from others), give you whatever source code they still have archived,
and let you license it to the public as you choose.
If you
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, R Moog wrote:
There is another way but it's still a hassle for MS. Ask them nicely. If
they decide to follow up on the request then the ball is in their court to
make it happen.
Ideally, you'd find someone that works there that could be an advocate for
the process. If
Microsoft *has* released the entirety of early versions of DOS under (IIRC) the
MIT license, as well as (IIRC) the old Win3 file manager, and has in recent
years been much friendlier to Open Source than in the past.
As to where the money is in open sourcing old code, I think part of it is the
There is another way but it's still a hassle for MS. Ask them nicely. If
they decide to follow up on the request then the ball is in their court to
make it happen.
czw., 26 wrz 2019, 16:15 użytkownik R Moog napisał:
> Rather* grim. I hate autocorrect.
>
> czw., 26 wrz 2019, 16:15 użytkownik R
What hypervisor?
śr., 25 wrz 2019, 05:16 użytkownik napisał:
> I have tried multiple times to install FreeDOS on Raspberry Pi3.
>
>
>
> I have created a 100M and 200M raw disk image.
>
>
>
> Mounted the Standard and then tried with the Legacy ISO.
>
>
>
> Both will boot the ISO, partition and
Hi Jim,
> When you are finally able to start the installation, be prepared for
> the install process to take a looong time. This is because
> installing all the FreeDOS packages requires a lot of disk I/O to the
> virtual freedos.img drive.
Blasphemic idea: Use symlinks to move the
Rather* grim. I hate autocorrect.
czw., 26 wrz 2019, 16:15 użytkownik R Moog napisał:
> I agree but here's a reality check. The outlook is father grim and we
> won't live until the copyright expires. From copyright.gov, works created
> after 1978 have their copyright expired 70 years after the
I agree but here's a reality check. The outlook is father grim and we won't
live until the copyright expires. From copyright.gov, works created after
1978 have their copyright expired 70 years after the death of its author.
In case of Windows ME, we're looking at all the devs croaking, Microsoft
Quoting andrew fabbro :
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:36 AM Michael C Robinson <
mich...@robinson-west.com> wrote:
Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
course.
Besides being a huge witch hunt for code proprietors and a hassle to
convince them to relicense, it also involves digging out source code that
might not exist anymore. This happens.
czw., 26 wrz 2019, 15:37 użytkownik Michael C Robinson <
mich...@robinson-west.com> napisał:
> Is it possible to
It's not as much hurting a nonexistant bottom line by now, but chasing down
every owner of every piece in these versions od Windows and convincing them
to re-license their stuff. It's a huge hassle.
czw., 26 wrz 2019, 15:37 użytkownik Michael C Robinson <
mich...@robinson-west.com> napisał:
> Is
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:36 AM Michael C Robinson <
mich...@robinson-west.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
> Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
> One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
> course. Even Windows 3.1 and
Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since
Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore?
One would want to get the source code and then open source it of
course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely,
Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't
32 matches
Mail list logo
