Live data from Hacker News

Windows XP source code has leaked

gizmodo.com.au

451–460 of 485 posts

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#451
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 10 telemetry, secretly turning on auto updates even after you turn it off and correct me if I am wrong, even if you disable the update service or add the urls to the hosts file it now "mysteriously" undoes that stuff over time. Windows 10X will probably have some more goodies.

I believe auto updates aren't malicious. Microsoft had a huge problem with worms infecting millions of computers that used outdated Windows version. It made Windows less secure in public opinion, even though these issues had often been fixed a long time. Forcing people to update was probably the only way to stop that. I'm also not a fan, I got burned at least once by a Windows 10 computer restarting in the middle of…

>I got burned at least once by a Windows 10 computer restarting in the middle of the night when I had programs running on it

That means you have been spared. For me "getting burned" means endless boot loops and reinstalling windows. Windows updates have bricked my system on every version of windows so far. Windows Vista, 7, 10. Their updates all suck.

Yes, I'm one of those "stupid" people who installed updates as soon as possible. No more bullshit. I'm using Linux now.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many forced Windows 10 updates have bricked peoples computers? Just looking at the dates after googling has dates from '18, '19 and '20. So at least once a year. On an OS that has been out for 5 years now. Do I control my computer or not? If I do then I should be able to control what happens when.

You control your computer, turn off updates, get malware, then come back and complain how M$ / Windows is crap. I really don't understand why so many people in this thread are actively complaining about not being able to turn off updates. It's like once a month and they give you advance notice and "pick a time"; you have a whole week to choose a good time to restart and apply some updates...

From my perspective windows updates are malware. I received one of Microsoft's malware updates on Windows 10. The computer forces updates on reboot except the update never completes. I've waited 2 hours for an update and let the computer stay on overnight. After 20 hours it still didn't complete. The solution? Reboot and turn windows updates off by disabling the windows update service. Except then they decided to override that option and suddenly my system started boot looping again. Why can't they just fix their crappy software? They've had two decades. It's always the exact same failure type on Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 10. Sometimes you you can clear the windows update cache by hand but guess what. That only works if you can actually disable the windows update service which they prevent you from doing now.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#453

I wonder how this will affect other projects, such as ReactOS and Wine. Exciting.

It will reduce the number of eligible contributors. If you have seen the windows source you are not allowed to contribute to wine. Unless someone uses this as an opportunity to document the interfaces and create a test suite and thereby allows a clean room implementation the source code isn't just useless. It actively ruins the wine project.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#454
post #120
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i would add that the biggest problem is not the downloading part, but the upload which you are also doing when using torrents.

> the upload which you are also doing when using torrents. Unless you set your seeding limits to 0kb. You take a hit in speed/availability (as more peers will likely not do business with you), but you also don't distribute anything.

Honeypots can still record your IP address and ask ISPs which customer is behind that IP.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be a matter of experience. If you are more experienced with Linux, it could be easier than if you are more experienced with Windows. For me, Linux is easy to install, and it has been for a while, but then trying to customize it to do what I want, is much more complicated than Windows. For example, I want RAR support. There is no LinRAR, so I had to download a library and install it. It wasnt that bad, but in…

The issue there is you're trying to run Linux like it is Windows. If you do that then you're never going to have a good experience. For example if you're after Windows software on Linux or insist on downloading software rather than using the package manager then you clearly prefer the Windows-style workflow. Which is fine -- everyone has their own preferences. But if that is your preference then the issue isn't Linux…

Thanks. I know what you mean.

In the case of downloading vs package manager, the problem is that there is lot of software that I use that is not on the repositories. If everything was there, I have no problem on using 100% package manager.

Regarding the apps, there off course the issue is that some apps have no equivalent in the Linux world.

There is no MS Office, LibreoOffice is good but not so good, and same for Adobe Suite. Total Commander I can more or less replace with Double Commander, or TC under Wine.

Afaik, there is a unrar.dll equivalent in Linux, but not a proper WinRAR.

Thanks for your opinion!

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue there is you're trying to run Linux like it is Windows. If you do that then you're never going to have a good experience. For example if you're after Windows software on Linux or insist on downloading software rather than using the package manager then you clearly prefer the Windows-style workflow. Which is fine -- everyone has their own preferences. But if that is your preference then the issue isn't Linux…

Thanks. I know what you mean. In the case of downloading vs package manager, the problem is that there is lot of software that I use that is not on the repositories. If everything was there, I have no problem on using 100% package manager. Regarding the apps, there off course the issue is that some apps have no equivalent in the Linux world. There is no MS Office, LibreoOffice is good but not so good, and same for Ad…

[deleted]

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I'm not touching it with a 10 feet pole. Besides the fact that I would need new hardware for that( it's a core 2 duo system) which they are unwilling to fork the money for, anything that happens with it in the future will be my fault.

But it would be a time when the HD dies. Are you able to re-install? If no, you should try to backup/virtualize.

No I'm not able to reinstall. I am also not willing to deal with tech support. If and when it dies I'll just order a dell for them and they can sort the software issue themselves.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really a fair comparison though because most of those stages are just part of the download stage you glossed over in Windows (I really hate having to browse the web looking for software then having to manually download the thing after I've found what I want). Also Windows has no managed way to keep applications up to date. Which means you either have to manually repeat all those steps yourself or run backg…

Again, I find incredible cool what the Linux community has accomplished. And yes, the update process in Linux is much more simple in theory (sudo apt update). However, at least for my use case, the pros do not outweigh the cons. Firs cons: lack of key apps (Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative Suite). Second cons: lack of OEM produced drivers, which means that some things work worst than in Windows. Example, energy ma…

> Firs cons: lack of key apps (Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative Suite).

Propitiatory commercial applications, sure. But there's plenty of open source counterparts. I've been using LibreOffice (and OpenOffice before then) for years and while it does lack a lot of polish compared to MS Office most of the issues with it are really just cosmetic. Plus I never liked the ribbon bar anyway. Adobe Creative Suite is a bigger problem. I have heard of professionals uses open source counterparts and getting on well with it but the last thing a person wants is technology getting in the way of their creative process (a sentiment I'm intimately familiar with from a music composition perspective).

Ultimately though, if you're unwilling to try changing muscle memory to use open source applications then Linux is never going to be the right fit. The problem there though isn't that it's not possible to do something on Linux but rather than you just more comfortable with Windows. And that's fine -- but it is literally just habit rather than a technical reason. > Fourth cons: Why do I need to look for the specific distribution version of a program? I can install a Windows XP program in Windows 10. I can even install a Windows 95 program in Windows 10. But I have to look for the specific version of Ubuntu 20.08 of a program. The version for Ubuntu 17.06 would not work.

> Second cons: lack of OEM produced drivers, which means that some things work worst than in Windows. Example, energy management for my ThinkPad.

I honestly prefer Linux for driver support. Windows was such a pain in the arse with having to install 3rd party drivers (though that's less the case these days) where as on Linux everything just worked with the default install.

That said, you do sometimes find edge cases where drivers are missing functionality but it's not all that common.

With regards to battery life, I a lot of that will also be down to tuning. Windows ships some pretty aggressive tuning features where as Linux basically ships untuned. You can do that manually and it is a bit of a joke that users have to do it manually. But I've found losing an hour or two off a 10 hour run time isn't all that painful.

> Third cons: it seems to me that most things are more complicated to do than in Windows. Case in point, even if we do not consider the wgets, installing mkvtoolnix and vmware.

I actually find the opposite to be true. Most things are more complicated to do in Windows. Developer tools, programming language support, containerisation/docker, debugging tools, networking tools, automation (this is by far the worst thing about running Windows for me), resolving issues (far easier to fix a broken Linux install), documentation (far better documentation in Linux), error reporting, etc.

Updates are a key thing too. Windows: you need a thousand different update managers running on start up. You need to regularly reboot due to Windows update (which forcefully locks you out of your system whether you want it to or not). Linux: everything is managed from one package manager and no reboots required (unless it's a kernel update but even then it installs it without locking you out and the reboot is just to load the new kernel)

Another bugbare is having to browse for applications on the internet, avoiding phishing sites for popular software, then manually downloading and installing it. Repeatedly for some applications that don't have update managers too. Users shouldn't be doing this in 2020 -- it's just a crap way to manage software.

> Fourth cons: Why do I need to look for the specific distribution version of a program? I can install a Windows XP program in Windows 10. I can even install a Windows 95 program in Windows 10. But I have to look for the specific version of Ubuntu 20.08 of a program. The version for Ubuntu 17.06 would not work.

That's why you use package managers ;)

> Again. I can for sure use Linux if needed to (I am currently trying BSD on my ThinkPad), but if given the chance, I feel much more comfortable and productive in Windows.

BSD is going to be much more painful for you than Linux given the complaints you're making about Linux. You're better off trying a Mint Linux. Or if you don't mind the one time pain installing Arch then go with that (Arch has no installer, you have to do it all manually. Which sucks for non-techies but once you're over that hurdle it's probably the most painless OS I've ever ran over long periods of time)

I don't rate Ubuntu much as a distribution. Canonical spend too much time reinventing the wheel and not enough time fixing the common complaints with Linux (though `snap` is an attempt at that but unfortunately even there Canonical's solution is hamfisted).

Ultimately though, it all boils down to habits and personal preferences rather than X being better than Y.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#459
It was OK, but it was the thin end of the wedge of many things bad about computing since then. I'm referring to product activation and updates.

The internet and operating systems have had an evil feedback loop. To quote from The Outer Limits, 1963: "We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: There is nothing wrong with your television set."

Even supposedly free browsers like Firefox are getting in on the act, pestering the user with updates, and make it difficult to turn off. My dad complains about this constantly.

More and more, we see external agents dictating policy.

I don't think even Richard Stallman originally predicted the true nightmare that computing would be become.

Re: Windows XP source code has leaked

#460
Ha! Shame it wasn’t Win 7 that was released as I still use it on a few of my machines. ;-) Win 7 is the last MS OS that I now permit on my operational hardware. These days, Linux and rooted Google-free Android are my main OSes of choice.

Not that I care much nowadays, as XP's code release is unlikely to affect me in any practical sense other than for just curiosity to see what goes on beneath its surface.

Having experience with almost all Windows releases from the grotty, horrible Windows 1.0 of 1985 to the current Win 10, I've no doubt whatsoever the best and most practical version of the OS for me was Windows 2000, and from the numerous post I've read here many of you agree with me. (Incidentally, to be more precise, Win 3.1 for Workgroups was the first version I used in any practical sense as I found that Win 1.0, 2.0 and even 3.0 were essentially useless.)

My second choice is Win XP and it's still installed on one of my older working machines. In some ways, my next choice would likely be NT4, I had a lot of experience with it but once you got it working, which wasn't always easy, it was reasonably solid and straightforward to use. Of course, its major downfall was both the lack of drivers and not having any effective plug and play infrastructure (hence installing it was often messy and time consuming).

That said, I doubt this XP source code leak will be a unique event. I fully expect that we will see a great deal more source code becoming available from proprietary Windows-like software in the not-too-distant future—even if these 'leaks' do not originate from within the software companies in question (as all that will be needed is access to the compiled code).

There is little doubt that soon we will see competent deep-leaning AI disassemblers become available that will be able to learn how to disassemble large programs such as Windows with ease whilst simultaneously attributing its disassembled code with meaningful and intelligible code comments and descriptions. Moreover, I see little way that software manufacturers will be able to do to stop this from happening.

(I'd however add a caveat to the above, which is that whilst AI disassemblers will likely be able to eventually disassemble most existing compiled code that's been developed for past and present-day processors—from say the earliest 4004, 8085, 8051 and upwards to present-day ones as well as those likely to be developed in the immediate foreseeable future—this may not always remain the case, as it's possible that neither critical parts of compiled code nor newer specialized processor instruction sets may be available once manufacturers become aware of the threat.)

Furthermore, I'd wager it's likely that eventually AI disassemblers will actually learn on code such as this leaked Win XP. After all, what better sample would be available to a third-party AI developer or researcher to train his or her AI on than the source of the once-famous XP? None I suspect! Moreover, I'd add that I would be very surprised if companies of the likes of Microsoft and Google aren't already training their own AI on disassembling their own code. (After all, they've 'brilliant' examples to hand and a vested interest in seeing how capable AI is at the task of code disassembly—and moreover they need to know how much lead time they have before this new technology poses a serious threat to their existing products).

That said, with about a half century's worth of existing software compiled from many trillions of lines of code that will be available come the time AI is ready to examine and disassemble it, the snoopers among us will still have great scope! Frankly, I reckon the large-scale application of AI to code disassembly would be a truly great thing: just think of all the bugs and shitty bloated code we'll find. Moreover, exposing source code would put manufacturers on notice to improve their products—as not only would their multitudes of bugs and crappy code be exposed but also they wouldn’t be able to hide dirty tricks and corrupt practices as Volkswagen did with its engine emission technology.

AI disassemblers may even force many manufacturers to adopt the open-source model for their software development.

I've little doubt that over the long term code disassembly by AI will change the current paradigm of software development forever. Unlike its current undisciplined laissez faire approach to product development that encourages sloppy code full of bugs, software development will have to adapt to become a much more professional and rigorous engineering profession such as chemical or civil engineering both of which adhere to much stricter rules and disciplines—and I reckon that will be a good thing.

A more rigorous approach to software development is something I've advocated for many years—as I class myself a victim of poor software having lost thousands of hours of my valuable time—right, thousands of hours out of my life that would have otherwise been used to better purpose—resolving problems caused by poor, buggy and dysfunctional software—of which the majority thereof would never have occurred had standards comparable to those of other engineering professions been applied to software development. Given AI technology is of itself a product of software, and that it inevitably will be turned upon its own means of creation, seems to me to be poetic justice.

In the interim, I eagerly await revelations and 'meaty' pronouncements from eager XP code examiners.

Post reply on HN