Live data from Hacker News

Open Sourcing DOS 4

hanselman.com

261–270 of 382 posts

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No upside for the company? Do you not see all the people who are delighted to be able to browse the code?

No commercial upside for sure. Just some extra reputation points among a very niche group and maybe some happy employees.

Those niche people are the developers they want to use their software. When that niche is the target audience for whole product line of yours pleasing them is a good idea.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, I missed the bus on this one. What's wrong with "sanity check"?

since 1984 no one was offended by it, but in 2024 it became offensive to insane people AFAIK "sanity check" doesnt even have a history like "retarded" (which actually became an offensive slur). maybe some folks just feel left out if they cant rage about and feel offended by something these days. ::eyeroll::

Usually its offended on someone elses behalf.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MacOS is notorious for this. By default, it would only run binaries signed with an Apple-issued certificate. You can bypass this multiple different ways, of course, but that requires knowing that it can be bypassed in the first place. Then there are mobile OSes where you don't get to see the binaries at all. Yes you can repack an apk but again, that's a more involved process requiring specific tools and knowledge (an…

> MacOS is notorious for this. By default, it would only run binaries signed with an Apple-issued certificate. You can bypass this multiple different ways, of course, but that requires knowing that it can be bypassed in the first place. What do you mean? When I compile something with a myriad of different language stacks or compiler toolchains, I'm not aware of an Apple-issued certificate ever being involved and thos…

Probably because the environment you use to compile it, like the terminal or Xcode, is added to "developer tools" under security settings. Xcode in particular does that for itself automatically.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#265
post #175

When I was nine years old, I liked poking around with a hex editor on my dad’s PC. I didn’t speak English and MS-DOS wasn’t yet localized to Finnish in 1989, so I decided to try translating it myself with a dictionary by manually finding and replacing strings in the SYS/COM files. The result worked and my dad was suitably impressed, if probably a bit peeved that nothing worked anymore in the shell as expected (since…

The DOS era was a bit before my time; I had a C64 as a kid but I managed to break it before I got to do too much fun [1].

That said, I got into web dev when I was a pretty young kid, about 9 years old, and I would have fun hacking together different websites. Eventually I noticed the “edit” button on top of the browser and learned you could mess with other people’s sites as well. I had lots of fun breaking stuff.

Computers are so cheap now, I think it’s relatively easy for most families to have a computer that can be programmed. For that matter, the Raspberry Pi is cheap and has hundreds of resources available to play with, many of which are kid friendly.

[1] before you ask, I am not 100% sure what I did, I was playing around with some code I found in a manual for it that my dad gave my when I was 7-8, and I must have done something bizarre cuz it stopped booting.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MacOS is notorious for this. By default, it would only run binaries signed with an Apple-issued certificate. You can bypass this multiple different ways, of course, but that requires knowing that it can be bypassed in the first place. What do you mean? When I compile something with a myriad of different language stacks or compiler toolchains, I'm not aware of an Apple-issued certificate ever being involved and thos…

Probably because the environment you use to compile it, like the terminal or Xcode, is added to "developer tools" under security settings. Xcode in particular does that for itself automatically.

So I don't even need to know how to bypass it because it happens automatically behind the scenes. Nice.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because the environment you use to compile it, like the terminal or Xcode, is added to "developer tools" under security settings. Xcode in particular does that for itself automatically.

So I don't even need to know how to bypass it because it happens automatically behind the scenes. Nice.

But if you edit a binary with a hex editor, invalidating its signature, you would need to know how to bypass it.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For DOS, I believe the core was only ever Microsoft or IBM. Some DOS versions bundled add-ons by third parties, but they are hardly essential for operation - e.g. MS-DOS 6 included DEFRAG and MSBACKUP (both licensed from Symantec) and MSAV (licensed from Central Point Software) Similarly, with Windows, the third-party components are generally inessentials such as certain device drivers, games, some optional system co…

Isn't the zip support in explorer the stuff written by Dave Plummer? I would imagine MS has the rights to that already, and if they don't, I'd imagine Dave would, and I'm sure he'd be fine with it being released. He has lots of YouTube videos about the zip stuff.

It was but Dave sold it to MS, so they own it

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#269
I'm seeing FreeDOS mentioned here, but I do wonder what practical use it is being put to. I only ever see it as something computer makers write into the hard disk because they have to put something there, which gets promptly wiped and replaced with a variety of Linux. (Why they couldn't ship an empty HD, I have no idea.)

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#270
post #175

When I was nine years old, I liked poking around with a hex editor on my dad’s PC. I didn’t speak English and MS-DOS wasn’t yet localized to Finnish in 1989, so I decided to try translating it myself with a dictionary by manually finding and replacing strings in the SYS/COM files. The result worked and my dad was suitably impressed, if probably a bit peeved that nothing worked anymore in the shell as expected (since…

You can still patch binaries on Windows.
Post reply on HN