21–30 of 81 posts
>This project is a fully working native Windows x64 port of Microsoft Word for Windows 1.1a, whose historical codename was Opus. Not to be confused with the Anthropic LLM model Opus - what was once an old codename is as good as new once again!
It’s a common word amongst people with even a bit of erudition. In truth, using it for any kind of software is overusing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are pics from the developer in this article (not sure why he neglected them in the README): https://www.neowin.net/news/developer-ported-word-for-window...
Wow, it really looks like Win 10/11. Microsoft is back to the roots now. But Word 1.0 even has 3d GUI elements. They must have had impressive computers back then.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...
>This project is a fully working native Windows x64 port of Microsoft Word for Windows 1.1a, whose historical codename was Opus. Not to be confused with the Anthropic LLM model Opus - what was once an old codename is as good as new once again!
And not to be confused with its plural form "opera".
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original source for WfW 1.1a was open sourced (I realize that doesn't mean there isn't copyright, but it's unlikely to be the reason that there are no pics): https://github.com/danielcosta/MSWORD
The point of open source is to address and concerns around copyright. And this source is not open source by the definition most people use when they refer to “open source”. It’s still proprietary but source available. However I will say, this source is unlikely to be useful to anyone beyond academic curiosity. So for the purposes of this project, the source license is “good enough”.
[flagged]
ermmm care to explain whY? tis just different pointer arithmetics, and given this was written in C, shouldn't be so immensely difficult?
but some don’t
agentic engineering would make this easy, especially when following the blueprint of the projects that do this translation already
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original source for WfW 1.1a was open sourced (I realize that doesn't mean there isn't copyright, but it's unlikely to be the reason that there are no pics): https://github.com/danielcosta/MSWORD
The point of open source is to address and concerns around copyright. And this source is not open source by the definition most people use when they refer to “open source”. It’s still proprietary but source available. However I will say, this source is unlikely to be useful to anyone beyond academic curiosity. So for the purposes of this project, the source license is “good enough”.
0. Freedom to run for any purpose? No.
1. Freedom to modify the program? Maybe; Microsoft can revoke it without cause at any time.
2. Freedom to distribute unmodified? No.
3. Freedom to distribute modified? No.
I'm using the free software definition [1] because it's simpler and clearer than the open source definition [2], which is usually considered mostly equivalent in practice, but as far as I can tell Microsoft's license satisfies zero of the latter's ten criteria, apart from perhaps non-discrimination and technology-neutrality. Most of the criteria of the open source definition have to do with distribution, which is not allowed by Microsoft's license.
[0] https://computerhistory.org/blogs/microsoft-research-license...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might the lack there of be copyright related? I guess not something you want to burn your hands on.
The original source for WfW 1.1a was open sourced (I realize that doesn't mean there isn't copyright, but it's unlikely to be the reason that there are no pics): https://github.com/danielcosta/MSWORD
https://github.com/danielcosta/MSWORD/blob/master/LICENSE
says
You may use, copy, compile, and create Derivative Works of the software, and run the software and Derivative Works on simulators or hardware solely for non-commercial research, experimentation, and educational purposes. Examples of non-commercial uses are teaching, academic research, public demonstrations, and personal experimentation. “Derivative Works” means modifications to the software, in source code or object code form, made by you pursuant to this agreement. You may copy and refer to any documentation provided as part of the software. You may not distribute or publish the software or Derivative Works. You may not use or test the software to provide a commercial service unless Microsoft permits you to do so under another agreement. You may publish and present papers or articles on the results of your research, and while distribution of all or substantial portions of the software is not permitted, you may include in any such publication or presentation an excerpt of up to fifty (50) lines of code for illustration purposes.
