Finally

>Microsoft owns github
so they copied it form one folder to another

>No Makefile
how do Microsoft devs build it ?
also if it's just .ASM files , we just got the comments right ?

What did they mean by this?

Attached: ic-3072.png (253x80, 5K)

Nah, once you have an enterprise-strength process you don't let your employees bypass it.
The author date is in 1980s, but the commit date is recent.
commit 80ab2fddfdf30f09f0a0a637654cbb3cd5c7baa6
Author: Rich Turner
AuthorDate: Fri Aug 12 17:53:34 1983 -0700
Commit: Rich Turner
CommitDate: Fri Sep 21 17:53:34 2018 -0700

MS-DOS v2.0 Release

More than likely the repo was converted to git format from something more ancient like RCS which was created in 1982.

>The source files in this repo are for historical reference and will be kept static, so please don’t send Pull Requests suggesting any modifications to the source files, but feel free to fork this repo and experiment .
>5 pull requests code artisans trying to put their hands on typos in the readme

>github.com/Microsoft/MS-DOS/pull/1
zoomer js faggot with anime avatar tries to delete everything

Why don't they just make windows 98 entirely open source plus the dos base

*sips detergent*

You can ask but I doubt they'd do that.

Nah, no way. Windows 98 is a lot closer to current systems that they'd like you to believe. Heck, just a single chink managed to bring it up to windows XP functionality with a single fucking patch (kernel ex).
With that shit released ReactOS would instantly become more viable.

>No SMP support
>Windows 98 is a lot closer to current systems
>No SMP support

Neat-o. I wish a lot more companies would start release ancient shit under free licenses. Like, the source code for the Chex Quest video game or Hype Time Quest.

Attached: Chex_Quest-front_cover.png (316x316, 209K)

>single fucking patch

I think he means the win32 stuff on 9x is probably really close to NT

Well, I mean you have a point, but still. He didn't have the kernel's source code, just built upon the functionality that was already available.
Yeah dude, he just implemented a few missing APIs and most things just work

The most recent DOS source code I have is the 6.00.204 beta. Anything newer floating around?

its at least a little better that microsoft is realizing how much they have been screwing up and trying to fix it, this is a good start

Really maeks you think.

Attached: 1530759819599.png (984x89, 5K)

>hurrr delete dos it sux amirite gaisss
>me funny me make jokes

MS is kind of like two-face. They do all this neat shit, sometimes genuinely good stuff, then they turn around and go back to fucking you up the ass as hard as they can.

>he run MSDOS?
>activate the bsod

>MS-DOS 2.0
Literally useless, why the fuck they won't release 6.20 and stop this bullshit? seriously, what's the point?

I bet the freedos devs are frantically masterbating right now.
They can finally have 1:1 compatibility.

>download is less than 1MB
When did operating systems go to shit?

Attached: anime2.jpg (700x400, 52K)

someone make the same PR on her own repos please

Attached: 1530491310037.jpg (1443x1063, 1.2M)

Open an issue.

Win32 will have to be dead and buried before that happens.

GUIs

github.com/kfarwell/werchan
So this is what Jow Forums looks like on GitHub.

>OS is written in ASM
>source code released
>literally just the same as a disassemblers output, only with labels
user...

github.com/Microsoft/MS-DOS/pull/24
true Jow Forumsentleman

upload NT kernel

>no CoC
>100% CLI

Guys, is this /ourOS/?

But the CLI sucks, and I bet 4DOS, which was actually good, won't run on something this ancient.

It always was.

50 years from now

>low IQ

Attached: Hard_drive_capacity_over_time.png (600x400, 4K)

Microsoft thinks starting to open source irrelevant things will make Linux users jump into their honeypot botnet.
What were they thinking?

Attached: 1537484950030.gif (315x174, 1.39M)

>being so dumb you think they're thinking what you're thinking

>unable to read
>calling people dumb
literally losing your mind over a statement and a question

Attached: 2018-09-12_03-16.png (875x325, 195K)

>Chex Quest
that's just a doom wad

The DOSbox people are gonna cum. Other than that, who cares?

MOV CX,AX ; Save in CX
CMP BX,AX ; enough for EXEC?
JB EXECMER ; nope... cry

Incredible, I honestly can't wait until Windows 10 becomes open source, and they keep their proprietary enterprise/business services as they are.

Seeing that, I was actually impressed that they managed to keep their revision history intact, ported across who knows how many different vcs all that way from 1983. Then I checked the repo. I'm dumb. Did version control even exist back then?

Why bother, NT's source code was already leaked

>Nah, once you have an enterprise-strength process you don't let your employees bypass it.
So how does that work? Do their machines not have access to the internet and things like stackoverflow?
People who've posted here claiming to be employees said they have the entire source code for Windows on their machines.

You misunderstood me. I was only making the point that they don't "copy [the source code] form one folder to another", they sign up on GitHub, join whatever orgs and push their commits like any other user, and that's a standard practice.

Their legal position, probably. You've got to keep in mind, the most recent DOS revisions were still being sold shockingly recently and some are likely still under extended support contracts.

Why would something being 'under an extended support contract' prevent you releasing it Open Source? The fuck do Red Hat do all day?

Probably because it means that they internally still consider it to be a commercial product, if not a mainstream one. I don't know user, I'm just trying to understand their internal process here. Don't assume malice where incompetence or indifference are adequate explanations.

why?

Not an experted programmer, but, what can you guys do with it? no one use ms-dos anymore right? what use can you give it?

You can finally legally port DONKEY.BAS to SDL.

Literally just keeping enough competition afloat/about to avoid being a monopoly.

Is Tim Paterson the biggest cuck in computing history?

because if they release it, they open up the possibility of every user to get hit by half a dozen 0-days at once.
That only matters because it's still supported, so they wont do that.
>windows security

this. the only reason win10 still has that shit is because nobody would use win10 if they didn't.

>get hit by half a dozen 0-days at once
Or perhaps it'll be more like last time, where a buffer overrun was found in IE two months later.
securitytracker.com/id/1009067

The DOSbox people are already laughing heartily at microsoft's attempt

Yeah, what is the replacement, UWP? Even Microsoft hates that shit.

arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/09/microsoft-suspends-development-of-touch-friendly-office-apps-for-windows/

>he uses software that is only available on Windows
i remember what it feel like using inferior tools.

They'd literally lose 99% of their corporate userbase if that were to happen.

Attached: Lotte broom dance.gif (540x304, 1.98M)

The thing is it makes sense just from a product segmentation standpoint. The 'app' versions on W10 were for nobody. Company with Office 365? Everybody's using the full x86 suite on their work laptops or the webapps and the android apps on their phone. Home user? You're still using an old Office 2010 disc or you've bought a single use license to Office 2016 or something. It was a weird extra SKU that didn't really have a corresponding market segment.

The absolute state of zoomers

>2020
>Linux is dead, its corpse consumed by bloated pink haired SJWs
>OpenDOS is now the most popular FOSS OS on the planet

Attached: 1536410476185.gif (424x581, 3.39M)

where are you from, loser? are you from losertown because you're a loser

>also if it's just .ASM files , we just got the comments right ?

Compared to what, cracking open the binary and reading the assembly? The assembly source file will give you the comments, but more importantly all the symbols will still be meaningful symbols and not simply memory addresses that you have to guess at or painstakingly reverse engineer the intent. Plus the source file will have some form of structure to it designed to increase human readability, the assembled binary will have been optimized by the assembler, code broken up and arranged in the most optimal way possible for branching, replacing some opcodes with more suitable ones when possible, sometimes even optimizing patterns of operations depending on how advanced the assembler is and how aggressive optimization is set to.

>a single-tasking glorified program loader with no privilege separation
>"OS"
how's it feel to be fukken stupid?

Attached: 1439738067395.jpg (578x600, 45K)

labels and comments, what is your point? do you think you can just read assembly and figure out what a program is supposed to do?

This isn't the real source though. It's broken in many places and won't build. Also, is that old 2.11 source that was released under 2.0 or is this the actual 2.0 source?
Too much stolen IBM code maybe.

Attached: 1495449730716.png (120x120, 4K)

kek

>Did version control even exist back then?
yes

;_;

What license?