Comment by jeditobe
7 years ago
Hello from ReactOS team!
We don't use the leaked code from MS,
We don't use Windows Research Kernel,
We thank you for the PR campaign you have stared 'pro bono' for our project! ;D
7 years ago
Hello from ReactOS team!
We don't use the leaked code from MS,
We don't use Windows Research Kernel,
We thank you for the PR campaign you have stared 'pro bono' for our project! ;D
OP wrote "If any of the presumed authors wants to chime in and explain the similitudes, I’m happy to change my mind".
Since you're from the team, could you provide some example explanations? Technical arguments are surely significant, rather than a purely rhetoric answer.
I don't think they need to. The OP blames ReactOS, the burden of proof is on him, if he thinks it's an issue. Otherwise it's called trolling.
Axel didn't provide any examples of allegedly copied code, so what can they explain?
This is an utterly insufficient answer to the allegation that you copied internal data structures entirely from the NT kernel, including (why?) their names.
Brushing this off as a free "PR campaign" only works if those NT programmers simply made everything up. That's possible, because we as the general public have no way of knowing. But it's hard to ignore that there are just two possible scenarios here, nothing in between.
Could you please clarify: If MS people say they do recognize verbatim code from NT in your source, are they lying? If they're not lying, what happened?
> This is an utterly insufficient answer to the allegation that you copied internal data structures entirely from the NT kernel
It's quite sufficient when you consider that, unless the allegation is made in a court of law, it's in ReactOS’s interest for it to be perceived as plausible. Being perceived as either an actual (if unauthorized) fork of Windows or as something that a Microsoft insider could reasonably mistake for one is not bad for ReactOS.
And if Microsoft is going to bring the allegation in court, no matter the merits, the lawyers defending ReactOS aren't going to want lots of detailed public statements to have been made first.
> Brushing this off as a free "PR campaign" only works if those NT programmers simply made everything up
It works and, I'd argue, is the only sane strategy so long as Microsoft isn't suing them. Because, among other reasons, without such a suit it is nothing more than a free PR campaign especially if it is true.
Admittedly, it doesn't maximize imaginary internet debate points, but while that maybe be OPs interest, it doesn't seem to be ReactOS’s. (Also, probably not Microsoft’s, who I imagine so long as they aren't suing ReactOS would prefer not drawing attention to it, either.)
I don't disagree with your assessment from a PR point of view, I guess I was just hoping the open source community would hold itself and others to higher standards. Being technically not provably guilty in a court of law is not exactly the peak of virtuousness.
Well, now please re-read your statement
Do you understand that internal data structures entirely from the NT kernel, including (why?) their names != verbatim code from NT in your source
The program code is logic first of all.
For the similarities of names and structures itself - the answer is in this already mentioned video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D9ExVc0G10&t=9m53s from the 9:53 moment of time. TL:DW there are a lot of legal ways of obtaining names of variables, exported functions and structures
Never having had access to the NT kernel source, I don't actually know how deep these similarities go. When MS kernel engineers say those are not only superficial, I'm inclined to believe that until ReactOS have at least conducted an investigation.
It's a serious allegation that deserves more than a casual brush-off and some condescending statements about publicly available debug symbols. If MS is really full of shit, as I hope they are, they should be held accountable with more than a shrug and a smile. If ReactOS does contain copied code (and yes, that does include data structures as well as instructions), well then that should have consequences as well.
1 reply →
Many "undocumented" Windows kernel structures are actually documented on third-party sites, for example [1] and [2]
[1] https://www.nirsoft.net/kernel_struct/vista/index.html
[2] http://msdn.mirt.net/
They were found, for example, in debugging symbols released by MS. And sadly Axel didn't provide a single example of code that allegedly was copied.
Heh, thats a very guilty looking answer.
True about the free campaign but that might backfire.
You didn't spell started correctly both on here and on quora aka thanks for the low effort canned response. Maybe try addressing their points directly. This is bad PR for you.
You mean the accusations for which the accuser refuses to provide any proof?
What "points"? Axel didn't provide a single example of what could be allegedly copied code.
Why would you call it a PR campaign if it wasn't favoring you? Just curious.
Not only is ReactOS getting a lot of coverage it otherwise would not have, but the core claim seems to be that ReactOS is actually such a good re-implementation of Windows that actual Windows engineers think it couldn't have been accomplished without using the Windows source code.
Probably because it makes far more people aware that ReactOS even exists.
because a lot of people probably just learned about ReactOS as a result of this controversy. "There's no such thing as bad press." -someone
The controversy is just unverifiable claims from a Microsoft employee. ReactOS comes out looking pretty good.
You never heard of "all publicity is good publicity"?
Even very dirty river water would still spin your mill, as long as the mill itself is good.
This guy literally confirms that one little open source OS could be as good as Windows $)