← Back to context

Comment by TZubiri

24 days ago

I can see how you would think that. The concept of purity is double edged, on the one hand it can seem pure to eat an apple from a tree, but on the other hand, raw sugar has a very high purity!

So windows is pure in the first sense, but linux is pure in the second sense.

You say that with linux you get the bare essentials, whatever grew from the ground, but take a look at the size of a linux distro, linux is actually very distilled, Windows is RAW. You get a binary in there that nobody knows how it got there and there is no source code.

There is source code/recipe/ingredient list/dependency manifest for a vanilla and fudge pastrie, but there is no source code for an apple/windows, you get what it is. For the most part windows didn't have source code in the early stages themselves, it's not like they kept the source code hidden under lock, rather they discarded it or lost it to the ages. It's like compilers, it's just something that grows over a couple of generations from the previous version.

I don't know where you got the idea that MS doesn't have copies of their own source code. They aren't just blindly shipping binaries from decades ago with unknown provenance. They keep meticulous archives, and even employ full-time digital archivists. Some of their source has leaked in fact*, spanning all the way from the 1980s to the 2020s, so you can see for yourself if you really want to. If you can download a torrent, you can bet MS has a copy too. And if you search on YT, you'll find people who have built working copies of the OS with these leaks. It's all there.

* https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41873