Yes, we have contacted every single publisher of every software title on our site and have been granted explicit permission...
Sorry, I couldn't resist the sarcasm, this has been asked so many times over the years.
There really is no simple answer, it depends on where you live and what policies your government has towards file sharing, abandonware and the like. Personally I would not consider our site to be 'illegal'.
All software available on our site is a minimum of 7 years old and no longer supported or published as described on our About page. We've been operating for 10 years and have yet to have an issue. We will willingly comply with a formal request to remove a software title from our collection, but we have yet to receive any.
The simplest explanation is most publishers simply don't care, considering the rampant piracy of movies, music and new software on the internet today, our site is small potatoes. We run this site for the public good to preserve abandoned and beta software, to share with fellow enthusiasts and help those in less fortunate circumstances, not to make money.
Short answer: If you're asking if the police are going to kick your door down or get disconnected from your ISP for downloading something off our site, the answer is almost definitely no.
As WinWorlds designated abuse contact, I'm more than happy to work with publishers who have issues with our distribution. So far, we have had no complaints.
It would be convenient of the next iteration of DMCA revision allowed for official sanctioning of abandonware. A 7-year cutoff would probably be relevant with most digital software IP; and/or anything where the original company supporting it has dissolved.
Well, ideally, people would be kind and just release the source of their old software, but that doesn't happen as often as I'd like.
It would be convenient of the next iteration of DMCA revision allowed for official sanctioning of abandonware. A 7-year cutoff would probably be relevant with most digital software IP; and/or anything where the original company supporting it has dissolved.
Well, ideally, people would be kind and just release the source of their old software, but that doesn't happen as often as I'd like.
Having a sanction for abandonware is as likely as having Mickey Mouse enter public domain. Regardless if it's not supported, most companies would want to make things as hard as possible to access, in order to keep profits on their newer software. However, at the same time, they wouldn't realize that they're letting things vanish into oblivion.
Gee, It's easy to rant about what the DMCA forbids, but doing that here, is like preaching to the choir.
Right, just a shame that the obsolescence doesn't void the license. Though legally speaking, it would be difficult to define without causing problems with other IP, logos etc.
Well whatever, I'll use Win9x how I want and I don't plan on being prosecuted for it. :P
I don't really think anyone is going to come after you for pirating abandonware. Good companies will actually release their old stuff themselves, for example Adobe (which, admittedly, I wouldn't normally consider a good company) released CS2 recently.
Though, in this age of lawsuit happy companies, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did try to fight abandonware.
I don't really think anyone is going to come after you for pirating abandonware. Good companies will actually release their old stuff themselves, for example Adobe (which, admittedly, I wouldn't normally consider a good company) released CS2 recently.
Though, in this age of lawsuit happy companies, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did try to fight abandonware.
I pruned around various news sources and whatnot the past few days and I've not see anyone sued oreven dmca'ed over any older software. The only thing that ever has been really pursued is the leak of the source code to Windows 2000. If anyone finds a copy of it, have a look at the comments, some are very hilarious, like one involving changing tabs to spaces.
If anyone finds a copy of it, have a look at the comments, some are very hilarious, like one involving changing tabs to spaces.
There are actually good reasons to get mad about things like this.
private\windows\media\avi\verinfo.16\verinfo.h:
/*
* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
* !!!!!!!IF YOU CHANGE TABS TO SPACES, YOU WILL BE KILLED!!!!!!!
* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!DOING SO FUCKS THE BUILD PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*/
I guess that might be understandable.
private\shell\shell32\util.cpp:
#include "shitemid.h"
....
// BUGBUG (reinerf)
// the fucking alpha cpp compiler seems to fuck up the goddam type "LPITEMIDLIST", so to work
// around the fucking peice of shit compiler we pass the last param as an void *instead of a LPITEMIDLIST
This guy must have been pissed when he wrote this. Not to mention he misspelled piece.
LOL oh god. Microsoft programmers seem to hate Windows as much as Nathan Lineback.
His seemed to be more directed towards Internet Explorer and its integration into windows in addition to killing a lot of open standards/interoperability with other architectures. Which, you can agree in some aspects because look what happened afterwards. IE6 came out with next to no competition and was never updated for a very very long time. In that time, look at the amount of garbage that came out adware/malware wise because they basically fired their IE development team and let that software stagnate. If they didn't act like that, things could have been much more advanced. They even killed some of their good ideas they had in development because they saw really no competition for almost a decade.
private/shell/browseui/itbar.cpp
//
// HACK: Office2000 needs us to call a special proxy to get around thier DDE bugs and
// to check the HTML document for the name of the original document. These problems
// should be fixed in the apps themselves. Morons!
I love that the code I poked through when I used grep to find stuff like this is riddled with spelling errors. The method for what they're doing to help the office team is called OfficeHack. Lots of articles online mention that they have to do stuff like this to keep people's applications working. All that excess code I'd think is a ticking time bomb.
Office rules everything at Microsoft because it is one of the divisions which consistently makes money (the other being servers - I think developer tools/relations fall under this too). Windows RT wouldn't have a desktop mode if not for Office not being Metro-ready.
Office rules everything at Microsoft because it is one of the divisions which consistently makes money (the other being servers - I think developer tools/relations fall under this too). Windows RT wouldn't have a desktop mode if not for Office not being Metro-ready.
Usually, office is developed in parallel with Windows to be the first software that takes advantage of newer features that were released with the newest version of windows. However, taking a quick trip to Wikipedia reveals that Office 2000 came out a year before Windows 2000, which kinda surprised me actually. Typically office has come out after the newest release of Windows.
Also found on the page for Windows 2000 (if wikipedia allows hotlinking):
Holy hell, what the heck did that person do to that disk?!
Edit: Guess they don't. Fixed the image.
Regarding Windows & Office release dates, I believe Office XP was similar in that it was actually 2003 that really corresponded with XP correctly. Office XP was more WinME-like...
Regarding Windows & Office release dates, I believe Office XP was similar in that it was actually 2003 that really corresponded with XP correctly. Office XP was more WinME-like...
Office XP's UI styling was based around the Whistler Watercolour theme, rather than the final Luna.
Regarding Windows & Office release dates, I believe Office XP was similar in that it was actually 2003 that really corresponded with XP correctly. Office XP was more WinME-like...
Office XP's UI styling was based around the Whistler Watercolour theme, rather than the final Luna.
That's so believable. Just like the rainbow stripe thingy in the about window. It just SCREAMS Watercolour. That said I prefer Watercolour to Luna.. What the hell were they thinking?
I liked office XP. I ran it for years. But I will always have a place in my heart for office 97.
I had the same opinion of Office XP and newer as I did towards XP and its activation requirement for the longest time, which was why I swore by Windows 2000 and Office 2k well up until a few years ago after Windows 7 came out. Even then, I ran Office 2k until I had to get a copy of Office 2010 because of the amount of docx files I kept getting.
New file standards, I guess that's the only way you can force people to upgrade in some aspects.
Regarding Windows & Office release dates, I believe Office XP was similar in that it was actually 2003 that really corresponded with XP correctly. Office XP was more WinME-like...
Office XP's UI styling was based around the Whistler Watercolour theme, rather than the final Luna.
That's so believable. Just like the rainbow stripe thingy in the about window. It just SCREAMS Watercolour. That said I prefer Watercolour to Luna.. What the hell were they thinking?
When I have to use machines using XP, first thing I do is turn off Luna. It's been over 10 years since it came out and I still think Luna looks hideous. Now the media center themes, those weren't too bad, but the default XP themes make me agree that it looks like a child's toy. When I first installed 7, I assumed I'd have to do the same thing with aero, but the theme doesn't seem to get in the way as much as it did in XP, so I left it. That or my use of compiz on linux made some changes to my opinion, I really don't know.
I didn't really use Office XP that much. I pretty much went from Office 2000 to Office 2003. I've played around with Office XP and I do like it, but by the time I would have started using it, Office 2003 was out and it's what my school used, so I went with that.
I hated Office 2007 for a long time. I started using it on my laptop, but I never really liked it so much as I could tolerate it. Kind of like Vista in that regard. Then 2010 came out and I loved it. It's much improved compared to 2007. Plus I grew to tolerate the ribbon interface more. I still think it's a dumb design, but I'm used to it now so the anger has faded away.
As far as XP and Luna goes, yeah, Luna was pretty crappy. When I ran XP, occasionally I'd have this weird urge to use Luna, but it would only last about a week at most, then it was back to classic.
When I started using Vista and 7, it was the same thing. Aero off, Classic on. After completely making the switch to Windows 7 on my main desktop, I started by using Classic. Then I realized, Aero actually looks damn good. Plus the added benefit of desktop composition and hardware acceleration when using Aero convinced me to leave Aero on. Now Classic just looks kind of clunky and awkward.
Now that 8's out and they've removed the classic theme, I have to say I don't miss it at all. The problem with that though, is the lack of customization options. For instance, I can't change the highlight color on 8 like I can with 7. Also, they need to add the ability to change the title bar text color because without transparency, you're pretty limited on the colors you can choose and still have readable text. The UI design of the release preview was much better.
I didn't really use Office XP that much. I pretty much went from Office 2000 to Office 2003. I've played around with Office XP and I do like it, but by the time I would have started using it, Office 2003 was out and it's what my school used, so I went with that.
I hated Office 2007 for a long time. I started using it on my laptop, but I never really liked it so much as I could tolerate it. Kind of like Vista in that regard. Then 2010 came out and I loved it. It's much improved compared to 2007. Plus I grew to tolerate the ribbon interface more. I still think it's a dumb design, but I'm used to it now so the anger has faded away.
As far as XP and Luna goes, yeah, Luna was pretty crappy. When I ran XP, occasionally I'd have this weird urge to use Luna, but it would only last about a week at most, then it was back to classic.
When I started using Vista and 7, it was the same thing. Aero off, Classic on. After completely making the switch to Windows 7 on my main desktop, I started by using Classic. Then I realized, Aero actually looks damn good. Plus the added benefit of desktop composition and hardware acceleration when using Aero convinced me to leave Aero on. Now Classic just looks kind of clunky and awkward.
Now that 8's out and they've removed the classic theme, I have to say I don't miss it at all. The problem with that though, is the lack of customization options. For instance, I can't change the highlight color on 8 like I can with 7. Also, they need to add the ability to change the title bar text color because without transparency, you're pretty limited on the colors you can choose and still have readable text. The UI design of the release preview was much better.
If 8 was a bit more customizable, including the ability to turn off metro, I would say it would be tolerable. I see no use for a tablet UI on a desktop machine, or a non touchscreen laptop. Even on a desktop with a touch screen, I don't think I could tolerate using a touch screen for every aspect of computing. I prefer my physical keyboard for typing still, and there's no way to type 100wpm on a touch screen (that I'm aware of). In terms of use, I still have to say that it's better than Gnome 3, at least 8 is more customizable out of the box.
Hm, so all of this makes me wounder what is in Windows XP. If the team was that pissed on 2000 I wounder what could be hidden in XP grandmaf's chicken soup recipe perhaps. XD. Now did you find anything in the code that Windows took from OS/2?
Comments
Sorry, I couldn't resist the sarcasm, this has been asked so many times over the years.
There really is no simple answer, it depends on where you live and what policies your government has towards file sharing, abandonware and the like. Personally I would not consider our site to be 'illegal'.
All software available on our site is a minimum of 7 years old and no longer supported or published as described on our About page. We've been operating for 10 years and have yet to have an issue. We will willingly comply with a formal request to remove a software title from our collection, but we have yet to receive any.
The simplest explanation is most publishers simply don't care, considering the rampant piracy of movies, music and new software on the internet today, our site is small potatoes. We run this site for the public good to preserve abandoned and beta software, to share with fellow enthusiasts and help those in less fortunate circumstances, not to make money.
Short answer: If you're asking if the police are going to kick your door down or get disconnected from your ISP for downloading something off our site, the answer is almost definitely no.
Well, ideally, people would be kind and just release the source of their old software, but that doesn't happen as often as I'd like.
Gee, It's easy to rant about what the DMCA forbids, but doing that here, is like preaching to the choir.
Well whatever, I'll use Win9x how I want and I don't plan on being prosecuted for it. :P
Though, in this age of lawsuit happy companies, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did try to fight abandonware.
This guy must have been pissed when he wrote this. Not to mention he misspelled piece.
private/shell/browseui/itbar.cpp // // HACK: Office2000 needs us to call a special proxy to get around thier DDE bugs and // to check the HTML document for the name of the original document. These problems // should be fixed in the apps themselves. Morons!I love that the code I poked through when I used grep to find stuff like this is riddled with spelling errors. The method for what they're doing to help the office team is called OfficeHack. Lots of articles online mention that they have to do stuff like this to keep people's applications working. All that excess code I'd think is a ticking time bomb.Also found on the page for Windows 2000 (if wikipedia allows hotlinking):
Holy hell, what the heck did that person do to that disk?!
Edit: Guess they don't. Fixed the image.
Office XP's UI styling was based around the Whistler Watercolour theme, rather than the final Luna.
That's so believable. Just like the rainbow stripe thingy in the about window. It just SCREAMS Watercolour. That said I prefer Watercolour to Luna.. What the hell were they thinking?
New file standards, I guess that's the only way you can force people to upgrade in some aspects.
When I have to use machines using XP, first thing I do is turn off Luna. It's been over 10 years since it came out and I still think Luna looks hideous. Now the media center themes, those weren't too bad, but the default XP themes make me agree that it looks like a child's toy. When I first installed 7, I assumed I'd have to do the same thing with aero, but the theme doesn't seem to get in the way as much as it did in XP, so I left it. That or my use of compiz on linux made some changes to my opinion, I really don't know.
I hated Office 2007 for a long time. I started using it on my laptop, but I never really liked it so much as I could tolerate it. Kind of like Vista in that regard. Then 2010 came out and I loved it. It's much improved compared to 2007. Plus I grew to tolerate the ribbon interface more. I still think it's a dumb design, but I'm used to it now so the anger has faded away.
As far as XP and Luna goes, yeah, Luna was pretty crappy. When I ran XP, occasionally I'd have this weird urge to use Luna, but it would only last about a week at most, then it was back to classic.
When I started using Vista and 7, it was the same thing. Aero off, Classic on. After completely making the switch to Windows 7 on my main desktop, I started by using Classic. Then I realized, Aero actually looks damn good. Plus the added benefit of desktop composition and hardware acceleration when using Aero convinced me to leave Aero on. Now Classic just looks kind of clunky and awkward.
Now that 8's out and they've removed the classic theme, I have to say I don't miss it at all. The problem with that though, is the lack of customization options. For instance, I can't change the highlight color on 8 like I can with 7. Also, they need to add the ability to change the title bar text color because without transparency, you're pretty limited on the colors you can choose and still have readable text. The UI design of the release preview was much better.