Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Sep 2008 15:38 UTC
"Since its release a few weeks ago, curious developers have been sniffing through the source code for Google's new Chrome web browser. Chrome's source is interesting for a variety of reasons: there's the new V8 JavaScript virtual machine with its boasts of near-native code performance, the WebKit rendering engine that does all the hard work of understanding and displaying web pages, and (last but not least), Chrome's secure sandbox designed to minimize the impact of any security flaws that might exist in both the browser and plugins alike. It is this secure sandbox that has piqued the curiosity of some observers, and for a reason that many may find surprising. From reading the source, it looks as though Google has reverse-engineered Windows, and that's explicitly prohibited by the Windows EULA."
Thread beginning with comment 331152
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Let the OS wars Begin!
by google_ninja on Tue 23rd Sep 2008 18:33
in reply to "RE: Let the OS wars Begin!"
Member since:2006-02-05
It could prove that Microsoft are deliberately hiding their best code their their own products (for want a crude description) thus hindering 3rd party programmers to better intergrate their applications with Windows (which is one of the many reasons MS have been taken to court over the years).
That is just silly. It comes down to that a supported API has to be supported. If you want to use an unsupported API that is fine, nobody is stopping you, but don't complain to anyone when it is broken in the next point release. Sun does it in java, Apple does it in OSX, Linux doesn't really do it, but the linux devs dont maintain backwards compatibility, so the point is moot.
Secondly, something like DEP is something that should be managed by the system 99% of the time. The capability exists in post XP SP1 systems to manually muck with it in those 1% of corner cases. Public facing apps that execute arbitrary code off the internet are in those cases, so they wanted to use it. Since this ability was only really exposed to the world post XP SP1 (which was primarily about fleshing out security), they had to rely on a hacky way to do it.
This is not proof that MS is "hiding its best code", it is chrome trying to utilize an obscure feature of the APIs in operating systems that came out before it was publicly supported. I would say more then anything it is a testament to their thoroughness, since most people would have just said "we dont support pre xp sp1.", as it was a major upgrade that any xp user should have.
RE[3]: Let the OS wars Begin!
by sbergman27 on Tue 23rd Sep 2008 18:50
in reply to "RE[2]: Let the OS wars Begin!"
Member since:2005-07-24
Linux doesn't really do it, but the linux devs dont maintain backwards compatibility, so the point is moot.
Linux devs don't do it *at all* because *everything* is open and visible. It is unclear exactly what you mean by "Linux". The user space API of the kernel is sacred, and programs written for 1.0 will still run against the 2.6.27 kernel. (Its only the kernel's internal API that changes.) If you are talking things like GTK. Well, GTK's backwards compatibility has been the subject of much discussion here. The GTK 3.0 plans are all about breaking some things, and its big news.
RE[3]: Let the OS wars Begin!
by siki_miki on Tue 23rd Sep 2008 20:52
in reply to "RE[2]: Let the OS wars Begin!"
Member since:2006-01-17
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-03-26
If this proves true, then it would be interesting to see if this adds any weight to the calls for Microsoft to further release information on undocumented calls.
It could prove that Microsoft are deliberately hiding their best code their their own products (for want a crude description) thus hindering 3rd party programmers to better intergrate their applications with Windows (which is one of the many reasons MS have been taken to court over the years).
However, the realist in me expects little to come from any potential court case. Both sides are far too smart and have far too good lawyers to let anything significant harm (or good for their business opponents) happen.