Comment on Still booting after all these years: The people stuck using ancient Windows computers

• shalafi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  That idea often comes up in these discussions and I’ve never really had an argument against. Best I got is that parts of that software may have moved to more modern stuff that was purchased by another company. But that’s a damned thin excuse not to implement this.

  source
• guy_threepwood@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  If you are a big company there are often ESCROW agreements for things like this. I have encountered the “data dumps” from time to time and whilst it’s “better” it’s not ideal. Half finished documentarian, virtual machines of mis-configured OS installs… it’s almost as if it was just a straight copy of the development environment as it was just as they made the final version of the software…

  But it’s better than nothing.

  Main issue I can see with this forcing open source would be libraries and frameworks licensed from others who would likely still be in business and wouldn’t agree to those parts becoming open sourced. See also WinAMP theregister.com/…/opensourcing_of_winamp_goes_bad…

  source
• Broken@lemmy.ml ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I like that idea bit it’ll never fly. That software is an asset. A bankrupt company needs every asset to be sold to cover as much percentage of their debt to their vendors as possible. I’ve been in a company that went bankrupt and I’ve been the vendor of a company that went bankrupt. Being the vendor was the harder experience.

  source

  • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’m sure it makes the bean counters happier to have another asset valued at X amount, but in practice the software will just be locked in some vault where it won’t do anyone any good.

    Its an instance where the number on the screen doesn’t actually correspond to any useful economic activity.

    source
  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    To bad

    source