How come no one at microsoft has leaked the source code for windows

Because source code can only be compiled by some scripts from 90s. Nobody knows how they work so nobody knows what exactly to leak.

No one person or machine has the code. It's in pieces to prevent this from happening.

Microsoft source codes for Windows are probably kept on proprietary drives that only Microsoft has, then kept in vaults.

>>55110691
>>55110707
>>55110715
I figured it'd be something like that, maybe bill will do it when he's on his death bed

Are the leaked NT4 or 2000 sources compilable? We should just make our own fork of Windows. With blackjack and hookers.

>>55110798
they call it reactos

>>55110798
They released DOS 1.1

>>55110656
Because nobody cares about xp anymore.

there are thousands of individual components and dozens of teams working on windows. one person wouldn't be able to leak it, even the nt4 leaked code isn't complete.

>>55110798
That wasn't the whole thing, was it? I thought it was just a portion of the source code

>>55110814
they should call it shit

>>55110715
>>55110707
>>55110691
Are you guys just pretending to be stupid? Microsoft allows viewing and modification of source code to appropriately licensed business entities and the government. It's just proprietary software, not some X-Files-tier conspiracy.

>b-but then why hasn't anyone leaked it??
Because they would gain nothing by doing so. Nobody cares about whether a bunch of neets on /g/ considers them "a hero".

File: 1459257529526.png (178KB, 600x582px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 600x582px

>>55114941
I care

>>55110798

This guy is right. >>55112757

The Windows 2000 leak was only partial. It was only interesting enough to more or less to get a small idea of how these guys work and operat.e

>>55110798
which would be highly illegal

>>55110798
Some guys on the BetaArchive forums compiled NT4 and are working on shoving the Win2k source into it.

>>55110798
I'm already working on the logo

>>55110732
who cares
it's shit