What a black eye for Google and a victorious win for
Microsoft. Here we have Google who supposedly has the
best programmers and they had to take code from
Microsoft (who everyone says can't write code) to use
in their browser. It makes you wonder just how much
actual code did Google employees write? I'm guessing
very little to none considering all they do is sit
around playing with office toys.
Google Chrome has Microsoft's code inside, says MS manager
Summary
A senior program manager at Microsoft claims that Google took some open-source code from Microsoft and used it in their Chrome browser. And it's perfectly legal.
Topics
From Rupert Goodwin's blog on ZDNet UK:
And furthermore, he says, that's a good thing.
A great post over at Scott Hanselman's blog goes into some detail of the Microsoft code Google has included in Chrome. It's all street-legal: the code was made available under a very permissive open source licence back in 2004, and may be the first of Microsoft's steps in that direction.
Hanselman is a senior program manager at MS, and clearly enthusiastic about the whole business. He also writes a mean blog--if you've got any curiosity about some of the gnarly bits inside Chrome, including how it works securely with multiple versions of Windows, then give this the once-over.
Even more interesting than Chrome's internals is this statement:
"One of the reasons I wanted to work for ScottGu was because of Microsoft's always improving attitude about releasing source. It's a big company and sometimes moves slow, but more people "get it" now than before."
I do so hope this is true. Can't happen quickly enough.
Talkback Most Recent of 50 Talkback(s)
-
Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008 -
Clearly, Google didn't write any code for Chrome
All they did was stitch a bit of IE onto WebKit and
ta da! it was done.
Fred Fredrickson12th Sep 2008 -
Another sucker.
Jeez guys, at least read the reference material before you make such comments. Rather than coming accross as sarcasm, which is often quite funny if done intelligently, it makes you come accross as ignorant. Or worse; plain thick.
Bozzer12th Sep 2008 -
Yeah baby!
"Rather than coming accross as sarcasm..."
Yep.
"...it makes you come accross as ignorant"
Nup. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.Fred Fredrickson12th Sep 2008 -
I could believe that
And they did a poor job of it no less.Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008 -
Explains many things...
The first is you know nothing about software.
Bruizer12th Sep 2008 -
No
You know nothing about software!Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008 -
That would be a bad thing.
And you may never want to fly again. All you have to do is
read your many posts and realize you have a remedial
understanding of software engineering concepts.Bruizer12th Sep 2008 -
My many posts
My many posts highlight the trends and facts of
today's IT industry.Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008 -
Your many posts...
Show a lackluster understanding of computers, software and
the industry in general.Bruizer12th Sep 2008 -
That would explain why you think Chrome sucks...
You think it's all IE code. That would certainly
explain your disdain for the browser considering how
much disdain you feel towards Internet Explorer.
jasonp@...12th Sep 2008 -
That is not why chrome sucks
Chrome sucks for reasons I stated prior. Now you can
start your little name calling tantrum like you always
do. 3..2...1..go!Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008 -
Childish...
You're response to genuine criticism shows that you
always take the higher road, Lovey-D. I'm so
impressed by your vast knowledge of the IT industry.
In fact, that's why I read ZDNet at all; I love to
read your insight and wisdom. It's always as if the
Microsoft gods have been appeased and have seen fit to
rain wisdom down on us clearly inferior Google-using
mortals.
As a side note I haven't used IE in two years (except
to test my web projects since it's not standards
compliant) and I have been using Chrome almost
exclusively since their launch. It hasn't crashed
once.
mattnico16th Sep 2008 -
LOL!
Dude, you really didn't read Scott Hanselmans blog at all did you. But then, you are only here to provoke a reaction.
Anyway, Scott explains it quite elequantly. Here, let me summarise the main point.
"The Windows Template Library (WTL) is MFC on template-based steroids - after a successful stretch on the slimfast plan. WTL provides the user-interface frameworks that we need to write proper GUI applications without resorting to the bloated MFC or complicated pure Win32 API programming. A number of the "must-have" classes from MFC are also available as WTL utility classes too, welcome back your old friends CPoint, CSize, CRect and most importantly CString! WTL produces small executables that do not require the MFC run time libraries - in fact if you stay clear of the Visual C++ runtime functions (strcpy and friends) you can dispense with msvcrt.dll as well - leading to really small programs, which run fast too"Bozzer12th Sep 2008 -
Ok..
and they used Microsoft code instead of Google code.
Still a punch to the face for Google and win for
Microsoft.Loverock Davidson12th Sep 2008
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
