Wow, it really looks like Win 10/11. Microsoft is back to the roots now.
But Word 1.0 even has 3d GUI elements. They must have had impressive computers back then.
The original source for WfW 1.1a was open sourced (I realize that doesn't mean there isn't copyright, but it's unlikely to be the reason that there are no pics):
The point of open source is to address and concerns around copyright. And this source is not open source by the definition most people use when they refer to “open source”. It’s still proprietary but source available.
However I will say, this source is unlikely to be useful to anyone beyond academic curiosity. So for the purposes of this project, the source license is “good enough”.
I came here to say that. Though not in a bad way; the economics of what is possible but practical/impractical changes greatly with LLMs, and I suspect and hope we will be figuring out the ramifications for a while.
Tried to build it but it references a `cmake/GenerateMenuHelpHeader.cmake` that seems to be absent from the repository?
Impressive work. Translating 16-bit segmented memory to x64 without emulation is no small feat. The test suite covering UI workflows is a nice touch.
A screenshot or two would have been nice
There are pics from the developer in this article (not sure why he neglected them in the README):
https://www.neowin.net/news/developer-ported-word-for-window...
Wow, it really looks like Win 10/11. Microsoft is back to the roots now. But Word 1.0 even has 3d GUI elements. They must have had impressive computers back then.
There is a screenshot in the original source code release: https://computerhistory.org/blog/microsoft-word-for-windows-...
Might the lack there of be copyright related? I guess not something you want to burn your hands on.
The original source for WfW 1.1a was open sourced (I realize that doesn't mean there isn't copyright, but it's unlikely to be the reason that there are no pics):
https://github.com/danielcosta/MSWORD
The point of open source is to address and concerns around copyright. And this source is not open source by the definition most people use when they refer to “open source”. It’s still proprietary but source available.
However I will say, this source is unlikely to be useful to anyone beyond academic curiosity. So for the purposes of this project, the source license is “good enough”.
>This project is a fully working native Windows x64 port of Microsoft Word for Windows 1.1a, whose historical codename was Opus.
Not to be confused with the Anthropic LLM model Opus - what was once an old codename is as good as new once again!
Would be ironic if Claude Opus was used in making this port. IMHO the README does have a bit of LLM smell to it.
Check in the github src directory.
I came here to say that. Though not in a bad way; the economics of what is possible but practical/impractical changes greatly with LLMs, and I suspect and hope we will be figuring out the ramifications for a while.
It’s a common word amongst people with even a bit of erudition. In truth, using it for any kind of software is overusing it.
And not to be confused with its plural form "opera".