Topic: Why did satoshi develop bitcoin in windows? - page 2. (Read 1246 times)

Those little details only rise my suspicious that the dramatis personae "Satoshi Nakamoto" between 2008/2013 was in fact Hal Finney ...

Windows 10 is a spyware, XP is the best version of Windows. you can try https://www.ubuntu.com/desktop for free.

Maybe it was important for it to be available to a wide range of users. If it was only for Linux, it would have been exclusive to the tech-savvy people. Everyone can run Windows, so everyone could use Bitcoin. Nothing difficult - click, run, gain. This is what made the breakthrough, the ease of use. Remember that when you chose the next ICO or build your own coin - the easier your product is for people to use, the more likely to succeed it is.

He's also in bed with anyone who appears to have authority. I find this highly unlikely.

Now maybe Peter Thiel...

Because satoshi is actually Elon Musk. If you read books about him, he is a guy who programs in Windows and good at C++.

I think y'all are reading too much into this.

Back in '09, 'Nix was not really that accessible or usable to the average person. If you were very familiar with Windows, like I was, 'Nix was kind of incomprehensible without a sharp learning curve. And unlike today, where Ubuntu and Mint are extremely widespread, there was the definite problem of the Linux community.

It was an 'old boys club' to the extreme. Newbie bashing on here is NOTHING compared to what it was in the late 20th and first years of the 21st century in the Linux community! Those people had an axe to grind, and just couldn't possibly get it sharp enough. I switched to Linux in '12, and haven't regretted it. But the community has changed.

The biggest roadblock to the general adoption of Linux in the early days (I'm talking 91 to about 2010) was the linux community itself. They openly viewed themselves as superior beings, and damn you if you wanted to break in! Then they whined about people using Windows when there was an oh-so-superior option. That it actually IS superior in a lot of ways was not a mitigating factor. Whether you love or hate Ubuntu, Canonical went a LONG WAY in changing that perception, and now 'Nix is gaining a lot of traction. It still has a lot sharper learning curve than Windows, but past that, I'd consider them about equal from the user perspective. But Windows is a LOT more friendly to a newbie, still, than any flavor of Nix.

Now as to Satoshi, first off, he/they were NOT outstanding coders. The later development team described the original code as "spaghetti code" in several instances. The brilliance of Bitcoin cannot really be understated, but it's brilliance is in concept, not the initial programming. If I were to field a guess, I'd leave out all the conspiracy theories (though I like some of them ) and just say it simple: He was familiar with Windows. Unix was still pretty esoteric back then.

In my opinion
This sounds reasonable to me. Back in the Flintstones, I used Windows servers for years because Windows was used in the lab media where I was trained and also by my first ICT company. My suggestion is that you can know it first

Well, this is ironic to create an open source code in a restricted one. Maybe they were just trying to make a point, or maybe they just wanted blockchain to go into everyhouse.

But to me is not relevant, to be honest.

I see two reasons bitcoin was developed on Windows:

- Satoshi wanted bitcoin to be accessible to as many people as possible so Windows at the time would have been a good choice. 

- Also, Unix development of bitcoin may have given clues to the identity or identities of Satoshi being that the platform was smaller.

I think he just liked Windows over linux

It goes even further... last year it was discovered, that all HP machines had a sound driver, which would log all keystrokes into a log file. The original intend is for sure unknown, but the idea was, that you had to capture the control keys to change the volume (and more). So there was debug code in the executables, and they have been detected fairly late. There is no evidence, that this data was used to be sent anywhere, but if a sound driver is able to log keystrokes, even those which are irrelevant for its function, then security in a layered fashion is not one of the strong points of this operating system. Now try to get the source code of this sound driver! You won’t, it’s also closed source. Same could be true for WiFi cards... closed source. Now compare this to Unicode systems. You can install proprietary software, but you must not! And you can read source codes of majority of the OS, and you can even modify it in a way, that you see, what is going on under the hood. You can’t do this with Windows. There is a reason, why this OS is not used in high secure environments...

Okay. I am interested in about windows as unhackable as you said.... but why except Windows 10? it's still windows... forgive my ignorance. I just want to know so that I can buy better OS in the future.

Doesn't make sense to me. In order to be sure that something is not hacked, you would need to at least know what the code is doing. Sure this doesn't mean that Linux isn't hackable, everything with code is, but my point is.. how do you even know what updates to enable and what other updates to ignore? Updates are packages of closed source code. You are trusting to believe what it says on the description but you don't know what you are actually installing with each update, one of these updates could contain a backdoor for the NSA or something. You can block ports with a firewall, but that's about it. A keylogger that's embedded in a file that is part of the OS would go ignored by firewalls for instance. For example, imagine that the reporting tool in windows which is just an exe, sends a text file with keystrokes to someone... how would you even notice if you can't see what Dw20.exe is doing? (or any other closed source executable for that matter).

I believe the part about "extremely sound coding" is wrong.I have heard some comments that Bitcoin's early code was full of bugs and was basically spaghetti code and it started to improve when the first contributors came in.

This made some followers think that Satoshi was a good cryptographer and mathematician but he was not a good programmer.

How would you know this fact?

Edit: restored message from crash
The alternative theory is that he was an "experienced programmer" with an equivalent of black-belt in billable hours padding. That doesn't preclude being "good programmer", just puts in the background to the primary goal.

Yet another alternative theory is that initial coding was done by Satoshi's contractor, not Satoshi himself; and that later on they split for whatever reason.

Those then segue to the whole group of theories that Satoshi was an employee of some government spying agency. Those theories further split into two subgroups:

a) intentional covert work for which Satoshi was normally paid
b) after-hours personal project that unexpectedly grew, possibly affecting negatively his normal duties.

Properly secured Windows (except Windows10) computer is unbreakable. Even for NSA. Why? Because a 0-day in network stack or network card drivers is only way to hack it. Manually install all security patches. Disable all auto updates. Disable unnecessary services and configure firewall to reduce attack surface. It is it. I challenged to hack my Windows 7 or Windows XP machine to steal all my coins back then. Nobody succeeded. In such case the NSA/CIA/FBI will try to get physical access to machine to install malware or read disk contents.

It is ridiculous how paranoid some Windows haters are. They obviously never been hackers themselves and also dont know how police and spy agencies do things.

More notable thing that probably nobody noticed is that Satoshi's hard drive was using NTFS compression, most likely on whole partition. This is very untypical to have NTFS compression enabled on whole partition upon manual formatting.

I don't get it. In the early releases the mining client was the same as the wallet client because satoshi's idea was that everyone could be able to mine, so this means that the biggest bulk of coins was mined with whatever initial software was availble which again was also the wallet. This means

1) The computer was online
2) The computer was running windows

When was the first linux ever release? Some guy here said 0.2 I think... I wonder what amount of coins got mined by then? So unless im missing something, a big chunk was mined in an online windows computer which means a compromised computer.

Have you thought the reason could also be that he used windows to help the adoption? If he used something else, people would say "ahhh again something for geeks"


You maybe have never tried GNU/Linux, because the time when everything was done in a terminal is gone since decades. You can do almost everything with a GUI and now some OS are more "friendly" to use than Windows OS. I can customize a Linux OS you won't really be able to make a difference with Win 7

I think Satoshi had a much bigger vision for Bitcoin that most people give him credit for. Let's take someone that write virusses. What platform will you target for your virus, if you want it to go viral : The answer is simple - You target the platform with the most users for maximum exposure.

If he wrote this in some obscure code, most people would have recognised his work from previous projects. He can hide much easier in a community with thousands of developers coding for the most popular OS.

IMVHO initial  release was on Windows for two reasons:
1. Developer(s) wanted to reach the broad audience.
2. Convenience. Specialist in cryptography was developing on ready available computer. Linux on home computers was not so polished  as today.

Funny, that prevented me to look at Bitcoin core till v. 0.2.