Author Topic: OS/4 (non technical issues)  (Read 1219 times)

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 57
  • Posts: 1336
    • View Profile
OS/4 (non technical issues)
« on: June 16, 2020, 09:33:00 pm »
I would point out, that the Arca Naoe drivers etc. are licensed for use with supported versions of OS/2, by users who have a subscription, when the driver is released. OS/4 is NOT OS/2, and there is NO support, at all, when using them with OS/4. Strictly speaking, it is probably illegal to use any of them with OS/4. The released source is available. Build, and support, your own, if you want to use them.

I will also point out, that using my Logical Config.Sys Sort (LCSS) program will sort your CONFIG.SYS properly. It is at HOBBES. LCSS will probably work with OS/4, but I don't intend to support it in OS/4 (or even with 4OS2)..

Igor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2020, 10:33:04 pm »
I want to note that I am an official user of drivers from Arca Noae. I paid them for a subscription and expect them to work. In the meantime, even in OS / 2 with the official kernel, they are not quite operational.
I see no reason to divide the land in our cemetery. Actually OS / 2 has not been supported for a long time and is rather not alive. However, both Arca Noae and the OS / 4 team are involved in the development of the system. Both of them did a lot for the system to develop. And now it’s very important to find a way for the various components supported by different developers to work together.
The OS / 4 kernel has been seriously updated; significant errors have been removed from it; it is significantly faster than the OS / 2 kernel. In the OS / 4 kernel, virtual machines run significantly faster. And in some modern systems, the OS / 2 kernel does not work at all and the system starts only with OS / 4. Not only that, some Arca Noae drivers do not work on the OS / 2 kernel, but they work on OS / 4. And most importantly, the OS / 4 kernel is supported and updated regularly.
If we abandon development that ensures progress, then there will be much less movement in our cemetery.

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 57
  • Posts: 1336
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2020, 12:04:21 am »
Quote
I want to note that I am an official user of drivers from Arca Noae. I paid them for a subscription and expect them to work.

If they aren't working, open an incident in the Arca Noae Mantis Bug Tracker. I suggest reporting only supported configurations. I will also note, that the USBXHCD driver is a PREVIEW version, and is not actually supported. Be sure to READ the docs. If you need an updated driver, but have not renewed your subscription, don't expect freebies.

Quote
Actually OS / 2 has not been supported for a long time and is rather not alive.

Arca Noae has legal authorization to distribute patched versions of OS/2 software (the ArcaOS kernel is one example). NOBODY else has that legal authorization, including the OS/4 group (even eCS was not permitted to do that). If Arca Noae started to use stuff from, or produce stuff for, OS/4, they could be shut down. It is in their contract with IBM.

Quote
The OS / 4 kernel has been seriously updated; significant errors have been removed from it; it is significantly faster than the OS / 2 kernel. In the OS / 4 kernel, virtual machines run significantly faster. And in some modern systems, the OS / 2 kernel does not work at all and the system starts only with OS / 4. Not only that, some Arca Noae drivers do not work on the OS / 2 kernel, but they work on OS / 4. And most importantly, the OS / 4 kernel is supported and updated regularly.

Arca Noae drivers are supposed to work on machines that are running supported versions of OS/2, If they don't, report the problem. It may not be fixable, but I guarantee that it won't be fixed if you don't report it. The support group does insist on supported configurations (no PREVIEW software, or "unknown" operating systems - like OS/4). They don't have the resources to try to do otherwise.

Perhaps the OS/4 group will support their software. The biggest problem with OS/4, is that the legal status is far from clear. If, as they claim, it has been developed in a clean room, that may still not pass the legal system. Until it has been judged by the legal system, the status is unknown (and I doubt if the OS/4 group could afford the legal fees, so they would lose by default. So would Arca Naoe, if they break the rules of the contract). Use OS/4 if you like, but don't expect Arca Noae to even recognize that it exists. They just can't take the chance that IBM will take them to court.

Quote
If we abandon development that ensures progress, then there will be much less movement in our cemetery.

There is movement. The biggest problems, at Arca Noae, are too few good programmers, and not enough money in the pot. I have no idea how OS/4 is funded, nor do I much care.

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 492
  • -Receive: 98
  • Posts: 2707
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2020, 12:11:14 am »
Hi

Are we still discussing if OS/4 Kernel is legal or not? Even if OS/4 kernel is based on OS/2 Kernel source code leak, I consider it legal while it remains a research non-profit project. Under the US Copyright law #107 it says:

Quote
17 U.S. Code § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use 

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

My interpretation of the US Copyright law may be challenge by OS/2 kernel copyrights owner on court, IBM is free to sue and a Judge will define if it legal or not. Also, the ruling may not apply outside the US.

Regards
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 01:08:09 am by Martin Iturbide »
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 11
  • -Receive: 181
  • Posts: 2490
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #4 on: June 17, 2020, 02:34:58 am »
Whether the OS/4 kernel is legal or not is beside the point from Arca Noae's viewpoint as they have a contract with IBM and they don't want to risk losing the contract by having anything to do with the OS/4 kernel.
I haven't seen the contract but going by Lewis's statements, it is a real worry and simplest for Arca Noae to not have anything to do with it.

Lars

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 60
  • Posts: 576
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #5 on: June 17, 2020, 07:05:42 am »
Can someone explain to me why it is illegal to produce drivers that work for both: OS/2 and OS/4 ?

I don't think there is a technical reason why a driver would not work with OS/4, the programming interface for most drivers is fairly well documented and OS/4 has no intention to break a programming interface (they added a few specialities for their own drivers and they enhanced the kernel but other than that, they are backwards compatible).

If there are no reasons regarding technical issues, I assume it is a marketing twist. It's easy to write a driver that is not compatible with OS/4 if you really want that.

Igor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2020, 10:46:09 am »
Quote
Use OS/4 if you like, but don't expect Arca Noae to even recognize that it exists. They just can't take the chance that IBM will take them to court.
Can a deliberate introduction of an algorithm into the code be considered due to which some software refuses to work on the OS / 4 kernel by recognition of its existence? ???

I do not suggest Arca to deal with the OS / 4 kernel. People are already doing it and everything is fine there. However, I believe that community efforts should be aimed at preventing a developer war.
OS / 4 Group is actually working on the development of Arca Noae business. And he does this without receiving financial benefits.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 12:50:22 pm by Igor »

Sigurd Fastenrath

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 16
  • -Receive: 72
  • Posts: 444
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2020, 10:55:11 am »
Quote
I want to note that I am an official user of drivers from Arca Noae. I paid them for a subscription and expect them to work.

If they aren't working, open an incident in the Arca Noae Mantis Bug Tracker. I suggest reporting only supported configurations. I will also note, that the USBXHCD driver is a PREVIEW version, and is not actually supported. Be sure to READ the docs. If you need an updated driver, but have not renewed your subscription, don't expect freebies.

Quote
Actually OS / 2 has not been supported for a long time and is rather not alive.

Arca Noae has legal authorization to distribute patched versions of OS/2 software (the ArcaOS kernel is one example). NOBODY else has that legal authorization, including the OS/4 group (even eCS was not permitted to do that). If Arca Noae started to use stuff from, or produce stuff for, OS/4, they could be shut down. It is in their contract with IBM.

Quote
The OS / 4 kernel has been seriously updated; significant errors have been removed from it; it is significantly faster than the OS / 2 kernel. In the OS / 4 kernel, virtual machines run significantly faster. And in some modern systems, the OS / 2 kernel does not work at all and the system starts only with OS / 4. Not only that, some Arca Noae drivers do not work on the OS / 2 kernel, but they work on OS / 4. And most importantly, the OS / 4 kernel is supported and updated regularly.

Arca Noae drivers are supposed to work on machines that are running supported versions of OS/2, If they don't, report the problem. It may not be fixable, but I guarantee that it won't be fixed if you don't report it. The support group does insist on supported configurations (no PREVIEW software, or "unknown" operating systems - like OS/4). They don't have the resources to try to do otherwise.

Perhaps the OS/4 group will support their software. The biggest problem with OS/4, is that the legal status is far from clear. If, as they claim, it has been developed in a clean room, that may still not pass the legal system. Until it has been judged by the legal system, the status is unknown (and I doubt if the OS/4 group could afford the legal fees, so they would lose by default. So would Arca Naoe, if they break the rules of the contract). Use OS/4 if you like, but don't expect Arca Noae to even recognize that it exists. They just can't take the chance that IBM will take them to court.

Quote
If we abandon development that ensures progress, then there will be much less movement in our cemetery.

There is movement. The biggest problems, at Arca Noae, are too few good programmers, and not enough money in the pot. I have no idea how OS/4 is funded, nor do I much care.

Doug, you are still sitting on a high horse.

As we all know there are limited resources and limited money.

Eternal repeating does not change anything nor make things better.

Reading the docs tell: USB 3 is ALPHA Code. Well done after 4 Years of Development! Once there is a problem and one can not solve this, it may be time to go for help or open oneself. Naming Lars and Wim are only two of those who might have been able to assist (assumed and provided they would have liked to) or help. So the argument "Limited Resources" does not count when it comes to USB 3. The reason for this is another one:

ArcaNoae decided to go the other way, making what is left from OS/2 to some kind of closed source.

And in addition: why have there never been - as suggested before - some kind of open beta for USB 3? Instead there is some kind of open Alpha here with 5.05 now, a product that is for sale?! But - who cares - it is like it is.

I remember the kernel versions I got from Holger, based on the 14.106 Kernel and in addition his patches for WPS files. Even if I do not really understand what technically he has done - the results counted. And his kernel and WPS patches did lead to a much more stable OS/2 (or ArcaOS) than I have had ever before or after.

I might make a shot in the dark, but I would guess some of his - you may would call it from your "Lord Protector for the Holy ArcaOS" position as some kind of illegal - changes have somehow find their way into ArcaOS.

So ist the OS/4 kernel - if you like it or not, it does provide usefull functions and abilitties the AOS Kernel miss.

In the end results count:
ArcaNaoe is basically doing a very good job.
USB 3.0 is far from working stable, it is some kind of Alpha software.
ArcaOS is getting more and more closed source.
"Protection Policy" for Software is contra productive in our days. It will destroy what is left of the "OS/2 community"
Suspect others - like OS/4 team - without a real proof as "illegal" is not OK and sounds like narrow minded thinking!

In December we will held our OS/2 User meeting in Cologne, we will see if there is enough demand for a meeting in 2021 or if it will be the last. We are waiting for the DE Version for some years now, and motivation (and the age/time) is running out for most of us. 8)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 11:08:15 am by Sigurd Fastenrath »

Digi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 12
  • Posts: 46
  • http://os2.snc.ru/
    • View Profile
    • OS/2 ports and applications
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2020, 02:38:18 pm »
It is very stupid to wage this war. OS/4 developers do not have any material benefit from their activities. OS/4 is a wonderful project, a huge number of problems have been fixed, the system has accelerated significantly. It has been repeatedly said that no IBM source codes are used.

The senseless confrontation only spends the strength of developers and distracts from useful work, for a small group of users of OS/2 the harm from this is enormous.

Let’s make efforts to develop the system, and not engage in dirty politics. This will benefit everyone - and Arca Noae whose system is improved through such third-party projects, and users get new opportunities.

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 492
  • -Receive: 98
  • Posts: 2707
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #9 on: June 18, 2020, 01:53:27 am »
Hi

Like always every company, group or individual is free to do whatever they want, think or feel to, while it is legal on their country.

My issue remains that both Arca Noae and OS/4 Team does completely commit to move OS/2 to an open source development model. It feels to me like one side thinks that open source is evil communism and the other thinks that it is evil capitalism. Even if it happens that both sides commits fully to open source, that is only the first step, then we have to motivate more developers and users to join OS/2 and became active on the community. 

I would love for the OS/4 kernel to became GPL (copyleft), so it will be open source today and in the future. And will completely wash away the doubt if it is based on the OS/2 Warp 4 leaked source code. Turning it copyleft will not allow anybody to close source it on the future (like it can happen with a BSD license)

I would suggest for Arca Noae to give the source code of the drivers to Netlabs and turn it into a close source collaborative project (like Lars' USB drivers), since the IBM DDK license does not allow it to turn it open source. Arca Noae will still have the commercial benefit that the can sell IBM's OS/2 binaries (since they paid for it), and that is a strong hold on the commercial market. But I still insist on the Redhat business model where all the Linux investment they did is opensource, but they charge for services and support.

I think that open source can produce a common ground for the OS/4 Team and Arca Noae to collaborate, where instead of paying for software or intellectual property, a commercial exchange can exist based on developers efforts, time and talent. 

On 2020 we should not be paying for software, we should be paying for the developer's time for doing awesome and useful things with OS/2. The "Free Software does not grows in trees" motto sound like my grandpa complaining how he does not understand the younger generation. That motto does not motivates anybody to support a project. There should be projects plans, time frames and goals that motivates people to support it.

Stardock's Brad Wardell once wrote that "The market becomes a community", if someone wants to make money (to pay fair salaries to developers or even to get profits) with OS/2 they will have help growing the community so it can evolve back into a market. Forcing the money squeezing from the OS/2 community today will backfire to kill what is left of the community.

Like always this is my personal opinion and everybody is free to think I'm crazy  ;D

Regards
« Last Edit: June 19, 2020, 01:28:47 am by Martin Iturbide »
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Eugene Tucker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 31
  • -Receive: 6
  • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2020, 02:44:38 pm »
Martin, one big problem with what you would like to see, IBM. They have been asked once maybe twice to release OS/2 to Open source. They have had reasonable excuses for not doing that, maybe. I personally would love to see the model of development evolve and grow and even flourish. but alas I fear that is not going to happen. With fewer OS/2 users it is doubtful about positive response from IBM. 

Igor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2020, 04:34:20 pm »
I have the only request to programmers and Arca Noae's management - do not make deliberate changes to the code that interfere with the launch and operation of drivers on the OS / 4 kernel. I really hope that the community will support my request.
This will help develop research projects and will allow, among other things, to sell drivers to users of these projects. You chop a tree branch on which you sit.

I also inform you that I regularly pay for a driver subscription and so far everything has been fine with me. If it turns out that driver inoperability is intentional destructive actions, I will reconsider my attitude to paying for products and most likely refuse.
Naturally, no one can require Arca Noae to support their drivers in an environment that they did not choose.
But it’s also natural to require the product to have no specially made incompatibility.

Andi B.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 24
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2020, 06:13:17 pm »
Is there any evidence that AN prohibits the drivers to run on OS/4 kernel on purpose? Or is this just a side effect cause OS/4 kernel is not as compatible as it should be?

Guess OS/4 kernel developers have to debug the reason to shed some light on this.

Igor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2020, 07:03:02 pm »
Is there any evidence that AN prohibits the drivers to run on OS/4 kernel on purpose? Or is this just a side effect cause OS/4 kernel is not as compatible as it should be?

Guess OS/4 kernel developers have to debug the reason to shed some light on this.
There is no direct evidence and I sincerely hope that this is a mistake that will be fixed sooner or later.
The OS / 4 team carefully monitors compatibility with the OS / 2 kernel, but it’s hard to keep track of undocumented features if they were or weren’t brought to the core of the system by Arca Noae.

OS4User

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 71
  • -Receive: 7
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: OS/4 (non technical issues)
« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2020, 08:21:23 pm »
Is there any evidence that AN prohibits the drivers to run on OS/4 kernel on purpose? Or is this just a side effect cause OS/4 kernel is not as compatible as it should be?

To my mind, both assumptions look possible.

Guess OS/4 kernel developers have to debug the reason to shed some light on this.

As far as I know, OS/4 team doesn't have access to drivers to do such a research.