Author Topic: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.  (Read 4739 times)

David Kiley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 9
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« on: May 25, 2021, 09:46:49 am »
Iv'e decided to jettison the idea of installing on bare metal and instead decided emulating in virtualbox is the best bet (for me),
Since, I can run arcaos 5 indefinitely inside virtualbox on my suse linux host.
I don't have to worry about future hardware support or getting the right hardware.
I don't have to care about a lack of functional web browser, since I have endless options on suse.

All of my old favorite os/2 apps will continue to work in my virtualbox window, and I can share files with the host computer.

I can already hear you guys already getting worked up that I am not supporting the future of os/2 in that case..
But iv'e already spent hundreds if not thousands of dollars supporting os/2 :).
Supporting Suse, which is my favorite linux distro, which is 64 bit and hence has a more viable future, would be a better return on investment for me at this point.

The only way I can see myself buying another license is maybe if I decide I also want another os/2 instance running on virtualbox on my laptop as well as my desktop.

Which brings up another topic - that I don't really agree with the general direction of os/2 development at this point.
There is no solving the OS being stuck in 32bit- which is a ticking time bomb.
All the resources being spent developing new hardware drivers is a waste, as well as the web browser development.
It would be better to just accept emulation as the best future course of the OS for all the pros I just described.
Instead of spending endless resources trying to get the OS again functioning on yet another motherboard and developing yet another web browser just to have it get obsolete again -
Instead Arca Noa could be spending time adding new features to the OS like GUI enhancements and new productivity features, if people just accept that emulation is the best route. I mean I could probably think of all kinds of cool things Arca Noa might be doing if they were not spending time getting the os working on yet another motherboard - like maybe integrating the OS with cloud services like Google Drive.
And then, maybe I would have a reason to upgrade to future version :).
« Last Edit: May 25, 2021, 09:50:31 am by David Kiley »

Ibrahim Hakeem

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 87
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2021, 03:18:40 pm »
I don't think anyone here's getting worked up, David.

Many of us who run OS/2 here also do a lot with other operating systems - hell, I'm active in the Haiku community myself and run Debian as a daily-driver on my desktop. Your money is your money to spend. The points you make shows that you don't understand the philosophy behind ArcaOS, much less all that has actually been achieved. None of this is anyone's prerogative to explain to you however and I hope you understand that. Arca OS was never intended to be a competitor to mainstream operating systems, it was designed to serve it's niche of modern OS/2 users and does it remarkably well.

I'll respond to a few of your points while we're here:

Quote
The only way I can see myself buying another license is maybe if I decide I also want another os/2 instance running on virtualbox on my laptop as well as my desktop.
Good, most of us already do this.

Quote
There is no solving the OS being stuck in 32bit- which is a ticking time bomb.
OS/2 has always been a 32 bit platform, for the sake of compatibility with the vast majority of the software (and hardware at times) we use, it ought to stay this way. Not to mention the plethora of other issues that would come with a 64 bit release.

Quote
All the resources being spent developing new hardware drivers is a waste, as well as the web browser development.
Perhaps for your specific use-case of virtualization. A lot of folks (myself included) are using OS/2 on modern hardware and as such, we appreciate having updates that allow us to take full advantage of those features (i.e NVME)

Quote
It would be better to just accept emulation as the best future course of the OS for all the pros I just described.
Again, nobody is stopping you and a lot of people already do this.

And finally
Quote
Arca Noa could be spending time adding new features to the OS like GUI enhancements and new productivity features
These features already exist with more coming. That is to say, one of the biggest features of the OS/2 Warp platform is the workplace shell, with the current generation of user interface optimizations/enhancements there have been few to no complaints about it.

It's your choice to use whatever operating system you want. Nobody minds  ;D
« Last Edit: May 25, 2021, 03:26:19 pm by Ibrahim Hakeem »

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 593
  • -Receive: 121
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +26/-0
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2021, 04:09:36 pm »
Hi David

Your opinion is respected, and I guess you want to tell us about it just to inform us, and I also guess you don't want arguments for people trying to convince you or debate your point of view.

The community has different points of view, some other are happy with ArcaOS emulated, others want bare metal and some others want to try old software with OS/2 Warp has a retro-hobbie to remember the good old days. ... and some others want all of them :)

What I agree with you is the lack of a "long term strategy" for the platform. I also used to criticized Serenity Systems with eCS, that at some point it looked that they only wanted to patch OS/2 to have the minimum necessary to run on PCs.

About ArcaOS, my opinion is that the first part of their strategy it to have a solid OS/2 running on today's hardware. They want people to be able to buy a new PC or laptop, and being able to run ArcaOS, and their OS/2 favorite app. ArcaOS 5.1 is going to be an important milestone, like modern hardware support (UEFI, GPT, NVMe ) and multilingual support. Once that is accomplished some new goals should be defined.

On the other side, I have seen the spark on Lewis' eyes (Arca Noae) when he talks about how OS/2 should be today if IBM haven't pulled the plug. I honestly think his motivation for the platform is to turn it awesome, instead of just a commercial motivation.

Yes, there is no "long term strategy" for ArcaOS yet as a platform, but the first steps to make it usable on today's hardware it is necessary. I hope that once ArcaOS 5.1 is released and stabilized, it is going to be time to move forward on what killer apps do we need and what OS/2 components needs to be updated. I wish everything can be faster, but I guess the speed is according the resources they have.

Regards
« Last Edit: May 25, 2021, 10:05:14 pm by Martin Iturbide »
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Sergey

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2021, 05:12:24 pm »
Hi David

I use the system to play music. I use the PM123 player, which we have improved and added many features to it. Therefore, I use the system only on bare metal.
By the way, the system is very promising in this direction..
There is a great interest of users in this direction.

Rich Walsh

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 14
  • Posts: 145
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • ONU! (OS/2 is NOT Unix!)
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2021, 06:00:18 pm »
I don't have to worry about future hardware support or getting the right hardware.

Oh ye of little faith...

Friday afternoon I went out and bought a mass-market "Windows PC" - the kind of low-end machine OS/2 users have always avoided.  In this case, a Lenovo IdeaCentre i5 with Intel i7 (8 cores), 16gb mem, and a 512gb NVMe drive formatted GPT with Win 10 Pro ($800US incl tax). The system is pure UEFI with no BIOS or CSM support.

After setup, I changed the drive order to boot USB first, then used Windows Disk Manager to shrink the Win partition. When done, I inserted my flash drive with the latest ArcaOS beta, crossed my fingers and rebooted. The installer came right up and the installation proceeded without issue. No "drama" whatsoever. I now have a fully functioning OS/2 UEFI/GPT system running on hardware that was 100% incompatible 6 months ago. No flawed emulation needed.

Now, does the integrated WiFi/Bluetooth work? Of course not - but the ethernet does and that's all I need. Does the audio work? Not with my older Uniaud build [it does work] - but I use USB audio instead because it always works. Etc, etc... Ignoring the bits and pieces that have always been a problem, I'd say AN has delivered (or is about to deliver) on its promise of OS/2 on modern hardware.

BTW... check out WSE in a few weeks - there will be a demo of installing AOS on a Windows Linux PC.

[Full disclosure: I work for AN and am actively involved in UEFI/GPT development.]
« Last Edit: May 26, 2021, 07:46:53 am by Rich Walsh »

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 15
  • -Receive: 30
  • Posts: 969
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2021, 08:50:55 pm »
Rich made an excellent point.

I just went through a purchase of a brand spankin' new PC for my son, who is away attending school. Now the machine he was using at home wasn't all that old: Asus Prime X470-Pro, AMD Ryzen7 2700 CPU, Samsung 970 Pro M.2 NVMe drive, etc.

Guess what...now that I have "acquired" that hardware (having easily convinced my son to "upgrade") I absolutely intend to take a shot at moving my OS/2 install into that new world.

Point being, our OS/2 still has some legs left in it...yeah, it'll take a little more care than normal/usual, but results can be achieved and this wouldn't have happened had AN not pursued the changes to AOS they did pursue.

I for one am more excited by what's been delivered over the past 6 months then the stuff I've seen over the last 5 years.

David Kiley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 9
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2021, 12:25:56 pm »
I don't think anyone here's getting worked up, David.
The points you make shows that you don't understand the philosophy behind ArcaOS, much less all that has actually been achieved. None of this is anyone's prerogative to explain to you however and I hope you understand that. Arca OS was never intended to be a competitor to mainstream operating systems, it was designed to serve it's niche of modern OS/2 users and does it remarkably well.
Glad to see I didn't ruffle too many feathers :).
Yeah iv'e definitely seen from these responses that there are a lot of people that care about running on modern hardware.
It just seems to me a lot more could be done with the OS if that wasn't the focus, which I guess was my point.
OS/2 has always been a 32 bit platform, for the sake of compatibility with the vast majority of the software (and hardware at times) we use, it ought to stay this way. Not to mention the plethora of other issues that would come with a 64 bit release.
My understanding, if i'm not wrong, is that based on source code limitations it can't be more than a 32bit os, and that is putting a strain on the future especially in web browsers. But, if the focus is on creating the best emulated environment, then things like the web browser wouldn't be so important and could be let go - since the host would already have a suitable browser.


andreas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 1
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2021, 12:53:52 pm »
I think AN do well the way they do.
An OS that only works in a virtual box is not really an "OS" anymore.
It would be just an interim solution for its own death.

I agree that the future might be 64bit. But to be honest, for me I don't see any need for 64bit as long as i can do all i need to do with my "old" 32bit system. I am not a programmer and using my pc mainly for writing and organizing office stuff. What I try to say is, that it always depends what you need an OS for and what you expect from it. I really enjoy OS/2 since it is so very comfortable to work with it and i wouldn't want to miss it. And i am really happy that AN is doing a great job to keep it alive as an OS....

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 52
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: +13/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2021, 02:45:21 pm »
Quote
I agree that the future might be 64bit. But to be honest, for me I don't see any need for 64bit as long as i can do all i need to do with my "old" 32bit system. I am not a programmer and using my pc mainly for writing and organizing office stuff. What I try to say is, that it always depends what you need an OS for and what you expect from it. I really enjoy OS/2 since it is so very comfortable to work with it and i wouldn't want to miss it. And i am really happy that AN is doing a great job to keep it alive as an OS....

As you say a 64 bit version of OS/2 is a dream, I have to ask 'what advantage would a 64 bit OS have over a 32 bit one for everyday usage?'

Like andreas I use OS/2 tor writing and editing of manuscripts, yes, I can do that on one of my Linux boxes but not as easily and it still takes the same length of time.  Also there are times when I see memory problems because the modern motherboards and uefi bios are set up for windows only and don't play well with any other OS - since I will not use windows I have learned to live with those quirks.  Even my MSI B550-A Pro board wit a third gen Ryzen processor runs OS/2(ArcaOS) on the bare metal, just wish MSI had better memory management.

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 15
  • -Receive: 30
  • Posts: 969
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2021, 02:53:47 pm »
...As you say a 64 bit version of OS/2 is a dream, I have to ask 'what advantage would a 64 bit OS have over a 32 bit one for everyday usage?'...

This comment right here that ivan made is the key point when I look at the future roadmap and the direction I wish to pursue.

For everyday use there really is no 64-bit requirement that I can think of. Sure, maybe if you needed to run a massive database server, or perhaps handled huge data files (OK, sometimes a massive TIFF or JPG file will cause a problem on my machine here, especialy if I already have a few days of runtime on it and the memory has been throughly chewed up), but otherwise, we should be quite alright living in 32-bit world!

Not to take a different direction here with this conversation, but once AN is done getting us the capability to run on new bare-metal I honestly wish they could spent some time on addressing the stuff that always turns out to be the weakness, shared memory...I've got to believe there is a way to technically do "garbage collection" and/or prevent the fragmentation to start off with.

Neil Waldhauer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 14
  • -Receive: 58
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +14/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blonde Guy
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2021, 03:56:58 pm »
I think Darius asked the right question. Why do we need 64-bit?

The 2TB barrier for DASD can be overcome without it.
The 4 GB barrier for memory use has already been somewhat lifted with the new RAM drive.

But do not underestimate code bloat. At some point in the not-to-distant future, a simple web browser will not fit into the largest available OS/2 addressable space.

A good 64-bit API added to OS/2 could possibly make it the only 64-bit operating system that can execute compiled programs from the 1980s.
Expert consulting for ArcaOS, OS/2 and eComStation
http://www.blondeguy.com

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 593
  • -Receive: 121
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +26/-0
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2021, 04:38:38 pm »
Hi

I like the theories about a OS/2 64bits kernel. Here it is the forum thread which everybody is free to continue.

OS/2 does not need a 64bits kernel, a 64bits kernel is needed if there will be a long term strategy for the platform when we want to use all the resources of new hardware. Maybe a dumb comparison will be to buy a new car, and never turn on the radio, wipers or lights. The basic use or the car is being applied (to mobilize people from one place to other), but you are not using the complete experience.

I prefer the idea of grabbing an new 64bits microkernel with market potential (Zircon?) and replace the OS/2 kernel with it. You grab the OSS kernel, create the OS/2 binary interpreter, the CPI API clone and try to run OS/2 interpreted over it (PM, SOM, WPS, Apps). Easy to say, but a lot of work and lot of little details need to be worked out.

Regards
« Last Edit: May 26, 2021, 04:41:21 pm by Martin Iturbide »
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 13
  • -Receive: 221
  • Posts: 3110
  • Karma: +53/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #12 on: May 26, 2021, 05:04:23 pm »
I think Darius asked the right question. Why do we need 64-bit?

The 2TB barrier for DASD can be overcome without it.
The 4 GB barrier for memory use has already been somewhat lifted with the new RAM drive.

But do not underestimate code bloat. At some point in the not-to-distant future, a simple web browser will not fit into the largest available OS/2 addressable space.

Code bloat is one of the big things. Developers generally have powerful machines and that is what they target. For commercial software, the managers want fast development, not slow optimized development. And for open source, once again the developers likely have powerful machines with lots of ram and a lack of motivation in general for optimization.
Otherwise, browsers are going to use more memory, large canvases, JavaScript engines doing more and more and the big one, sandboxing. One weak point in all operating systems is browser based malware, as we do more and more in the browser, it becomes more important to stop one tab from spying on another or otherwise affecting it.
Then there's also building this stuff. Building Mozilla for quite a while was close to the limit, I'd see compiling one file taking up over a GB of memory and linking using the whole address space. This has got worse with the QT web stuff. While still build-able, care has to be taken. Instead of taking advantage of all cores by having multiple jobs compiling, only one which slows things down to the point where a recompile can take most of a day.
Manipulating images and especially videos are another area. Cameras get more pixels creating bigger images and videos get bigger and use more memory intense compression.
Sure there's other things as well.
While software could be written to take advantage of the ram above 4GBs, it is non-trivial and unlikely to happen in a big way.

Quote
A good 64-bit API added to OS/2 could possibly make it the only 64-bit operating system that can execute compiled programs from the 1980s.

The way 64 bit mode works is incompatible with 16 bit software. OS/2 has too much 16 bit software internally. Programs from the '80's are usually 16 bit. There's a reason that even 64 bit Windows can't run old code natively, and that's the design.

Roderick Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 26
  • Posts: 422
  • Karma: +6/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #13 on: May 26, 2021, 09:45:18 pm »
I think Darius asked the right question. Why do we need 64-bit?

The 2TB barrier for DASD can be overcome without it.
The 4 GB barrier for memory use has already been somewhat lifted with the new RAM drive.

But do not underestimate code bloat. At some point in the not-to-distant future, a simple web browser will not fit into the largest available OS/2 addressable space.

A good 64-bit API added to OS/2 could possibly make it the only 64-bit operating system that can execute compiled programs from the 1980s.

On large disc bigger then 2 TB GPT is supported. So tha is off the table it seems that issue.

Roderick

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 593
  • -Receive: 121
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +26/-0
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.
« Reply #14 on: May 26, 2021, 10:23:02 pm »
Hi

I remember that on the early 2000 I was expecting to see a change similar in software from 16bits to 32bits when Intel announced the 64bit Itanium. At the end Itanium was incompatible with all the 32bits software (it was a too aggressive change of instruction set), the processor flop, and the 64 bits adoption on PCs took a slower path. AMD created the x86-64 instruction set (2003) which was retro-compatible with 16 and 32 bits, and the adoption took that path. I think that by 2010 the 64bits adoption PC was 50% (with Windows 7).
The only improvement I saw from 32bits to 64bits was the adoption of better video edition, playback and compression, maybe because of having more memory access.

The "2TB barrier DASD"  and "4 GB memory barrier" are issues of the present. For a 64bits kernel you need to think on the future, how a 64bits kernel can improve the OS experience? what extra things can be added to ArcaOS with 64bits support?
If the goal is to have the same old comfortable thing on new hardware, without any expectation of future improvement for the platform, there is no case for 64bits.

If someone wants a 64bits kernel for OS/2, it is because they want the OS to evolve, get more relevance and be able to get the full resources that the hardware provide.

Regards
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.