OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical > Setup & Installation

Is eComStation DEAD?

<< < (14/18) > >>

Martin Iturbide:
Hi Barbara.

Maybe I'm wrong, but WPS for Windows was only a mask to make Windows 3.1 looks like WPS. I think that there are not SOM Classes or WPS classes on it. Please correct me if you think I'm wrong. For example, on the little that I know, I understand that WPS classes source code has .idl files, on this case I don't see any of those on the source code of it.

In general, my main reason to support open source is that it reduced the risk. Which risk? to be left "High and Dry". Open source does not mean it is going to be developed and improved by air, but it reduced the risk of depending in one single individual or company. Will it be better to be close source abandonware or open source abandonware? At least with open source we have a chance that anybody else can improve it in a legal way and distribute it. Open source it is just the tool and methodology, we still need the collaborative spirit to work together in a single goal.

Now, on WPS, what I learn about it, it that it is so cool, because being close source it can be expanded. And since it is composed by single classes, it can be very structured to make a "one by one class replacement" for it, until we get a complete open source WPS clone. But sadly the idea does not have much traction between the developers I talked about it, since WPS is on top of other close source software (SOM and Presentation Manager), so we never end the discussion if it is better to start "top to down -> WPS - SOM - PM" or down to top "PM - SOM - WPS". But there is also no resources to start from any of this points.

But there are some half-baked projects that can help:
- PM Clone - FreePM , OSFree
- SOM clone - Somfree
- WPS clone - ??? - Some open source wps classes, XWorkplace, etc.

The short term project are always drivers, and yes, we need drivers. Some people always complain to me why focus time on fixing what is is working like this components?. But I think that the long term project will be to start on PM, SOM and WPS (on any order). This components are part of the soul of OS/2 GUI and having them open sourced will create a favorable wave for our goals inside the open source community.

Regards

muffetta:
I totally agree with you, Martin, but I repeat, just a start-up, if motivated programmers wanted to understand how WPS was structured, with or without SOM, perhaps to integrate also after, I do not think that they would had problems, especially Mensys/SSI, without resorting Netlabs programmers, that miracles they have done really a lot!!
I only say that with a different point of view we do not waste time and resources.

dbanet:
Well, let me share my opinion about Linux/2: please, no.

David Kiley:

--- Quote from: Eugene Gorbunoff on August 02, 2014, 12:55:08 pm ---Today OS/2 is valuable because it can run on real hardware. There is flow of money, there are developers because it is running on real hardware, there is demand on this alternative OS.

If settle OS/2 to Virtual machine or create WPS for Linux then it will become unnecessary. All developers will go away and .. only the developer of WPS front-end will stay alive.

--- End quote ---

Sure, today it's "valuable" in a limited way because there are banks and other enterprise companies trying to run os/2 on legacy systems, or upgrading to more modern systems so they can run old os/2 software. That's why serenity was in the business, so they can sell hundreds of enterprise licenses.

But if you stick to that path then it will only lead to the death of the os , because eventually all of these companies are going to abandon os/2 and there will be no market.

On the other hand i've watched more than one open source project grow, such as freedos, reactos and even linux since I originally booted slackware on a floppy in the 90's..
And one thing i've noticed is that while it always starts little, tons of people are curious about alternatives and eventually join the army.

So right now we only have a few people that care about os/2..
But if we abandon this path of holding onto the old, and instead focus on creating something new - then we will soon have a lot of friends to help us since people are inspired by creation :).

My 2 cents anyway..

David Kiley:

--- Quote from: Boris on August 02, 2014, 05:54:02 pm ---Well, let me share my opinion about Linux/2: please, no.

--- End quote ---
Well, certainly linux is just my suggestion for the base kernel, but if you have something against linux specifically, other alternative bases could be considered.
The point is currently a huge amount of effort is being spent patching software to run on old closed source os/2..

Whereas we could instead focusing on creating NEW os/2 software on the back of an already modern os, be in a BSD or Unix, or whatever base the community feels inspired... therefore no need to spend time making drivers that have already been created, and no need to recreate software like firefox that already runs on those OSs.

Instead you could put all your effort into a new os/2 desktop experience, which lets be honest is where most of us are spending our time on os/2 :).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version