OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical > Hardware
The last nail in OS/2's coffin
Martin Iturbide:
Hello
Sorry to keep philosophizing here:
--- Quote from: ivan on January 26, 2024, 01:03:14 am ---Has anyone considered that AMD might not blindly follow Intel down this road? I see this as an attempt by Intel to gain relevance.
--- End quote ---
If Intel does it (which we don't know if he is going to do it) and succeed reducing costs without any major technical/market impact, AMD will follow.
I guess it will be similar to the UEFI transition. How got impacted with that UEFI only transition in some machines? A little part of the Intel market (us), that they just don't care. The only worry for Intel was that Windows and Linux supported UEFI, and that's it.
--- Quote from: Mentore on January 30, 2024, 09:57:03 am ---This may indeed be a possible scenario, also due to the technical challenges a complete 64 bit transition will create.
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure of the technical challenge, if Windows and Linux works fine under a 64bit-Only processor, Intel will not care much about the rest (us).
--- Quote from: Mentore on January 30, 2024, 09:57:03 am ---That said, I'm fairly sure that the actual x86 architecture will survive for long, before it can be considered a dead horse. Too many installed machines and too much software written for it.
I feel confident OS/2 will survive this generation 8)
--- End quote ---
I hope for that. But I still have the itchiness that we should try what the Linux community accomplished. By being open source they are vendor free, they do not longer need IBM, Microsoft or anyone else to keep updating their OS. Distributions comes and goes for them, but the source code is always there to create, modify and expand their OS. Being more open source will allow us to reduce our issues with hardware changes, we will have something to reuse and update.
Regards
Dave Yeo:
--- Quote from: Martin Iturbide on January 30, 2024, 02:32:03 pm ---
I hope for that. But I still have the itchiness that we should try what the Linux community accomplished. By being open source they are vendor free, they do not longer need IBM, Microsoft or anyone else to keep updating their OS. Distributions comes and goes for them, but the source code is always there to create, modify and expand their OS. Being more open source will allow us to reduce our issues with hardware changes, we will have something to reuse and update.
--- End quote ---
Well, Microsoft and IBM are the top committers to the Linux kernel. Then there's systemd.
Roderick Klein:
--- Quote from: Mentore on January 30, 2024, 09:57:03 am ---
--- Quote from: ivan on January 26, 2024, 01:03:14 am ---Has anyone considered that AMD might not blindly follow Intel down this road? I see this as an attempt by Intel to gain relevance.
--- End quote ---
This may indeed be a possible scenario, also due to the technical challenges a complete 64 bit transition will create.
That said, I'm fairly sure that the actual x86 architecture will survive for long, before it can be considered a dead horse. Too many installed machines and too much software written for it.
I feel confident OS/2 will survive this generation 8)
Mentore
--- End quote ---
I share that viewpoint.
Roderick
Martin Iturbide:
--- Quote from: Dave Yeo on January 30, 2024, 04:18:15 pm ---
--- Quote from: Martin Iturbide on January 30, 2024, 02:32:03 pm ---
I hope for that. But I still have the itchiness that we should try what the Linux community accomplished. By being open source they are vendor free, they do not longer need IBM, Microsoft or anyone else to keep updating their OS. Distributions comes and goes for them, but the source code is always there to create, modify and expand their OS. Being more open source will allow us to reduce our issues with hardware changes, we will have something to reuse and update.
--- End quote ---
Well, Microsoft and IBM are the top committers to the Linux kernel. Then there's systemd.
--- End quote ---
Yes, they are the top "Contributors", but they giving the changes under GNU GPL V2, which means they can not block access to the source code. If any of those companies cease to contribute, since it's open source, the Linux community has the option to take the source code and continue with other developers. The case differs from close source software, which depends on the author that has the source code.
Regards
Dave Yeo:
That's why I mentioned systemd. Consider my phone and the majority in the world. Sure I can download the source code for the Linux kernel in my phone, what can I do with it? It's not like I have root and while my particular phone has instructions for rooting, unlike many, the kernel is still locked down by being signed and interacts with binary blobs.
Also consider IBM owned RedHat, you have to sign a contract to get access to the source, including the kernel which is likely patched.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version