WebSite Information > Article Discussions
[Arca Noae] So, what would you like to see next?
Eirik Romstad:
I think a step-by-step approach adding/fixing things users want is most imperative for the short run. Some vision is needed for the longer run (run on modern hardware, able to use more of the memory on newer computers) as one of the strengths of OS/2 was its speed and versatility. Having a long term vision is also helpful for short term work.
Given the size of the OS/2 - eCS community, it is extremely important that we use our scarce resources wisely = have clear priorities.
Eirik
Wim Brul:
--- Quote from: Mike La Martina on November 26, 2014, 09:12:19 pm ---Hi Martin:
I was not thinking about that aspect of a replacement. Retaining backward compatibility with PM would seem to me to be an enormous task. As far as Qt is concerned, I would be interested if anyone could comment on the independence of the Qt Library from the native PM Apis. I was under the impression that it used PM Apis. I welcome correction if this view is erroneous.
--- End quote ---
I went to http://trac.netlabs.org/qt4/wiki and viewed the README.OS2 file that describes a.o. how to compile the library in order to gain some understanding. And yes, the QT library is build on top of Presentation Manager.
Martin Iturbide:
That is not complete bad, Qt using PM can be a good example of showing us which should be the priority of the PM components to clone.
Olafur Gunnlaugsson:
--- Quote from: Martin Iturbide on November 26, 2014, 03:14:45 pm ---- PM is the OS/2 GUI
- WPS is the desktop shell. The objects that organize the GUI to create the desktop interpretation (based on a real's world desktop) of the OS. WPS requires SOM and PM to show itself as it is.
--- End quote ---
Yes, but you see, the PM is just a port of Visi/On, a quick and dirty solution to getting OS/2 v1.1 out of the house in a form resembling what they had promised their larger customers. As a graphics engine and GUI it was backwards even when released, never mind 2015, some 30 years later, and yes the Micrografx engine that is used in 2.x and higher helps but it is something of a kludge. API emulation, binary emulation or partial emulation is fine for getting older software to run, but recreating it is sheer madness.
The WPS and the original OS/2 2.0/CUA 91 metaphor is on the other hand pure genius and needs to be preserved if only in a vague work-alike, just look at MacOS X, they have been talking about a fully object oriented front end since they released the first NeXT in 1988 and still have not managed to tie together something resembling a coherent vision, or fully object oriented for that matter.
You should track down the old DOS demo presentation of CUA91 and watch it, that was what OS/2 2.x was meant to be, and we almost got it. The concept of non-modal software is something that we got in lots of early IBM software but then slowly disappeared as OS/2 software got more Windows like (or Linux like, since all Linux shells ape windows down to a tee). We are starting to see non-modal software concepts on mobile phones and tablets since it is a concept that makes sense, and is genuinely one less thing to worry about for an end user that is using a tool rather than what his/hers life centres around, but desktop software seems to be going backwards.
...... sheeeesh ........ ranting on the Internet ..... a sign of fast approaching old age I suppose
Dave Yeo:
--- Quote from: Martin Iturbide on November 27, 2014, 03:43:13 pm ---That is not complete bad, Qt using PM can be a good example of showing us which should be the priority of the PM components to clone.
--- End quote ---
I'd suggest running without the WPS for a bit to see how useless the Presentation Manager is without it. I don't know about QT but I'd guess a lot of functionality would vanish, it's like that for most programs. Even Mozilla uses the WPS to get its list of helper applications and if you want to drag'n'drop a URL etc.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version