Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ibrahim Hakeem

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Option 2 would probably be the best choice. If you are interested in having a mirror of Hobbes oriented to the modern OS/2 user, it's important to acknowledge that the latest UniAud is not always a one-size-fits-all solution and that certain systems need a specific release in order to have working audio at all. By that definition, it can't be considered legacy if it is a core component for, by our use-case, a modern platform.

2
I know this might not be realistic (as i mentioned before, i'm not a programmer), but i just would like to know if this could be a way to get a 64-bit system:

Can there be some sort of merger between a host and a virtual machine? Maybe similar like WINOS/2 that got part of OS/2?

Maybe we could get a basic new 64-OS with only everything that is necessary to load our 32-bit-OS/2 in some sort of virtual machine in some way that you don't even realize, that we have a virtual machine.
Then we'd also need some sort of connection between that host and the guest - also in some way, that the user wouln't even realize we have actually 2 systems.
Would that be feasible or are there any technical restrictions?
Since i know, we have virtual machines worlking on 64-bit platforms, this might work. I'm just not sure, if an interaction between both worlds can be achieved...

This has been spoken about quite a bit, even in the most recent Warpstock it was stated to be wishful thinking.

3
Web applications / Re: QT5 simplebrowser
« on: June 08, 2021, 04:27:34 pm »
Echoing what others have said - I think it's more crucial than ever for marketing to be considered. That statement goes for the wider community of OS/2 developers as opposed to solely focusing on the just-as-important work from Bitwise.

On the note of fundraising - I've witnessed that charitable groups running a monthly or quarterly auto-renewing "set and forget" subscription model seem to garner a lot more success than those which only have the option for once-off donations, even if with reminders to donate again.
Additionally, perhaps it would be a good idea for every new installation of ArcaOS to have a once-off welcome screen promoting and crediting the various groups and people who have created or ported the software which help make this OS what it is today, as well as a recommendation to donate to them so they may continue their work.

One final thought on the train of attracting interest and subsequently, funding for projects: I personally have doubts that the proposed Retro-Gaming-Release of AOS will even produce the sufficient hype we need in attracting new users (consider DOSBox's prevalence and popularity + OS/2 Support). I particularly refer to the younger community, I am yet to come across an active user of ArcaOS or OS/2 in my age range as of yet (20-25) and I feel it is a market we need to work hard to target in order to ensure the longevity of this OS.

Thank you

4
Games / Re: PrBoom+
« on: June 05, 2021, 07:07:42 pm »
Very nice! I do have to ask though, does anyone know if it is possible to use Kmidi and Timidity in tandem? I feel each of them have their separate advantages.

5
I'm relieved I'm not the only one. I did some asking on the Discord server when I noticed it happening with me - the current ad layout is definitely a pain. Like Lars has said, it's gotten to the point where you need an adblocker to even be able to properly read threads from a smartphone.

6
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

7
General Discussion / Re: eCS 2.2 purchase
« on: May 18, 2021, 07:02:04 pm »
@Neil Waldhauer eCs2.2 beta 2 not work on my ibm thinkpad T42 but eCS2.2 beta 5 work.
i think its better that i buy arcaos 5.0.6 which should work on my thinkpad T42.

For the purchase I suppose it is an email with the link that we received (digital download), because in DVD, shipping is expensive to France.

I can burn the iso file with imgBurn to DVD.
The last version for ArcaOs is 5.0.6 ?

If I'm not mistaken, once you've made the purchase you will then be able to click a link to have an ISO generated for you through your orders page on your Arca Noae account. When the ISO is ready, you'll get an email notifying you and it's smooth sailing from there. I can verify that imgBurn will work just fine as I've used it to burn ArcaOS ISOs. I'm pretty sure there's even the tools to make a bootable USB in the package from Arca Noae, but I'd personally recommend going with burning it to a DVD since that option is much more straightforward.
From personal experience, when I had a T42 - I noticed that using a DVD burnt beyond 8x speed seemed to not work reliably. I'm not sure if this is a universal thing or just due to the condition of my drive, but it's worth keeping in mind.

Regarding PCMCIA cards, I don't have any knowledge on this when it comes to ArcaOS, but I'd have to assume so long as you've got the relevant drivers for whatever card you're trying to work with, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. If you are installing a DWA-610 for the sake of having WiFi, your internal card on the T42 should already be compatible. I think the XWP addon for wireless connectivity already deals with the hard stuff. Just to be clear, this addon is included.

As for USB floppy drives, I believe the feedback is mixed on them due to how many options there are with their own varied controllers. Your mileage may vary. You won't need to boot from a floppy drive to install ArcaOS though, it's bootable from the DVD drive.

8
General Discussion / Re: eCS 2.2 purchase
« on: May 18, 2021, 04:59:38 am »
Seconding Martin's quote here:
Quote
It can be also a nice exercise to install OS/2 Warp 4.52 on your T42 first, but I think you will be happier with ArcaOS.

It's not a bad idea to tool around with OS/2 Warp 4.52, but definitely avoid Ecomstation and go straight to ArcaOS, especially since you are already committed to spending the money on a new license. I'd personally recommend upgrading to something like a T61 or T400 if you intend on using the OS/2 platform for a longer period of time however.

9
With low-end Windows 9x 3d gaming being a goal wouldn't it be feasible, easier even, to just bypass VT all together? Without VT, I find that I can properly use Linux, Windows XP and to a limited "down-tuned" extent even 7 with no major performance losses on Virtualbox with the stock kernel. Keep in mind, it's not like this is going to be the next VBox so I doubt that degree of performance is even necessary.

Besides (putting technical legality aside as a whole can of worms), as good a platform as the OS4 Kernel can be, I personally feel it would be better to have it running on our stock kernel for the sake of stability and to an extent, ease-of-use.

10
Continuance from this thread. This new thread is for consistency's sake as the topic of the discussion had changed.

There has been some discussion for development of a new version of QEMU for OS/2 and a bounty for it being made. Here is the quote from my post proposing the bounty:

Quote
If anybody may be interested, I am willing to start a bounty for a well-rounded release of QEMU under the following conditions:
>Stable enough for everyday use
>Smooth Windows 95/98 emulation
>Audio, preferably SB16 compatible emulation
>Semi-decent video support (I.E, can run something like Flight Simulator 98 at low-mid settings with at least 30 to 40fps)
>A reliable GUI for configuring and launching VMs

Effectively, something that's going to be solid for low-mid range Win9x gaming.

I have a hunch this will most likely be 2.4.x or earlier. Once again like others have said, there's no need to build a newer version that's going to have more compilation related headaches - especially when modern Linux distros are still going off 2.4.x code without any complaint. I understand this will require more effort than a simple compile n' go situation especially with the desired specifications listed, but I believe there to be very viable use-case for a new and reasonably stable release of Qemu for our platform

The goal wouldn't be to replace Virtualbox, but to get up to speed for one ArcaOS's aims of being a good platform for DOS and early Windows emulation, especially in lieu of ArcaOS 5.1 hopefully being on the horizon. It would be really cool to have more usable and up-to-date software for 90's era x86 emulation. Plus I'm sure many of us still wish that this wasn't a hoax  :P

If there is enough interest for this idea, I sincerely hope we can make something of it for our platform's sake.

To get things started, I am willing to contribute 100USD to the pool which I will additionally match as a donation to Bitwise Works.

Thank you for your consideration  :)

11
Quote
I support your bounty idea. In my experience I think it will be better to find the developer first, know how much he is asking for the service and then push to get the funds.

Fantastic, I really hope we can get the ball rolling here  ;D
I'll go ahead and start a new thread as the topic of this one no longer seems relevant to the current discussion.

12
If anybody may be interested, I am willing to start a bounty for a well-rounded release of QEMU under the following conditions:
>Stable enough for everyday use
>Smooth Windows 95/98 emulation
>Audio, preferably SB16 compatible emulation
>Semi-decent video support (I.E, can run something like Flight Simulator 98 at low-mid settings with at least 30 to 40fps)
>A reliable GUI for configuring and launching VMs

Effectively, something that's going to be solid for low-mid range Win9x gaming.

I have a hunch this will most likely be 2.4.x or earlier. Once again like others have said, there's no need to build a newer version that's going to have more compilation related headaches - especially when modern Linux distros are still going off 2.4.x code without any complaint. I understand this will require more effort than a simple compile n' go situation especially with the desired specifications listed, but I believe there to be very viable use-case for a new and reasonably stable release of Qemu for our platform

The goal wouldn't be to replace Virtualbox, but to get up to speed for one ArcaOS's aims of being a good platform for DOS and early Windows emulation, especially in lieu of ArcaOS 5.1 hopefully being on the horizon. It would be really cool to have more usable and up-to-date software for 90's era x86 emulation. Plus I'm sure many of us still wish that this wasn't a hoax  :P

13
Honestly, having audio would be a massive win in of itself compared to the options we've currently got for any post Win3x emulation. I have a feeling that Qemu might also potentially be a bit faster compared to vBox.

14
I guess I should start by looking at ver 2.4.x (latest). I don't have the skills to write a kernel driver though, it would end being a port similar to what we have, hopefully without the SMP issues that Ivan reported.
The git repository is weird, with a whole bunch of submodules and I have no experience dealing with submodules so it seems that I can't simply check out the right tag. Git does make development easier, create a branch and commit changes.

Forgive my ignorance, I'm not too familiar with this end of stuff. Without a kernel driver will things like audio, networking, graphical emulation (specifically DX-style 3d rendering), etc be a possibility? Effectively - what would the limitations/expectations be?

15
I have some experience in building Qemu from qemu.org on Linux for x86 and ARM-Linux as well as for Windows via Msys2. You can also build qemu in termux on android.

It does take a fair amount of space and requirements however the executables and program with documentation is typically less than 300-500MB.

Most of the older source versions are still available via qemu.org and its is sufficient to build with older source if needed. Ie if you dont want to build ninja first.

The current version is 5.x and most Linux distros still only include 2.4.x. So there is no reason to stick to a specific version if its causing build requirement headaches.

Qemu typically needs a kernel level hypervisor or accelerator to make full use of the hosts CPU capabilities.


Thank you kindly for your input Nicolas. I did a bit of Googling and this adds up. it would appear the Qemu project switched over to Ninja as recently as version 5.2 at Dec 2020. If I'm not mistaken, any earlier versions should be compileable for OS/2 with Cmake/Sphinx. Not to mention - if most Linux distros are still running version 2.4.x, there is probably good reason for it. It would probably be easier to compile an earlier version too for what it's worth.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6