OS2 World Community Forum

OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical => Applications => Topic started by: Martin Iturbide on October 10, 2014, 12:12:55 am

Title: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 10, 2014, 12:12:55 am
Hi

I wrote this as a response to other thread, but I didn't want to hi-jack that thread. So I'm creating a new one just for the fun of the open discussion. 

I had checked a couple of sites in the past that discussed the price of eComStation. Some OS enthusiast say they want to give it a try to eComStation. But when the see the $149 for Home and Student edition price they say that it is too much for just a "wild interest". $149 it is too much for an OS that gives you a 30% chance (am I being kind?) of not running on your computer and that may be incompatible with your hardware. So, for the OS enthusiast, there is a money breaking point of how much they want to spend/risk just to try out the experience of eComStation.

If we compare eCS 2.1 $149 price against Windows, it may sound competitive:

Check out Windows prices (from some sources on the internet)
- $69.99 for DVD upgrades from Windows XP, Vista, or 7 to Windows 8 Pro
- $69.99 for a downloadable upgrade key
- $99.99 for standalone OEM version of Windows 8 (32-bit and 64-bit)
- $139.99 for standalone OEM version of Windows 8 Pro

But that was OEM, let's check out Retail:
- Standard edition - $119.99
- Pro version -  $199.99.

eCS 2.1 $149 even looks cheaper than Windows (or Windows may be overpriced), since eComStation costs more to be maintained, since it have less sales than Windows. eCS Home/Student gives you the right to be installed on 5 PCs and there is no crippled version of it, since it will be compared to the Pro version of Windows.  I can put a lot more blah, blah, but the fact is that all of this arguments are non valid arguments, since the reality is that we don't have "new" people buying eCS for individual use, not even the OS enthusiast. (I can say this, because I don't see a grow in the community)

The facts are that:
- eCS does not have updated drivers and you may not have sound or network on your computer.
- Windows keeps selling on every new machine (at least the good thing is that the PC market is coming down with it)
- Linux is good enough for an OS and it is free.
- Other experimental OS (ReactOS, HaikuOS) are available for free.

I think that eComStation needs a more aggressive pricing for people that are new to the platform and that want it for individual use. Maybe limiting it more to an specific individual non-commercial use, but giving it cheaper.  Maybe giving a $30 non-commercial individual license, without any subscription or drivers updates, will be a good breaking point for people that wants to give it a try. who knows?

Of course that there is the limitation that IBM wants his OEM fee for each license, but we don't know that agreement. I don't know if IBM is asking $1 dollar of each license or $148 :)   On the end, what is happening is that we do not have any users grow, and they will suck the money out of the legacy until the last one turn off the light.

So, I think that a money sacrifice needs to done on the license cost from Mensys/XEU. The other alternative is to continue with the same model until the last one of the corporate customer migrates to other platform and the last OS/2 user dies (For the moment no one has returned from the death to complain that eCS has no drivers - or is it that the nonliving does not use this forum? :)

Money is a resource that is required and needed, but it is useless if all the people leave and there is no one left to use the platform.  eCS needs to try to move out from the "Legacy Market" because that market is focused to "squeeze money" while it is available and later dump it. It needs to move to a different market, which is hard, but at least it needs to be tried.

This is why I think that all efforts that we made today needs to be done in a way that allows derivative works to be done in the future without the control of only one person or company........ is it the open source solution showing up again?
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Eugene Gorbunoff on October 10, 2014, 12:35:54 am
> eCS Home/Student gives you the right to be installed on 5 PCs

it's wrong

* 1 license = 1 computer

* if you need 1, 2, 3 or 4 eCS licenses  then you should buy Home/Student.

* if you need >= 5, .. 10, 20, .. licenses then you should buy Business


Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fahrvenugen on October 10, 2014, 01:14:14 am
> eCS Home/Student gives you the right to be installed on 5 PCs

it's wrong

* 1 license = 1 computer

* if you need 1, 2, 3 or 4 eCS licenses  then you should buy Home/Student.

* if you need >= 5, .. 10, 20, .. licenses then you should buy Business

Hi,

As I seem to recall the above is *almost* correct.

The last version of the eCS license that I actually took the time to read through, the license gives you the right to install it on 2 computers - 1 desktop and 1 laptop - as long as the laptop and desktop are not both in use at the same time.

Of course that may have changed with more recent versions of the license.

Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: guzzi on October 10, 2014, 02:08:34 am
The right to install. Yeah, right..... I actually only run eCS on one pc. But if had had a few more, I would not pay for additional licences. When I install win 7 on computers for other people, I buy a 'used' licence on ebay. Is that legal? I don't know and don't care. Most of the pc's I have seen in russia running windows, have a pirated version. Most here, have been delivered with windows. Most pc's not from vendors like HP, Lenovo but custom built, have 'copies' running on them. Selling os's is a dead business.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 10, 2014, 05:08:28 am
eCS Home/Student gives you the right to be installed on 5 PCs..
Sorry, my mistake. I must be confused with other thing.

Any comments on the rest?
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Jean-Yves on October 10, 2014, 10:48:39 am
Hello Martin.

I would very much like to see a non-commercial license. I'd pay $30 no problem to upgrade from 1.2R to the latest version. $50 even. The current price is very much geared towards corporates and not enthusiasts, which ultimately is a problem as it is the enthusiasts who are likely to be developing new innovations and keeping the OS fresh.

Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Eugene Gorbunoff on October 10, 2014, 11:28:13 am
Yes, there are many questions:

1)
* if you need 1 kg of apples, then you buy it for $5, if you want buy 100 kg of apples then you get a discount and spend .. $1*100
in case of eComStation, if you need more licenses then you spend more money.

* to compete with Windows.. to make company select eCS instead of Windows, the price should be .. -30% or -60% lower if compare with Windows


2) IMHO, I didn't discussed this topic with eCS people:

eComStation is not ready for selling in super-market. So, it's difficult sell it to new users, to random users. Nobody was selling eCS PC black boxes with OS/2 solutions installed.
That's why the manufacturer of OS was oriented to companies / users which were using OS/2 already. The market is limited, the quantity of users is known. N users + 12 monthes to release updates + $X from sponsors  => as result, the price of eCS should be: ...

If reduce eCS price down to $30 then.. => yes, the sellings will increase, but the budget will collapse.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Jean-Yves on October 10, 2014, 11:41:37 am
$30 would be for a non-commercial license though.

Companies would still pay the premium which they can afford.

Unless I misunderstood Martin's initial thoughts?
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 10, 2014, 04:33:22 pm
Yes, the idea is to have something cheap for the entry - noncommercial market. Something that may be limited in some way ....I prefer non-technical limited, but limited by licencing or service, like you can not use it on a company (commercial), or you will not get newer drivers subscription. But that it allows OS esthusiast to buy it to testing. It is not going be the big bang of new users for us, but it may be a smaller part of a bigger strategy.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 10, 2014, 05:58:42 pm
The other idea is a 100% free license for Students and University Research.  And about this subject I want to say that IBM used to have free for charge for Universities OS/2 Warp 4.52 under the "IBM Academic Initiative Program". On the download catalog (maybe until 2006) OS/2 Warp 4.52 and Warp Server was available for download for teachers. So that may not be as wild and one can think.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 10, 2014, 07:01:20 pm
Well I have my doubts that there will be new users which will be parts of community (new developers, customers for software etc.) anyway eCS cost 30 $ or even when it would be for free.

If a new user installs eCS he will see that a lot things are not working like on other platforms. Too many standard things are not avi or just to complicated (hell even a USB stick will not work without learning LVM and DFSEE). Nobody will do that what we bone-headed old os2 users are willing to do because we love this platform. There is no advantage in eCS or OS2 above other plaforms anymore other than these things which are relevant for old users only - who wants to run old applications and love the continuity (which are great features but only for us long time users). There are no killer apps anymore. Lot of things are outdated.


I say this beeing OS2 enthusiast and I will be the one who turn the light off (in 20 years or so) ;)
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: muffetta on October 10, 2014, 07:41:07 pm
Yes, you are right Fr4nk, and the few who try, if they are stubborn and pass the first step, then starting to appreciate so much the platform due to its characteristics of quickness, stability and lightness that despair replaces, caused by the lack of all those drivers and applications now common and standard to all other modern operating systems  :-[
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Joop on October 11, 2014, 03:59:53 pm
Price is not that important, that the computer works without problems is. With Windows a computer will work, drivers are available. Almost no help is required from internal or external helpdesk. Next the problem with compatibility with other programs, the working together problems. Price will only be a problem when licenses are not scalable, ie the license for one user will cost the same as for 100 because the license minimum is for 100 users or more. With other OS systems drivers may not be available for the systems which where bought by the company, ie lots of money is going in making the machines running. So for eCS its important that it will work and run straight out of the box on any system.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 11, 2014, 04:57:12 pm
I still don't want to think that the only future of the platform is to be part of a legacy that should be squezzed until and last coporate customer leave and that our destined future is for Fr4nk to turn off the light at the end :)

I really want to give it a try and at least share some ideas of what can we do about the future of the platform.

I think that reducing the price of eComStation is not the final solution, but I think it can be a smaller part of a bigger plan. So the idea is not to see it it binary and say "Reducing the price is the only thing we need todo to save the world"...no. It has to be seen as one thing that "adds up".
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 13, 2014, 08:36:56 am
Quote
[...] at least share some ideas of what can we do about the future of the platform.

- set priorities and sort important things
- make it running perfectly on a reference hardware (support a small set of hardware but then perfectly)
- make killer apps (niche apps that don't exist on other platforms)
- get back to stability instead of desktop enhancers
- don't port 1000 (qt) apps and don't test but port 2 apps and make it big
- @developers: make as much as possible software free (Open Source or even freeware)
- @developers.ru don't try to sell mini apps which are better and free on all other platforms for 20 years.
- avoid things like "you can only use this software when you're a member of my club"

If it gets competitive to other platforms you can drew the price of course.

The first things should be to hold last users/2. Even more worse than no new users are less users.

I agree 100%  about squeezing the last guys - this will disperse users.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: eirik on October 13, 2014, 10:00:55 am
Hi,

one way to increase the number of persons who wants to try eCS is to have a 30 day free period where people can install and test.  Many software companies use this approach successfully to avoid loosing potential users.  More eCS users is key for the future development of eCS.

Otherwise, I agree with much of what Fr4nk writes on prioritizing work. The key issue here is drivers, where net access (particularly WiFi) is where eCS struggles the most.  Qt apps are nice, but without proper drivers, people will not even get to that stage.

In economics where I work we have a saying "Poor money drives good money away".  Attempts to sell apps that are available for free is pretty close to this economics saying.  Point well taken Fr4nk.

Eirik
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 13, 2014, 05:21:54 pm
Quote
[...] at least share some ideas of what can we do about the future of the platform.

- set priorities and sort important things
- make it running perfectly on a reference hardware (support a small set of hardware but then perfectly)
- make killer apps (niche apps that don't exist on other platforms)
- get back to stability instead of desktop enhancers
- don't port 1000 (qt) apps and don't test but port 2 apps and make it big
- @developers: make as much as possible software free (Open Source or even freeware)
- @developers.ru don't try to sell mini apps which are better and free on all other platforms for 20 years.
- avoid things like "you can only use this software when you're a member of my club"


Thanks for sharing your ideas, those are very good.

In my wild dreams I will like to suggest a development strategy based in 2 pillars.

Pillar 1: Short Term Strategy:
- Drivers  - (Have a good reference hardware for eCS/OS2 to run)
- Stability
- Porting apps
- Find Killer Apps

Pillar 2: Long Term Strategy:
- Clone replacements for OS/2 close source components like Presentation Manager, SOM, WPS, Loader, etc.
- Fix the things that are not broken.... yes, fix the things that works.... Start experimenting replacing things. Ex: REXX vs. Regina REXX,  try to replace OS/2 close source DLLs produced but OSFree. This is very polemic since there is resistance to do modify the legacy, but it has to be done. The first tries will not be something stable, but if it is open it will allow to be improved over time.
- Some focus on replacing every single IBM close source EXE. Caring about little "quickwins" like "hey!!.. today I replaced bldlevel.exe with an open source one".

But the two pillars needs to be under an open source basis. It is not worthy to support "future abandonware". It is good that developers asks for money to do things, but it is not good to produce close work that can not allow derivative works. The idea is that things produced on the "Pillar 1: Short Term Strategy:" can also be reused for the second one.

About fixing what is not broken: I remember that some guy from an evil corporation told me "Good code produces a user community, bad code produces a developer community". I think that our main issue is that OS/2 is good code, it still runs after 12 years of not touching the PM, SOM, WPS, Kernel, Loader code.  That made us stop worrying about those components because it is good enough for our needs, but when some of it got broken or misbehave the real problems starts. The developers needs to do tricks to keep applications running, without any possibilities of fixing the source of the problem. That is why we need to move slowly caring about cloning the things that are working.

But there is also the part that can do the "Non-Developers".
- Share content/articles under a license that allows derivative works (OS2World Wiki, EDM/2 with Creative Commons)
- Help document the software and share the documentation with the public.
- Upload source code on the Github for other developers to find out what we have to create derivative works.
- Post pictures/screenshots/experiences on social networks and on the community.
- Keep collaborating on forums.
- Help posting news and team up with developers to help them manage announcements and requirements of the community.

The thing is not to leave everything for developers, the trick is for everyone to collaborate for our common benefit.
And any efforts that we made should be focused that can be added or included on something bigger, that's why I think open source/Creative commons are important.

Regards
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 14, 2014, 08:18:46 am
Well good ideas but if you make big plans (like rewrite the whole os) you need to consider the resources! Who should do all that work? It is  Here are only a handful of developers left while on other platforms like Linux are 100.000 of developers and some big companies behind.

So we need to stick to important things and don't start too many construction zones especially where things are working. Focus on things we need today and for next 3 years. I understand your point but it is 20 years too late. You say 'long term' but computers are a moving target. E.g. look at ACPI, it tooks years and it is even not ready and will never be ready as along as hardware changes.

Btw if you want rewrite os2 it would be even easier to write PM/WPS for a *x system and put it on top, like apple did with their system.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 14, 2014, 01:53:36 pm
Hi Fr4nk.

For the moment it is only an idea that needs support and a lot of work. But the thing is that making OS/2 clone is not just having the resources and clone everything, it is a process that will take time. I want to set a goal for the future, even if it sounds to crazy right now, otherwise our future is to be shut down when the last of corporate user migrates to other platform. So, if you want to dream, you need to dream big, if at the end get only PM cloned, that will be success too.

If I would have the resources I will only focus on cloning PM, SOM and WPS running on eCS first. PM looks as the priority today (under the 2nd pillar)... or course that there are more short term priorities like drivers, but I think that companies and the community needs to care about the long term. 

Plus, the idea is to grow, we will not be a 100K dev community in one day, but we need to show progress (and good attitude) for other developers to join.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Sergey Posokhov on October 14, 2014, 04:11:52 pm
I'm not sure that IBM would allow someone else to make a clone...
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 14, 2014, 07:17:56 pm
Hi Sergey.

I don't think IBM care, and making a clone is not illegal. Please remember that Linux started as a Mimix clone, which is a Unix clone.  Linux lift up as a product by itself, but being a clone was on his origins.  And we have ReactOS which is a Windows 32bits clone, and I haven't hear that Microsoft is suing them (because they don't see $$). 

IBM will not move a finger, not even for suing if it not a good business. For example a ZOS clone will freak out IBM because it is still a good source of money for them (like happened before (http://www.informationweek.com/ibm-sues-maker-of-intel-based-mainframe-clones/d/d-id/1049524?) - They sued Platform Solutions Inc. (2006) and on 2008 they bought it. (https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/24560.wss) ....and the problem was that IBM didn't gave permission to run ZOS on their hardware, so it is not the same as cloning) Thinking about IBM should not be an stopper for cloning PM/SOM/WPS.

Regards.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Andi B. on October 15, 2014, 10:47:45 am
Compaq cloned the IBM PC Bios (in contrary to other PC makers which more or less illegally copied it) and IBM could do nothing against it.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: eirik on October 15, 2014, 09:28:16 pm
There is an old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".  Fr4nk got it spot on - the scarce developer resources we have should be applied where demand is most pressing.  Based on past posts and comments, that appears to be drivers (wired, wireless, screens), porting key software (like continue developement of Open Office, ThunderBird and Firerox for eCS) and mulitmedia (in particular video which is becoming more common on the net).

Comments on my "priority list" based on my recollection only -- anyone with a better memory than me?  Or maybe we should redo a quick web-survey to see what preferences people have?

Eirik
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 15, 2014, 11:34:30 pm
I agree that the scarce developer resources need to be used in a better way. Despite what some seem to think, RPM/YUM is wasting a tremendous amount of developer time, for very little gain (in spite of what they say). Recently, it seems that RPM/YUM is contributing to DLL H_LL, not fixing it, as promised.

I agree that driver development is at, or very near, the top of the list. The heavy lifting for wired network adapter drivers has been done (as promised), but NOBODY has picked it up from there. Paul Smedley did do some work on that, and managed to make updates for the Realtek, and Intel, devices, but nothing else has been added to the list. I took a look at doing some of that, but I cannot get the current drivers to build. Something is missing, and I think it is something that I cannot get (sorry, I don't remember the details). It also seems that Wireless drivers are under construction, but delayed because of other things that are happening. The longer it takes, more people will be forced to abandon the platform, and they are not likely to return.

I also have a Lenovo ThinkPad L530, where UNIAUD will make noises, but nothing like they should be. I am not too concerned about that, because I didn't get a laptop to play music (they aren't that good at it, even in windows).

OpenOffice seems to be under some sort of development. Firefox seems to be progressing, but far to slowly (partly because there are not enough developers working on it). Thunderbird, and Seamonkey, should follow Firefox, since they are from the same code base.

I am not too sure what is meant by "Multimedia". PM123 seems to work well for audio, and VLC seems to work with video (I haven't tried streaming video).

Surveys have been done too often, and always seem to say much the same thing. Basically what has already been mentioned here.

The cost of eCS has been mentioned, and is probably the main reason why we see few new users. I doubt if anything can be done about that, since it would cost IBM a penny or two to get the lawyers to change the rules, and Mensys needs to cover their costs. IMO Mensys has done a pretty good job of managing all of that, and getting updates done, to keep OS/2 actually working. Now Arca Noae seems to be taking on part of the support (although the specifics have not, yet, been made clear). As usual, there are not enough resources (including people, and money), to do what needs to be done.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 16, 2014, 12:01:48 am
Hi

The old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is good for some things, but I think we need to bend that rule for some things.

We have a lot of "Short Term necessities", drivers, apps, etc. But they are only short term, after four years we are going to have that same necessities again, because hardware will change and applications will be updated. While we cover the "Short Term necessities" more users are going to leave the platform because some do not see a future for it. This happens because the copyright limitations we have with IBM close source binaries and that there is no way to improve some components of OS/2 (because only IBM has the source code of it). For example Presentation Manager, GPI, REXX, SOM, WPS are abandonware right now, nobody is coding them, nobody can fix them, only do workarounds.

If we want to really look in the future we also need to start worrying about a "Long Term Strategy". I personally believe that a long term strategy is to try to clone the things that are working but that are abandonware like PM, WPS, SOM, etc, etc. Making them open source will open the doors for other people to join freely to the platform and collaborate.

It means to start worrying about the things are working but are close source, and how they will be replaced in the future. It does not mean "let's stop everything and just exclusively worry about this" (this is not binary). The idea is to start having conscious that we need to clone PM, WPS, SOM, etc... before they break complete without a way to fix them, or before we loose all of the people of the community and Fr4nk turn off the light :)

I don't want it to sound to easy, because it is not, but our "short term necessities"  does not allows us to see a future for the platform.  There was some spark to try clone more things with Voyager and OSFree on the past, but now I can not find it anymore. I blame myself in part for supporting them more in those days.... they saw a future a possible for the platform at that time while I didn't.

I just hope that this spark can be ignited on the companies that are still making some money with OS/2 and on some developers. It is important to also start thinking on those components, even if those are still working today.

Regards
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Dave Yeo on October 16, 2014, 01:31:36 am
Compaq cloned the IBM PC Bios (in contrary to other PC makers which more or less illegally copied it) and IBM could do nothing against it.

That was in the era of no software patents so all they had to do was prove they reversed engineered it instead of copying it which just meant documenting the process very well.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 16, 2014, 08:01:25 am
Quote
If we want to really look in the future we also need to start worrying about a "Long Term Strategy". I personally believe that a long term strategy is to try to clone the things that are working but that are abandonware like PM, WPS, SOM, etc, etc. Making them open source will open the doors for other people to join freely to the platform and collaborate.

The main problem with that, is that every resource is working flat out, just to try to stay where we are now. There are no people, and no money, to do any more. Taking resources out of the current mix, to even think about most of what you propose will end OS/2 sooner, rather than later. If you take even one knowledgeable person off of driver development, to put them on the problem of trying to define the WPS (for example). we will lose even more ground in driver development. Without drivers, OS/2 and eCS, cannot use new hardware. Without hardware to run on, the user is forced to run it in a virtual machine. When you do that, you might as well pick a host that will already run what you need, and use OS/2 only for those things that the host system can't do. After a while, maintaining a virtual machine becomes a chore that is no longer necessary.

The bottom line is that the "long term strategy" is to make OS/2 (whatever it may be called), last as long as possible. There  is no hope that it can last beyond being useful, other than as a footnote in history. DOS has already passed that stage. Some people still use it, but not enough to bother counting them. DOS has been cloned, and expanded, but it still isn't used much, and DOS is a LOT easier to clone than OS/2. The amazing thing is that OS/2 is still viable, even with no serious development for too many years. Those who choose to work on it are doing wonderful work, but they cannot perform miracles, and they cannot be working on two projects at the same time.

The other side of the equation is that hardware, as we (and OS/2) know it, is going to go away sometime in the next few years. Your average cell phone is now capable of doing almost everything that a desktop computer can do (my new cell phone has a quad core processor). Why would anybody buy a desktop computer? That, in turn, will drive up the cost of desktop computing to the point where there isn't going to be enough market for anybody to bother building desktop machines. Servers that are useable as a desktop machines are well on their way out of existence, being replaced by the "cloud", which requires large amounts of storage and processor power (far more than any desktop user could ever dream of using). That too will drive up the cost, because there will be no need to have enough machines to make it economical to build them. Of course, OS/2 will live on in old hardware, as long as it will still run. Will it be useful? Probably not any more than DOS is today. There will also be an accelerating exodus, of developers and users, as the old hardware, and software, become less, and less, useful.

The light may remain on, for many years yet, but to accomplish a clone of OS/2, would require many hundreds of millions of dollars, and many hundreds of developers. We have little hope of getting enough people interested, even if somebody donated the money. I suspect that those who would be willing to tackle the software development, would come from the Linux world, and they already think they know more about software than IBM did (and that may be true, today), so they would be reluctant to try to reproduce what IBM  produced, all those many years ago. At best, you would end up with a kludge that might look like OS/2, but it would probably not have the solid base that we know, and love. Even if they do reproduce OS/2, it is not suitable to run on a "wristwatch computer" (which I expect would be common by the time the task was accomplished). Even Linux, and windows, are not suitable for technology like that. Something new will be developed (perhaps that should be the target of your quest), making all of the current software, and hardware, obsolete. All we can hope for, is that whoever does it will plan very carefully, and make it much better than what we have today. So far, I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel. Even if I did, it would be unclear whether the light is an approaching train, or clear blue sky.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Dave Yeo on October 16, 2014, 08:27:44 am
To add to what Doug said, the desktop itself is moving away from being OS/2 compatible. Hard drives have grown to big for the old way of partitioning, which has led to new ways to boot an OS. In theory we can adapt with new drivers but it would be a big job by itself, especially since I believe the kernel itself contains some of the functionality that allows booting.
Even worse for us is the move to 64bit computing. Needed programs such as the browser are growing and eventually won't fit into a 32 bit address space, we're already close to the limit. The office suite is likely going in the same direction. Even things like video are starting to move that way. I loosely follow X264 development and they don't have much interest in supporting 32bit, especially as the newer processors have extensions that work much better on 64bit CPUs,  use the various SSE implementations for math instead of the primitive math co-processor is one example. Another is AVX which our kernel will never support as bigger registers need to be saved when doing a context switch, and once again the 64bit version is much more superiour to the 32 bit implementation. And 64 bit CPUs have totally dropped support for 16 bit code when in 64 bit mode so not only the operating system would need rewriting but most every device driver.
It has been a good run and there are a few years left but not many for our 1990 technology.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 16, 2014, 03:08:16 pm
So, the strategy is "give me drivers now, because I know that I will drop the platform eventually" "We are doomed anyway" "There is not future".

For the moment I keep seeing projects like ReactOS and HaikuOS that are acomplishing more in open source cloning than us. Where do they get developers? Where do they get money? They have the same issues.. market drifting away from PCs, limited resources, no marketing.... but they keep going, why? It is just easy to put your arms down and do not think about this.

Again, this is not about taking away all the resoures to clone. This is about making every effort to "add on" to a common goal of being a free (as in freedom) platform.
Let's make it little steps, like making the little bldlevel.exe replacement open source and adding on.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 16, 2014, 05:57:36 pm
Quote
So, the strategy is "give me drivers now, because I know that I will drop the platform eventually" "We are doomed anyway" "There is not future".

You are catching on. Unless somebody drops about 500 million dollars into the pot, it isn't possible (be realistic). Even if that does happen, you are not going to find developers who even know what OS/2 is, never mind try to duplicate it. Then, there is the problem that OS/2, as it exists today, is not going to be useful on something like a cell phone (existing cell phones will be obsolete in 5 years). It would be easier, and more effective, to develop a whole new OS, aimed at hardware that will exist in another 5 years (it will take at least that long to create a prototype, and that will be a moving target).

Quote
I keep seeing projects like ReactOS and HaikuOS that are acomplishing more in open source cloning than us.

Are they? I don't see users rushing out to use them. The main "problem" with both of them, is that they are trying to be something else, that already exists. By the time they get there, the target has changed (we have that problem too).

Quote
This is about making every effort to "add on" to a common goal of being a free (as in freedom) platform.

Nice thoughts, but not necessarily a good way to go. Linux already has that locked up. Why would anybody want to start over with a 1990s OS, when they can jump to Linux. Sure there are a few things that OS/2 can do, that have not been implemented in Linux, but the developers are free to do what they want, and there are enough of them, with financial support, to get it done. Since nobody has bothered to make WPS for Linux, I have to assume that there is little demand for it. My guess would be that about 50% of what the WPS can do, is never used anyway. I know that I don't use much of what it can do. I doubt if the remaining community could actually define all of what the WPS can do.

Quote
Let's make it little steps, like making the little bldlevel.exe replacement open source and adding on.

That tool is useful when programmers include the information in their work (not all that difficult, as I understand it). In fact, the program could likely be implemented in REXX (which is automatically "open source"), but I fail to see the point in creating a new tool that does exactly what the old tool does. If it is to be done, one would need to clearly define the function, AND, whatever new things it should do. Then, you would need to convince programmers to use it (many don't even use what already exists). The EXCEPTQ tool seems to be catching on with programmers, but only because it benefits them. It does nothing for the average user.

Quote
I believe the kernel itself contains some of the functionality that allows booting.

I think that the QSINIT project may be part of the answer. It would take some hard work, but it may be possible to build a "front end" loader that will hide the modern ways of doing things, and implement a translation layer in the background for OS/2 to use (effectively, run a VM in QSINIT). QSINIT has already implemented a RAMDISK that uses memory above the 4 GB mark, that OS/2 can use. A more defined API could make that memory available to programs that are written to use it. It may even be possible to replace the current memory allocation API so that old programs will use it, without even knowing about it. Don't waste valuable developer time re-inventing the wheel. Add what we need now, and use the old code while it still works. Rewriting the old code, using the same restrictions that exist today, accomplishes very little anyway.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 16, 2014, 09:24:05 pm
Look the latest Haiku OS post on their site 2014-10-10:

Quote
The Haiku project is participating in this year's "Semester of Code" (SoC) of the European VALS project. The SoC is similar to Google's GSoC, but without the financial incentive and more emphasis on the educational side.

Its goal is to connect higher education students with open source projects to introduce them to the cooperative nature of working within a group on a bigger project. For Haiku, besides potentially extending its feature set, it's another opportunity to spark the interest of new, eager developers with a chance to gain future regular contributors.

ReactOS is at least tried to do something different:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop)

On the other hand:
- "We don't have a future" is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Why bother"  is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Be realistic, we are doomed and our destiny is to switch platform"  is not an strategy or an idea.

Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: guzzi on October 16, 2014, 10:23:42 pm
Look the latest Haiku OS post on their site 2014-10-10:

Quote
The Haiku project is participating in this year's "Semester of Code" (SoC) of the European VALS project. The SoC is similar to Google's GSoC, but without the financial incentive and more emphasis on the educational side.

Its goal is to connect higher education students with open source projects to introduce them to the cooperative nature of working within a group on a bigger project. For Haiku, besides potentially extending its feature set, it's another opportunity to spark the interest of new, eager developers with a chance to gain future regular contributors.

ReactOS is at least tried to do something different:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop)

On the other hand:
- "We don't have a future" is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Why bother"  is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Be realistic, we are doomed and our destiny is to switch platform"  is not an strategy or an idea.

It would be great if we could get students to do semothing with eCS. And I do agree that "we don't have a future" is not exactly a constructive attitude. The reality is that indeed the platforrm, pc, that our OS runs on, is rapidly changing and indeed, disappearing. So, it will take more than an open source clone to preserve OS/2. It will need to be adapted to more modern hardware and ways of using computers/hardware. I personally don't see the desktop disappearing very soon, but it -is- disappearing rapidly in private use. Eventually, OS/2 will die. As has DOS, Amiga, Commodore 64. And as Windows will, and as Android will. Some os's are practically stillborn, like Sailfish (sadly). It's life. Nothing is forever. I'll leave it to Frank to switch the light off, but after he has done so, the lights of my hard drive will probably light up the room a few times more until the hardware finally gives up the ghost).
Strategies... I actually have no idea what it will take to keep OS/2 alive as long as possible, or to make it evolve eevn into something nw and modern. Drivers to keep it running -now-, for sure. A new approach, open source replacement would certainly extend the life of it. I do agree with Martin that development of one does not preclude the development of the other. It is merely a matter of attracting people to spend time on it. How to do that? Maybe we van learn from Haiku and similar. But it won't be easy to convert an OS from a previous age of computing into an interesting project for students.....
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 16, 2014, 11:53:17 pm
Quote
On the other hand:
- "We don't have a future" is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Why bother"  is not an strategy or an idea.
- "Be realistic, we are doomed and our destiny is to switch platform"  is not an strategy or an idea.

I will point out that I did not say "We don't have a future". We can have a future, IF, and only IF, every user pulls some of the load. It will also be necessary to think "outside of the box" to accomplish a lot of what is necessary NOW. We need too many things TODAY, to go wasting time "fixing" things that are not, yet, broken. In case you haven't noticed, new software NEVER works properly the first time, so we will need more time, and effort, to "fix" things that never should have been done in the first place.

I will also point out that "Why bother" is a question. If something is working, it makes no sense to expend very valuable resources to "fix it". Other things need attention, and the resources are VERY limited.

I also didn't say "Be realistic, we are doomed and our destiny is to switch platform". I did say "Be realistic". If you insist on wasting developers time, trying to clone something like the WPS, you will take away from far more important projects, and that will very quickly destroy what we have left. If anything, we need developers to expand the capabilities (and I don't believe that it is necessary to mess with the kernel to do that) so that new software can be supported. One of the BIG problems that we have is that most "new software" is coming from other sources. There is very little "original" work any more. That, in itself, is not bad, but it does mean that the majority of our software developers are not getting the experience necessary to do original development. Without that experience, it will be extremely difficult to expand the platform, or even try to clone it. Of course, working on an OS is not the same as working on a standard program. "Switching to another platform" will happen, no matter what anybody does. Eventually, something better will arrive, and/or OS/2 will become impossible to use. Every day, that time comes closer. Some will need to change directions before others (many have done so already), but it will happen (even windows, and Linux, face the same fate). The time for "cloning", or "open sourcing", has also passed (at least 10 years ago). Not only has the critical mass of users (and even more so, knowledgeable developers) diminished below the level required to keep it going, the target has also moved further away. Sorry, but all we can do, is try to keep up as best we can, and that will require every user to do their part. As we lose more users (and that will happen), we will fall further behind, until it just won't work any more.

As I said, it is time to start thinking "outside of the box", to gain ground. The other option is to continue as we are. It is too late for other strategies. Not too long ago, it was argued that it was "impossible" for OS/2 to use memory above the 4 GB mark. The QSINIT RAMDISK has shown that it is possible, and it has paved the way for further development down that road. All we need is for somebody to expand on that development, and make that extra memory usable for other things. That would make a lot of things possible, that can't be considered now. QSINIT has also solved a few problems with memory fragmentation that has left the OS2LDR program baffled. I do know that some of the very best OS/2 developers looked at modifying OS2LDR, and left it as being a VERY difficult job. I think that QSINIT (source available) holds the key to overcoming some of the worst problems with trying to keep the current OS/2 going, for a while. Somebody should be looking at that, not wasting time trying to clone things that are not broken.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 17, 2014, 12:28:50 am
I will point out that I did not say "We don't have a future". We can have a future, IF, and only IF, every user pulls some of the load.

Doug, I only read the positive things of you reply :)  I prefer to move on on this discussion, we all set our points.

Why don't you list your ideas of "thinking outside the box"? For example:

- Putting focus on QSINIT is a very good idea. Improving it to replace the original OS2LDR is a very positive project .  But also remember that having QSINIT source code public it does not make it open source. Its license says it is freeware and can not be used for commercial use, so it is against open source (and free software). 

What else do you think are "thinking outside the box" projects/priorities for this platform?
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Dave Yeo on October 17, 2014, 03:19:19 am
Look the latest Haiku OS post on their site 2014-10-10:
...
ReactOS is at least tried to do something different:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thorium/thorium-core-cloud-desktop)

We're back to the original subject. BEOS was available for free for years and most everyone owns Windows.
Perhaps if IBM had made OS/2 freely available back in '98 we'd have more developers but as long as it's a pricey purchase we're not going to attract many users or developers.
Besides I've never known anyone who was using Haiku as there main machine. When I see people posting patches for Haiku, they're always using a Mac email client. Beos was always more of a hobbyist platform, even back when it was the Bebox.
 
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 17, 2014, 07:51:14 am
This is turning into some kind of philosophical discussion. But making plans is one thing, realize things is a completely other thing.

I think the desktop PC will not be replaced. It will stay for all people who wants more than you can do on a small screen and a touch display. Smartphones and tablets are new mainstream platforms and some people will not use Desktop PCs anymore but a lot of people will. Imagine to do DTP on a tablet. I tried to feed my blog in my holidays from a smartphone. Even I had a real external keyboard - it was pain in the neck. Mobile devices lack the comfort and ergonomics you have with a big screen, a mouse and and a keyboard. If mobile devices want to replace PCs they have to be somethings like the Desktop PC.

And I think there are some more possibilities between "being doomed" and "rewrite the whole system".

We can add things. We can replace single components. We can patch some things. We can build bridges and we could use layers.

If we don't get this right there is no need to discuss a rewrite of the whole system.


And Mart no offense but "rewrite the OS and turn it open source" is not an idea - it is a wish - like world peace or to build the Cheops pyramid. Nothing wrong to have this wish. But this is easy. You need ideas to make it happen. Good ideas consider resources or how to get them. Ideas for concrete solutions, how to get money and developers. And this is difficult.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 17, 2014, 06:12:14 pm
And Mart no offense but "rewrite the OS and turn it open source" is not an idea - it is a wish - like world peace or to build the Cheops ...

Fr4nk there is a phrase that says "when you dream, you dream big". It is not a wish, it is "Utopian Goal". Just like when the GNU community and Linux users dreamed one day of being a full Unix replacement and a solid operating system.

We can add things. We can replace single components. We can patch some things. We can build bridges and we could use layers.
This is good. Which are the components? tell me your "wish list" on the "adding things or replacing single components" priority. Which is the specific things that needs to be prioritized? (in your opinion).

Regards
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 17, 2014, 06:49:23 pm
Quote
Why don't you list your ideas of "thinking outside the box"?

I have been doing that. Some time ago, I was told that PAE memory access was "impossible". Now, thanks to the QSINIT project, we have a RAMDISK that can use the memory above the 4 GB mark. That has the basis of creating an API to be able to access that memory for other programs to use. It likely could not be used with shared memory, but I see no reason why private memory could not use it.

There are a few other possibilities, but creating a virtual machine type of environment for OS/2 to run in is probably the most likely to work. It doesn't need to be a full VM, it just needs to capture the parts that OS/2 has trouble with, and convert them to something that OS/2 understands, while operating the real hardware. I am sure that that is not as simple as it sounds, but it should be possible. If it is done properly, multiple VMs should also be possible. The QSINIT project currently runs a couple of simple games, or the new OS/2 loader, then frees the memory for other things. Some sort of stay resident program would need to be developed to make it look like an "old style" machine to OS/2, while operating things like large disks, or unknown video. I suspect (guessing) that the VBoxDrv.sys could be a base for that (although that may not be necessary, as long as the system still supports classic BIOS). It is likely that the QSINIT operating system would also need some serious expansion to accommodate some of it.

You need to remember that QSINIT is really a mini OS, and it can be programmed to do what is required. Easy? No. Possible? Yes. It just needs the right person to spend a LOT of time doing it. "So simple a child could do it. Child sold separately." (Sorry, I couldn't resist).  ;D

At the moment, I see a requirement to interface to new, large, disks. If a QSINIT (stay resident) program could capture the raw disk access, and tweak what OS/2 sees, to look "normal", while translating the access to something that can access the real disk, most things should work. The large (say 16 TB) disk would need to present itself as multiple, smaller (2 GB, or less), disks to OS/2. Or, better, create a 2 TB, or less, partition, and present that to OS/2 as a "normal" disk (multiple partitions = multiple disks to OS/2, and JFS can concatenate multiple disks into a single volume, up to whatever the limit is - 64 TB??). Of course, there is still the problem with trying to create boot partitions on disks that are larger than about 500 GB, so it would be good to create a 500 GB partition, and present that to OS/2 as a 500 GB disk (in many cases, that should be sufficient for the whole OS/2 system anyway). Since it would use RAW disk access, there should be no problem with format, internal (to OS/2) partitions, or things like EAs. The RAW access doesn't know about things like that anyway. Linux, windows, etc would probably "see" the partitions as "unknown", but even that could be tweaked to prevent them from trying to use them.

Just thinking out loud...   8)
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 17, 2014, 07:42:01 pm
Quote
I think the desktop PC will not be replaced. It will stay for all people who wants more than you can do on a small screen and a touch display.

I think it is already happening. Why would anybody want a full size PC (or even one of those mini boxes), when all they need is a screen, keyboard, and mouse, that will work with their cell phone (or wrist computer or???)? Bluetooth already supports some of that. I have seen a full size, full function, keyboard that rolls up so that it would fit inside of your average coffee cup (sticking out the top). I think it was wireless USB, but even if it isn't, it could be made wireless, or use Bluetooth. Keyboards may be on the way out anyway. I can simply talk to my new cell phone, and it converts voice to text. I agree that that may not be ideal for doing things like spread sheets, or programming, but it could be done. If a mini HDMI connector is added to the phone, it could use any modern TV as a full size (or larger) screen. Convert that to Bluetooth, or some other wireless method, and it would just happen. Eventually, some manufacturer is going to do it. Now, what do you need a desktop computer for? No market = no manufacturing. No manufacturing = no source for such a thing. Of course somebody may build a full size PC, for whatever it costs them plus profit. We will be back to needing a $10,000 (today) computer to even think about running OS/2. Those who have no other choice will pay for it. Your average user will throw up their hands and say "enough, I'm outa here".

Quote
"rewrite the OS and turn it open source" is not an idea - it is a wish"

I agree. I can have an "idea" to travel to the far end of the universe, but that is just a "wish" because it is not possible. Martin, your "idea" is much the same. It is a "wish" because it is not possible.

Quote
We can add things. We can replace single components. We can patch some things. We can build bridges and we could use layers.

Spot on, but you left out implementing "work arounds". "Layers" could include building OS/2 interfaces to the hardware, that OS/2 has no need to know about. See my suggestion about trapping the RAW disk access, and converting it to whatever is needed on both ends of the conversion. I am pretty sure that other things could be done the same way. QSINIT has paved the way, and would seem to be one way of doing that.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 17, 2014, 08:38:33 pm

This is good. Which are the components? tell me your "wish list" on the "adding things or replacing single components" priority. Which is the specific things that needs to be prioritized? (in your opinion).

Well, I use os/2 (eCS) now for around 20 years. And I have to say my current system, is the best os2 system I ever had during this time.

I'm using a Intel 2700MUD board with DuoCore 2 x 2,1 GHz, onboard graphics and lan.

Here are some details:
http://www.intel.de/content/www/de/de/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/desktop-board-d2700mud.html
http://www.cartft.com/catalog/il/1224

Its a fanless and silent device. I have 4 GB RAM and I use SSD harddisks. Boot time <30sec. USB, LAN and sound is working.

4 GB RAM are more than enough and SSDs are far away from 2 TB limit.


The thing is I used Win and OS2 on one computer years ago and then I also had to choose hardware for both, Win and OS2 or eCS. And this caused trouble. Since some years I just use 2 computers so I'm able to use hardware that doen't need to care about Windows or other systems. And eCS needs no highend hardware I can use a dualcore system with very good performance. For Win/Lin I just use a second computer, but actually I use Win only for some games - I do all work on eCS.


I use eCS on a daily base and I run my business on it.


So at this moment I'm doing pretty fine. Of course there are some things which could be better - and of course there should be a future.

I would like to have better video play support. Holger wrote on os2.org that hes working on bug fixes in Presentation Manager DLLs to make this happen (some VLC problems on multi core systems result from PM bugs and not from VLC itself). Thats damn great. So my first which is a fixed PM and my second thing is a fixed VLC aswell. In general I wish a stable system.


Another thing really bothers me is that I can't read USB sticks (and other devices) if a mate comes around and hes using Win, Lin or Mac. The USB Sticks will be recognized as super floppies and then they don't work without to be partioned and format on os2. There are lot of barriers using USB devices. This should be easier to change data between systems. Same problem for USB mp3 players, cameras, sd cards etc.pp. Generally the combination of USB support and files systems should be much better.

I would also have to better font rendering, better font support with full TrueType and OpenType for usage on screen and print - incl. embedding TT and OT fonts into PDF files using ePDF/Ghostscript. Gostscript supports it but our print system does not (I dont know situation on cups I never - I used it).

A problem I see coming around in near future might be Firefox since the performance of FF is getting slower and slower. This seems to be problem of FF itself and not of the port - FF just tuns into blown software. There are also problems with server scripts and JavaScript. It works ok at this moment (thanks to bitwise) but my computer might be too slow in near future. And new computers leads to new problems. So of course my which is in general good hardware support (a wide field for sure). I don't know what kind of hardware we will have in 5 years so it is hard to say what we need.

Maybe we will need a new TCPIP stack for the next IP, maybe old IPv will be supported aswell.

Other things I would like to have are things on application layer. I would like to have things like DVDFab, a fixed Maul DTP, some missing features at Mesa.

Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 18, 2014, 02:26:53 am
Quote
Another thing really bothers me is that I can't read USB sticks (and other devices) if a mate comes around and hes using Win, Lin or Mac. The USB Sticks will be recognized as super floppies and then they don't work without to be partioned and format on os2. There are lot of barriers using USB devices. This should be easier to change data between systems. Same problem for USB mp3 players, cameras, sd cards etc.pp. Generally the combination of USB support and files systems should be much better.

It occurs to me that the "large floppy" problem might be fixable by using a device filter (*.FLT) to detect the problem, and put the LVM stuff in front of the drive (but not on the drive), so that LVM will see what it wants, without messing with the drive itself. This would not let you use specific drive letters for the device, but it should work with the drive letter that gets automatically assigned.

Quote
I would also have to better font rendering

I need to ask what: What is wrong with it? I find font rendering to be excellent. It is never perfect (even with Windows, or Linux), because of the nature of the devices that render them. Pixels are of a fixed size, and there isn't much you can do about that, other than to use the settings that the device was designed to use. Most of the time, the visual problems are caused by using a VGA connection, where the device needs to convert the analogue VGA signals to digital. That never works quite right. DVI, on the other hand, always gets the dots lined up properly. There is still some mismatch where characters go around corners, because you can't use part of a dot. Printing has always had that problem because it has always used dots. High resolution is the best answer to those problems.

Quote
I dont know situation on cups I never - I used it

You, and everybody else who has a printer, should try CUPS, even if your printer is not supported. It seems that CUPS is the only hope that we have for future printer support. You don't have to actually use it, you can have multiple drivers installed for the same printer, so you can use the one that works, and see if you can get the CUPS driver to work. When more people try it, and report problems, there is a better chance that problems will get fixed, and it will support more printers in the future. From what I have seen, what gets supported depends a lot on what Apple decides to support, and there are problems when the printer manufacturer supplies a proprietary module to make it work (never supplied for OS/2, and we are not able to "port" them).

Quote
This seems to be problem of FF itself and not of the port

In fact, the current port (FF 24.8.1) is working well. It loads a little slower than the windows equivalent, but once it is operating, it seems to be about the same as on windows. I think it has not been optimized for performance, and still has some debug code in it. Of course, you are right that it is bloatware, and that is also true on all platforms. Older hardware will have problems, unless there is enough memory to keep it from swapping. Otherwise, it seems to be okay. If you are still using old hardware, you probably need to use an older Firefox, but that introduces the possibility that malware might do something bad. That is probably not as dangerous as on windows, but there is still an exposure, and some of the newest tricks may not work right.

Quote
Maybe we will need a new TCPIP stack for the next IP

IPv6 is a bit of a puzzle. It seems to already exist, on other platforms, but I have not, yet, seen anything use it (that could be because I use OS/2, and a router that has the option turned off). It appears that we will not have a problem, until something actually insists on using it, with no alternative. When that will happen, is anybodies guess. Meanwhile, that is another thing that is approaching the top of the list. I think we are safe, for a while, simply because there is so much old hardware, and software, out there that won't work with it.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Alex Taylor on October 18, 2014, 04:37:36 pm
I would also have to better font rendering, better font support with full TrueType and OpenType for usage on screen and print - incl. embedding TT and OT fonts into PDF files using ePDF/Ghostscript. Gostscript supports it but our print system does not (I dont know situation on cups I never - I used it).

My FT2IFI on Hobbes allows support for OpenType, at least as a beta.  (It doesn't work with all fonts, still trying to debug why that is.)

My PSPRINT driver supports TrueType embedding, I've been planning to update it to handle OpenType as well but that will take a while. It doesn't support subsetting, that's something I hope to look at eventually as well someday but I'm pretty sure it's incredibly hard to do.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Fr4nk on October 20, 2014, 08:21:02 am
@Doug
Quote
You, and everybody else who has a printer, should try CUPS

I will do but days have only 24 hours. I'm a bit tired of these ports where you have to search around for required packages and where you have to create half unix tree below your hood (correct me if I'm wrong with cups).  An alternative for me is PostScript with ppd import. I hope this will work on new printers as well, and there we have a well fashioned driver model. I know things will not proceed if there are no users reporting bugs.
I'll give it a try some day If I find time.

Quote
I need to ask what: What is wrong with it? I find font rendering to be excellent.

Ok - you are right - topic font rendering is really not on first priority.

Anyway some thought about this:
There is plain font rendering without anti aliasing. I think this works pretty good if you use the right fonts. Especially Warpsans is working really good without anti aliasing and I agree - this is the first choice. I like the grainy view. It is great for the desktop itself and it also saves system resources. Ok on modern computers you will not notice any performance problems with anti aliasing on desktop but its wasting of resources anyway.

But then there is anti aliasing you need for desktop publishing, image editors or html rendering, and sometimes it is bad and sometimes good. And most font rendering with anti aliasing I saw on OS2 is bad compared with other platforms. E.g. aa seems to effect the spacing on characters or the aa is not steady going. Text is showing up like using a bad working diffuser. E.g. on Linux Ubuntu I have much better anti aliasing.

But this might be off topic here since it is application stuff (at least on OS2).

@Alex
Quote
My FT2IFI on Hobbes allows support for OpenType, at least as a beta.  (It doesn't work with all fonts, still trying to debug why that is.)

My PSPRINT driver supports TrueType embedding,

Yes and I appreciate your work. I wasn't able to embed TT fonts into a PDF with your driver yet. My apologize that I didn't wrote a ticket. As soon as I find time I will re-check the latest version. I haven't tested FT2IFI (wasn't aware of it)  - thanks for your tip!

Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Doug Bissett on October 20, 2014, 06:15:01 pm
Quote
I will do but days have only 24 hours.

I am still looking for a source of 36 hour days. No luck yet.   :(

Quote
I'm a bit tired of these ports where you have to search around for required packages and where you have to create half unix tree below your hood (correct me if I'm wrong with cups).

Well, you are partly wrong. There is a WarpIn installer for the older CUPS (v 1.4.8 ), which works pretty well. It is not really a unix tree, in the sense that RPM/YUM does it, but there is a pretty good size tree, mostly kept in it's own base directory (they seem to want to put it on your boot drive, but it works a LOT better when it is on another drive IMO). You do need to add a few other base directories for Ghostscript (which must be in the root of the drive where CUPS is installed), and whatever other support you may need (HPLIP, SPLIX). The WarpIn installer looks after getting CUPS itself installed. Then, there is the CUPSGUI program, that is used to create an OS/2 printer object. That seems to be a hit and miss thing. Sometimes it works perfectly, and sometimes it doesn't. CUPS is controlled by using your browser.

There is now a CUPS version 2.0.0, that I haven't managed to get going (close, but not quite there yet). It doesn't, yet, have a WarpIn installer, and there seem to be some bugs that haven't been worked out yet. It is one of Paul Smedley's projects, and he has the same 24 hour days that the rest of us are stuck with. Paul does so many things for the OS/2 world, that he tends to be a little slow at getting everything done, that people demand.

CUPS itself comes from Apple, and is used extensively in the *NIX world. Unfortunately, being a *NIX program, it tends to be bloated, with far more "options" than are really necessary. It also has some strange interaction with real *NIX systems, sometimes.

Quote
An alternative for me is PostScript with ppd import.

Unfortunately, not all printers support that, so something else needs to massage the data into something that can be used. That is basically what CUPS does. The "problem" arises when the printer manufacturer makes a closed source module to make their printer work, or when CUPS doesn't have a translation module for a specific printer. The bottom line is, that OS/2 users need to be very careful when they buy a new printer (which has always been the case).

Quote
But this might be off topic here since it is application stuff (at least on OS2).

Nothing OS/2 is off topic here (within the rules of the forums), but a new thread might be a good idea. Alex is the font expert in our world.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Paul Smedley on October 21, 2014, 10:12:43 am
There is now a CUPS version 2.0.0, that I haven't managed to get going (close, but not quite there yet). It doesn't, yet, have a WarpIn installer, and there seem to be some bugs that haven't been worked out yet. It is one of Paul Smedley's projects, and he has the same 24 hour days that the rest of us are stuck with. Paul does so many things for the OS/2 world, that he tends to be a little slow at getting everything done, that people demand.

Gotta say - I'm not sure how to interpret the above..... in particular the section I've highlighted in italics..............................
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Ian Manners on October 21, 2014, 11:28:26 am
Hi Paul,

I would interpretate it as meaning that Doug has noticed people 'demanding' things of you, though I have no idea of who those people may be.

All I can say is I hope no one is demanding anything of you in relation to the OS/2 world, wishing yes, demanding no.

Speaking only for myself, I appreciate all of the software you compile and take the time to listen to feedback on, even if I don't use a lot of it I know it contributes to keeping many people using OS/2.

I certainly would not expect you to do what you do unless you are happy to do it, in your own spare time, as it happens. If others want things to be simpler in installing, I see no reason that they cant spend some time to learn and give back to our community by creating, or helping to create installers and or documentation.

Even Doug creates installers, so it cant be that hard for others to help out as well :)

Said nicely and with respect.
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 21, 2014, 03:17:25 pm
Hi

I also apreciate what Paul and Doug had been doing. (Plus many other developers on the community)
Maybe it was a just missuse of the world "demand". We all understood that we can not demand things for developers that are giving their own free time, only "wish" like Ian says.

Regards
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on October 31, 2014, 11:15:58 pm
Hi.

Check out the comments at: http://www.osnews.com/comments/28011

Regards
Title: Re: About eComStation Pricing
Post by: guzzi on October 31, 2014, 11:21:45 pm
And http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Aus-der-Gruft-Neues-zu-OS-2-von-der-Warpstock-2014-2439922.html