Hi
I also want to rant, but my dislike is only for
FHS, which I think it is the worst of the Linux world. But beside FHS I'm fine with RPM/YUM and ANPM really helped with the lack of GUI for it.
But all the software ported from the *nix world to OS/2 is helpful to us. There is a lot of software that uses libraries like libc, pixman, cairo, SDL etc., and having that libraries ported to OS/2 make it easy for developers to also make ports (and even new software) to run (natively) under this platform. It is hard to find people with skill on the classic OS/2 API (CPI, Presentation Manager, SOM and WPS) today, so sticking strictly to that classic API will let us without a lot of modern applications. Maybe that's is why it is faster for an OS/2 developer (without money or an army of developers) to have the p7zip DLL ported instead of trying to adjust all *nix software ported to use a "classic API" zip tool.
And, about having the manual in my native language (Spanish) and a INF format, I prefer to have the application ported first and if I want a specif manual for the OS/2 platform I would help the developer to format it on a wiki or translate it so he/she did not spend time on that kind of tasks.
Having personal preferences for OS/2 1.x, 2.x, Warp 3 or Warp 4.0 is ok. But I think that a developer can not focus to port software to every version in time of the "Classic OS/2 API". With the limited resources that the community have I found it alright to focus on the 4.52 level of the API.
I think that is good today that developers have more choice under the OS/2 platform. They can develop with the "Classic OS/2 API" (which source code remains on IBM's basement) or they can use a "Open API" (which evolved over time) to create their applications on OS/2. Or they can even mix the two APIs
. As users we have the benefits of both sides, OS/2 created with the "Classic OS/2 API" runs and newer applications (made with the "Open API") from the open source community are also available.
Regards