OS2 World Community Forum

WebSite Information => Comments, Suggestions & Questions => Topic started by: Neil Waldhauer on December 29, 2024, 08:41:26 pm

Title: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Neil Waldhauer on December 29, 2024, 08:41:26 pm
I'm looking at how people use OS/2. I think people want to try something different, and I see a lot of copies that can be downloaded.

OS/2 is not abandonware. No version of OS/2 is “free”. ArcaOS is based on an IBM licensed OS/2. It's still for sale.

That said, you can freely download any number of OS/2 versions. If you are a licensed OS/2 user, you can legitimately use these downloaded versions.

These are the license classes I recognize

OS/2 Warp 41996 release, without Software Advantage
OS/2 Warp 41996 release including Software Advantage
MCPone of the Merlin Convenience pack releases, 1, 2, 2R
MCPwith Arca Noae software
eCSeComStation release, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.2R, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 beta
eCSwith Arca Noae Software
ArcaOSversions 5.0.x, 5.1
ArcaOSwith Software Subscription



While running under VirtualBox, Warp4 needs TCP/IP 4.3 from Software Choice to implement Shared Folders
While running under VirtualBox, Warp4 and MCP both need Arca Noae Software to implement Power Off
Warp 3 probably has the same restrictions as Warp 4
Earlier versions of OS/2 probably cannot run TCP/IP 4.3
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Andrew Stephenson on December 30, 2024, 03:23:42 pm
I hope this helps...

A while back, I suggested OS/2 (and probably most OSes) has Developers and Users, putting myself firmly in the latter class. Since then, I have begun to suspect I should have at least two machines.

One would run normal AOS, currently 5.1 here, and do AOS-type work, including internet (assuming Them As Fix Things can settle the Browser Saga so I need not use my Dell m/c running Win-10).

The other would be the equivalent of the trusty old office typewriter, for writing work, the WP being WordStar-7c. When I ran eCS-2.1, WS-7c ran well. Not so with AOS-5.1's DOS session, which requires me not to invoke certain commands (or the system crashes) and its Win-3.1 session (which is flaky with old reference tools like the Oxford Compendium). So it would be Nice if They could offer a package comprising eCS-2.1 with upgrades of its ability to handle today's disk formats and USB types. Communication with the AOS m/c, as required, would be through intermediate USB storage devices. The AOS m/c, at a pinch, could format those devices. For office work, that's all I need.

What are my chances?
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Roderick Klein on December 30, 2024, 04:47:17 pm
I hope this helps...

A while back, I suggested OS/2 (and probably most OSes) has Developers and Users, putting myself firmly in the latter class. Since then, I have begun to suspect I should have at least two machines.

One would run normal AOS, currently 5.1 here, and do AOS-type work, including internet (assuming Them As Fix Things can settle the Browser Saga so I need not use my Dell m/c running Win-10).

The other would be the equivalent of the trusty old office typewriter, for writing work, the WP being WordStar-7c. When I ran eCS-2.1, WS-7c ran well. Not so with AOS-5.1's DOS session, which requires me not to invoke certain commands (or the system crashes) and its Win-3.1 session (which is flaky with old reference tools like the Oxford Compendium). So it would be Nice if They could offer a package comprising eCS-2.1 with upgrades of its ability to handle today's disk formats and USB types. Communication with the AOS m/c, as required, would be through intermediate USB storage devices. The AOS m/c, at a pinch, could format those devices. For office work, that's all I need.

What are my chances?

Did you open a ticket for this issue with WS-7C. I worked on eCS 2.1 at Mensys with Joachim. Boy that was a job to get 2.0 and 2.1 gone. I am also on the beta tester list for ArcaOS 5.1.0.
But what I typed before for other people there are not many changes to the code for VDM session. Some VDM drivers where updated as there was no choice.

But please open a ticket with Arca Noae if it can be reproduced the issue.

What do you un a UEFI based ArcaOS or a system with ArcaOS and BIOS boot. Without these details its hard to make any proper judgment if its ArcaOS or eCS 2.1.
generate on an CMD exe command the a testlog generic with this command and attach it to your ticket. Maybe we can make a further analysis to help you out.

Best wishes for 2025.

Roderick Klein
president OS/2 VOICE
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Dave Yeo on December 30, 2024, 05:10:54 pm
ArcaNoae can't sell eCS as much of it is copyrighted by Mensys or their successor. Look at https://www.arcanoae.com/shop/os2-ecs-drivers-software-subscription-personal-renewal/ (https://www.arcanoae.com/shop/os2-ecs-drivers-software-subscription-personal-renewal/) for upgrading your eCS and which drivers you can update.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on December 30, 2024, 06:02:07 pm
Hello

I personally think that "IBM OS/2" is abandonware. But the issue here is that everybody takes the definition of abandonware as they like.

Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware) says:
Quote
"Abandonware is a product, typically software, ignored by its owner and manufacturer, which can no longer be found for sale, and for which no official support is available and cannot be bought."

For me IBM OS/2 is abandonware, ArcaOS is not. Mostly because IBM OS/2 is no longer for sell from IBM and IBM does not offer support for it.

But does it means we can do anything we like with the "Abandonware"? For me it is "No".
Abandonware it is not Public Domain and it is still copyrighted by it's author even if he does not want to enforce that copyright at the moment.

But, also according to wikipedia "Currently, US copyright law does not recognize the term or concept of "abandonware"
So, even if we say that "IBM OS/2" is abandonware, by law it is not, because it is not defined. So, I guess Neil is right  ;D

Regards
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: JTA on December 30, 2024, 06:49:21 pm
OS/2 (ms & ibm versions) are, for me, Whack-A-MOS's (Whack-A-Mole OS's) ...

They are copyright and enjoined on paper & shrinkwrap, and by copyright law, but because their copyright owners have mostly abandoned them, it's now moot. Add to that the Internet distribution models of today (archive.org, many others), they can no longer be "contained" (restricted). Finally, virtualization capabilities of modern hardware and software allow anything, from any time, to be explored & tested. Availability is not containable for pretty much any piece of software from any time period, unlike the old days.

This means these OS's will pop their heads up in many configurations and uses, and it would be up to MS, IBM, and others to decide if that head, as popped up, warrants "whacking" (egregious use warrants whacking by cease&desist, lawsuits, etc.; casual use does not, at this time).

ArcaOS is an exception, as it is a modern OS, licensed and enforced in such a way that you know who is redistributing it (illegally), and the owners (AN) can go after it if any such illegal use head pops up. It is also small enough that it has escaped modern developer attention (hacking it's distribution model in any form).

My own use case? "I see dead OS's ..."
... and then I bring them back to life (with virtualization software), and put them to use again! There are infinite possibilities here. This ranges from DOS and earlier, to OS/2 and later, Win and later, and many others ... I even have a mainframe running in virtualization (this is a little trickier to get it to do something useful for me, but I'm working on it).

So, if you can get at an OS (or any piece of software), make use of it ... just don't let your head rise up too far to where it gets noticed, and position yourself for whacking ...
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Doug Clark on December 31, 2024, 02:33:06 pm

If someone wants to run a older copy of OS/2 it is pretty simple, and cheap, to buy a copy from ebay.  This avoids any potential legal issues.

Finding a used copy of eCS will probably be harder.  From the viewpoint of running Win-OS/2 I think there is very little advantage to eCS over a earlier version of AOS - meaning what will run in eCS v 2.x will probably also run in AOS version 5.0  It is when you get to later versions of AOS that I have seen some Win-OS/2 issues start to appear.  And most of those Win-OS/2 issues that I have experienced can be fixed by running limited to one CPU.

Whether those issues would appear in eCS or AOS running in a virtual machine I don't know.  It would be interesting to hear from someone that is running Win-OS/2 in either eCS or AOS in a virtual machine. 

Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Andrew Stephenson on January 02, 2025, 10:44:25 am
Thanks for the feedback, to what I posted and to others' comments. A HappyNewYear-2025.0 to all!

The points about the purchase/acquisition of eCS being restricted by copyright is a nuisance; but, as someone who has copyrighted material Out There, I accept it.

Roderick: No, I have not (yet) opened a ticket on the DOS session problems. For two reasons: (1) I am bogged down in work that must be done as soon as possible but seems likely to keep me busy at least for another month; (2) knowing what to report is tricky, because different problems appear with different applications. I'd probably be happy to supply Arca Noae's boffins with an entire copy of WS-7c, that being (with Borland Quattro Pro, which mostly works okay) my main tool. But it has to wait.

(BTW, around now someone will be tempted to mention WordTsar. I have tried it and am impressed with what its author has achieved so far; but I do not dare rely on it until it is finished and sufficiently bullet proofed.)

It would be lovely if AN could debug the DOS/Win-3.1 (and how about Linux &c?) sessions of AOS-5+. Having asked here, I shall ponder the answers and see what I can achieve, once my prior devoirs are dealt with.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Roderick Klein on January 02, 2025, 12:26:56 pm
ArcaNoae can't sell eCS as much of it is copyrighted by Mensys or their successor. Look at https://www.arcanoae.com/shop/os2-ecs-drivers-software-subscription-personal-renewal/ (https://www.arcanoae.com/shop/os2-ecs-drivers-software-subscription-personal-renewal/) for upgrading your eCS and which drivers you can update.

Having worked at Mensys I know what type of contract Arca Noae most likely has. IBM licenses OS/2 via a so called ASL contract. The product can not be named OS/2 and has to have different name.
Even if its an OS/2 product, IBM legal perspective how they understand see it legally as different product. So you can not for example buy a license of ArcaOS and then run for example MCP 4.52.
While Mensys provided an upgrade license, no discount was given by IBM to Mensys for the upgrade licenses sold. Again simply because IBM does not consider eCS as an OS/2 product.
Technically its an OS/2 product, legally not....

As for using the driver package on eCS. I just wonder how much trouble its worth. So many other OS components in ArcaOS have also been updated and getting update install media with eCS
can be done with the new drivers. But its a big headache.  eCS 2.1 was released in 2011. And I can not even to start mentioning how many bugs have been fixed in ArcaOS you miss out on with
eCS or Warp 4 even. I am not saying it can not be done. But its really for the brave solls :-)

Roderick
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Neil Waldhauer on January 02, 2025, 03:44:23 pm
If someone wants to try OS/2, and downloads a copy from the Internet, I doubt they can get in trouble with IBM, even if they are violating license terms.

It's different for someone who wants to offer OS/2 software. IBM may have issues with someone distributing OS/2 parts and fixpaks. Here on OS/2 World, we don't even give links to unofficial OS/2 media and fixes. But OS/2 has been off the market for 18 years.

Is there some time limit after which OS/2 licensing doesn't matter?

Have we already reached that time?

When can a business or other organization offer OS/2 parts without licensing restrictions?
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Roderick Klein on January 02, 2025, 05:09:35 pm
If someone wants to try OS/2, and downloads a copy from the Internet, I doubt they can get in trouble with IBM, even if they are violating license terms.

It's different for someone who wants to offer OS/2 software. IBM may have issues with someone distributing OS/2 parts and fixpaks. Here on OS/2 World, we don't even give links to unofficial OS/2 media and fixes. But OS/2 has been off the market for 18 years.

Is there some time limit after which OS/2 licensing doesn't matter?

Have we already reached that time?

When can a business or other organization offer OS/2 parts without licensing restrictions?

Just like a book copyright applies to software. Look how long the copyright lasts for a book. That should also apply to software. Which is at least 70 years or in the US, best I can tell.

Roderick
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Neil Waldhauer on January 03, 2025, 01:34:31 am
The copyright seems to be 120 years for a commercial product like OS/2. Software written by one person would be copyrighted for 70 years after the end of his life.

Oddly, it looks like a private person downloading a copy of OS/2 and using it may be OK legally. Offering a copy of OS/2 for download from a server in the USA is probably not OK.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Remy on January 03, 2025, 02:15:07 am
IBM does not offer support for it.


Are you sure IBM no more providing support as special exclusive contract for customer customer requesting it ?
I remember IBM having provided OS/2 support in year 2015 for a client having a special support contract (not catalog referenced)
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 03, 2025, 03:40:53 pm
IBM does not offer support for it.


Are you sure IBM no more providing support as special exclusive contract for customer customer requesting it ?
I remember IBM having provided OS/2 support in year 2015 for a client having a special support contract (not catalog referenced)
Hi Remy

If you have information on which customer and which special support let me know. I haven't seen any leaked file, document, comment or evidence that IBM has patched or released new binaries since 2006 or in the latest years. Sometimes I think that we like to dream and have the hope that IBM is still working on it.

Regards
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Andrew Stephenson on January 05, 2025, 04:21:11 pm
[...] Look how long the copyright lasts for a book. That should also apply to software. Which is at least 70 years or in the US, best I can tell.
IIRC (and assuming the rules have not changed), literary copyright starts from the moment you create the text and lasts until "lifetime plus 70 years". Companies seem to have ways of refreshing copyrights, however: comics publishers (AIUI) simply need to re-use a character every so often. Titles and brand names can also be affected by rules about "passing off", so (eg) a breakfast cereal called "OS/2 Flakes" might escape IBM's wrath. What a certain well-known corporation would make of impotence medicine whose name included "Microsoft" is anyone's guess.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 05, 2025, 05:24:12 pm
Changing the subject from Copyright to Trademark

Can we do something evil since IBM let the OS/2 trademark expire ?  ;D ;D
- https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=74515112&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
Maybe something like register the logo again and create own our legal T-Shirts.

Any Trademark lawyers friends around?
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Roderick Klein on January 05, 2025, 06:39:48 pm
Changing the subject from Copyright to Trademark

Can we do something evil since IBM let the OS/2 trademark expire ?  ;D ;D
- https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=74515112&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
Maybe something like register the logo again and create own our legal T-Shirts.

Any Trademark lawyers friends around?

A difficult question. This website might provide some of the answers. And it might also depend per country if you can use a trademark that has expired.
There are a lots of shades or grey in this discussion what is legal todo and what not.
https://harperjames.co.uk/article/dead-trade-mark/#section-6

So you want to use the word OS/2 or the logo's from IBM ?
 From the website above:
"If the dead trade mark is a logo, the copyright in the logo could still belong to a third party such as the original designer. Copyright can last for the life of the author plus seventy years and you may have to conduct additional research if you want to use an existing logo and perhaps secure a written assignment of its copyright if you can locate the original owner."

Roderick Klein
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: jmase on January 20, 2025, 11:13:00 pm
What access does Arca Noae have to OS/2?
Do they have access to source so they can fix problems or is "all" they get old binaries?

I understand that IBM has no interest trying to open all or parts of the code since there are
so many old copyrights but with a NDA Arca Noae should be able to work around that?
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 21, 2025, 01:49:37 am
Hello.
What access does Arca Noae have to OS/2?
Do they have access to source so they can fix problems or is "all" they get old binaries?

I understand that IBM has no interest trying to open all or parts of the code since there are
so many old copyrights but with a NDA Arca Noae should be able to work around that?

As far as a I know, IBM did not share the source code of OS/2 with Arca Noae. For what I hear from Lewis, IBM licensed the binaries for Warp 4.52 and the SMP kernel of Warp Server so it can be sold as ArcaOS. I guess it is very similar to the agreement of IBM with Serenity System on the eComStation days. There were old rumors that Stardock didn't went forward with this kind of agreement with IBM on 2000, because they were not going to have access to the source code.

But the good thing is that the OS/2 architecture allows you to extend the functionality (at some limit) to keep it running today on modern hardware. The ACPI driver is a good example of OS/2 being extended for something that was not supported at that time.

I really don't know if IBM still has the OS/2 source code stored somewhere were they can access it. If there is any fear of IBM getting sue by Microsoft by releasing the OS/2 source code, I don't think it applies anymore because the IBM Microsoft Joint Development Agreement (https://techrights.org/o/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/px00004.pdf) gives a 10 year period to maintain the source code confidential. If we count OS/2 2.0 as the last work the did together we are pass that. (personal opinion)

Quote
For a period of ten (10) years from the date of receipt of Source Code from the other party, neither party shall disclose to any third party such Source Code of the other party unless such disclosure is made in accordance with terms and conditions regarding confidentiality substantially similar to those contained in Addendum A to this Agreement, entitled "SAMPLE CONFIDENTIAL DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT"

My dream remains on open source cloning OS/2 components file by file.

Regards
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 21, 2025, 02:41:08 am
To add to what Martin said, I think ArcaOS also got the right to reverse engineer and patch the system binaries including the kernel. These are limited to only being available for ArcaOS.
Neither of us are speaking for Arca Noae and we could be misunderstanding things.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: jmase on January 21, 2025, 09:48:19 pm
The problem as far as I know is not Microsoft but all the other companies IBM used as contractors.
Many of them don't even exist any more so finding out who owns rights might be a nightmare.

When the OS/2 kernel source was leaked (20 years ago?) the people I talked to told me they were able to build and use everything that was there. They also told me that according to text in the code there was a lot of subcontractors that kept their copyright. It was not like a Linux kernel where everything has the same license.

If IBM still have some big customers with OS/2 installations they support then they definitely have the code and the tools to build it. Not that many people know how to build it though.

Yes, the divide between kernel and device drivers makes it easier to support more modern hardware. Less stuff in the kernel makes it easier to expand it from the outside.

But in the end, without open source it will fail, it's quite amazing that modern CPU's still supports 30+ years old code. The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.


 
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 21, 2025, 09:51:58 pm
The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.

This is why today I put my faith in AI to help a developer to open source clone OS/2.  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 21, 2025, 10:25:43 pm
The problem as far as I know is not Microsoft but all the other companies IBM used as contractors.
Many of them don't even exist any more so finding out who owns rights might be a nightmare.

Seems a bit surprising that the kernel used contractors, device drivers yes.

Quote
When the OS/2 kernel source was leaked (20 years ago?) the people I talked to told me they were able to build and use everything that was there. They also told me that according to text in the code there was a lot of subcontractors that kept their copyright. It was not like a Linux kernel where everything has the same license.

Interesting.
I remember hearing rumours that the PowerPC version of OS/2 didn't have as many licensing problems and IBM even considered open sourcing it. It would have needed device drivers, network stack etc as well as an LX loader to run regular OS/2 programs. If  it had been released with a good license at the right time, who knows where it may have gone.

Quote
If IBM still have some big customers with OS/2 installations they support then they definitely have the code and the tools to build it. Not that many people know how to build it though.

I remember Scott saying what a bitch it was to build, and he was the kernel maintainer.
I've also heard rumors that, yes some big customers (banks?) did have the source.

Quote
Yes, the divide between kernel and device drivers makes it easier to support more modern hardware. Less stuff in the kernel makes it easier to expand it from the outside.

But in the end, without open source it will fail, it's quite amazing that modern CPU's still supports 30+ years old code. The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.

Well the last kernel updates were more like 20 years age. They included supporting SSE etc and fixed some timing issues to boot on what then was modern hardware, they seem to have future proofed it enough that the later kernels can still boot on fairly modern hardware. My Warp 4 install still boots on my 7th generation I5, WPS fails to load though.
The ReactOS kernel would maybe be a better choice to support OS/2. NT did start as OS/2 v3 NT, supported OS/2 1.x binaries up to Win2k or XP and I had a Byte issue, from perhaps '94, with a little news article about MS getting the 2.x Presentation Manager running on NT.
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: Roderick Klein on January 23, 2025, 12:19:13 am
The problem as far as I know is not Microsoft but all the other companies IBM used as contractors.
Many of them don't even exist any more so finding out who owns rights might be a nightmare.

When the OS/2 kernel source was leaked (20 years ago?) the people I talked to told me they were able to build and use everything that was there. They also told me that according to text in the code there was a lot of subcontractors that kept their copyright. It was not like a Linux kernel where everything has the same license.

If IBM still have some big customers with OS/2 installations they support then they definitely have the code and the tools to build it. Not that many people know how to build it though.

Yes, the divide between kernel and device drivers makes it easier to support more modern hardware. Less stuff in the kernel makes it easier to expand it from the outside.

But in the end, without open source it will fail, it's quite amazing that modern CPU's still supports 30+ years old code. The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.

I can provide some clarity. IBM and Microsoft jointly development OS/2 and. Later from about OS/2 2.1 IBM continued the development of OS/2 without Microsoft.
I talk to some people who used todo work for IBM (like a company in Latvia that wrote part of the USB stack). Even they did not get certain sources.
At the time I understood Scitech (who worked on Scitech Display Doctor) also did not get some of the GRADD sources they requested.

The gist was that IBM has always been strict on on Intellectual Property. When I worked at Mensys, Serenity Systems had a ASL contract for eComStation. This is effectively a kind of OEM agreement for OS/2 (binary access). It was looked into if we could get access to the source under IBM supervision. Well that was not possible. What might have been possible was a so called TCO contract. Uhuuu that was in my recollection not something the funds where available for. I seem to recall that this was just a copy of the sources for OS/2 within IBM. What other rights
that may have given I have forgotten this is more then 20 years ago :-)

From what I heard over the years is that around 1996 when IBM started reducing OS/2 funding internally it seems somewhere some of the OS/2 sources where leaked. From what I understand however not everything of OS/2 was leaked.   But I have no direct evidence of this leak.

Roderick
Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: jmase on January 25, 2025, 05:06:58 pm
The problem as far as I know is not Microsoft but all the other companies IBM used as contractors.
Many of them don't even exist any more so finding out who owns rights might be a nightmare.
Seems a bit surprising that the kernel used contractors, device drivers yes.

Quote
When the OS/2 kernel source was leaked (20 years ago?) the people I talked to told me they were able to build and use everything that was there. They also told me that according to text in the code there was a lot of subcontractors that kept their copyright. It was not like a Linux kernel where everything has the same license.

Iirc there was less subcontractor in the kernel compared to PM and tools. I guess IBM never thought about letting anyone outside work with the code so it did not matter then.




Interesting.
I remember hearing rumours that the PowerPC version of OS/2 didn't have as many licensing problems and IBM even considered open sourcing it. It would have needed device drivers, network stack etc as well as an LX loader to run regular OS/2 programs. If  it had been released with a good license at the right time, who knows where it may have gone.

Heard that to. I remember visiting a friend with one of these machines with beta version of OS/2 PPC. He was developing a game for the sampler CD.



Quote
If IBM still have some big customers with OS/2 installations they support then they definitely have the code and the tools to build it. Not that many people know how to build it though.

I remember Scott saying what a bitch it was to build, and he was the kernel maintainer.
I've also heard rumors that, yes some big customers (banks?) did have the source.

Quite probable that some big customers has a CD (or several) with encrypted sourcecode. If IBM disappeared or refused to modify things for them they would be able to get the key from some thirdparty (lawyers).



Quote
Yes, the divide between kernel and device drivers makes it easier to support more modern hardware. Less stuff in the kernel makes it easier to expand it from the outside.

But in the end, without open source it will fail, it's quite amazing that modern CPU's still supports 30+ years old code. The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.

Well the last kernel updates were more like 20 years age. They included supporting SSE etc and fixed some timing issues to boot on what then was modern hardware, they seem to have future proofed it enough that the later kernels can still boot on fairly modern hardware. My Warp 4 install still boots on my 7th generation I5, WPS fails to load though.
The ReactOS kernel would maybe be a better choice to support OS/2. NT did start as OS/2 v3 NT, supported OS/2 1.x binaries up to Win2k or XP and I had a Byte issue, from perhaps '94, with a little news article about MS getting the 2.x Presentation Manager running on NT.


The ReactOS kernel is probably better as a kernel but to get drivers for modern hardware then Linux is the way to go.

Another way might (if running apps it what's important) be to make a Wine for OS/2. As it only emulates userspace its easier and even though its heavily geared for games OS/2 do have one real advantage, the API has been set in stone many ears ago. Also, it should be possible to "steal" alot from the Wine code, the API's are quite similar.

Title: Re: OS/2 Licensing
Post by: jmase on January 25, 2025, 05:29:49 pm
The problem as far as I know is not Microsoft but all the other companies IBM used as contractors.
Many of them don't even exist any more so finding out who owns rights might be a nightmare.

When the OS/2 kernel source was leaked (20 years ago?) the people I talked to told me they were able to build and use everything that was there. They also told me that according to text in the code there was a lot of subcontractors that kept their copyright. It was not like a Linux kernel where everything has the same license.

If IBM still have some big customers with OS/2 installations they support then they definitely have the code and the tools to build it. Not that many people know how to build it though.

Yes, the divide between kernel and device drivers makes it easier to support more modern hardware. Less stuff in the kernel makes it easier to expand it from the outside.

But in the end, without open source it will fail, it's quite amazing that modern CPU's still supports 30+ years old code. The only way to save anything imho is to use the Linux kernel and build a "personality" on top. But there are no resources nor business case any more.

I can provide some clarity. IBM and Microsoft jointly development OS/2 and. Later from about OS/2 2.1 IBM continued the development of OS/2 without Microsoft.
I talk to some people who used todo work for IBM (like a company in Latvia that wrote part of the USB stack). Even they did not get certain sources.
At the time I understood Scitech (who worked on Scitech Display Doctor) also did not get some of the GRADD sources they requested.

The gist was that IBM has always been strict on on Intellectual Property. When I worked at Mensys, Serenity Systems had a ASL contract for eComStation. This is effectively a kind of OEM agreement for OS/2 (binary access). It was looked into if we could get access to the source under IBM supervision. Well that was not possible. What might have been possible was a so called TCO contract. Uhuuu that was in my recollection not something the funds where available for. I seem to recall that this was just a copy of the sources for OS/2 within IBM. What other rights
that may have given I have forgotten this is more then 20 years ago :-)

From what I heard over the years is that around 1996 when IBM started reducing OS/2 funding internally it seems somewhere some of the OS/2 sources where leaked. From what I understand however not everything of OS/2 was leaked.   But I have no direct evidence of this leak.

Roderick

Sounds resonable, 30 years ago open source was not an important concept and things ran on the users computer. Was much harder to protect your software. Today much/most? stuff runs on internet  where its impossible to get the source (C#, Java, PHP or what ever) and software are for hire, not for owning.

About the leak, the person that "put he's teet" into it was after some work able to build the kernel. All or most command line tools were there. PM was mostly complete iirc but no Object Desktop and no networking. This fits with IBM and IP protection. Networking was build by another part of IBM and possibly Object Desktop also, so the kernel and PM team might not have had any access to that code.

I dont know who the leaker was, my best contact was an ex Lotus employee who had access to internal documents and Lotus stuff, but not OS/2 code. But I knew who worked and built with the leak. This is all 25-30 years ago.

The only thing I have left from that time is the programs I developed, their source was put on hobbes a long time ago. My oldest backup I saved is from 2008 and then I was forced into Windows.

I'm proud to be a Linux users :-)