OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum

WebSite Information => Article Discussions => Topic started by: El Vato on 2008.02.08, 17:45:32

Title: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: El Vato on 2008.02.08, 17:45:32
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/16898/2/ (http://www.os2world.com/content/view/16898/2/)
QuotePosted by Martin Iturbide - Friday, 08 February 2008


There is. .. .

Not all geeks are created equal.  For this geek who obviously has not engaged in the OS/2 experience but pretends to make authoritative statements on a process that he is merely observing from outside his box of comfort, amounts to an desperate attempt to get some attention.

Perhaps I should rephrase the initial statement above as: not because he claims to be a geek, he has the authority to comment over something that he was not involved in or, as a matter of fact experienced first hand.  This kind of empty utterances remind me of the criticism leveled against Schopenhauer who, seated at well served table, praised the decision of those who commited suicide.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: Ronald St-Maurice on 2008.02.08, 18:32:16
Reads more like a frustrated farewell post.

I am glad X opportunity didn't rise up. ;D
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: lwriemen on 2008.02.08, 21:32:07
Quote from: El Vato on 2008.02.08, 17:45:32
Not all geeks are created equal.  For this geek who obviously has not engaged in the OS/2 experience but pretends to make authoritative statements on a process that he is merely observing from outside his box of comfort, amounts to an desperate attempt to get some attention.

Perhaps I should rephrase the initial statement above as: not because he claims to be a geek, he has the authority to comment over something that he was not involved in or, as a matter of fact experienced first hand.
Actually, the person does claim to have run OS/2 for a number of years and the name seems familiar, but that doesn't make up for the number of un-factual or half-factual statements in the article. I agree with the other respondent that this sounds "like a frustrated farewell post". Not as extreme as the Tim Martin and John Ominor psychoses, but certainly related.  :D
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: RobertM on 2008.02.10, 22:06:44
Quote from: lwriemen on 2008.02.08, 21:32:07
Quote from: El Vato on 2008.02.08, 17:45:32
Not all geeks are created equal.  For this geek who obviously has not engaged in the OS/2 experience but pretends to make authoritative statements on a process that he is merely observing from outside his box of comfort, amounts to an desperate attempt to get some attention.

Perhaps I should rephrase the initial statement above as: not because he claims to be a geek, he has the authority to comment over something that he was not involved in or, as a matter of fact experienced first hand.
Actually, the person does claim to have run OS/2 for a number of years and the name seems familiar, but that doesn't make up for the number of un-factual or half-factual statements in the article. I agree with the other respondent that this sounds "like a frustrated farewell post". Not as extreme as the Tim Martin and John Ominor psychoses, but certainly related.  :D

I think part of his "article"/commentary indicates a bias against OS/2, while part of it indicates an unwillingness to admit what enhancements have been made since Serenity started selling eComStation, and part of it seems to be a lack of understanding of how OS/2 does things (it seems he is entrenched in thinking of OS and GUI extendability in the fashion that MS requires it to be done with no understanding of SOM/DSOM, the WPS or extensibility of the OS itself).

This seems common, sadly... in the "Should IBM's SOM/DSOM be open sourced?" (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/09/2041204) thread on Slashdot there are way too many posts that indicate similar problems (lack of understanding).

I think that aspect of the OSNews guy's comment is somewhat similar in that respect to the posts on Slashdot - and very similar to the fact that those in the Linux community who want "the WPS" ported to Linux don't understand that what they also need/want is SOM/DSOM ported to Linux... nor any idea of what subclassing/superclassing truly is or can do (except in the limited fashion it is possible on Windows - or without understanding that virtually everything in the WPS is a set of classes that can be subclassed and/or superclassed. Other OS users (and even OS/2 users past and present) dont make the connection that the WPS (and other things in OS/2) are so powerful/extensible because near everything is an object of that nature.

With an (admittedly) limited understanding of the underlying technology, I (and others of us here - with probably greater understandings of such than me) at least understand that much - but to most others on any other OS, "a lightbulb is a lightbulb" as can be seen on Slashdot where people are comparing SOM/DSOM to COM/COM+ and D-Bus on Linux (and dont even understand the difference between IPC and a truly extensible object framework).

Sadly, I think much of the lack of interest in porting various components of OS/2 are based on that (and similar) lack(s) of understanding...

I for one won't consider Linux for anything that requires extensive use of the GUI until something like the WPS/SOM/DSOM is implemented on it, nor for anything truly thread/process heavy until it's threading model is as dynamic and flexible as OS/2's - but that's simply because, even with a lack of true understanding of the core technology, I've seen what OS/2 can do with a truly well threaded app - and what that app can do on OS/2 (like Domino GoWebserver for instance and a couple thousand threads allocated and in some state of action). And because I've also seen benchmarks for such apps from IBM themselves on NT - and gotten literally ten times the performance out of the same app (again Domino Go) on OS/2 (on the same exact hardware IBM tested with).
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: lwriemen on 2008.02.12, 17:14:07
Quote from: RobertM on 2008.02.10, 22:06:44
part of it seems to be a lack of understanding of how OS/2 does things (it seems he is entrenched in thinking of OS and GUI extendability in the fashion that MS requires it to be done with no understanding of SOM/DSOM, the WPS or extensibility of the OS itself).

This seems common, sadly... in the "Should IBM's SOM/DSOM be open sourced?" (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/09/2041204) thread on Slashdot there are way too many posts that indicate similar problems (lack of understanding).

Yes. Too often people mistake "new" for progress. This is especially true for people who only possess partial knowledge; they tend to think their partial view can extend to encompass the whole. This is seen very often in the software world where, despite Frederick Brooks' admonition, people continual try to discover the silver bullet. One current example is XML; it has it's uses, but it is being driven to be applied even where it is not so useful.

SOM is not a silver bullet either, but to dismiss it because it is old is just ignorant.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source` VS Raw Code
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.02.12, 20:59:46
All hypotheticals aside Maybe...(//), given a few years of code update by DEVS from the old school- OS2,  would be lets say brought forward into the open source world without temidity nor as sanctamonious drivvle; someday someone up there on the fourth floor may realize that open source is not simply source code from linux or unix; that day I hope will come sooner  than later (cuz I am olde)and all arguments will have become subsided by truth form and logic rather than by speculative imaginings...:)
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source` VS Raw Code
Post by: El Vato on 2008.02.14, 07:44:56
Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.02.12, 20:59:46
All hypotheticals aside Maybe...[...] someday someone up there on the fourth floor may realize that open source is not simply source code from linux or unix;[...]



someday os2 will be ruled by the young and famous-at least in the opensource world!

Do you think that Mike Kaply (http://www.chingonazo.com/mikek.png) will still meet those qualifications by that "someday?"  ;)
(http://www.chingonazo.com/mikek.png)
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: RobertM on 2008.02.15, 19:17:17
Quote from: lwriemen on 2008.02.12, 17:14:07
Quote from: RobertM on 2008.02.10, 22:06:44
part of it seems to be a lack of understanding of how OS/2 does things (it seems he is entrenched in thinking of OS and GUI extendability in the fashion that MS requires it to be done with no understanding of SOM/DSOM, the WPS or extensibility of the OS itself).

This seems common, sadly... in the "Should IBM's SOM/DSOM be open sourced?" (http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/09/2041204) thread on Slashdot there are way too many posts that indicate similar problems (lack of understanding).

Yes. Too often people mistake "new" for progress. This is especially true for people who only possess partial knowledge; they tend to think their partial view can extend to encompass the whole. This is seen very often in the software world where, despite Frederick Brooks' admonition, people continual try to discover the silver bullet. One current example is XML; it has it's uses, but it is being driven to be applied even where it is not so useful.

Indeed... Windows Server 2003 had "new" administration screens... this year we got stuck with a support contract that included WinServer2003 administration, and I finally realized how very spoiled I was having WSeB and WS4 domains to administer in the past... DnD Objects were (are) such a beautiful thing. I've still yet to find a server admin GUI based tool as easy as Warp Server's "Drag anything onto anything" method - but then again, 99% of the server admins out there have never seen anything like it, so I am guessing that WinServer2003's admin stuff seems amazing compared to previous efforts. Though, don't get me wrong... it's not like OS/2 does everything right (much less perfect), but I thought that a good example of how "new" definitely is not real progress - except in the limited scope that most people compare "new" to.


Quote from: lwriemen on 2008.02.12, 17:14:07
SOM is not a silver bullet either, but to dismiss it because it is old is just ignorant.

Very true... it definitely isn't... but (as you and I know - but they dont seem to) anything with enough valid technical advancements/capabilities, such as SOM/DSOM can only make such efforts to create something better that much more possible. I think in that respect alone, it would be great having SOM/DSOM - and tying it together with the best of other efforts to make something even better (incorporating the best features/designs/capabilities of all)...

Unfortunately, I think we are all "preaching to the choir"

-R
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: sdennis on 2008.03.01, 21:42:46
(A little late, but better late than never...)

QuoteNot all geeks are created equal.  For this geek who obviously has not engaged in the OS/2 experience but pretends to make authoritative statements on a process that he is merely observing from outside his box of comfort, amounts to an desperate attempt to get some attention.

To make your point shorter, the author was talking out his ass.

Just ignore it-remember, every so-called expert likes to talk crap about OS/2...and the chances are good that they haven't touched it in ten years, therefore don't know s*it from Shinola about the subject anymore.

I laughed when I read that.  I wanted to tell him that he was full of crap, but hey, he wasn't worth the electrons then...and still isn't now.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
OK OK ill ignore the shame me down comment here with one caveat: that exception is that Mike is a smart guy and I wish I could see inside his brain and pull us together rather than swirling anon and apart, thereby confounding us hey you complain I cut out alot of crap here just to keep it brief, because in that universal OS[2] brain somewhere lies heaven as the ultimate cabal, seen rarified in a not so dim light of truth: os2 Warps the minds of even those that have never used it...how could this be you ask? well my boy, there is still hope for you elroy, uncle john and constance M, regardles of your background or your fall_backwardness;  as long as the forum keeps on with its petition efforts that is-those that tweak and fail will be brought along with us who hold are ambition high among the chosen and within all of us they will have been exposed and as well as guided into the mist of reality devoid of any more quark like posts like we see here from time to time, to intimidate; so infrequently those weird statements come to the fore to agitate and cajole us, and alas aren't we all a bit stymied by the orderliness of the trite and also by the wonder of the real here at os2world? I wish I was an os2 code warrior but I repented that years ago and paying for it now with the advent of more and more anguish over Vista...I heard yesterday even gates is having trouble with hastalaVistahhh...my old ibm 770x cant accept my globe trotter-edge network bus card so i just use my newer lap like a firewall and connect to it using a serial cable-the old to the new work well togther so I surf that way- as though I am still in the olde world of 0ses maybe I can still be thwarted out and I wish I could use OS2 more but I intend to keep on using os/2 in some way forever, someday somehow it will be open...and we can do it even if ibm goes before us kicking and screaming all the way to warp5
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: El Vato on 2008.07.22, 13:08:03
Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
OK OK ill ignore the shame me down comment here with one caveat: that exception is that Mike is a smart guy

Well, let me assume that since you mention Mike, it must be Kaply --hence you are referring to my response to your previous  post, ModZilla. 

Several sets of moons ago, too many to count with my fingers since I only have ten, I bought an new Aptiva that came preinstalled with Win 3.1.  Instead of just giving up –like some fellow who previously posted here, and who jumped to the dark side of the metztli ...er, moon, through his recently opened window in the  spaceship, I went to one of the spaceship's cabins and bought Mike Kaply's book, "IBM's Official OS/2 Warp Faq pack." 

In the enclosed CDROM media I found the updated OS/2 CD device drivers needed to update my OS/2 installation floppies.  Subsequently, OS/2 Warp 3 installation media was enabled to recognize the Mitsumi physical CD device of the Aptiva. Yes, and Mike also had a picture of himself in the multimedia section of the CDROM –the one that you saw in my post.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
and I wish I could see inside his brain and pull us together rather than swirling anon and apart, thereby confounding us hey you complain I cut out alot of crap here just to keep it brief, because in that universal OS[2] brain somewhere lies heaven

"heaven" I prefer a more agnostic term, how about nirvana ???

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
as the ultimate cabal, seen rarified in a not so dim light of truth: os2 Warps the minds of even those that have never used it...how could this be you ask? well my boy, there is still hope for you elroy, uncle john and constance M,

Your last phrase is cool, down to earth, but animated writing, ModZilla, possibly I will borrow from you for future use –do you mind?

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
regardles of your background or your fall_backwardness;  as long as the forum keeps on with its petition efforts that is-those that tweak and fail will be brought along with us who hold are ambition high among the chosen

"chosen" smacks of status quo elitist notions, I like more macehuales (http://www.uv.mx/popularte/flash/scriptphplen.php?sid=359&len=In), or those who, like Sysiphus, persevere in an apparently "futile and hopeless labor. (http://members.bellatlantic.net/~samg2/sysiphus.html)"

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
and within all of us they will have been exposed and as well as guided into the mist of reality devoid of any more quark like posts like we see here from time to time, to intimidate; so infrequently those weird statements come to the fore to agitate and cajole us, and alas aren't we all a bit stymied by the orderliness of the trite and also by the wonder of the real here at os2world?

Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
  - Walter Lippmann

Hence, dissent is always healthy, when done in a constructive manner as opposed to that babbled by ignoramus like him whose blog post this thread is reacting against.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
I wish I was an os2 code warrior but I repented that years ago and paying for it now with the advent of more and more anguish over Vista...

Well, according to your previous post (that I replied to whimsically) you are a visionary –that is somewhat of a rarity in the OS/2 World pseudo community.  You have the ability to transcend notions that even some OS/2 developers can not --as judged from the again quoted crucial statement of yours stating that open source is not only relevant to GNU/Linux:

All hypotheticals aside Maybe...[...] someday someone up there on the fourth floor may realize that open source is not simply source code from linux or unix;[...]

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
I heard yesterday even gates is having trouble with hastalaVistahhh...

Privately, he has been cursing his own creations since the earliest WinXX releases.  Why would that be surprising ???

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
my old ibm 770x cant accept my globe trotter-edge network bus card so i just use my newer lap like a firewall and connect to it using a serial cable-the old to the new work well togther so I surf that way-

If you ever come by the San Francisco Bay area, let me take a look at your machine.  I may be able to create some magic and convince your machine to like your network card directly –oh, it is going to be on the house, courtesy of Metztli IT  ;) .

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.21, 23:19:57
as though I am still in the olde world of 0ses maybe I can still be thwarted out and I wish I could use OS2 more but I intend to keep on using os/2 in some way forever, someday somehow it will be open...and we can do it even if ibm goes before us kicking and screaming all the way to warp5

That is what I keep telling them over and over  :)...(sigh)
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.22, 15:13:24
Re:

Quote

Quote Wrom: AIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEU
I heard yesterday even gates is having trouble with hastalaVistahhh...

Privately, he has been cursing his own creations since the earliest WinXX releases.  Why would that be surprising  ???


From the above... why should this come as a surprise to anyone:

Quote

Bill Bates promoting IBM OS/2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIq0ukqUJSk


In the above video clip Mr. Gates may have inadvertently left out the words "and beyond"  ;D ::) ;D when he said that OS/2 was the "platform for the 90's"!   8)

Best regards,

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.22, 15:51:52
I particularly enjoyed reading this:

Re:

Quote

I could use OS2 more but I intend to keep on using os/2 in some way forever, someday somehow it will be open...and we can do it even if ibm goes before us kicking and screaming all the way to warp5


I personally wish this ("ibm goes (had gone) before us kicking and screaming all the way to warp5") had actually happened 5 or more years ago. So, at this time rather than anticipating the General Availability (GA) eComStation 2.0 we would all be lining up for the General Availability (GA) of WARP 6.0 (or, should it have been WARP 7.0?). ;D ;D ;D

Best regards,

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: abwillis on 2008.07.22, 16:43:03
Quote from: El Vato on 2008.07.22, 13:08:03
If you ever come by the San Francisco Bay area, let me take a look at your machine.  I may be able to create some magic and convince your machine to like your network card directly –oh, it is going to be on the house, courtesy of Metztli IT  ;) .
Sorry for the off topic but being relatively close (considering Jan is coming from Germany after all) will you be able to attend Warpstock in Santa Cruz this year? 

Andy
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.22, 17:01:40
In addition to the above....

Re:

Quote

and we can do it even if ibm goes before us kicking and screaming all the way to warp5


Taking a "cue" from the "Flintstones" (Fred and Wilma)  ;D ;D ;D; Just which will be better or easier: Pushing "IBM" in front ("ibm goes before us kicking and screaming") or pulling them behind us? Open-Source or not! ::) ::) ::)

Kindest regards.

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: El Vato on 2008.07.22, 19:14:05
Quote from: abwillis on 2008.07.22, 16:43:03
Quote from: El Vato on 2008.07.22, 13:08:03
If you ever come by the San Francisco Bay area, let me take a look at your machine.  I may be able to create some magic and convince your machine to like your network card directly –oh, it is going to be on the house, courtesy of Metztli IT  ;) .
Sorry for the off topic but being relatively close (considering Jan is coming from Germany after all) will you be able to attend Warpstock in Santa Cruz this year? 

Andy

Well, Andy, I am mostly busy.  I tested the reaction to a couple of topics that I might  present at WarpStock in the thread named: Question to Potential Warpstock attendees (http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,1077.msg7200/#new) and basically no one cared.  Now I have a tight schedule after my (at the very least one day) planned attendance to the LinuxWorld 2008 event --to be held at the Moscone Center in San Francisco during the previous week to WarpStock.

Among the stuff that I am working on is an pre colonial ancient language plug-in for Symphony and I am already way behind schedule.  Besides, I have mostly worked alone on my OS/2 projects.  I found out the hard way, before I had a medium to publish some of those projects --like my blog-- that I am mostly 90 to 180 degrees of a different perspective than my OS/2 peers.  That possibly is due to my early entry into the open source world --where procedures where performed with no GUI interface in mid 1990's -- whereas my OS/2 peers were happy being hand held by MS proprietary WinXX "clicky" hand.  Hence their chains never broke like mine did.

Accordingly, as a peer at WarpStock there may not be synergy with other attendees who would not understand why my insistence on change at the fundamental level of development of the OS/2.  I have had to defend my position here a number of times against some of those who will be attending the event  --let's leave it at that.

I have found out that I need more options --that Linux provides-- and that if the OS/2 is not set free will hardly be in a position to offer me those options.  Yes, that includes the ability to execute in 64-bit mode as a host to hold my tests of mixed 32 and 64-bit fully and paravirtualized virtual machines, for an specific instance.  And this is one of the key points that I have been arguing over and over.  Yet, this kind of issues are conveniently swept under the rug by many around here --and possibly many who will be attending the event.  Hence...let's leave it at that.

Regards.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: Saijin_Naib on 2008.07.22, 21:21:33
That's kind of a shame really, OS/2 events need all the talent they can draw because our pool is rather divided and small. I believe that differing perspectives should not conflict so much as feed into a hybrid of both that will address the validity that each viewpoint holds.

Hopefully you still keep OS/2 around as a hobby OS Vato, as your contributions and presence are surely most welcome.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.23, 00:44:52
Hey El Vato,

You have said (et al) in this post:

Quote

Among the stuff that I am working on is an pre colonial ancient language plug-in for Symphony and I am already way behind schedule.  Besides, I have mostly worked alone on my OS/2 projects.  I found out the hard way, before I had a medium to publish some of those projects --like my blog-- that I am mostly 90 to 180 degrees of a different perspective than my OS/2 peers.  That possibly is due to my early entry into the open source world --where procedures where performed with no GUI interface in mid 1990's -- whereas my OS/2 peers were happy being hand held by MS proprietary WinXX "clicky" hand.  Hence their chains never broke like mine did.

Accordingly, as a peer at WarpStock there may not be synergy with other attendees who would not understand why my insistence on change at the fundamental level of development of the OS/2.  I have had to defend my position here a number of times against some of those who will be attending the event  --let's leave it at that.

I have found out that I need more options --that Linux provides-- and that if the OS/2 is not set free will hardly be in a position to offer me those options.  Yes, that includes the ability to execute in 64-bit mode as a host to hold my tests of mixed 32 and 64-bit fully and paravirtualized virtual machines, for an specific instance.  And this is one of the key points that I have been arguing over and over.  Yet, this kind of issues are conveniently swept under the rug by many around here --and possibly many who will be attending the event.  Hence...let's leave it at that.....


Dude, I for one have been following some of the interesting things that you have been saying and have an interest in "the ability to execute in 64-bit mode as a host to hold my tests of mixed 32 and 64-bit fully..."; but, let me ask you this question: How many different ways are there possible for persons to get to the top of a mountain? And, BTW, if you are climbing the mountain (as against that of an "helicopter" landing) how about having some "Sherpa Guides/Helpers" (other *experienced OS/2 developers*, testers...) to come along on the journey ;D ;) ;D .

Also, do you necessarily think that you do have to "climb" that "proverbial mountain" alone as I would not mind the experience of being at the "Base Camp" even if I can't make it to the "Summit"! ???

Kindest regards,

SAB
   
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: El Vato on 2008.07.23, 13:31:09
Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.07.23, 00:44:52
Hey El Vato,

You have said (et al) in this post:

Quote
[...]
OS/2 peers were happy being hand held by MS proprietary WinXX "clicky" hand.  Hence their chains never broke like mine did.[...]
Yet, this kind of issues are conveniently swept under the rug by many around here --and possibly many who will be attending the event.  Hence...let's leave it at that.....


Dude, I for one have been following some of the interesting things that you have been saying and have an interest in "the ability to execute in 64-bit mode as a host to hold my tests of mixed 32 and 64-bit fully..."; but, let me ask you this question: How many different ways are there possible for persons to get to the top of a mountain? And, BTW, if you are climbing the mountain (as against that of an "helicopter" landing) how about having some "Sherpa Guides/Helpers" (other *experienced OS/2 developers*, testers...) to come along on the journey ;D ;) ;D .

Also, do you necessarily think that you do have to "climb" that "proverbial mountain" alone as I would not mind the experience of being at the "Base Camp" even if I can't make it to the "Summit"! ???

Kindest regards,

SAB
   

I think you are reading too much into what I wrote, SAB.  There is no proverbial mountain.  To paraphrase Marten Mickos, of MySQL AB fame, at a keynote address he gave at the Open Source Business Conference (OSBC) 2007 in San Francisco, "You only follow the (hockey) puck wherever it goes and/or attempt to figure out its trajectory --after being banged by all those IT players."   Evidently, the hockey puck might represent a particular state of technology and/or applications in the constant competitive flux.

That's all.  :)

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.07.22, 21:21:33
That's kind of a shame really, OS/2 events need all the talent they can draw because our pool is rather divided and small. I believe that differing perspectives should not conflict so much as feed into a hybrid of both that will address the validity that each viewpoint holds.
[...]

Saijin_Naib

Using the analogy above, the hockey puck is in constant movement.  The slow player --as is represented by the OS/2's current owner and business associates-- has difficulty keeping pace with its more nimble counterparts;  its change of uniform with the eCS logo does not add much to its speed and agility.  For instance, when the OS/2 player arrives at a given location, the puck has been flung elsewhere by another player. As mentioned elsewhere in another thread, Apple is cheating by abusing the BSD license (http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,734.msg7207/topicseen,1/#new) to keep playing and hitting the puck. 

MS and GNU/Linux are locked in the struggle.   The OS/2 player needs to leverage open technologies and GPLv2-3 licenses to get a chance to hit the puck and make a difference --or even to get close to another player and cause some effect in the trajectory of the puck.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.23, 17:45:55
Hi El Vato,

Quote

I think you are reading too much into what I wrote, SAB.  There is no proverbial mountain.  To paraphrase Marten Mickos, of MySQL AB fame, at a keynote address he gave at the Open Source Business Conference (OSBC) 2007 in San Francisco, "You only follow the (hockey) puck wherever it goes and/or attempt to figure out its trajectory --after being banged by all those IT players."   Evidently, the hockey puck might represent a particular state of technology and/or applications in the constant competitive flux.

That's all.   :)

Quote Wrom: YOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEG
That's kind of a shame really, OS/2 events need all the talent they can draw because our pool is rather divided and small. I believe that differing perspectives should not conflict so much as feed into a hybrid of both that will address the validity that each viewpoint holds.
[...]

Saijin_Naib

Using the analogy above, the hockey puck is in constant movement.  The slow player --as is represented by the OS/2's current owner and business associates-- has difficulty keeping pace with its more nimble counterparts;  its change of uniform with the eCS logo does not add much to its speed and agility.  For instance, when the OS/2 player arrives at a given location, the puck has been flung elsewhere by another player. As mentioned elsewhere in another thread, Apple is cheating by abusing the BSD license to keep playing and hitting the puck.

MS and GNU/Linux are locked in the struggle.   The OS/2 player needs to leverage open technologies and GPLv2-3 licenses to get a chance to hit the puck and make a difference --or even to get close to another player and cause some effect in the trajectory of the puck.


Substituting the the "Terrestrial Hockey Rink" that we all know  for that of "International Space Station II" then what "conditions" do we experience - objects (like the hockey puck) floating around; and, rather than all the world viewing an very action packed "hockey game" it sees "space bound astronauts/cosmonauts, tourists..." having to to rely on carefully crafted skills to get certain "tasks" completed successfully rather that the more "agile players" (IT folks) dominating the game; and, its one reason that in the past I have made several references in these threads about the OS/2 exploits by the Russian Space Federation.

Be it as it may; (and, to repeat what you have said "the OS/2's current owner and business associates-- has difficulty keeping pace with its more nimble counterparts")  the may not necessarily be the owners of those crucial "source code-base" and it is felt that as generous as they have been in the past (Linux)  ;) - then we ought to respect their position on these and other issues related to any enhancements of OS/2.

It is the reason why it is believed that VOYAGER (and, all else being equal - CASSINI)  will be having the attention of the viewers and IT players all around the world. I am quite sure that you are familiar with the words -re-engineering, re-engineered, team-work....; also, add to these - "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bushes/forests"! (Again, substituting the the "Terrestrial Hockey Rink" that we all know for that of "International Space Station II" (as the mountain to be scaled)!  ;D

Best regards,

SAB
     
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ddan on 2008.07.23, 19:58:00
I can't seem to follow the discussion here. What the heck are you on about?

Since I don't get it, here's my one cent rather than two.

What exactly is there to gain by trying to keep up with the useless excesses
of Windows and Linux? MOST people WILL NOT USE because DO NOT WANT most of
whatever new "features" are added to the function already available in OS/2.

That present function is already seriously cluttered up under Windows / Linux
precisely by the ever-increasing bloat of new geeky "gee whiz" features that
complicate without improving, particularly for what most people do.

Geeks don't grasp that most people do not PLAY WITH the computer as such, nor
even play games, but wish to accomplish tasks, usually simple ones. There's no
getting around that fact.

Concrete example: I never figured out most of Media Player 10. I just wanted
to play a little music and video by clicking on files; it bombarded me with
"Library", skins, effects, and playlists, NONE of which I wanted, ALL of which
is too complicated to learn for no obvious benefit, and then there's the
built-in advertising and spyware aspects. Even new skins require learning,
trying to figure out what buttons designed for "eye candy" rather than
function do. Turns out that even with XP and WMP10, saving playlists from
Shoutcast.com is actually MORE trouble than the method I kludged up for Dink's
Z and Firefox; playlists still have to be manually re-named from the generic
name as downloaded. Where's the COOL in that?

Call me Utilitarian, but if automobile controls were designed the way software
interface is, you wouldn't be able to get out of your driveway.

I say that instead of whining about what OS/2 "lacks", the marketing position
should be to PLAY UP its simplicity and reliability. That whole niche has
essentially disappeared from the market, who are stuck with Windows and all of
its bloat and problems, and for whom Linux is, er, unknown if not unknowable.

Licensing issues aside (ahem), IF a generic OS/2 CP2 image was available (with
at least Snap Graphics, Uniaudio, Firefox, and maybe CD-burning software), and
installed on suitable medium-old hardware such as your friends and family have
lying around, and they were provided with printed instructions sternly warning
of a few things NOT to do, and on HOW to do the few things that normal
(non-geek) people do, then they'd probably be able to use that system
indefinitely without problem.

(True geeks would likely swoon if trying out OS/2 was easy, particularly if a
concise description of its features was provided, not least the difference
between Desktop objects and shortcuts.)

Linux is ALMOST suitable to adapt for BASIC functions, dodges the licensing
too, BUT Linux types are characteristically unable to do simple, so it would
effectively always be under attack from its own side dangling "upgrades" and
eye-candy to "keep up". That's why OS/2 would be better: it's essentially
frozen, yet does everything that a reasonable person wants to do.

(As for "necessary" IPv6 changes: predictions are that it has police state /
corporatism elements so that YOU won't want to use it, but will be FORCED to.)

If only people KNEW that there IS a reasonable alternative to both Windows and
Linux, and Apple too, and installation was EASY...
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.23, 20:59:43
Re:

Quote

I can't seem to follow the discussion here. What the heck are you on about?


Well, well, well! Here is a very simple question for you: Have you read, understood... the spirit of the OS/2 World Foundation's Petition Letters (1st. and 2nd.) to the perceived owners of the OS/2 Operating Systems Source-Codes (or those Source-Codes purportedly owned) to IBM.  ???

Here in part was the response from IBM:

Quote

Dear Mr. Haverblad,


Thank you for your letter and continued suggestions recommending an OS/2 open source project.


As stated in our response to your September 2005 letter we have considered the positioning of OS/2 and open source several times in the past, and for a variety of business, technical, and legal reasons we have decided to not pursue any OS/2 open source projects.


IBM has service offerings that continue to be available for customers who need ongoing support for OS/2, although IBM has no plans for product enhancements. IBM has recommended that customers on OS/2 consider migration to alternative solution offerings, and has a broad array of software assets and services to help customers migrate. We would like to ask you to encourage any customers who are still planning their migrations or who have other technical requirements to contact their IBM representative to discuss how these assets and services could be leveraged.


It would seem to me from all appearances when reading into the above IBM's response that this is not the same as your:

Quote

That's why OS/2 would be better: it's essentially
frozen, yet does everything that a reasonable person wants to do.


when IBM has clearly stated (and to repeat):

Quote

We would like to ask you to encourage any customers who are still planning their migrations or who have other technical requirements to contact their IBM representative to discuss how these assets and services could be leveraged.


All the above when taken into the broad context (the technical requirements that may have been referred to by El Vato et al) it is intended then this should hopefully help one to get the general directions of this discussion.

Have a nice day.

Regards,

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ddan on 2008.07.23, 22:36:51
Saborion: did you read past the first line of my last post?

Here's my position boiled down: let's keep OS/2 SIMPLE. It's a BIG advantage, properly marketed.

I believe that I'M the one getting back to the original topic; it's just that I don't want to GO where everyone else IS. Why bother? If you want annoying, use Windows; if you want geeky, Linux. Let's have a true alternative that at least gets the simple things right.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.23, 23:24:23
Hi ddan,

Re:

Quote from: ddan on 2008.07.23, 22:36:51
Saborion: did you read past the first line of my last post?

Here's my position boiled down: let's keep OS/2 SIMPLE. It's a BIG advantage, properly marketed.

I believe that I'M the one getting back to the original topic; it's just that I don't want to GO where everyone else IS. Why bother? If you want annoying, use Windows; if you want geeky, Linux. Let's have a true alternative that at least gets the simple things right.

From an Enterprise (Warp) perspective/concept... Is having an "essential" product such as Lotus Sametime (see the attached link) running on OS/2 (ported to OS/2) too much to ask for in the fast paced world of today in which we all (geeks or no geeks) live?

Quote

IBM/Lotus sharpens weapon for unified communications battle
IBM/Lotus Sametime at heart of strategy; Vendor committing $1 billion to develop platform

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/072208-ibm-lotus.html


Please say, is this not such a "simple" enough request after all that would "keep OS/2 simple"?  8)

Best regards,

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
El Vato "bluurped" and we all belched here, this thread has spun out of control and we are afraid to say maybe he meant it as a slur, but for sake of peace of mind, lets just say he is right and meant no harm, he is glad perhaps for reasons yet to be stated, maybe dreaming of the intangible is just a waste of time for some, while for others it sparks the kind of energy which has set off the fire storm of these forums...so many many great posts in this thread were all generated from such a simple position, he is glad ok ok, but I beg to differ, respectfully, I wish IBM had the youknowwhats and the vision to make the source code available to those who could really make it useful as an opensource driven OS, one that would spirit simplicity rather than control as opposed to what I have learned to expect from the big not so blue, so to have the code not released may not be best for IBM in a technical or legal way for now, but who really knows; I am no international copyright lawyer, but I do understand one thing in this competitive world of ours: without risk there is no economic gain and today, there is this huge OPUS, the driving engine of progress and sometimes it just drives us all off a cliff and yet it may drive decisions that ultimately cause OSes to be put into peoples laptops, blackberrys and small micro devices that are simply just browsers that use apps online...seems simple enough but maybe its not the way we want to go as ende users, do we have any say unless we go open? - this recent trend may lead to a pandoras box being opened, ie browsers that are too smart and maybe too smart means loss of control, when they become remotely controlled from servers, who will be watching the quarks and the kitty? Who gets the money for development and who hires sys admins to protect the product and offer real security: the question is perhaps will open source just fade out as real desktop user OSes become simple browsers used in a vast network that we would all forced to use as we become connected to each other in ways not so personal, such that determining the fate of open source would result only in the death of the personal desktop and of the personal computer; yes, lets keep it simple...arrrgh I apologize in advance for any disclarity or typos as I am a little upset here...
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ddan on 2008.07.24, 05:45:56
To Saborion2:

Quote:
From an Enterprise (Warp) perspective/concept... Is having an "essential"
product such as Lotus Sametime (see the attached link) running on OS/2 (ported
to OS/2) too much to ask for in the fast paced world of today in which we all
(geeks or no geeks) live?
------

Uh... Don't know, don't care. First I've ever heard of "Lotus Sametime", and
while I don't mistake my narrow little views for Universal Truths, odds are
that it's rare. I didn't even know that Lotus was still in business. At least
tell me how it would make my everyday tasks and activities more pleasant.

I'd rather have an improved clone of "Celebrity Word Processor Plus". It has
apparently unique features including a macro language that allowed me to
program next file / previous file keys, so that I can skim through them at
about the keyboard rate, MUCH more convenient than ANY file selector dialog.
I've been considering starting a thread on Celebrity, expanding to my ideas
for improving it, and for text editing in general (especially as distinct from
typesetting as GUIs do, which only distracts from ideas), but would require
lengthy explanation, and then to actually use the program, so I'd have to dig
out its original diskettes and upload to somewhere. It's worth preserving, and
I may have the only copy left of this 21 year-old marvel. It's not an
"enterprise" solution, but I'm not a trekkie, heh, heh. Celebrity is merely a
tool that I've used most days of 15 years now, so of NO interest to fickle
geeks who live on "the edge".

------------------
Okay, NOW I'm complaining about the online editor: it bailed out on me yet
again after I had composed the above and I had to re-type it, having foolishly
closed the window. Only loss of time, nothing wrong with my short-term memory.
Guess I'll learn to edit only in my trusted old DOS program, then paste it.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: El Vato on 2008.07.24, 11:55:54
Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
El Vato "bluurped" and we all belched here, this thread has spun out of control and we are afraid to say maybe he meant it as a slur, but for sake of peace of mind, lets just say he is right and meant no harm,

Not a slur and no harm intended, ModZilla.  Taking as a precedent Henry Thoreau's past position against critics who, like those in present day USA who defend current conservative policies of throwing constitutional civil rights into the toilet in the name of "protection",  I could claim that I echo the universal integrating platform aspect of the OS/2 –much like Thoreau claimed he was the conscience of the country. 

My stance opposes the finite and the narrow perception of the OS/2 --convenient to the current vendor(s) old business model practices-- and practically frozen and predictable for the old timers (with the proper amount of respect to the previous term) who, understandably in humans, may feel afraid of change in their favorite os.  But change is inevitable in life, as in all phases of human endeavors and ephemeral creations. 

Hence, in order to leverage scarce OS/2 resources, betas of OS/2 development should be open; that is, the sample target should not be controlled, as it is currently, so that the element of variation may enter the OS/2 experience.

Any additional development, like drivers, etc., should be released under the GPL –implicitly inviting others around the globe to collaborate.  As it is now, current OS/2 components are tainted for any subsequent redistribution; that simply promotes  the notion of elitism of the developers of the license holders.

Active promotion in non OS/2 sites of the capabilities of the OS/2 as an viable computing alternative, matching current technological trends.  The latter should be backed with essence –hence, not only "it runs in a virtual environment."  Cool to be admired, but can it support "current" applications?  I am sure, judging from the hits recorded, this WSEB entry must have raised a few eyebrows (http://manual.b2evolution.net/System_requirements) due to its going against the babbling of "expert" journalists and ignoramus pseudo bloggers who, time and again, have pronounced the OS/2 as dead.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
he is glad perhaps for reasons yet to be stated, maybe dreaming of the intangible is just a waste of time for some, while for others it sparks the kind of energy which has set off the fire storm of these forums...so many many great posts in this thread were all generated from such a simple position, he is glad ok ok, but I beg to differ, respectfully,

Ditto.  But I do not differ in a respectable manner since he is no OS/2er but a  hireling --of the sort hired to attack Blake in his works expounding the European imperceived symbolic death of God and miracles by scientific explanation of natural phenomena.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
I wish IBM had the youknowwhats

This statement is ambiguous, ModZilla.  If by any chance you are referring to the dual compartment where males carry their essence, you might be branded as a chauvinist by the femmes.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
and the vision to make the source code available to those who could really make it useful as an opensource driven OS, one that would spirit simplicity rather than control as opposed to what I have learned to expect from the big not so blue, so to have the code not released may not be best for IBM in a technical or legal way for now, but who really knows;

True.  Rather than accept a deterministic fate, the big blue door should be knocked again and again.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
I am no international copyright lawyer, but I do understand one thing in this competitive world of ours: without risk there is no economic gain and today, there is this huge OPUS, the driving engine of progress and sometimes it just drives us all off a cliff and yet it may drive decisions that ultimately cause OSes to be put into peoples laptops, blackberrys and small micro devices that are simply just browsers that use apps online...seems simple enough but maybe its not the way we want to go as ende users, do we have any say unless we go open?

No.  Going GPL we call the shots.  Otherwise, there is no market muscle (unless it is hidden in enterprises) to produce an effect on current vendor(s).

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
- this recent trend may lead to a pandoras box being opened, ie browsers that are too smart and maybe too smart means loss of control, when they become remotely controlled from servers, who will be watching the quarks and the kitty?

If the clients are GPL, it can be known when E.T. will be phoning home.  If the clients are BSD and not tainted, it can still be known; but if the clients are tainted BSD (like Apple does) and/or proprietary, then it can not be known.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
Who gets the money for development and who hires sys admins to protect the product and offer real security:

Market resources are used to pay for that maintenance and protection of the client in the network is the computer paradigm in the model espoused by the likes of Google.  For enterprise users, the big IT hockey players offer them alternatives.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
the question is perhaps will open source just fade out as real desktop user OSes become simple browsers used in a vast network that we would all forced to use as we become connected to each other in ways not so personal,

This is the key in the network is the computer paradigm, ModZilla: become connected in ways not so personal.  In other words, you decide what you want to share and what you want to keep private.  I know that my friend BenDragon is a little paranoid but if he is using a GPL client, and he does not want to disclose that he wears underwear with printed little harts, no one will know.

On the other hand, with all those close-up spy devices along the Texas border, I would also be paranoid.  What the US ostrich-like conservatives conveniently ignore is that their economic monster demands economic slaves that in this particular case is being fulfilled by the least privileged class in former Spanish colonies --whereas in ancient Greece that position was filled by red-haired slaves from conquered peoples. 

Hence, in order for Plato to philosophize someone had to do the dishes and cook for him.  And Aristotle preferred to dance when he was getting plumpy rather than engage in manual work --that the Greek democracy slave and beast lowest layer performed. The current migration of so called "degraders of the environment" by Chertoff, might be attributed as a direct result of so called free trade agreements with the elitist upper classes of those former Spanish colonies.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
such that determining the fate of open source would result only in the death of the personal desktop and of the personal computer;

Well my boy, there is still hope for you Elroy, uncle John and constance M1,  since a full fledged personal desktop like GNU/Linux (or even OS/2 Next Generation) are (or might) be composed of only GPL components, as well as a simple lightweight client (browser), to connect to the network is the computer paradigm implementations.

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.24, 00:17:56
yes, lets keep it simple...arrrgh I apologize in advance for any disclarity or typos as I am a little upset here...


1 Assuming that you licensed your cool phrase under the GPL (in the simplest case), ModZilla, I have modified it and contributed those changes so that others may use it  :).  That is the beauty of the GPL, I can not make your code mine, like Apple does with BSD.  I must share my modifications, however minor, to the source from which I took so that others can benefit –from capitalization changes in this simple instance.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.24, 17:47:42
It must be "History Lessons" (on the development of OS/2 Operating System) time!!!  ???

Re:

Quote

Quote Wrom: ZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJBLVLMH
the question is perhaps will open source just fade out as real desktop user OSes become simple browsers used in a vast network that we would all forced to use as we become connected to each other in ways not so personal,

This is the key in the network is the computer paradigm, ModZilla: become connected in ways not so personal.  In other words, you decide what you want to share and what you want to keep private.  I know that my friend BenDragon is a little paranoid but if he is using a GPL client, and he does not want to disclose that he wears underwear with printed little harts, no one will know.


And, here is why:

Quote

In November, 1994, OS/2 Warp 3.0 was released. It was the first PC operating system to have built-in Internet support. At the time, OS/2 critics said that Internet support was just "more geek crap," but today every major operating system ships with built-in Internet support. The release of OS/2 Warp Connect followed, and included full network support out of the box for all the major protocols, including IPX, TCP/IP, and NetBIOS. At this point, the focus for OS/2 became the "networked computer." When Windows 95 was released in August, 1995, resellers reported record sales on OS/2, as many people saw how Microsoft's hack didn't quite cut it for real-world, mission-critical usage.

OS/2 Warp 4.0 (codename "Merlin") was released in August, 1996. It's new features included a "beautified" GUI; the new graphical icons and "widgets" were designed by an ex-Apple programmer. The beauty was much more than skin deep, however. Also included were OpenGL support, OpenDoc support, and a full Java Development Kit, which included a Java Virtual Machine, which allows Java applications to be run independent of a browser.

http://www.os2bbs.com/OS2News/OS2Warp.html


So, the question is - did I get this about OS/2 correctly; and, to repeat: "The beauty was much more than skin deep, however. Also included were OpenGL support, OpenDoc support, and a full Java Development Kit, which included a Java Virtual Machine, which allows Java applications to be run independent of a browser...."

Talk about "browser" bloat, and more "browser" bloat and yet certain financial and economic analysts around the world (after years and years of waiting) still cannot get their work (involving "simple" but sophisticated spreadsheet applications) done. And, such are the "limitations" of OS/2, Windows, Linux et al that it is felt at this corner of the world that our goodly colleague El Vato is pleading with us to consider by poring combustible liquid at the end of an "ignition sequence" (the OS/2 World Foundation's First and Second Petition Letters to IBM). But; then again,
Quotethe youknowwhats
may be far removed from IBM as we know that company today as certain developers that were associated with the company may have died of natural causes; or, were deliberately eliminated.! 8)  ;D

This was just my little trek back in time on an aspect of the OS/2 Operating System's development path (non-browser usages...) while some are emboldened enough to say ("`I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`"). Ouch!  8)

Best regards.

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.07.25, 01:50:41
you are right here 'el vato' but you started this thread, not me, I guess I will always have a bone to pick with IBM and corporate culture amasse, Henry David would never have understood pure cut throat materialism driven by greed, so now its all been so softened by this guilt conciousness thing we all hide behind now, so in keeping with my mischeivious vagueries as some kind of not so enboldened shield-I'll put it to ya this way: they aint got no GONADS dude!

Impressiona are made but fortunes? ... always lost [can't take it with you!]

MZ
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.25, 02:23:38
Re:

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.25, 01:50:41
you are right here 'el vato' but you started this thread, not me, I guess I will always have a bone to pick with IBM and corporate culture amasse, Henry David would never have understood pure cut throat materialism driven by greed, so now its all been so softened by this guilt conciousness thing we all hide behind now, so in keeping with my mischeivious vagueries as some kind of not so enboldened shield-I'll put it to ya this way: they aint got no GONADS dude!

Impressiona are made but fortunes? ... always lost [can't take it with you!]

MZ

Hmmmm... words like
Quote"cut throat materialism driven by greed", "Impressiona are made but fortunes? ... always lost [can't take it with you!]...

and, quests, aspirations, "The Development Continuum"...

What was it? Was it "The Philosophy of Poverty; or, was it "The Poverty of Philosophy"!!! Maybe, we have to look to CONFUCIUS' teachings for the answer then our goodly colleague El Vato's (as well as others who will come after him) efforts would not have been in vain. Then it would appear not to be the question of
Quotealways lost [can't take it with you!]...
but one of what ("legacy") you are "leaving behind"! ;) ;D ::)

Kindest regards.

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.07.25, 06:18:48
Heaven, Mike, Nirvana, El Vato's OS2 Driver revelations, its all the same, depends on what framework you stuff your stream of conciousness into my friends, it may be hell when it doesn/t fly-when it does it is like a bird on a wing, if not, things don/t pan out so well, take your lumps and keep flyin  -as high as you can toward/from the GODHEAD or however you strike your core its all the same no matter how you perceive, @some point I suppose we're all struck from the same cpu our image shown brightly at the event horizon...no matter how dim a past just another day in paradise...and we get a glimpse of it all in one simple mind together war and peace its all just part of the whole schema which is like what RUSH used to say:
to go the distance first you got to last...we are becuz we are I am becuz you...


you fill in the blank/s

I didnt say Limbaugh, I hate politix y'all 'ave a great nite



MZ
there he goes tryin the green shinin' blue in the rain but wait hes not insane just indigooooo....
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.25, 17:47:24
Additionally,

Re:

QuoteHenry David would never have understood pure cut throat materialism driven by greed, so now its all been so softened by this guilt conciousness thing we all hide behind now, so in keeping with my mischeivious vagueries as some kind of not so e(m)boldened shield-I'll put it to ya this way: they aint got no GONADS dude!

Impressiona are made but fortunes? ... always lost [can't take it with you!]

Also, from an essay on : "Thinking Men":

Quote

Abstract
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes lived during a very turbulent century in Britain. Both men were great thinkers of their time, but held very different opinions on politics and many other facets of life and man. Both of these men were theorists on natural law and social contracts, but this is where the resemblance between the two ends. The time in which these two men lived can account for the pessimistic views of Hobbes on the nature of man and the ideal form of government. Locke, however, held very different views on these subjects, offering fairly more realistic and optimistic words about them. Locke believed that men are born with basic rights, while Hobbes believes that men are born with no rights at all. Locke theorized that, man will exist in peace, and will naturally exist to help himself survive and not get in the way of others in their identical pursuit....


So, from the above then let us substitute "Michael Reed" for "Hobbes"; and, "El Vato" for "Locke" while extending "Locke's" theory to the U.S. Constitution....; and, what are the conclusions? Whose "theory" (battle shield) to be taken to the bank - "Michael Reed's" or "El Vato's"?  ;D

And, lest we forget, this:

Quote

does it is like a bird on a wing, if not, things don/t pan out so well, take your lumps and keep flyin  -as high as you can toward/from the GODHEAD


So, I would personally say to El Vato - "fly" all the way home from whence you came and remembering always - to (Even "I" The "GODHEAD") as the "64-bit OS/2 Kernel (or should it be the "OS/3 Kernel) initiates.  ;)

It is said that - "Victory Can Be Sweet"!

Have a nice day.

Regards,

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.26, 06:35:54
Re:

Quote

Why they can't release the source

At the present time, even if IBM wanted to release the OS/2 source code it would be unlawful for them to do so. This is because they are not the sole owners of every part OS/2. OS/2 started as a joint project between IBM and Microsoft; because OS/2 contains code that belongs to both parties, IBM would have to convince Microsoft to also agree to the release. Microsoft would never do this.

Also, it seems probable that other companies, such as Adobe, have some of their work embedded within OS/2.

This raises the possibility of a partial source release. Obviously, an incomplete version of the source code would be insufficient to allow programmers to build and then distribute a working version of OS/2. In such a case, programmers would have to expend effort in recreating the missing parts from scratch. This would be a lot of work.

Even a partial release would be a lot of work for IBM. There is probably almost no part of OS/2 that doesn't include at least some code that belongs to other parties. Sorting out which bits are clear for a release would involve a code audit of every single line of the huge OS/2 code base.

As much open source goodwill as IBM may have, doing it as a favour to open source community simply isn't on the cards.

Therefore in accordance with this statement by El Vato:

QuoteNot all geeks are created equal

Ditto!  ;D

So, while companies like "Microsoft" go out of business "ideas" like eComStation (VOYAGER, CASSINI....) live on forever.

Best regards

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.07.27, 03:43:12
guess you are spot on here, IBM does not need a big legal battle against anyone esp MS as it might mukety muck over the opensource standard , but there is a big hypothetical here, if you were CEO wouldnt you initiate a legal fight to get all the code released even though you might make some enemies in the process? In reality it is impossible to break all the code that is well, co owned at this point. I have read that some of the NT code came from there and alot of cross-company agreements have been drawn up way back when to protect both parties, ie  MS/IBM. God I hate to mention both in the same post...

Mz
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.07.27, 23:45:09
Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.07.27, 03:43:12
guess you are spot on here, IBM does not need a big legal battle against anyone esp MS as it might mukety muck over the opensource standard , but there is a big hypothetical here, if you were CEO wouldnt you initiate a legal fight to get all the code released even though you might make some enemies in the process? In reality it is impossible to break all the code that is well, co owned at this point. I have read that some of the NT code came from there and alot of cross-company agreements have been drawn up way back when to protect both parties, ie  MS/IBM. God I hate to mention both in the same post...

Mz

Hey "ModZilla",

What's this alll about; re:

Quoteif you were CEO wouldn't you initiate a legal fight to get all the code released even though you might make some enemies in the process?....

Just as it is stated in the engineering profession that there are people calling themselves as well as having other people calling them engineers (hint, hint...) so, in the business arena there must be people calling themselves as well as having other people calling them CEOs. (hint, hint....).

Never mind the:

Quoteyou might make some enemies in the process?

also:

QuoteI have read that some of the NT code came from there and alot of cross-company agreements have been drawn up way back when to protect both parties, ie  MS/IBM. God I hate to mention both in the same post...

As, at times in some military conflicts around the world "collateral damages"  ;D ;D ;D (like can be the cases of IBM, Intel....) during tactical and strategic strikes are unfortunately unavoidable. And, as "El Vato" said in the opening salvo et al:

Quote

Not all geeks are created equal.....


Also, "trash in" (like "geek crap" in) will always be "trash out" (like "geek crap" out)! (hint, hint....) 8)

We have only just begun!  ;D

Best regards.

SAB   

 
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: ModZilla on 2008.08.27, 15:50:27
very good SAB! But its all about the marketing and what money that will get you and then you can have more marketing having spent the fruits of your labor and then more money from that, on and on upwards and onwards without reason.
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.08.27, 16:56:15
Hey ModZilla,

Re:

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.08.27, 15:50:27
very good SAB! But its all about the marketing and what money that will get you and then you can have more marketing having spent the fruits of your labor and then more money from that, on and on upwards and onwards without reason.

Do ya think that's all you get? Don't you know that with the "fruits" of the successful marketing campaign you get round trip to the International Space Station with every possibility of the space vehicle (carrier rocket...) that you travel in was OS/2 supported.  ;D ::) ;D

You can ask a guy named "Paul"; and, if you will be satisfied with traveling shorter distances close to Earth then you can find out from a guy named "Bill" what is it like traveling in the "AirCars"  ;D ;D ;D

So much for the payment of the "r-o-y-a-l-t-i-e-s"!  8)

BTW, Have ya heard about a certain airline planning on dumping the "safety gears" that are normally aboard just in case one has to swim. (unlike having DESKTOPS we now have Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim - ETOPS). Just what is going on in the world of today?  ???

Have a nice day.

SAB
Title: Re: `I`m Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source`
Post by: saborion2 on 2008.08.28, 20:11:48
Hi All,

Re:

QuoteDo ya think that's all you get? Don't you know that with the "fruits" of the successful marketing campaign you get round trip to the International Space Station with every possibility of the space vehicle (carrier rocket...) that you travel in was OS/2 supported.  Grin Roll Eyes Grin

You can ask a guy named "Paul"; and, if you will be satisfied with traveling shorter distances close to Earth then you can find out from a guy named "Bill" what is it like traveling in the "AirCars"  Grin Grin Grin

So much for the payment of the "r-o-y-a-l-t-i-e-s"!  Cool

BTW, Have ya heard about a certain airline planning on dumping the "safety gears" that are normally aboard just in case one has to swim. (unlike having DESKTOPS we now have Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim - ETOPS). Just what is going on in the world of today?  Huh

How do the "b-i-l-l-s" get paid if people work for free:

Re:

QuoteOne of the biggest backers of Linux has been Brazil's federal government, which has a stated preference for open-source software and has mandated its use in the program that helps subsidize financing for low-cost PCs.

"What interests the government is to give options, to give alternatives to the proprietary--to the almost monopolistic domain," said Augusto Cesar Gadelha, secretary general of Brazil's ministry of science and technology.

http://news.cnet.com/Brazils-love-of-Linux/2009-1042_3-6245409.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.0


Also, are there any (what if there are any) merits in this "Michael Reed's" article:

Quote

'I'm Glad That IBM Declined to Release the OS/2 Source'

http://www.osnews.com/story/19298/Im_Glad_That_IBM_Declined_to_Release_the_OS_2_Source


To each his/her own. So, where in the world are the OS/2 Developers to provide the OS/2 communities around the world with yet an alternative Operating System to Windows and Linux??  ???

Have a nice day.  8)

Best regards,

SAB