• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

IBM To Team With Linux Vendors on 'Microsoft-Free' PCs

Started by BigWarpGuy, 2008.08.11, 19:20:28

Previous topic - Next topic

ModZilla

dont want to get too deep ::) here or renegade this thread, but I will take a shot even as I am no code warrior ;D  and I may add...after a somewhat breif perusal-too bad really microsoft just dozint get out of the hardware business ala cart. I know they could do it and they now build and plan to market their own smart chipped mobos; why? You tell me! Bubble memory was squelched by MS in the mid 80's as it would have resulted in a totally different standard to build upon, not xX86. We wouldnt be talking MS free PC vs . [and/or] openSOURCE "anything" .../as the opposion would be MS A_NON...)and all their registry crap(...they would like nothing better than to control the hardware AND software market direction which I beleive MS is attempting to do and which BTW is why IBM is spending buku on the LINUX connection with their large- servers dev,  et al. Its not that Balmers image turned upside down makes a pretty good, err bad um likeness to BEEZEL_BUB, its that NTFS still has so much control itself over what goes on consequently with your computer when you insta VISTA/XP? MS is not trying to get rid of the 8/16 bit architecture or even DOS completely, not really, they just dont want people seeing the console button, hence learning what you can do to a network over a command line hack session)dont get me started on XP installs though why do they warn you not to use NTFS if installing "OTHER" Oses on the same machine...me, I am in favor of a multi boot platform VM loader on every machine,  as a universalist :-*,  dont want to step on anyones toes... :'(  furthermore, before I go completely 'planet Z'- I would personally like to thank Rob for his posts and insight therein/therupon, I liked the part of one of your post as: i.e., your reference to NeoN [no longer...or?] for OS/2-NEVER HEARD of it so I did some searching, and found "[NeoN] can construct 3D objects by combining simple shapes, or by extruding or spinning 2D curves..." reminds one of AutoCAD v10 or IGDS

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

RobertM

Something interesting I found on another forum... someone there is claiming OS/2 was modified ages ago to support PAE mode...

http://forums.nekochan.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&p=7281787

The post is by "Old Salt" near the end of the page...

I dont think it accurate though (unless it is a more recent change than 1999/200), since various Netfinity units from that time said in their docs that OS/2 was limited to 4GB even though the systems were limited to 8GB for the models I was looking at.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


ModZilla

I read and was told about those limitations in the HPFS and OS relationship with HD sizes and reading big drives, so would the work around be an OS/2 program that could use virtual partitions on the fly, controling the BIOS? and I quote:  "IBM is bringing a Journaled File System (JFS) to the next version of OS/2 Warp Server, code
named Aurora" end.quote, but this was done for speed and access times not so much for disk size as there is no solution when only one partition is used, one partition computing is stupid. just plain...well that. Blade server arrays hold terrabytes of enterprize based data strorage hence huge data streams/access, not for the home or even SOHO user especially when the SOHOs dont do alot of big scale networking and even small to mid sized corps buy up  and use tensX 10GB thumb drives and swap same betwn cubicles routinely...after all since there are typically so many Corp_SysOPs AATW who wants to bother them anyway for more diak space...MZ all smileys   

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

saborion2

#33
Re:

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.08.18, 16:37:37
dont want to get too deep ::) here or renegade this thread, but I will take a shot even as I am no code warrior ;D  and I may add...after a somewhat breif perusal-too bad really microsoft just dozint get out of the hardware business ala cart. I know they could do it and they now build and plan to market their own smart chipped mobos; why? You tell me! Bubble memory was squelched by MS in the mid 80's as it would have resulted in a totally different standard to build upon, not xX86. We wouldnt be talking MS free PC vs . [and/or] openSOURCE "anything" .../as the opposion would be MS A_NON...)and all their registry crap(...they would like nothing better than to control the hardware AND software market direction which I beleive MS is attempting to do and which BTW is why IBM is spending buku on the LINUX connection with their large- servers dev,  et al. Its not that Balmers image turned upside down makes a pretty good, err bad um likeness to BEEZEL_BUB, its that NTFS still has so much control itself over what goes on consequently with your computer when you insta VISTA/XP? MS is not trying to get rid of the 8/16 bit architecture or even DOS completely, not really, they just dont want people seeing the console button, hence learning what you can do to a network over a command line hack session)dont get me started on XP installs though why do they warn you not to use NTFS if installing "OTHER" Oses on the same machine...me, I am in favor of a multi boot platform VM loader on every machine,  as a universalist :-*,  dont want to step on anyones toes... :'(  furthermore, before I go completely 'planet Z'- I would personally like to thank Rob for his posts and insight therein/therupon, I liked the part of one of your post as: i.e., your reference to NeoN [no longer...or?] for OS/2-NEVER HEARD of it so I did some searching, and found "[NeoN] can construct 3D objects by combining simple shapes, or by extruding or spinning 2D curves..." reminds one of AutoCAD v10 or IGDS

MZ

Hey ModZilla,

I am quite sure that you have heard about acronym "WYSIWYG"; then, according to this article "OS/2 Warp, PowerPC Edition":

QuoteIf you look closely, you'll see that OS/2 PPC included a full fledged PC emulator, which supplied a virtual x86 CPU as well as common PC hardware. Interestingly, the DOS support in OS/2 PPC was based around PC-DOS 7 and not the outdated DOS 5 level code that OS/2 on Intel is stuck with. The OS/2 PPC DOS boxes thus had for instance the DOS E editor (very similar to TEDIT) or REXX support. Why IBM never updated the DOS support on the Intel side is beyond me. OS/2 PPC supported both windowed and full screen DOS sessions. The full screen sessions always ran in graphics mode, even when the emulated DOS application was using text mode.

Not satisfied with "just" DOS emulation, IBM also supported Win-OS/2, both full screen and windowed:

http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/os2ppc/index.html


Therefore, if we were Microsoft and we were still getting "milk" from the "heifer" ("8/16 bit architecture or even DOS") why on Earth would we want to herd it (them) ("8/16 bit architecture or even DOS") to the slaughter house. You know, it is a funny thing; but, I am curious to know what are the amounts reflected in the "Data Bases" of the US Health Care, Housing, Financial Markets et cetera, et cetera (leaving out the "National Debt Figures". Do you get the clear "Microsoft-Free' PCs" Desktop Picture - It looks "fuzzy" to me. So, I gather that some could be stuck with the "OS/2 Warp, PowerPC Edition" for now until eComStation 2.0 arrives.  8)

Its called - The OS/2 Warp Economic Fightback!  ;) ;D

Best regards,

SAB

RobertM

OS/2 barely (if at all) uses the BIOS after boot. HPFS has a partition size limit (64GB) and a file size limit (2GB), both of which are due to "artificial" limitations in the code itself... the "descriptors" can handle more than that... a lot more. I have yet to run into a hard drive size limit under OS/2.

If you add /V after your IDE driver (assuming you have an IDE system), you will see that OS/2 maps the drive using it's own methods (not the BIOS methods) even though it is aware of how the BIOS maps the drive. That allows OS/2 to (1) overcome any BIOS limitations, and (2) allows moving the drive to a machine with a BIOS that maps the drive differently (since OS/2 will use it's own mapping - not the BIOS mapping).

The lines in question are one of these:
BASEDEV=IBM1S506.ADD /V
BASEDEV=DaniS506.ADD /V


The first is the original IBM driver (default Warp 4, WSeB, Warp 3, etc install). The second is the driver updated by Daniella E, which, among other improvements, supports SATA (in non-RAID mode) and more IDE/SATA chipsets than the original IBM driver.

JFS was also designed to handle larger disks - it wasnt just a performance thing (though that was part of it, due to the exorbitant cost of licensing/buying HPFS386... it probably wasnt worth rewriting/modifying HPFS & HPFS386 to handle larger disks when IBM already had JFS implemented a decade before on AIX).

Either one supports spanning partitions across drives (to create a volume), and both have their advantages. All in all, I usually prefer HPFS386 (it's tried, tested and stable for over a decade) except for it's file and partition size limits. But, I have found that JFS handles certain writes better (probably due to the lack of overhead in ensuring the files arent fragmented). For instance, using Ceres Sound Studio, which makes extensive use of the HDD to write "undo files" on every action you do, JFS is far faster than HPFS386 with small to medium cache sizes. HPFS386 beats it if it has a very large cache and very long lazywrite time (which isnt something recommended for for JFS (the long lazywrite times).

For stuff like that (Ceres) or Firefox or OpenOffice, I would prefer JFS. For stuff like web serving and FTP serving, I'd prefer HPFS386 - but sadly, HPFS386 has become unusable for me in that arena (customers needing to store too many >2GB files, which HPFS/HPFS386 cannot handle).

As for partitions, one of my favorite things to do in days of old, was to have 3 or 4 drive letters, and span them across 20 or more hard drives. OS/2 couldnt care less what types of drives they were. Using HPFS386, the system flew, and (total) disk access was only limited by the bus speed and the interface speed. But keep in mind, that was because I was using the setup for a web server, so the OS/2 server would often be using all 20 plus disks at once. The fact that they were SCSI also helped (since the CPU wasnt being overrun actually handling the disk access - which was for the most part offloaded to the SCSI controller). The machine, at one time, had 26 drives being used for 3 drive letters (Drive D, was spanned across all 26, Drive E was spanned across all 26, Drive F was spanned across all 26 - while Drive C was on the 27th drive which was internal on the machine on a different controller).

Rob

Quote from: ModZilla on 2008.08.18, 17:13:40
I read and was told about those limitations in the HPFS and OS relationship with HD sizes and reading big drives, so would the work around be an OS/2 program that could use virtual partitions on the fly, controling the BIOS? and I quote:  "IBM is bringing a Journaled File System (JFS) to the next version of OS/2 Warp Server, code
named Aurora" end.quote, but this was done for speed and access times not so much for disk size as there is no solution when only one partition is used, one partition computing is stupid. just plain...well that.  


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|