• 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

Newbie wondering... what makes eCS/OS/2 special, in 2008?

Started by bhtooefr, 2008.11.08, 02:10:17

Previous topic - Next topic

bhtooefr

First off, I hope this is in the right forum...

This isn't a troll, I'm seriously asking this question because I seriously want to know. Obviously, there's a userbase, otherwise Serenity wouldn't be spending the money to develop it, and obviously, there's a really good reason that people are using it, because it looks like a license is $259. :o (Yes, I know, a legit full Vista license is more expensive for most versions, but there's reasons that someone would pay that much for Vista - among those, simply needing an OS to run Windows apps.)

So, what exactly is this reason? I obtained a copy of 2.0 RC5, and popped it into a VM to play around with it (along with various ancient versions of OS/2 - I like to mess around with old software every now and then.) And, my first impression so far has been... "they actually plan on selling THIS? In 2008? :o" And, software support is rather poor, IMO - only one real browser choice (at least it is Firefox, which is a decent browser (not my favorite,) but...) And, it looks like you have to pay for a support agreement to get OpenOffice? Unreal.

I was going to put in some UI complaints, but I do understand that the UI is different, and that I haven't had time to get used to it.

I'm going to be quite naive and assume that most people on this forum have paid for their copies of eCS (or OS/2 Warp 4, or whatever version they're using) when I ask... why? What makes eCS/OS/2 better than Linux, or Windows, or OS X, or FreeBSD, or one of the other competitors? More importantly, what makes it worth $259?

I realize that I'm probably going to start a flamewar with this one, even though I don't intend to...

Blonde Guy

I use eCS because I prefer it to the alternatives. The price is no problem. I like having the choice.

You forgot to add the price of Software Subscription to the $259 for eCS 1.2. Also OpenOffice support subscription. It's a cheap thrill to be able to use this stuff.

Expert Consulting for OS/2 and eComStation

RobertM

bhtooefr,

Many OS/2 and eCS users have different (or overlapping) reasons. I for one solely use OS/2 and eCS on any server I set up (though I do maintain various Windows servers for customers who invested a lot of money into them and arent going to reinvest in switching to eCS).

I do it because: 

(a) I can get cheap hardware (ie: outdated but solid, like the Netfinity and eServer xSeries by IBM) and OS/2 flies - faster than any Windows server I have ever tried (running on 8-10 times the hardware), and faster than Linux (but by not as great of a margin as it trounces Windows)

(b) I set up the boxes, walk away and then maybe come back to clean them (ie: remove dust, clean the fans). Other than the occassional hardware failure, I have never had to come back to do anything else - and the boxes I install have been running for (newest) 14 months to (oldest) 3 years.

(c) Can serve websites of very high load on machines of very low CPU power (and still have tons of CPU power to spare)

(d) REXX is phenomenal (and far more capable on OS/2 than it is on anything other than maybe AIX).

(e) I cannot live without the WPS. Period. Nothing matches it yet. It may not be as "pretty" as Vista or XP (though I think they both are ugly) or as pretty as some of the Linux GUIs (which I think are beautiful), but it is far more powerful. And after you add REXX to the mix, nothing compares.

(f) It seems to have the best support for utilizing multiple CPUs (when they are supported) than any other PC OS. Maybe that is part of the reason why my Quad 550MHz PIII box can outserve a Quad 2.8GHz Linux box, and make a Windows server box look like it is doing nothing (which much of the time, as it was crashed or overloaded, is exactly what it was doing).

(g) I'm willing to pay a few bucks for OpenOffice - as that means for a business workstation, eCS/Warp is then pretty capable (OO and FF).

(h) I've never had to upgrade Warp to keep it running (unlike Windows where certain issues just never seem to be fully fixed before each version's end of life). Think about it... in the OS/2 world, the rule is generally "If it works, dont change it" while in the Windows world it is "There's a new patch/update/hotfix! Lets grab it now! We need to install that" Heck, my WSeB servers still have never had a fixpack or update installed. I may one day... not because I need to, but because "What the heck? Might as well."

(i) I've rarely had to upgrade hardware for a new version of Warp at least not since the rather old Warp 3 (and hence my choice of a Netfinity 7000 M10 for my main server... Windows Server 2003 would crawl on it if it even loaded, newer versions of Windows Server wont even run on such "slow" hardware, and Linux needs 4 times the hardware for the same results).

(j) Once up and running, it is very very easy to maintain, back up, restore and generally keep running.

(k) With VirtualBox and/or VPC I can run Windows in VMs under OS/2 if I need Windows apps or such.

(l) If it continues to be enhanced and kept up with the times, then it's only lacking feature will be gaming, but to me, that's what a PS3, or the Windows box in my room (that I only turn on for gaming) is for (the rest of my home computer use is done solely on my IBM Thinkpad 600, 300MHz "beast").

Personally, I find the Windows interface kludgy, poorly implemented, and poorly thought out. But then again, that's also because I administer both Windows and OS/2 networks ("click, right click, click, click, click, click, type here, click, close, close, close, close, re-open just so the notebooks update, click, click, click" -or- "drag, drop, check properties, click a few things, close" <- that is the difference between changing account rights and taking over directories in WinServ2003 and Warp Server since WSv4).

And I like shortcuts that dont break simply because I moved a directory, or knowing that if I delete something from the commandline, it's shortcuts will dissappear too. I also like being able to create different shortcuts with different properties for each object. And HPFS's ability to virtually never fragment, and JFS's speed.

Others though may have different reasons...

Robert


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


Saijin_Naib

It's a fun toy and I like seeing it around as an alternative to the UNIX and Win32 OSes. Other than that, I honestly don't think it can stand in today's world. BeOS (which I feel was superior) died out but atleast is being reborn as Haiku.

rdonnelly

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 02:10:17
First off, I hope this is in the right forum...

This isn't a troll,

So, what exactly is this reason? I obtained a copy of 2.0 RC5, and popped it into a VM to play around with it (along with various ancient versions of OS/2 - I like to mess around with old software every now and then.) And, my first impression so far has been... "they actually plan on selling THIS? In 2008? :o" And, software support is rather poor, IMO - only one real browser choice (at least it is Firefox, which is a decent browser (not my favorite,) but...) And, it looks like you have to pay for a support agreement to get OpenOffice? Unreal.


Hmm.... Where was windoze 16 years ago? Oh, it was a crappy 16 bit gui gui, sitting on top of dos.
Fast forward, 10 years ago? Still a crappy, now 32 bit gui, still sitting on top of 16 bit dos. (95, 98, ME......)
Then finally 7 years ago, the renamed NT, XP and made it a crappy 32 bit gui, sitting on top of NT.

Sounds like 32 bit OS/2 has always been ahead of its time. Now in 2008 it fits its era.
Just waiting for eCS to have all the features................

bhtooefr

rdonnelly: Well, NT is at least a (relatively) modern 32-bit OS...

And, yes, architecturally, OS/2 blows away Win9x.

But, in 2008, I'd say, for most users, WinXP/Vista blow away OS/2 just on sheer availability of software choices, and all that.

However, I'm not trying to make this thread an OS/2 vs. Windows flamewar. I also brought up Linux, OS X, and FreeBSD. ;)

Let me put it this way... why should I run OS/2 instead of another OS? What does OS/2 do that another OS can't?

RobertM: Thanks for your reply, and that did point out some stuff that's interesting to me. I did notice that thing about shortcuts being maintained through file moves, actually. I probably should try to learn REXX scripting, and all that... and the performance benefits are definitely interesting. I'm running Linux on my personal server right now... and it's got plenty of performance (disk space is its limit, honestly,) but simplicity of configuration would be nice...

Software availability is a concern for a daily use machine, though.

RobertM

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 05:32:26
rdonnelly: Well, NT is at least a (relatively) modern 32-bit OS...

Considering it's based on OS/2 1.x, kinda. ;)

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 05:32:26
And, yes, architecturally, OS/2 blows away Win9x.

But, in 2008, I'd say, for most users, WinXP/Vista blow away OS/2 just on sheer availability of software choices, and all that.

Stand alone (ie: no VM software running WinXP/Vista on it), yes. But then again, needs determine whether availability matters. What would you consider it for?


Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 05:32:26
However, I'm not trying to make this thread an OS/2 vs. Windows flamewar. I also brought up Linux, OS X, and FreeBSD. ;)

Let me put it this way... why should I run OS/2 instead of another OS? What does OS/2 do that another OS can't?

RobertM: Thanks for your reply, and that did point out some stuff that's interesting to me. I did notice that thing about shortcuts being maintained through file moves, actually. I probably should try to learn REXX scripting, and all that... and the performance benefits are definitely interesting. I'm running Linux on my personal server right now... and it's got plenty of performance (disk space is its limit, honestly,) but simplicity of configuration would be nice...

Well, that gives you an idea of where you could go with OS/2 as a server platform. Two to 5 times the performance (depends on hardware and server daemons used - the more processors you through at each, the more OS/2 will outperform Linux, as good as Linux is).

Oh, this is from real world experience as a server, btw... here's one post related to it:
http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,977.msg8939/#msg8939

Someplace is a screenshot of the server's (lack of) CPU utilization from that day. The NT based system listed on Netcraft could not keep running - much less serving. At that time, our site was at about 1/10 of the traffic a month. And no, I did not suggest the Windows Server setup - that was before I took over. When switching to a more powerful server also failed, they gave up on that hosting company and switched to BlueHost and were given a non-dedicated box. When that failed under load, they (we) were given a dedicated box, which intermittently goes down due to load - but remains up far more often than the nigthmare that the Windows based box was.

The (my) OS/2 server didnt even seem to notice it was doing anything during the time I was hosting the box - all at the same traffic levels that the far more powerful Linux box handles.


On the other hand, the Linux box also made the Windows box look like someone trying to run a website on an Etch-A-Sketch. So, Windows may indeed have more apps... but as a server, it is abysmal.


Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 05:32:26
Software availability is a concern for a daily use machine, though.

Yes... depending on use. For certain business stuff, not necessarily.


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


David McKenna

The same thing that always made it special..... the WPS.

rdonnelly

You come to an OS/2 forum, post your first thread, and start calling OS/2 ancient, then you say it is not a flame war. I compare it to windoze, because that was its competition. Really OS2 is not all that different then it was 16 years ago at version 2.1. Why? Because it was a great OS then, and it still is now. The WPS is still far ahead of most mainstream OS's. The WPS was the first gui, (correct me if I am wrong) to use the right mouse button, it has always been an object oriented gui. I agree it is "OLD", but it does not fit into the ancient category, since it is still way ahead of most OS's. I mean, what could really be done to improve on OS/2?

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 05:32:26

rdonnelly:
However, I'm not trying to make this thread an OS/2 vs. Windows flamewar. I also brought up Linux, OS X, and FreeBSD. ;)


Just waiting for eCS to have all the features................

djcaetano

Quote from: rdonnelly on 2008.11.08, 15:32:25
I mean, what could really be done to improve on OS/2?

  Improve UI? I dunno. The only things I could think of were:

  - Clearing the last bugs (and I include MMOS/2 and a better solution for the
SIQ in this category)
  - Improve (update) the look.

   On the core system there are a lot of updates needed (better support for huge
amounts of memory, improved support for recent hardware, more more and more
drivers, and so on).

  BTW, about "lack of software", I seldom need something that is not available on
OS/2. One of them is AutoCad (because I never had time to learn MicroStation,
and BlueCad is just too damn limited - no 3D); another one is BlueMSX (or
OpenMSX), an MSX Emulator I use to test some hobby-software I develop.
   Both of them I am able to run inside VirtualPC, so it is not a real big concern
(the only problem is the keyboard input doesn't work for BlueMSX).

   Most of times I have to boot VirtualPC is due to some Windoze user that
sends me a file to work on that is for a "windows-only-software". But otherwise,
I always try to find on Windows the same software I use on OS/2. PMMail,
KON, Mr.ED, OpenWatcom, FireFox, Mercury Messenger, Embellish,
Lotus SmartSuite or OpenOffice, JUDE, Squeak, PMView, Z!, DFSee,
LarsenCommander, Apache, MySQL, PHP, OpenChat, ZOC... the list is BIG!
  The differences from them to most Windows-only software are:

  - They do exist on my main plataform (OS/2) and on my secondary Windoze)
  - They are able to exchange files keeping the data (no need to reformat a document)
  - Some of them are not usually updated, but they all work good
  - Most of them have not "that many features", but have the features I use and
    are sufficient to get the job done.

   If they are available on Windows, why not use Windows? Because:

   - They usually works better (and faster) on OS/2
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - Even using windows, most people do not use them, so the "compatibility problem"
keeps untouched.
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - Many of the software that are available at OS/2 and Windows support REXX
scripts on OS/2, but have nothing similar on Windows.
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - There are too many viruses and trojans on Windows
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - I do not need a computer for gaming (I have a PS2 and an Wii for gaming)
   - Windows has not the WPS

   I believe these are the main reasons. :D
   I could think about more reasons, but I am feeling lazy right now. :P

DavidG

Why use eCS/OS2?

The WPS and the operating systems speed.  There is nothing yet today that compares to the WPS.  As for speed, it is fast bringing up a program, no matter how many programs I have open.  Try that under Windows.  I feel Iike I have lost half my life waiting for Windows to do something once the program is started.  Work folders is another example of something Windows can't do.  By work folders, I mean that programs can be auto started when the folder is opened.  You don't have to wait for the folder to open before you manually have to start each program like you do in Windows.

Also, eCS/OS2 has the best file management programs on any platform; FM/2, Filestar, Larsen Commander and I do a lot of file management.

Programs like Seamonkey in my opinion are more responsive under eCS than WIndows.  Remember the long wait times under Windows.

David

bhtooefr

Quote from: rdonnelly on 2008.11.08, 15:32:25
You come to an OS/2 forum, post your first thread, and start calling OS/2 ancient, then you say it is not a flame war. I compare it to windoze, because that was its competition. Really OS2 is not all that different then it was 16 years ago at version 2.1. Why? Because it was a great OS then, and it still is now. The WPS is still far ahead of most mainstream OS's. The WPS was the first gui, (correct me if I am wrong) to use the right mouse button, it has always been an object oriented gui. I agree it is "OLD", but it does not fit into the ancient category, since it is still way ahead of most OS's. I mean, what could really be done to improve on OS/2?

I did not start calling OS/2 ancient. The only time I used the word "ancient" was in reference to something almost completely offtopic - that I was playing around with actual ancient versions of OS/2. (1.30.1 and 2.10, to be specific. I think everyone on this forum would agree that those are ancient.)

I was saying that I didn't see why OS/2 was a competitive product in 2008. There's a difference. And, I'm fully understanding that OS/2 has some architectural benefits that may even still be ahead of their time, and it's going to make me pay more attention to them.

Anyway, as for software availability... I do know that that's not actually a fault of the OS itself (unless it's because it's hard to develop for - see Palm OS, and try to find a good web browser for it... there isn't any, because nothing can be easily ported, and the (no longer available) J9 JVM is buggy, and Opera Mini hits those bugs a lot.) If it doesn't have the market share, obviously software availability will be poor.

I'll note that one thing that looks impossible is... using most flash content - Flash Player 5 is the current version? Granted, this means no flash ads, but it also means that flash content that you want to use isn't usable.

Let's say I want to watch a YouTube video, something I do quite often. Unless there's a secret version of Flash Player 8 that I don't know about... I have to go to a YouTube downloader, download the video, and then play the FLV in mplayer. That seems like a ridiculously roundabout way of doing things...

(Switched to IE/Win32 to edit this post, because my VM is a bit slow (I don't think my CPU supports VT, so VPC is doing everything in software,) and Opera (my browser of choice) just displays something corrupt on these forums.)

Oh, and one more thing... I know this is one hell of a stretch, but...

Quote from: djcaetanoWindows has not the WPS

For some values of Windows (all of them being 3.1x,) it actually does have the WPS.

rdonnelly

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 18:06:13

I was saying that I didn't see why OS/2 was a competitive product in 2008. There's a difference. And, I'm fully understanding that OS/2 has some architectural benefits that may even still be ahead of their time, and it's going to make me pay more attention to them.

Anyway, as for software availability... I do know that that's not actually a fault of the OS itself (unless it's because it's hard to develop for - see Palm OS, and try to find a good web browser for it... there isn't any, because nothing can be easily ported, and the (no longer available) J9 JVM is buggy, and Opera Mini hits those bugs a lot.) If it doesn't have the market share, obviously software availability will be poor.



I can agree with you there, I abandoned OS/2 a few years ago my self, just like IBM did ;)

I recently ran across ECS on the web, and was happy to see some one was willing to rescue it. So I am back, in anticipation that we may see some decent apps in the future. IBM and every other hardware manufacturer is a partner with MS weather they like it or not, and the software and hardware departments, did not see eye to eye. Probably another reason it never had enough support? An OS is nothing with out hardware and apps, and a crappy when can dominate with the opposite.
Just waiting for eCS to have all the features................

djcaetano

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 18:06:13
I'll note that one thing that looks impossible is... using most flash content - Flash Player 5 is the current version? Granted, this means no flash ads, but it also means that flash content that you want to use isn't usable.
Let's say I want to watch a YouTube video, something I do quite often. Unless there's a secret version of Flash Player 8 that I don't know about... I have to go to a YouTube downloader, download the video, and then play the FLV in mplayer. That seems like a ridiculously roundabout way of doing things...

  Current Flash on OS/2 is Flash 7 (whatever). Most Flash 8 content work on it. Even som Flash 9.
  Anyway, these "ever changing" technologies that impregnates Windows world is one thing I really do not like.
  I really hope someone propose a open and free (and popular) alternative to Flash.

  My Wii, for example, has not support to Flash 8. And there is nothing I can do about it.
  But I do not think I have to blame Nintendo. I have to blame Adobe/Macromedia *and* Website developers, that require newest technologies even when a previous one will work great.

Quote from: bhtooefr on 2008.11.08, 18:06:13
Oh, and one more thing... I know this is one hell of a stretch, but...
Quote from: djcaetanoWindows has not the WPS
For some values of Windows (all of them being 3.1x,) it actually does have the WPS.

  Well, this is a BIIIIIIIG stretch. WPS for Windows 3.1 only looks like WPS. And has some of the WPS feel. But that's all. :)

  It is installed in my WinOS/2, though. :)

RobertM

Quote from: djcaetano on 2008.11.08, 16:16:18
   If they are available on Windows, why not use Windows? Because:

   - They usually works better (and faster) on OS/2
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - Even using windows, most people do not use them, so the "compatibility problem"
keeps untouched.
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - Many of the software that are available at OS/2 and Windows support REXX
scripts on OS/2, but have nothing similar on Windows.
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - There are too many viruses and trojans on Windows
   - Windows has not the WPS
   - I do not need a computer for gaming (I have a PS2 and an Wii for gaming)
   - Windows has not the WPS

   I believe these are the main reasons. :D
   I could think about more reasons, but I am feeling lazy right now. :P


I agree with all of these... and one more...

Windows does not have the WPS.

bhtooefr, djc didnt (and probably cant) say that enough times. It may be "different"/"awkward" to get used to at first... but once you really figure out what it can do (which neither of us has even touched on), you may find that like us, there is no subsitute.

Robert


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