Author Topic: OS/2 Warp 4 (CP Merlin) NATIV on Lenovo X200T  (Read 5304 times)

Sigurd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
Re: OS/2 Warp 4 (CP Merlin) NATIV on Lenovo X200T
« Reply #15 on: 2011.03.29, 12:45:54 »
xWorkPlace was not developed for eCS. eCS supplies eWorkPlace - a "cut down" version of xWorkPlace. I prefer to *not* install eWorkPlace during an eCS install and add in xWorkPlace after the eCS install has finished - and I doubt that I am the only person who does that.

No, XWorkPlace was developed by the order of Serenity Systems. Is it based on XFolder class. The debugging of the extender continued during several years.

IIRC, Ulrich was working on xWorkPlace before SS approached him. It was smarter and easier for him to make a new package with xFolder as a subset instead of making the additional xWorkplace features a subset of xFolder. eWorkplace is a subset of xWorlplace.

Similar timeline also applies to eStyler/Styler2.

Sadly, even though they are ideal for the general/new OS/2 user, both (eWorkplace/eStyler) are limited in comparison to their OS/2 releases.

That aside, there are pros and cons to all the arguments presented here. Sigurd and most of the rest of us are not the common OS/2 user. Nor are we some poor Windows tech who is stuck supporting legacy OS/2 setups for large companies. Those people will not be able to go through the steps that Sigurd (or others of us) have went through to get OS/2 ACP/MCP working on newer systems.

On top of that, there are systems where ACP/MCP will NOT work on, or will NOT work on properly. These are systems that MUST have a working ACPI setup to run or run properly. A good example are the two IBM eServer xSeries 440 units we have. WSeB CP2 PF will install fine on them (for someone knowledgeable on OS/2), BUT, hyperthreading will NOT work, neither will more than two CPUs - the machine supports SIXTEEN CPUs. Though the machine supposedly follows the MP1.4 spec, it does NOT. There are too many variances in how it operates for more than 2 CPUs to allow OS2APIC to properly recognize and initialize the CPUs. For these systems, eCS v2 is the ONLY option to get full capabilities out of the machines - otherwise, people are limited to *2* CPUs instead of *16* CPUs. So, yes, WSeB will run on them, and run very darn well - but at 1/8th the capabilities of the machine. That's with every non-eCS fixpack and update to the OS, drivers, kernel, etc. There is something in the setup that requires ACPI to properly function.

So, in scenarios like that, it does NOT matter how one updates the WSeB/MCP/ACP disks... without the subsequent updates that eCS v2 has, those systems will NOT be fully utilized. In others, yes, updating MCP/ACP may indeed result in a fully operational system.

But that brings us back to the point at hand. One cannot say that "eCS is not necessary... one simply needs to update ACP/MCP with UpCD" just as one cannot say that "eCS is necessary for all newer hardware because MCP/ACP cannot be gotten to work with them"

NEITHER is true of all scenarios. EITHER only apply to CERTAIN scenarios for CERTAIN hardware. It is really senseless to argue EITHER point as a "be all, end all, one size fits all" scenario, because doing so would not be correct or accurate.

And for those of you who cannot stop to think about the VAST difference in your experience installing using OS/2 or eCS in comparison to the tens of thousands of corporate installs STILL running that get supported by some Windows tech who really knows nothing about computers - much less OS/2, I recently was engaged in a support email situation where one such tech couldn't figure out how to install network drivers for an OS/2 installation (one that was otherwise working fine). Even with DETAILED, SPECIFIC instructions that applied to his EXACT setup, the machine is (by the end of our communications) STILL not networked - TEN days. You guys and I could tie one hand behind our backs, close both of our eyes, take a nap and install the drivers for this particular card at the same time.

...ok, maybe we'd have to have at least one eye open and be awake to do it, but you get the point. For someone like those people, even if they are WONDERFUL Windows Techs (as this guy probably was), eCS is really the only viable option.

Everyone here can argue back and forth based on their experiences... but like any product, or any service, our experiences do not necessarily apply to all hardware, or to the experiences of those who are doing the work. Kinda makes it senseless to come to such conclusions on EITHER side of this figurative fence, doesn't it?

Hi Robert,

yes, you are for sure right. I think I may not wrote clear enough that I am - as allways - only speaking for myself on my hardware and my experiences. I never wrote "there is no need for ecomstation" - I did wrote "there is no need for ecomstation anymore for me".

And that's it. For some I may stress this fact to hard, but from time to time I got phonecalls from Mensys who allways told me: this will never run (BM and Windows 7, next to Windows 7 at all), Warp 4 will never run on modern hardware and so on, I can understand that they want to protect their product - but hey - once I tried I ALLWAYS proofed them wrong. And this does not make me happy nor victorious, it makes me sad, if you believe it or not. And that is something I just want to tell - I know at least some people who want to be informed about differenz ways of "OS/2 on modern hardware", i.e. I created a full usable Warp 4 FP 15 VDI for Virtualbox 4.04 (what I have been told - you may guess it - is impossible).

And please do not forget - there is an english eCS 2since may last year, I never saw the german one I paid for. I think also it is the right of a customer to ask or demand the things he paid for years but never came true (Yes - I am as tired as you reading this of writing this).

In my opinion it would benefit the community if more people would just test or try what they thing that might be possible, just to give it a try and to let others share their knowledge.

 I think if we just could seat together somewhere (may be with a cold beer and some small dishes) and talk from face to face there would have not been half of all this missunderstandings. It is not that easy for me as I am not using my mothertongue to allways hit exactly the point I try to explain. And therfore it may sometimes sound "hard" or "Harming" but this is not my intention, I am just writing about proffable facts that I on my machines do experience.

For me it is that simple: eCS 2 is dead for me as long as there is no reliable ACPI, I looked for an alternative and Merlin CP2 showed up and (till now - but as I worte - deep testing has to follow) fitts all my needs.

For me it is just Hobby and I am happy if there are some around who are able to benefit at least a bit from the things I did through the years. ;)


RobertM

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2034
    • View Profile
    • A.I.BuiltPC - using OS/2 Warp Server & eComStation for Custom Web and Database Solutions
Re: OS/2 Warp 4 (CP Merlin) NATIV on Lenovo X200T
« Reply #16 on: 2011.03.29, 20:58:24 »
Hi Sigurd,

My reply wasn't directed specifically at you (or Eugene for that matter). ALL of us, myself included, are guilty of giving such impressions from time to time, and probably unintentionally.

The problem is, when we do so, or when someone erroneously thinks we are doing so, that's when counterproductive arguments (like the one in this thread and elsewhere) start. That's something we've all agreed isn't necessary or helpful. I was simply trying to bring this conversation back to the true point at hand... on your Lenovo X200T, you managed to get MCP working.

We all need to make an effort in how we choose our wording... none of us should ever be saying things that imply a need for eCS or a lack of need for eCS for everyone else - which is something we've all done, usually unintentionally, from time to time. Instead, we must be careful to make posts that say "On *MY* (whatever machine) MCP worked" or "On *MY* (whatever machine) I needed eCS to get it to work"

The other thing everyone has to remember is that much of our posts do not make sense (or arent helpful) to the numerous people who surf in here for information to support some installation at work. They are by and large people without any OS/2 experience, and will not understand much of the more vague stuff we "pronounce as fact" because of a lack of referential information. For instance (totally made up example):

"ACP will not run properly on newer machines using Intel chipsets"
- what the heck does that mean? Define newer? 2 years old? 5? 10?
- what chipsets? Intel has made dozens or hundreds of variants. Surely this statement doesnt apply to ALL newer Intel chipsets.

While that's a made up example, it holds true for certain machines using Intel chipsets - and not for others. But it gets worse... the time frame for "newer" isn't even static. I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that there are some 4 year old machines that ACP *will* install and run on - and yet there are some 8 year old machines it will NOT.

Because of how vague and non-specific such things are, WE run into this problem in arguing stuff with each other too...

What would be REALLY helpful is, without us misreading or attacking each other or arguing with each other, we post information on each machine/OS combination as we come across it.

Perhaps the Wiki side of OS/2 World is a good place for that? If not, we can do it in these forums... naming threads similar to how you (Sigurd) did with this one... and then all of us need to stay away from the eCS vs OS/2 for installation battles.

What that means is let's drop the little jabs about "And I didnt need eCS at all" or "Only eCS will install on hardware of this age"

Honestly, none of that is necessary. Using this thread as an example (sorry Sigurd, not trying to single you out), Sigurd has gotten MCP to run on his X200T. Other than as a footnote indicating that no eCS files were used in the attempt, there is absolutely NO need to mention eCS AT ALL. And the same should hold true for threads about installing eCS on certain hardware - unless certain files were grabbed from ACP/MCP, there's no reason to mention them in such posts.

THEN: when we are done with such posts, we have valid, helpful resources that outline problems, pitfalls, steps needed and compatibility information about each hardware/OS combination. That would be far more helpful than almost every one of these threads turning into the OS/2 vs eCS battles that keep happening.



THIS PART I HOPE EVERYONE READS:

On that note, I will confess, speaking solely for myself and NOT my fellow moderators, I *am* getting a little tired of such threads turning into a battleground over such things... and I am getting tired of having to write such long-winded posts to try to get things back on track. At some point, unless my fellow moderators disagree (which is something we will discuss privately amongst ourselves), I will simply start deleting posts that turn into OS/2 vs eCS attacks (with neat little jabs at each other) if I find them in threads like this. They are not helpful or appropriate. And those jabs at each other are rather childish. For those, (anyone who enjoys such arguments) go make a thread about "Strengths/Weaknesses of installing OS/2 vs eCS on newer/older hardware" - and keep it civil. The borderline attacks that have happened over the years are also not acceptable and may result in post deletion too.

I try to be very tolerant and very calm in these situation, but honestly, without even trying, I can find a dozen threads in a minute of searching, where the conversations have turned into a bash-fest against each other or against either OS/2 or eCS. (to all) Please, let's stop that - so I don't have to be the one to stop it the next time it happens (we all have better things we can be doing than that).
« Last Edit: 2011.03.29, 22:30:09 by RobertM »
|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Sigurd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
Re: OS/2 Warp 4 (CP Merlin) NATIV on Lenovo X200T
« Reply #17 on: 2011.04.04, 08:58:25 »
Hi,

I am close to the goal and here some pictures for those interestet in. I was able to get "the best" IRQ selection for PCI in BIOS so everything is working fine and reliable as it ought to. No crashes at all.

As a small replacement for the "not haveing and working Powermanagement" I do use the program "coretemp 0.0.1" from Nicck, that does show me the Temperature of the CPUs (Core by Core) if I need to.

It would be great to have something to watch the Mainboard Temperature as well, but this seems to be a long way. Even though - it is NOT getting hot that much, even less than (sorry but this is the only way to compare something) eCS2 with ACPI.

Here are some pictures - taken with the X200T and OS/2 Merlin in Docking station and 1600X1200 SNAP Resolution):

(As you may see I did play around with the "Layout Palette" to get theses designs, so it is just "ALT and RMB" to change them)

More to come in the Final video.



« Last Edit: 2011.04.04, 09:00:18 by Sigurd »

Sigurd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
OS/2 Warp 4 (CP Merlin) NATIV on Lenovo X200T
« Reply #18 on: 2011.04.04, 14:04:06 »
Here are two more pictures, showing to be Online via UMTS and Firefox 4 playing HTML5 video.

Data rate seems to be slow, compared with the WLAN rate, I have to test this. May be limited because of the Injoy inbuild maximumrate for COM Ports.

Well, it is fast enough for anything else - but to watch Videos streams it is not good enough (for now ;-)  )

Please take a look at the x-center - both cores are not forced to work that much :-)

(I am using 100m_SMP kernel, Pictures taken "outside" Dockingstation)

Cheers