Author Topic: What is the future of this platform?  (Read 13325 times)

WarpWorld

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #15 on: 2012.06.11, 18:56:22 »
While not is out in the public. One thing that has improved and continues research is the ACPI section.
But also research in how to boot eCS from an GPT partition is progressing.

I don't think IBM has lost the sources. I know of one customer Mensys did not get that had a support contract with IBM then ran upto 2013 or 2014. So the must have source code somewhere.

Roderick
I am agree with that. This story ''we lost source code,blah,blah'' is for little children.What's for best team of programers form world to disassemble,decode or what of binary version of source code.So they don't have interest to do that.Time when they were selling OS/2 is past and that's end.I think OS/2 is one of definitely dead systems (like BeOS,MS DOS and others)...Yes existed open source clones,which can run compatible software,but they are not naturally closed source OSes from big companies...

Sigurd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #16 on: 2012.06.11, 21:05:20 »
Quote
As for IBM, I've always been puzzled by their attitude to OS/2 migration.

I worked for IBM for 25 years. For the first 20, they were a company that went out of their way to be sure that the customer got the best service, and products. In the last 5 years (ending in 1992, when I retired), the whole thing changed to "make money, or you're outa here". OS/2 had a solid customer base, but IBM was not making much money from it. Development was expensive, and there was not a lot of service to be done. I believe that it paid for itself, but there was little profit in it, so IBM tried to cut it. The only reason it hung around for as long as it did, was because of the solid customer base who refused to let it go. IBM filled the gap by pushing JAVA, for a while, but that also didn't produce much profit, so they jumped on the *NIX bandwagon, and attempted to make money by selling "conversion support". I think that is coming to an end too, but I have no idea where they plan to go next. I would suspect that windows would make more opportunities for "conversion", and maintenance, and I have seen a few indications that that is where they are going. I also believe that most customers are realizing that they are not getting the service, or products, that they need (from anybody, not just IBM). There is an opportunity to pick up a lot of that business, but I don't know of anything that is available to do the job. Cell phones, and *pad products will eventually replace the laptop, and desktop (if they haven't already), but the servers that do the background work are available to whoever can make the most reliable hardware and software. Linux, seems to have that market, but I am not so sure that it is really doing the job that is desired. OS/2 (as eCS), can still do a credible job, but it is getting very limited with new hardware, the GUI parts (OS/2's strong point) are becoming less important, and the networking is getting so far out of date (no IPv6 support), that everybody can see the end of the line, and they don't want to commit to it, until that problem (among others) has been resolved.

Where does it go from here? Well, rumor has it that IBM has "lost the source". If that is actually true, then IBM would be the last company that I would hire to help me protect my data. If it is not, how can anybody trust anything that they say?  So, IBM will be no help with the task. We can get little information about new products (even simple things like video adapters, and NICs), to be able to write proper drivers. There are far too few qualified programmers working with OS/2 software to be able to keep up with the changes that are demanded by users. The bottom line is, that Mensys (eCS) has made great progress in keeping OS/2 working, but there have been no great advances since IBM backed out. Eventually, OS/2 (as eCS), will just not be able to do the job any more, and the users will have to move on, to get the job done. A lot of that has already happened, but there is a hard core who are still committed to keeping the platform alive. More power to them, but they need as much help as they can get.

The best I read for some time here. I totally do agree!!

danielnez1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #17 on: 2012.06.11, 21:49:52 »
It's nice to see new developments for the platform (i.e. ACPI). Once that matures enough and we see some more drivers I'll probably use eCS as my main OS on my new Compaq Presairo CQ57 i3 (WiFi and sound don't currently work with eCS 2.1).

In terms of Linux, that has made some great strides over the past couple of years (bar GNOME 3 and Unity) however there are some aspects that frustrate me, such as the contemporary UNIX system structure and the fact you still need to use the Terminal for some basic tasks. Of course Linux has perhaps found its true home on smartphones/tablets and servers rather then the conventional desktops.

While OS/2 and eCS have their quirks (particularly some aspects of the Workplace shell) IMHO it still supplies a degree of familiarity to Windows users compared to Linux which to me is a good asset to have.

Ben

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • What is really important?
    • View Profile
    • The Self Wrighting Network
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #18 on: 2012.06.12, 13:17:24 »

It seems clear at this point in time, that any OS can be kept on life support indefinitely, even with just a trickle of new input. Some will thrive under limitless funding while others will just keep on trekkin'.

The real question one should ask is how is it that no new OS' have come into being?

Another question one should ask is how is it that no new computers have come along in all this very... long... time?

We still have the late 70's, early 80's, x86 architecture being patched and face-lifted with trowels of plaster, and great fanfare about miniscule, literally microscopic, changes yet there has been no significant enhancements and no... that's right.. .zero... newcomers into the arena.

This doesn't seem possible does it? That's because it doesn't work the way that TV tells us. In fact, nothing works the way that TV tells us. Yet TV is working precisely as it is supposed to. Precisely. Such a fine-tuned metaphorical, machine! Begrudgingly, respectful, admiration leaking out from what should be an open and unmitigated, hatred from all, (not just me).

Yes, we still have the Mac trudging along on the bones of the Power PC and now, oo! strange... now, it is also on the X86 architecture and and... yes... it has morphed into a Linux variant. All to give the illusion of real change where there is... none...

There's an old adage in politics; "throw enough shit at the fan and some of it will stick"... Do you see how that applies here, in reference to the previous paragraph?

In plain English, throw enough miniscule changes at the people, hype them in to the stratosphere, and everyone will think that we are in the massive rush of an "evolution"ary computer change where soon... soon... we'll progress, (undefined, that word is meaningless), into, into...


I do apologize; that wasn't plain at all. Here's plain.

They want a human & computer merger.

Why?

A computers chief usage is that of a control device.

Get it?

Why did, in the time of the Bubonic Plague, the elite give up lordship... mastery... over us, (the serfs/slaves), and hand control over to government that seemingly just popped into existence?

A question that is most easy to answer and everyone knows it; They didn't!



So... in ending the segway and in returning to the topic...

Does this computer OS/architecture, game-play remind you of politics?

There are two main contenders Conservative/Republican, (Windows/X86), and  Liberal/Democrat, (Mac), and a wishy-washy 3rd party called New Democrats/Green Party, (Linux), that caters to the misfits, an acts as a subtle rudder to steer the preselected candidate into power under the guise of "freedom of choice".

Can you discern a pattern?
Look around you. You'll see this very pattern repeated, never naturally occurring, yet pervasive. The ancient greeks, (do you know why I used a lower case "g"?), wrote about this method 2,350 years ago. So did the ancient Chinese around the same time period. No, not about computers, but about "techniques of control". Control of what? Control of you.

Anyway, like I alluded to in my first sentence, OS/2 can be kept going indefinitely. When the control system is ready to steer us in a different direction, a new, (Miracle!!), OS will come out. There will be much chatter and excitement, line-ups and raging, squawking and spats all about what the latest and greatest is as compared to the "ol' stand-by" as the masses, -- really one side being split into two opposing sides to promote infighting-- just go along with the hot-inflated, breeze from the fetid, breath of those that live upon high, swaying and harmonizing to the computer-generated songs and juvenile lyrics handed down to us from the filth at the top. (Yes folks, shit does float to the top).

Until then we will trudge along with our "True 32-bit, Object Oriented" wonder of yesteryear... which is still the best OS out there... as far as I'm concerned... and if I had a big, bag of money that I did not need, OS/2 would get a big boost!

But...

For some, the "jolt!" of real, brain activity, is too much! But don't worry... I put the pseudo-paramedics on stand-by in case someone flops over... and please! no keyboard stammering!.. or I'll have to send in the white coats... you know... those that are associated with nervous disorders... especially catering to the ones that have been exposed to recent, unexpected, externally excited, brain-activity. Shocking, you know... it's just not right!

Oh! Dear me.
Once again I must apologize... I didn't mean to talk about "the real issues". Don't be alarmed. I'll stop. I'll turn right now, back to your... regular... programming... programming... programming.

Ever seen a "zombie" movie? Where the "once men" creatures imitate real life, ambling along in their herky-jerky motion, lost in a somnambulant state somewhere between sleep and death? And what are these lost souls searching for? "BRAINS!"

Now, don't become alarmed, but those movies are just the sons-of-the-elite having their little fun... at our expense That is to say, the movie producers making fun of YOU! The Zombies. Do you get it? No? The movies producers know that you never will... Cows munch their cud, the masses munch their popcorn... So what is the difference between them? To those that make the movies, there is no difference. The fact that most of those who read this post will never think beyond the surface of those words, prove the movie makers right! Which are you? Do you understand the question?

So you don't like the above paragraph and reflexively think what I wrote was wrong, sardonic, (look it up!), or satirical? Rent one of the many, many, zombie movies out, and watch it. Pay particular attention to that metaphor I just gave you. And it doesn't matter which zombie movie; They're all the same. Take the 1st one as a suggestion, the old black and white starter by George A. Romero, the "Night of the Living Dead". Get it? It surely ain't no zombie movie! Look at it for a moment like the swelling masses of zombies are just the swelling masses of people and that there are, but just a few really alive! with working brains.

The National Film Registry wrote of this as a film deemed as "culturally, historically or aesthetically significant." Huh? How can such a piece of mindless trash get such accolades? That doesn't make any sense... unless you look at it in the light that I just shone upon it.

Don't like the Zombie flicks? Watch any of the many, (ever wonder why the make more than one version of the same flick?), versions of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", (Spock - Leonard Nimoy - is in one of them for all you Trekkies out there), and you'll see another take on the exact same thing, people becoming empty shells, mockeries of themselves, and the few really alive people with some brains, fighting against them. And in case you still didn't get it, we are the zombies, the walking dead... and the elite... are the ones that are truly alive and with brains.

Ever notice that? Common and constant re-occurrence of theme in the cinema?

There are only nine movie themes. It's well known amongst the literary community and critics talk of it all of the time. Ever wonder "why"?

Ever wonder why you have never seen a movie where people progress in a natural way, love and care for, and support one another, where the "functional", (not dysfunctional), family thrives and where government fades away, (no one wants to fight), and big business is no more? How can it be that no such movie exists if there is freedom?

Oops! More reality. Tut, tut. Where ARE my manners!

What? No remote?

Here! Let me push the off button for you. CLICK!



P.S.

Just as a side note...

Under every test ever done down through history and today, (and there have been many), the sons of the average joe always, (and I mean always), tested higher in ever conceivable test, (physical, mental, spiritual), than do the sons of the elite, (interbred). Always. No exceptions.

So how do they stay above us and in control?

They give us, (and we accept, into the very heart of our family), TV programming, grotesque video games, mindless, brain-rot trash, immoral behaviour, and fake revolutions, (computer, politics, etc.).

If you ain't stupid when you sit down to watch TV, have no fear, you soon will be! This is how we remain under their thumb and their puppets... that they toy with; we, the great genius' at birth, who are mindlessly conned into throwing away our birth gifts... our own, personal genius... so we can watch, rotten, TV garbage! Oh! What a deal we have negotiated!

Remember, it's always a choice... we are never forced.

Keep all of that in mind the next time you watch your favourite episode of "The King of the Hill" as he chug-a-lugs a half gallon of chilled, horse sperm, or as you gobble down the "very latest", "cutting edge", and obviously "faked" news broadcasts. (Not mindless trash you say?... right...soul-destroying would be more accurate.)


« Last Edit: 2012.06.21, 16:40:45 by Ben »

jdeb

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #19 on: 2012.06.12, 15:44:10 »
That is Great! Funny and thought provoking. Love it Ben ;D
« Last Edit: 2012.06.12, 15:53:48 by jdeb »
Foxconn P41A-P, Intel E7500, 2 GB DDR2 800, ATI X300, ADATA Sata II 64 GB SSD, 160GB WD Sata II HD, Intel Pro 100/1000, Antec Basiq 350W PS, Antec 300 Case, ECS 2.1

Ben

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • What is really important?
    • View Profile
    • The Self Wrighting Network
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #20 on: 2012.06.12, 19:31:27 »

Thanks, jdeb.

I'm glad you caught both the humour and the seriousness of it.

It's hard as hell to excite brain activity these days so you gotta add some "jabs" and some "bites" and a sprinkle or two of "humour."

But is it a wonder that only a very few people ever try to think anymore, with a plethora of thought-arresting phrases like:


  • Positive thinking
  • Negative thinking
  • Sustainability
  • Carbon Footprint
  • Don't be Left behind
  • That's just your opinion
  • I know
  • What's on TV?
  • Global Warming
  • Change is good, (yet is forever undefined. What are we being changed into and who asked for change?)
  • Progress, (yet is forever undefined. Progressing where and into what? Do I really want to go there? Not me!)
  • New Freedom, (ala G.Dubya Bush who also, never defined the term. And I can say this emphatically, he meant "less" freedom for us. Ask yourself, are we more, or less free, since he gave that speech?; We are far, less free...)

I could go on and on listing these terms and phrases that are all carefully crafted by teams of old, psychiatrists and psychologists, (old people having vast reserves of experience and knowledge upon which to draw), each specializing in different fields and subcategories of linguistics, philology, archeology, social engineering, behavioural patterns. And all of whom remain anonymous. (Can you name one?)

You know them as the amorphous blobs called "Think Tanks"... and there... are... hundreds of them, if not thousands. (Can you name one member of a Think Tank? or for that matter can you even name one Think Tank?) How can you know so little about groups that have such wide-reaching, affects upon your lives?

Who starts them?

Who pays them?

What people asked for them? Did you? I certainly did not!

What need do they serve and who are they serving? You? They surely are not serving me!

Why don't you know more about them?

Yet they control our society and our day to day existence in a deep and profound way that very few people will ever be aware of or understand.

Anyway...


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: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #21 on: 2012.06.14, 03:47:02 »
Quote
As for IBM, I've always been puzzled by their attitude to OS/2 migration.

I worked for IBM for 25 years. For the first 20, they were a company that went out of their way to be sure that the customer got the best service, and products. In the last 5 years (ending in 1992, when I retired), the whole thing changed to "make money, or you're outa here". OS/2 had a solid customer base, but IBM was not making much money from it. Development was expensive, and there was not a lot of service to be done.

What many people don't know about that time is that IBM Global Services was a multi-billion dollar division with a massive net to gross percentage. IBMGS was (though rarely mentioned) one of the largest "enemies" of OS/2. Companies were transitioning to smaller solutions and away from IBM's big metal (which were a large part of the bread and butter of IBMGS's support money). Like you said, there wasn't much in making money supporting OS/2. "Hey... it's still running, right?" "Yup"...

When I was "consulting" with IBMGS and we (one of their teams and I) were working on getting the Bank of America/Riggs Bank contract, I would have supported a MASSIVE chunk of the country. I as in *me* - not a team of people (as is the current banking situation with much switching to Windows)... that's a TINY profit potential compared to the current situation. (we lost to another IBM GS team - though I earned some very expensive OS/2 related packages, such as IBM CM/2, multiple OS/2 Warp Server licenses and a variety of other Lotus and IBM server and client licenses - and free training and certification on the also mostly unknown (but thoroughly amazing) IBM DSS for OS/2 and related products).

When it comes to "big metal", high support costs are expected due to the machine's and operating system's nature (and the massive up-front prices). Not so much when it came to PCs and PC based servers. Thus, already, OS/2 had a problem. One couldn't demand such massive premiums for supporting Intel based PCs and servers - and the support needs were drastically smaller than the competitors. IBM GS eventually transitioned into supporting what made them money - through the steps Doug posted and into Windows where the support money was.

This also impacted their server business. When the Netfinity line was transformed into the eServer xSeries line, the "cream of the crop" was to be the IBM eServer xSeries 430. It was a SIXTY FOUR CPU box that OS/2 was targeted for. Truth be told, OS/2 was the ONLY "PC OS" that could really run on it. Windows couldn't even handle 32 CPUs at the time. IBM re-focused at that time to such a massive extent that THEY helped Microsoft get 32 CPU support running and segmentation was implemented on the x430 to allow a fully configured version to act as two 32 CPU machines. And that was the death knell for OS/2 on the xSeries. Since then, only a small handful of basic xSeries servers would run OS/2 - which is why machines like the x440 and x445 have issues with it.

On top of that, something I've hinted at before... improvements to OS/2 *WERE* written - including things that would allow it to more fully utilize the x430. The extent of those improvements is largely unknown to me (only got into some of the details with IBM when I was dying for access to an x430) - and none ever saw the light of day.

WE will NEVER see those enhancements (YES folks, Warp Server 5 in some form *DID* exist. SO SICKENINGLY TIRED OF ARGUING ON THAT). They were never "completed" and fully tested as the project was killed. IBM *does* release beta code and even alpha code at various points for testing - heck, I've even gotten pre-alpha code for testing when I was part of their "real" beta/alpha test team - including code (yes as in code) and binaries for the "new" (at the time) 32bit print subsystem. But for integration into a production product? The binaries or code will never see the light of day except for rare instances where it's been compiled for a specific client for a specific scenario to honor a support contract (which is why some big companies have some interesting "fixes" - one of which myself and a few other companies got was fixes to the 32 bit TCP/IP stack to fix a stack hang on certain types of attacks - THAT set of binaries lasted (ie: were available - and only to a select few) for only a few hours, and on day two a more official fix was released and made available to others.

Much like the code we know about that is "lost", the code most people *don't* know about is even more "lost".



Now as for licensing and copyrights on the actual OS/2 components, sorry folks, Microsoft is a TINY piece of the problem. MUCH of OS/2 work was sub-contracted to or licensed from others, including WPS components. The actual list is daunting, including work licensed from companies that no longer exist (which doesn't invalidate the copyrights sadly - at least not in this country). Much of the remaining portions that Microsoft holds any claim to are HORRENDOUS and should have died DECADES ago - like the LanManager/MPTS configuration/installation disaster. There aren't many such places - and they all need to be replaced anyway.
|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


jdeb

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Foxconn P41A-P, Intel E7500, 2 GB DDR2 800, ATI X300, ADATA Sata II 64 GB SSD, 160GB WD Sata II HD, Intel Pro 100/1000, Antec Basiq 350W PS, Antec 300 Case, ECS 2.1

danielnez1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #23 on: 2012.08.10, 21:36:48 »
^^ In a way OS/2 was (and still is) indirectly through Windows NT  ;D

Having tried to install eCS on my new-ish Compaq and reading other people's experiences, it's clear the platform has some major hurdles to overcome, i.e: USB 3.0, WiFi etc. The OS/2 community and companies have done some amazing things with the platform and continue to do so, it does appear to be increasingly difficult to keep up to speed with the latest hardware.

danielnez1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #24 on: 2012.08.13, 19:49:33 »
One more thing, around 2010 there were a few rumours about IBM producing a Linux distro with OS/2 services running on top of it. The rumour seemed to fade after that, but was there any truth to it, or was it just wild speculation?

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: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #25 on: 2012.08.13, 20:53:38 »
One more thing, around 2010 there were a few rumours about IBM producing a Linux distro with OS/2 services running on top of it. The rumour seemed to fade after that, but was there any truth to it, or was it just wild speculation?

Since earlier than that (and the effort died off earlier as well - and more than once), there was interest to "port" the Workplace Shell to Linux and elsewhere. The history, 20 years in the making, goes something like this:

1990's:
  • In the VERY early 1990's, IBM started plans for a version of OS/2, the Workplace Shell and a kernel system that was device independent

  • This effort was announced by IBM (the corporate entity) in various press releases now "lost"

  • This effort was made more publicly known in 1993 (and later years) by David Barnes, who, in various presentation, detailed IBM's plans for such a thing

  • This effort DID succeed in creating a version of the WPS that was device independent. It was OS/2 Warp for PPC and was released on the IBM Thinkpad 801 (and possibly a few other rare machines). It never reached beyond "incomplete" or "beta" if memory serves, but did run on IBM's Mach kernel (a BSD based *nix variant)

  • This effort was to expand to IBM's announced "Workplace OS" as well.

  • THUS: there is a very real Workplace Shell that DOES run on a *nix based underlying system.

Early to Mid 2000's:
  • As IBM's "roadmap" for OS/2 began hinting at a slowdown in further development (culminating in the mid 2000's final roadmaps), interest in the Linux community (largely by those trying to implement an OS/2 replacement) for porting the Workplace Shell started again.

    At this time, IBM was assisting the *nix world with such things as ports of JFS and a LOT of help in improving Linux's threading (or virtual lack thereof) engine.

  • There were MANY flaws in the expectations, and no true *EFFORT* ever came of it - the ony thing that came to fruition was a *DESIRE* to do so. The desires were NEVER based (at THAT time) in either the technical reality or in the legal reality.

  • The Workplace Shell is encumbered by numerous copyrights and patents (various owned by non-IBM and non-Microsoft entities) - these were the *legal* hurdles that would not allow source to be released into the public or to the Linux community.

  • There were, at the time, various technical hurdles that could NOT be overcome, due to the state in which Linux operated. The largest one was Linux's threading engine. The Workplace Shell is highly threaded - and "highly threaded" increases to "very very highly threaded" once one starts adding new sub-classes and new features to it (for instance, all the WPS enhancement utilities available (or bundled with eComStation)). Any operating system unable to handle *BOTH* a large number of threads (especially in comparison to the hardware available at the time) *AND* a large number that often interacted with each other would be a VERY poor fit for the Workplace Shell - thus a port wasn't really a viable option - and a less threaded rewrite (which would cut out some of the WPS's amazing capability to speed aspects) would have been the only viable option.

  • Many seemed to hope, without researching either end of it, that IBM would magically release the code and it would be easy to create such a port - obviously, for both reasons above, that wasn't going to happen (and thus didn't)

In the late 2000's to today:
  • Interest and movements to get the WPS open sourced spawned again. At least due to the patent and copyright issues, that still is a virtual impossibility.

  • Serenity Systems, later followed my Mensys, has indicated that a kernel agnostic approach to a future version of OS/2 is a future consideration (since various parts of OS/2 couldn't be enhanced without such an effort). That of course would include a rewrite of the WPS. Note: I said (accurately) *rewrite* and not *port*.

  • Various other "OS/2 Clone" projects have been announced, with efforts at some level of planning, coding or documenting (ie: API documenting) by others who have planned (or perhaps are still planning) on creating a WPS clone that is not tied to x86 32bit OS/2 and its kernel.

During that time, various "migration methods" for running OS/2 type apps have been suggested by IBM - but no (that I can find or are aware of) plans for a Linux distro with an OS/2 personality seem to have ever surfaced in their press releases since the aborted OS/2 PPC version.

Also during that time, there were efforts to allow an OS/2 based server to distributively run OS/2 based apps on other clients - it was a similar but far more elegant version of how (in the Windows world) one could remote into another machine, run various apps, and so on from a different client (which was pretty much only drawing the interfaces). A similar thing already exists in the OS/2 world in the form of *SEAMLESS* WinOS2 (except that the Win Code is run locally), where OS/2 dialogs are redrawn as Win3.x dialogs (when in SEAMLESS mode) - which is why they inherit *OS/2's* object settings (such as border size, etc), because they are largely redressed OS/2 objects.

And finally, Citrix and Connectix had initiatives in this area (client, server and VM based) that suffered the following demises: Connectix's were all killed when Microsoft bought them. Citrix dropped efforts in the OS/2 arena over time as (1) their partnership with Microsoft strengthened, and (2) OS/2's demise was made known by IBM.

Hope that history (which may not be all inclusive) gives you some idea of what went on in that arena.

Best,
Rob
« Last Edit: 2012.08.13, 20:59:33 by RobertM »
|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


danielnez1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #26 on: 2012.08.13, 21:20:24 »
Thanks Rob, I knew a little bit about Workplace OS but it's fascinating to hear a bit of the back storey.

I guess the IP was the killer issue, unless IBM were to get something out of it (i.e. more clients etc.), I guess the work required in porting and any auditing required wouldn't be worth it.

That aside, the lack of a client OS does appear to be a gaping hole in their product lineup.

Cheers,

Dan

dryeo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #27 on: 2012.08.14, 16:26:32 »
What about the version of the Workplace shell that was written for AIX and other Unixes in the form of the Common Desktop Environment (CDE)? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Desktop_Environment
This has recently been opensourced and should run on Linux, http://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/

miturbide

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1154
    • View Profile
    • OS2World
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #28 on: 2012.08.14, 23:09:14 »
I used long time ago Common Desktop Environment (CDE) on AIX environment (ohh... the memories). It is good to see it open sourced and now available for the general public.

But I think that CDE differs a lot from what we know as the Workplace Shell (with all the objects and the SOM stuff).  Running CDE over OS2-eCS may be interesting too but I don't see it as a migration path for the platform to have a future.
Martín Itúrbide
OS2World.com NewsMaster
Open Source Advocate

Skype - martiniturbide
Google Talk - martiniturbide@gmail.com

miturbide

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1154
    • View Profile
    • OS2World
Re: What is the future of this platform?
« Reply #29 on: 2012.08.14, 23:10:29 »
Reading back the WarpStock 2007 Voyager presentation. I think that was the best idea. The OS/2 distinctive technology is the WPS constructed over SOM, and building a WPS and SOM open source clone over eComStation was a good plan to have at least a roadmap for the platform to have a future.

I would really like to start and collaborate on a project aims to clone WPS. For now it can be just over eComStation and IBM' SOM, re-using the stuff we have in xWorkplace, xshadows, etc. I'm not a developer but I can help on documentation, GIT admin, communication, whatever. I just hope that there will be some developers out there with interest to try to work together on this goal.
Martín Itúrbide
OS2World.com NewsMaster
Open Source Advocate

Skype - martiniturbide
Google Talk - martiniturbide@gmail.com