• 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

Downgrade from Vista to XP?

Started by kim, 2008.03.30, 17:34:35

Previous topic - Next topic

Would You downgrade from Vista to XP?

Yes, I hate it.
11 (68.8%)
Yes, but not possible
2 (12.5%)
No, I love it.
3 (18.8%)
Don't use it.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 0

Saijin_Naib

Right, but the whole point is, Linux as an OS existed before IBM did research to develop AIX, and due to the open nature of Linux, advancements in the main linux body is also easily incorporated into AIX, even if IBM didnt develop those enhancements.

saborion2

#16
Re: "even if IBM didn't develop those enhancements". Case in point - there was an wholesale transfer by IBM of the Journaling File System (JFS) (specifically developed for OS/2) to the Linux Operating System. Also, with regards to "Linux as an OS existed before IBM did research to develop AIX". As history will show... if fact "AIX Version 1, introduced in 1986 for the IBM 6150 RT workstation, was based on UNIX System V Releases 1 and 2. In developing AIX, IBM and INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation (whom IBM contracted) also incorporated source code from 4.2 and 4.3BSD UNIX.

Among other variants, IBM later produced AIX Version 3 (also known as AIX/6000), based on System V Release 3, for their IBM POWER-based RS/6000 platform. Since 1990, AIX has served as the primary operating system for the RS/6000 series (now called System p by IBM).

AIX Version 4, introduced in 1994, added symmetric multiprocessing with the introduction of the first RS/6000 SMP servers. AIX Version 4 continued to evolve though the 1990s culminating with AIX 4.3.3 in 1999...." and was not developed after "Linux as an OS existed before IBM did research to develop AIX" as you appear to be saying.

You may wish to try this link for additional information on this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIX_operating_system


Robert Deed

Sajin.. I think you got your timelines a bit off.. AIX is in fact an older product then Linux. 

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.04.01, 05:39:52
Right, but the whole point is, Linux as an OS existed before IBM did research to develop AIX, and due to the open nature of Linux, advancements in the main linux body is also easily incorporated into AIX, even if IBM didnt develop those enhancements.

Saijin_Naib

:-D Yeah, I'm a moron. I admit, I assumed AIX was based off Linux (derivative of UNIX), I had no idea it was a derivative of UNIX itself. Whooops. Hubris is a bitch, innit? Oh well, my point about getting enhancements they can use in AIX from the linux community stands. They dont have to pay those people! That saves them a ton of money, does it not? If OS/2 could have been like that, they would have had no reason to murder it off, as it would not have become such a financial burden. Or thats how I see it, I dont really know what went on there :\ Just they buggered us and I'm pissed.

Robert Deed

Linux is actually a free clone of unix and early versions didn't share anything in common with any unix derivative except for the GNU tools.

OS/2 was murdered off because in IBM's culture the product had no purpose.  IBM was the mainframe, the mainframe was IBM.  Even the RS/6000 workstations were ugly ducklings to the server guys.  Then comes along IBM Personal Systems.. and this product which actually could do most if not all of what the servers could do (even if not at the same scale).  There was little if any markup in the personal sector.  Even at 200 dollars a pop OS/2 could not cover it's own cost of development and support.  IBM never sold computers to John Doe Everyman.. unless of course that was John Doe Everyman CEO.  They couldn't see that licensing and volume would be the way of the PC.  They were used to selling one system with everything needed to run it for 200,000 and then billing hourly for support.   No one can fault IBM for wanting out of the pool after they dangled their toes in it. 

It is hard to effectively market a product when your sales people don't even believe in it, and when the company footing the bill doesn't even know why they are doing it.  I am sure there were some people within the structure of IBM which recognized the potential in the PC.  Especially when coupled with a system which was as power as OS/2.  (the proof is that even though OS/2 has changed very little since the early days of development it is still in use today.  I can sit someone down in front of my PC at home running eCS and they think I'm running XP with a custom theme).  The problem was, IBM mainframe division was the cash cow, and what they wanted they got.  What they wanted was nothing which could compete with their domination of the server market, especially not something which was significantly less expensive and even worse, made by IBM. =)

IBM's Linux effort is more of a slight against Microsoft then anything to do with AIX.  IBM still maintains AIX.  Linux was a way to support Windows network architecture on their VM platforms without the overhead (expense and processing power) of Windows.  It also was in a way IBM saying, "you may have won, but watch your back" =)

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.04.02, 06:44:53
:-D Yeah, I'm a moron. I admit, I assumed AIX was based off Linux (derivative of UNIX), I had no idea it was a derivative of UNIX itself. Whooops. Hubris is a bitch, innit? Oh well, my point about getting enhancements they can use in AIX from the linux community stands. They dont have to pay those people! That saves them a ton of money, does it not? If OS/2 could have been like that, they would have had no reason to murder it off, as it would not have become such a financial burden. Or thats how I see it, I dont really know what went on there :\ Just they buggered us and I'm pissed.

saborion2

We read you "Saijin_Naib" loud and clear. So; ok, calm down you are in good hands like those of "Robert Deed" et al. Re: Oh well, my point about getting enhancements they can use in AIX from the Linux community stands. They don't have to pay those people! That saves them a ton of money, does it not? (while I cannot give you any exact figures.... IBM cash contributions to the development of Linux was reported to be in the tens of millions and surpassed any other company's cash contribution in this respect) Also, "If OS/2 could have been like that, they would have had no reason to murder it off, as it would not have become such a financial burden". From all appearances OS/2 continues to make money for IBM and could very well be one of the reasons why IBM is very reluctant to Open-Source the Source-Codes. Also, among other issues involving the Microsoft Corporation... it is reported that it was IBM's own marketing strategies that slowed OS/2's adoption in the market place.

Anyway, do not give up hope just yet "Saijin_Naib" - Keep your eyes on the Sparrow that is (CASSINI).  ;)