Home | Gallery | Forum | Services | Webmail | Archive | Links | Contact Us | About Us
OS2 World.Com Forum
OS2 World.Com Online Discussion Forum.
Index / Public Discussions / General Discussion
author message
Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Post a new topic Reply to this Topic Printable Version of this Topic Forward this Topic to your Friend Topic Commands (for administrator or moderators only)
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
21. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
I am reminded of a childhood story:

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1/?letter=B&spage=3

Date: 20 Oct, 2006 on 06:55
BigWarpGuy
Premium member
in staff

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this memberhttp://home.comcast.net/~tomleem
posts: 2298
since: 12 Jan, 2001
22. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
If they got together and shared their perceptions, perhaps they would have a greater understanding of the elephant? Each would give information from their own perspective in a forum such as this.

---
BigWarpGuy
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
OS/2-eCS.org
Director of Communications
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
supporting the past OS/2 user and the future eCS user
http://www.os2ecs.org
Date: 21 Oct, 2006 on 23:03
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
23. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
Ok. Well writing here only as yet another blind man...

Voyager is a road map.

It has to be drawn because of recent changes in the status of OS/2. After the end of this year IBM is no longer a responsible developer of OS/2. This makes the already very significant Open Source developers for OS/2, as a group, now the most significant developers of OS/2.

With any Open Source project, there is the challenge of maintaining a consensus about its specifications. Each one handles this in a different way. Voyager attempts to use the power of persuasion to put forth a central vision for the future of OS/2, for developers to get on board.

The ever painful limitations of the aging base OS are draining and discouraging OSS development efforts. Voyager promises a brighter future by deprecating the base OS and proposing a platform whose beauty and function can reside on any OS.

The unique and desireable traits of OS/2 can be quantified, and they can be applied to and with more modern software technology. Voyager promises a more beautiful, more powerful, and more mature implementation of the concepts behind OS/2.

Voyager will run on OS/2. But it doesn't have to.

These bright promises give OS/2's Open Source developers encouragement to stay in the OS/2 realm. They also give them every reason to conform and contribute to the Voyager vision. Likewise, Voyager depends on the conformance and contributions of the developers.

Date: 31 Oct, 2006 on 04:44
Sebadoh
Premium member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this memberhttp://www.newterrasoftware.com
posts: 198
since: 10 Apr, 2001
24. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
The biggest problem being that OS/2 barely runs at all anymore. In the past 6 months I have had more non-hardware related crashes I have had over the past 13 years running OS/2. (it may be more, don't quote me on that). Especially apps like firefox and thunderbird which refuse to even run at the same time. It is quite silly actually. I like the skyos answer.. which is they made them a folder class =) yeah, think about that.. a half finished alpha of a probably never to be finished OS has a feature which sounds more like something OS/2 should have then the OS it exists in, but OS/2 doesn't. Without IBM, OS/2 is finished. I doubt alot that Serenity has the money it requires to get service contracts with IBM. Still running ecs.. though I find myself often thinking of replacements.
Date: 31 Oct, 2006 on 07:58
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
25. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
Sebadoh:

As I have had no such crashes in the past 6 months, logic would seem to indicate that your problem is not with OS/2 because it is localized to your PC.

It also seems an illogical leap to find a resolution to the problem in wrapping Mozilla applications a folder class.

Further, it is highly unclear what any of what you said has to do with BWG's question about Voyager.

Date: 31 Oct, 2006 on 08:42
warpcafe
Premium member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 350
since: 26 Nov, 2002
26. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
Hi,

I must admit that I need all my strength to stay calm... okay...:



The biggest problem being that OS/2 barely runs at all anymore. In the past 6 months I have had more non-hardware related crashes I have had over the past 13 years running OS/2.

Assuming you didn't change your hardware the last 13 years, I agree. Otherwise: What makes you sure that it's not a picky memory chip on a module? A bad solder point on your motherboard? A temperature flaw in your controller? And don't tell me "any other OS is running fine on that machine..."



Especially apps like firefox and thunderbird which refuse to even run at the same time.

Now THAT is nothing you can blame the OS for, neither your machine. It's a porting/build known limitation. However it can even be worked-around if you look into the common threads/forums a bit deeper. And - heck - even if not:
I personally give a damn as I'm running SeaMonkey (aka the Mozilla Suite). If I need a browser AND a mail client, what is the sense then in taking 2 "standalone" programs if I can get a better all-in-one??

I didn't like that hype that was made about the LITTLE brothers of the suite. Since they came out, I look into the options dialogs from time to time and... still they cannot cope with the features of the suite. Point. I can only recommend you to try SeaMonkey instead.


Without IBM, OS/2 is finished.

Oh come on! No, no, no: Severe error here: OS/2 is finished BECAUSE OF IBM. Not because of Microsoft, not because of Linux, MacOS or anything else, not even because of the f***ing climate change, nope, Sir: It's only because of IBM, their arrogance, their errors, their neglects, their contracts, their ignorance and their stupidity.


I doubt alot that Serenity has the money it requires to get service contracts with IBM. Still running ecs.. though I find myself often thinking of replacements.

Good lord! WHAT do you think is the reason that eCS exists? Serenity HAS GOT these contracts with IBM, otherwise they couldn't act as a "large customer" and come up with a "distro" on their own. The problem is that with the end-of-life, these contracts sooner or later are not even worth the paper their were printed on anymore. And this is why we need a FUTURE solution.

Finally, well.... honestly: What do you do? Are you using an operating system? No. What you use is programs. So to hell with operating systems. Did anyone give a damn about Linux being under the hood of OS X? No. They didn't. It was sold millions of times because it "looked like Mac" and worked.
Okay. Now THINK about voyager again... got it?
Take an open-source micro-kernel like L4 (this is NOT linux), an open-source GUI/Manager on top (Voyager) and here's the operating system of the future... benefits: As other communities are working on the kernel (L4) the few resources of OS/2 can be focused on the interface (Voyager) while other communities take care of drivers (= drivers for L4, not for "linux" or "voyager" or whatever).

Greetings
Thomas

Date: 31 Oct, 2006 on 10:01
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
27. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
Very well said warpcafe. One correction, though. Linux is not under the hood of OS X. Darwin is a BSD variant.
Date: 31 Oct, 2006 on 19:06
Jay
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this memberhttp://infrosoft.phatcode.net/
posts: 1
since: 09 Sep, 2006
28. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
I just hope that I, along with the developers of OsFree, can reinvigorate this dead project. If Voyager and OsFree combine their efforts to make the clone, that would be fine with me as long as they can differentiate themselves from each other and the only difference not ending up being their 2 different locations like half the Linux distros.
Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 01:42
Lee
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 7
since: 13 May, 2006
29. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

warpcafe (31 Oct, 2006 10:01):
Finally, well.... honestly: What do you do? Are you using an operating system?

Yes. If I was only interested in the applications, I would have left OS/2 a long time ago.

Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 03:32
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
30. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

Lee (01 Nov, 2006 03:32):

warpcafe (31 Oct, 2006 10:01):
Finally, well.... honestly: What do you do? Are you using an operating system?

Yes. If I was only interested in the applications, I would have left OS/2 a long time ago.


This is a very valid point. However it depends on definitions. What is an operating system? I don't think warpcafe is saying the general user experience of OS/2, as compared to other platforms, is irrelevant. Rather I think he is intending to separate what we actually use from the underlying mechanics.

Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 07:14
warpcafe
Premium member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 350
since: 26 Nov, 2002
31. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
last updated at 01 Nov, 2006 11:49 (1 times)

obiwan (01 Nov, 2006 07:14):

Lee (01 Nov, 2006 03:32):

warpcafe (31 Oct, 2006 10:01):
Finally, well.... honestly: What do you do? Are you using an operating system?

Yes. If I was only interested in the applications, I would have left OS/2 a long time ago.


This is a very valid point. However it depends on definitions. What is an operating system? I don't think warpcafe is saying the general user experience of OS/2, as compared to other platforms, is irrelevant. Rather I think he is intending to separate what we actually use from the underlying mechanics.


Right, obiwan.
What you use is applications. Applications then use and interface layers on top of the operating system. So even if you pop up a vio box and enter "copy" or whatever, you are NOT using the actual operating system.
When we talk about the benfits of the WPS for example, we have to be aware that the WPS is far away from being a part of the operating system. I'm not a driver developer so I am not into the concepts and can't tell how many "rings" the WPS is away from the actual OS but it surely is rather running in the application layer than anywhere else, which means that in theory, a "WPS for WinXP" is possible.

I am running OS/2 (or rather eCS) because of its GUI and security features - although I have to admit that if millions of people would be running it, there would perhaps also be more viruses for it . Stability? Well... back in Windows NT or 2000 times, yeah. Before with 9x and so on... sure. But looking at my current XPs I must admit, that the Redmond stuff is getting pretty stable too. I still prefer the WPS but I have to admit that one of the reasons I am using it too is that strange look of others...

Greetings
Thomas

Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 11:47
melf
Premium member
in staff

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 212
since: 11 Apr, 2003
32. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

warpcafe (01 Nov, 2006 11:49):

I am running OS/2 (or rather eCS) because of its GUI and security features - although I have to admit that if millions of people would be running it, there would perhaps also be more viruses for it . Stability? Well... back in Windows NT or 2000 times, yeah. Before with 9x and so on... sure. But looking at my current XPs I must admit, that the Redmond stuff is getting pretty stable too. I still prefer the WPS but I have to admit that one of the reasons I am using it too is that strange look of others...

Greetings
Thomas


I just have to agree with that. For my part, half of my engagement in OS/2 eComStation is about real things like multitasking capability, wps, responsiveness and beeing able to run with smaller resources and so on. The other half is psychology: identity, idealisation, its like a crazy love or like hanging to an old ideology...one you don't want to let go.

---
/Mikael

Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 17:05
Ben Dragon
Premium member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 139
since: 15 Apr, 2004
33. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
To me it boils down to one simple, overarching thing;

ease of use.

Everyone I know has countless troubles running Windows or whichever. They're worried to death about virii, about security flaws, about pushing their system too hard, about being able to afford the latest, cutting edge equipment just for acceptable performance, about stability, and about whether or not their updating software is gonna neutralize their, their, (bought and paid for), OS

Using eCS/OS2 quite simply, makes all those problems moot.

I don't want a computer as a make-work project, I have enough work to do, I want it as a functional, transparent tool... something you can rely upon to do the job and is easy on the nerves.

I know of no other OS that does this, though there are differing levels of success.

---

Date: 01 Nov, 2006 on 18:35
Lee
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 7
since: 13 May, 2006
34. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

obiwan (01 Nov, 2006 07:14):

Lee (01 Nov, 2006 03:32):

warpcafe (31 Oct, 2006 10:01):
Finally, well.... honestly: What do you do? Are you using an operating system?

Yes. If I was only interested in the applications, I would have left OS/2 a long time ago.


This is a very valid point. However it depends on definitions. What is an operating system? I don't think warpcafe is saying the general user experience of OS/2, as compared to other platforms, is irrelevant. Rather I think he is intending to separate what we actually use from the underlying mechanics.


I consider the underlying mechanics as the operating system. The WPS is just a GUI; the best GUI, but I don't think WPS on Windows would be as enjoyable as WPS on OS/2.

Date: 02 Nov, 2006 on 03:42
Lee
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 7
since: 13 May, 2006
35. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

warpcafe (01 Nov, 2006 11:49):
I am running OS/2 (or rather eCS) because of its GUI and security features - although I have to admit that if millions of people would be running it, there would perhaps also be more viruses for it .

Please don't perpetuate that security myth the Windows crowd likes to state as fact. Most of the reasons Windows is so vulnerable lies in the implementation of Windows and not in the marketshare of Windows.

Date: 02 Nov, 2006 on 03:49
Lee
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 7
since: 13 May, 2006
36. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

melf (01 Nov, 2006 17:05):
I just have to agree with that. For my part, half of my engagement in OS/2 eComStation is about real things like multitasking capability, wps, responsiveness and beeing able to run with smaller resources and so on. The other half is psychology: identity, idealisation, its like a crazy love or like hanging to an old ideology...one you don't want to let go.

Hear! Hear! I used to work on Unix workstations, so moving to Linux isn't a big deal. Vim and LyX are two of my favorite applications, and I really like the Unix command line tools. Somehow I just refuse to let go of OS/2.

I went through the PC wars (Atari, Commodore, Apple, IBM PC, etc.) and the OS wars. In neither war did the best technology win. OS/2 is a reminder of what could have been, and a last stand. WPS on another OS is settling for something less.

Date: 02 Nov, 2006 on 04:04
obiwan
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 164
since: 30 Aug, 2006
37. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
I have to agree with Lee on all these points. But one question remains. OS/2 for PowerPC used a variant of the Mach kernel and replaced most of the "underlying OS." It allegedly performed very well and the GUI was nearly indistinguishable from the x86 version. Would not such a microkernel base be an improvement over what OS/2 has now?
Date: 02 Nov, 2006 on 07:31
Lee
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 7
since: 13 May, 2006
38. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

obiwan (02 Nov, 2006 07:31):
I have to agree with Lee on all these points. But one question remains. OS/2 for PowerPC used a variant of the Mach kernel and replaced most of the "underlying OS." It allegedly performed very well and the GUI was nearly indistinguishable from the x86 version. Would not such a microkernel base be an improvement over what OS/2 has now?

It's an interesting question. From the article at http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/os2ppc/index.html
"Going deeper into the kernel, OS/2 PPC had precious little in common with the Intel version. The product was based on the IBM microkernel, which was a refinement of the Carnegie Mellon University MACH microkernel. The microkernel bore no resemblance to the Intel OS/2 kernel whatsoever and it was also very different from other operating systems."
It certainly sounds like it wasn't OS/2, but then why did IBM take this route? Here's an excerpt on portability from The Design of OS/2 by Deitel and Kogan: "Porting to RISC platforms is underway." In a discussion of the OS/2 2/X system they state, "an architecture designed to allow applications, dynamic link libraries, and ultimately the system itself to be portable to other processor platforms."
I think the final answer is in section 12.5 "System Portability" where it states, "The key ... is to finish the task of making the 32-bit OS/2 system portable ... Several alternatives are being explored for enabling the base system to be portable to other architectures, such as Microsoft's NT system, the Mach system embraced by OSF, and AIX. For OS/2 to be independent of the Intel 80X86 processor platform ... entails converting the rest of the kernel to 32-bit C " Earlier it was stated that "the utilities, the window management portion of the PM, and the device drivers" were still 16-bit.
Could you imagine if the microkernal OS/2 had been based on NT. Sacrilege!

Date: 03 Nov, 2006 on 03:14
zman
Normal member
in user

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this member
posts: 37
since: 25 Jun, 2005
39. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message
this is all very nice; but, i doubt time will stand still long enough for the applications. the advent of lucide gave a reprieve to the os/2 systems my company runs. our technical documents generally require reader version 6 or better. soon flash version seven will be useless due to version eight. this is a short list of essential apps for the future:

current native java
skype or equiv. internet phone
current flash
support for atsc television adapters
dolby 5.1 sound
virtualpc replacement that has usb support

apps i have that need replacement:

ceres sound studio
main actor
neongrafix
voicetype dictation

i've looked into an intel mac; but, til virtualpc runs on it, i'll stick it out a little longer with os/2.

Date: 03 Nov, 2006 on 11:12
BigWarpGuy
Premium member
in staff

View this member's profileSearch all posts from this memberSend an email to this memberhttp://home.comcast.net/~tomleem
posts: 2298
since: 12 Jan, 2001
40. Re:Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Reply to this topic with quote Modify your message

obiwan (02 Nov, 2006 07:31):
I have to agree with Lee on all these points. But one question remains. OS/2 for PowerPC used a variant of the Mach kernel and replaced most of the "underlying OS." It allegedly performed very well and the GUI was nearly indistinguishable from the x86 version. Would not such a microkernel base be an improvement over what OS/2 has now?

Would OS/2 for PowerPC have a greater chance of being open sourced? Perhaps it could be the basis for both Voyager and OSFree?

---
BigWarpGuy
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
OS/2-eCS.org
Director of Communications
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
supporting the past OS/2 user and the future eCS user
http://www.os2ecs.org

Date: 03 Nov, 2006 on 14:26
Voyager; Future Replacement of OS/2?
Post a new topic Reply to this Topic Printable Version of this Topic Forward this Topic to your Friend Topic Commands (for administrator or moderators only)
All times are CET+1. < Prev. | P. 1 2 3 | Next >
Go to:
 

Powered by UltraBoard 2000 Standard Edition,
Copyright © UltraScripts.com, Inc. 1999-2000.
Home | Gallery | Forums | Services | Webmail | Archive | Links | Contact Us | About Us
© OS2 World.Com 2000-2004