| Subject | : | IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | RadarCat |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 04:27 |
![]() IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp According to IBM Deutchland, "there are about 300 third party code-pieces in OS/2, where the legal situation would have to be clarified. Some of those "contributors" do no longer exist, sold their names (with or without assets) and many more things. It actually has been looked at and an estimate of around 500k$ to handle all above activities were estimates - beside the time IBM attorneys would have to spent." http://www2.warptech.info:81/ultraboard/viewtopic.php?showtopic=11&fromblock=yes Best, |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | BigWarpGuy |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 14:53 |
| Perhaps if IBM would allow Serenity Systems access to the souce code of OS/2 and SS could 'hire' developers to improve the code (once they promise not to release the code to the public?), they could get around any legal problems that might occure? (just thinking out loud).
--- BigWarpGuy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OS/2 Warp-ed/eComStation-ed to the very end. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | Radek hajek@vuv.cz |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 16:39 |
| Unpossible. Especially nowadays. The code is owned by somebody. That somebody has made a deal with IBM, which specifies how the code can be used. Any kind of partisan action is illegal. Add the fact, that *money* are the first and the last important thing today and you get the result above. Serenity Systems would need to make another deals with the owners of the source code. Be sure that the deals would cost Serenity Systems an unpossible amount of dollars. The only possibility would be the source code *without* 3rd party source code. Well, it would not be functional but it could be open sourced. Now, the few of us, which do not think that money are the first and the last thing in our Galaxy, can start to replace the 3rd parties. |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | cyberspittle cyberspittle@yahoo.com |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 18:24 |
| I think I tried to mention it before, but you really need to put open sourcing of OS/2 behind you. The open sourcing of OS/2 had all ready been discussed by the OS/2 community (close to ten years ago), when the Linux hype was getting started. If you really want to help OS/2 survive, *we need to work with Serenity Systems*. Open source programs can still be created on OS/2 using the GNU compiler. This is the preferred way to go for future programs, as shareware or other authors tend to get lost in the shuffle along with their source code. Rewriting OS/2's sub system would drain resources from where we need them. Now, instead of directing energy on open-sourcing OS/2, why not pick up a programming book and learn to write software we can use. Perhaps you can learn OpenGL and create a new desktop. We could then replace the Presentation Manager with an API that has 3D capability. Then we could make it object-oriented, and have a replacement for the Workplace Shell (WPS). If you open-sourced it for future use, we would all be happy. |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | Fahrvenugen |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 18:47 |
| While I'd love to see OS/2 open sourced, I too doubt it will happen. What we're likely to see is over time open-sourcing of *some aspects* of OS/2 as we already have. But I can't see the whole OS open sourced. Some examples of items we've seen open-sourced: -JFS (Okay, I know - this originally came from AIX. But it is still an important part of OS/2 which has been open-sourced) -Object REXX Also, source code is available for many device drivers and such, through the formerly available device driver kit (even though IBM has taken the kit offline, a lot of people still have complete copies of the whole kit). Aside from the fact that IBM doesn't own all the rights to all the code in OS/2 (as has been pointed out by many), we also can't ignore that even though IBM seems to be bending over backwards to try and make it difficult to buy IBM OS/2, they are still making quite a bit of money off the product. And it is a product which probably (overall in the IBM scheme of things) doesn't cost much to maintain. After all, there are practically no marketing expenses and no "future development / updates" costs. The main costs appear to be items such as maintaining the product as it stands - the occasional device driver, fixpak, updated kernel, etc. Aside from the purchases of OS/2 through IBM directly, IBM is making money through the sales of eCS. And based on postings I've read from Bob St. John, eCS is apparently selling quite well. Furthermore, I'm sure IBM is making money through support agreements. I'm sure IBM would stand to lose money if OS/2 was open-sourced. Serenity Systems would probably also have to re-think its business strategy. So part of the overall question for IBM is: Does it make business sense to spend the time and money to open-source OS/2? Just my thoughts. |
| Subject | : | OS/2 Warp Clone? |
| Author | : | BigWarpGuy |
| Date | : | 20 May, 2005 on 20:03 |
| Perhaps of trying to open sourceing Warp, perhaps our efforts would be better directed toward a clone of OS/2? ReactOS is a clone of WinNT that does not use the source code of WinNT but tries to emulate. There is a similar project for OS/2 called OSFree. http://www.osfree.org http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osfree Perhaps more effort should be put into this project than into trying to open source OS/2 Warp?
--- BigWarpGuy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OS/2 Warp-ed/eComStation-ed to the very end. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | warpcafe warpcafe@yahoo.de |
| Date | : | 21 May, 2005 on 14:33 |
| Folks, let me put it that way: From my point of view, it's quite simple: Cheers |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | cyberspittle cyberspittle@yahoo.com |
| Date | : | 21 May, 2005 on 22:30 |
| Warpcafe, Danke! (Thank you in English). That has been my point exactly. We have too many areas to improve before we can *even* think about open-sourcing. I personally have (or know) of hardware that doesn't have device drivers or "complete" device drivers (printers, scanners, multifunction devices). We also need some very basic programs; for taxes such as "clone" version of Quicken. We have had improvements ... DVD viewing (thanks to Kiev!), but there are so many programs still to be written or ported to OS/2. |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | RadarCat |
| Date | : | 28 May, 2005 on 00:27 |
These are very good thoughts, indeed! RadarCat, Webmaster |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | warpcafe warpcafe@yahoo.de |
| Date | : | 28 May, 2005 on 10:16 |
YES! You're right - THAT is the real question! To be honest, I actually don't WANT it to become open-source. It's okay the way it is - we simply need more applications. Okay, we might have a need for a better way to integrate new device drivers - but does that afford the entire OS to be open-source? In my mind, there's a dozen of key people (developers) that should team up to "merge" their knowledge and products into a new "strategy", to define a common target and give eCS a clear direction where it's heading for the next 3 years or so. Greetings |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | Fahrvenugen |
| Date | : | 28 May, 2005 on 17:33 |
I think you've made a good point here. For a number of years I've felt that in a lot of cases, the device drivers that come from developers in the community are often better quality then the ones coming out of IBM. A few examples: -Ray Gwinn's SIO / Serial port drivers. I've never been able to get the IBM com port drivers to work as well as SIO. -Any of the stuff from Daniela Engert. The Danis506 driver, DANIDASD, the patch for the OS/2 loader so it will recognize memory on systems which don't "see" memory above 64 megs, etc. These are some of the first drivers that I'll put on a system. -JJCDROM -Scitech SNAP for Video -Chris Wohlgemuth's USB drivers -The UNIAudio drivers (although I think these are based heavily on IBM source) and the SBLive drivers -The Generic WinOS/2 audio drivers I'm sure there are others that I'm not recalling right now (I probably have other non-IBM drivers on my system that I'm just not recalling right now). And I'm not saying that the drivers from IBM are not good or don't work - that's not the case. If I went through my config.sys I'm sure I'd find that the majority of drivers I have installed are still IBM ones. But my point here is there's a lot of great stuff which has come out of the community which nicely replaces IBM stuff. |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | ECSUser frank.alleyne@gmail.com |
| Date | : | 29 May, 2005 on 08:53 |
I have great hopes for the use of the GNU Compiler in porting good Linux programs to OS/2 as well as writing new software. Extensions to that GNU Compiler (ie: libraries and IDE support) for such things as SOM and OpenDocs (similar to what is proposed for the OS/2 Free Pascal compiler) and the EverBlue project (I wonder what the status of that is ??) would ease the development and porting work for new apps. (Another project with potential is the Eclipse IDE and SWT project, I would like to know the status of this one as well ??) But the question I have is What OS/2 OS software can we get from IBM to assist the community in improving the OS ? Regards |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | cyberspittle cyberspittle@yahoo.com |
| Date | : | 29 May, 2005 on 18:36 |
| eCSuser, In response to your questions: [SNIP] . . . >But the question I have is What OS/2 OS software can we get from IBM to assist the community in improving the OS ? None. This *is* the point of my earlier posts. Fact is, there is so much OS/2 code not owned by IBM. IBM employees can hold patents on their work, just like at other companies. The OS/2 community has wasted so much energy on this for so many years. We need to direct our resources to *what we can do* and not towards *what we can not*. >I'm thinking of source code for SOM 3.0 and the new WPS (beta) built on it that's supposed to solve the multiple input Queue problem ? It is one thing to ask your neighbor to borrow their toolbox, but it is another thing to ask the local hardware store to give them away for free. It comes down to money. Linux has only been able to compete with Microsoft Windows, because of it's cost effort: people donate their time to write software for the Linux community (Microsoft Windows is included in the price of a new PC). We do need people to write software with the tools we have. If I can get an OS/2 programming book (used book store, eBay, etc.), install emx, and write software, so can you! The OS/2 API is well-documented, what is stopping you? |
| Subject | : | Re:IBM's Cost To Open Source OS/2 And OS/2 Warp |
| Author | : | Fahrvenugen |
| Date | : | 29 May, 2005 on 21:03 |
Again, it is worth looking at this question from IBM's perspective. Anything they open-source is 1. Going to cost them money to open-source, and therefore 2. will have to make good business sense for them to do so. I remind that the "B" in IBM stands for Business. Good business sense means that it will - in the long run - somehow make money for the company. Its no secret that right now IBM is trying to move people off of OS/2. They state this in their "OS/2 Strategy" document. They also indicate this with actions - removing the Device Driver Pack containing device driver sources from its home on the Web. Removing the RSU update webpage for OS/2. Making the product difficult to figure out how to buy it (even to the point of the "how to buy" link on the OS/2 page takes you to another IBM page which does not mention OS/2 at all). IBM's current strategy is Linux. The way that IBM is making money off Linux (and going to in the future) is to support it - to make sure it runs - and runs well - on IBM hardware. All IBM hardware. And to make sure it integrates with other IBM systems currently in use. Mainframes and servers, AIX and others. So if IBM is going to release source code (assuming it owns the rights to release the source in question), my guess is that it will do so with the intent of improving Linux in some way. That's just how I see it. Does releasing SOM 3.0 have the ability to enhance Linux? Does releasing the WPS (either the current one or the "beta" one mentioned in the post) have the ability to enhance Linux? Does releasing the OS/2 kernel (either the i386 or the one from the PowerPC edition of OS/2) enhance Linux? Without including Linux in the question, I don't really see code being released. I could be wrong, but that's just how I see it. As I'm not currently much of a Linux user (I've played with it a few times, but otherwise have left it be), I'm not in a position to answer any of these questions. Just some thoughts. |