Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 28th Jul 2002 18:30 UTC, submitted by Prognathous
OS/2 and eComStation OSNews reader Prognathous writes: "Well, actually it was released earlier this year, but I couldn't find any references in your news section, so it's about time. The only problem is that other than in usenet, details are scant and the official release was very subdued (search the page for "4.52")." This release is only available to IBM's active software subscription customers of OS/2 Warp 4 and it does seem to be a service pack ("Convenience Package" as IBM calls it). IBM does not intend to provide any additional convenience packages in the future.
Order by: Score:
well..
by pherthyl on Sun 28th Jul 2002 19:24 UTC

its sad that they let it die but thats ancient history now, so I'm surprised that they are still releasing updates to it. Compared to some other OS companies (think no more win98 drivers from MS) thats pretty good.

This isn't the first time.
by Bayerwerke on Sun 28th Jul 2002 20:26 UTC

I am pretty sure the last convenience pack was also called the last one that would be offered. It was available through http://www.os2ss.com . This current last one doesn't seem to have much that isn't available elsewhere anyway. With project ODIN and Xfree86/2 and eCommstation still around, I think it's a little premature to pronounce it dead. Admittedly, about the only thing I'll call "dead" is CP/M. I can still use my OS/2 machine to perform much of what I do with a computer.

IBM has to
by Ludovic Hirlimann on Sun 28th Jul 2002 20:27 UTC

because clients running OS/2 also have VM's, AS400, things on which big blue does not have competition anymore ( nobody byes tandems anymore, nore do people bye HP300/ME, nor VMS .). These guys need to be carde about becaause the VM bussiness is lucrative ...


--
http://islande.hirlimann.net

Re: IBM has to
by Ronald on Sun 28th Jul 2002 21:16 UTC

Bingo! Their largee clients must have told them:

if (bye bye OS/2) then
Bye bye IBM.
end if

;)

Open source it!
by John on Sun 28th Jul 2002 21:40 UTC

They need a replacement for OS/2, they don't want it to be anything from Microsoft. Hey, got an idea, how about open sourcing it, and over time merging it with their other free OS of choice, Linux. It would make a ton of sense since they can't make money out of OS/2, but they really need it for their clients, and they want to get off cheap by using linux for their servers.

Heck, they might make the third big desktop system for linux and put some serious manpower behind it all. Competition is good, are you up to it?

VMS
by Douglas on Sun 28th Jul 2002 22:56 UTC

Hmm everybody who buys NT based system is buying VMS or a bastardized version of it.

Douglas

eComStation
by Anonymous on Sun 28th Jul 2002 23:05 UTC

I thought someone said eComStation was OS/2?

This CP2 which I have only very recently got will be shipped along with CP1 if you subscribe, since CP1 is a prerequisite of CP2 when not newly installed. Therefore for most users a license to OS/2 Warp 4 buys you software you will not use right out of the box, and upgrade from OS/2 requires both CP's to be applied consecutively.

I am totally blind, and haven't tested my screen reader, IBM Screen Reader/2, with CP2 yet; it'll prove an expensive buy if my screen reader, made to work with IBM OS/2 Warp 4, doesn't work with it after all. It also means that new GUIs, open source etc. probably won't help me much. The beauty of this upgrade path is the preservation of IBM's interface. IBM developed this screen reader, so I'm quite sure it'll work as did when I used it under Warp 4. OS/2 aint dead though, for sure; just not marketting to consumer style. Some say IBM would have been more successful had they marketted it at a time when they could have made a difference - Aug 1995. Perhaps a simple strategy like a new version would help? Perhaps if IBM stopped dreaming about Java integration everywhere and improved their ability for native applications cross-platform, like Win32? Their work on Linux should surely be enough for hardware independence, if they want that. The fact that users still use it is a testament to its success for the few people who didn't just go with the flow. The only dead thing about OS/2, if at all, is a manufacturer's point of view; developing device drivers for newer devices. While good support is here between OS/2 CP's and EComStation, obviously not as much as in M$ OSes for manufacturer support. Right now I can't even find a PCMCIA LAN card for OS/2!

EComStation I would like the opportunity of testing B4 I buy it, but Alas this won't be easy. Last of all, IBM's older accessibility team couldn't be more needed now, when their love of both Linux and OS/2 could bring out truely revolutionary assistive technology for both platforms. They have great manpower, why do they use it in other fields where it is sparingly used at best? http://www.ibm.com/sns .

Windows accessibility vendors (background only, simply to illustrate our lack of choice):
http://www.gwmicro.com/
http://www.dolphinuk.co.uk/
http://www.freedomscientific.com/

Support is also available for the Linux console (krnl patch Speakup), in Emacs and for braille terminals in BRLTTY. Such great support from IBM is gone now, and I feel that OS/2 should be just as well put in the hands of the visually impaired as it was in the past, instead of being carried on as a dead myth that no-one wants to hear about. Nothing wrong with supporting the majority if it saves on pointless cost, and the vendos mentioned are all great people, but half the blind people I know criticise OS/2 before they even know what it is - it's that forgotten.

OK, off my soap box and into the plughole. Sorry folks.

Re: eComStation
by Ronald on Mon 29th Jul 2002 00:40 UTC

it is OS/2 underneat. But it is value enhanced and has a future.

Re: Open source it!
by Magnum Innominandum on Mon 29th Jul 2002 03:17 UTC

Wow, I agree. That is a great idea. With all the time and money wasted on Linux they could have just open sourced a mature operating system or parts of it. (I am not a big fan of open source or Linux.) They have nothing to lose.

...
by rajan r on Mon 29th Jul 2002 03:41 UTC

They need a replacement for OS/2, they don't want it to be anything from Microsoft. Hey, got an idea, how about open sourcing it, and over time merging it with their other free OS of choice, Linux. It would make a ton of sense since they can't make money out of OS/2, but they really need it for their clients, and they want to get off cheap by using linux for their servers.

They are quite okay with Microsoft cause the only way they are competiting is with Linux and databases, nothing to stiff for Microsoft to kill IBM off.

However, what you have suggest is impossible, Microsoft would never had allowed that. Remember, OS/2 is Microsoft code to... well, most of it. Also, IBM had licensed OS/2 to eComStation.

Plus, IBM chosed Linux mainly for servers because it made sense, from the business point of view, and, I hope, from the technical point of view in the future. I don't see much technical reason to merge OS/2 and Linux (at least if we were talking about desktops).

OS/2 still kicks butt
by Dano on Mon 29th Jul 2002 03:55 UTC

Early versions of OS/2 had alot of MS Code, but as the product matured, it became more and more an IBM creation. OS/2 truely was and still is the best operating system for x86 based systems, which is what limited the OS. OS/2 was not marketed properly, but also it has code that can not be ported easily. OS/2 was hand optimized in assembly to run bullet proof on the x86 platforms. No HAL on this baby, just pure code execution from the get-go. I still love IBM for OS/2, especially when you look at the VM dos support and awsome memory management structure. Not to mention that the OS/2 desktop is still one of the best desktop implementations that I have ever used. I used OS/2 for more that 4 years as my primary OS at a company that I used to work at, and am still amazed when I get called back there to do software updates. We wrote alot of DOS code, native compiled OS/2 programs and REXX scripts that performed jobs that Windows could not handle at the time. We had a collection of thousands of small CNC machine programs that took up too much space on a DOS partition due to clustering problems. We formatted the partition with OS/2's super High Performance File System (HPFS), causing our clustering problems to melt away!

Sorry for the reminising...this OS still has a soft spot in my heart lol...

DANO!

...
by Dano on Mon 29th Jul 2002 03:58 UTC

When is IBM going to open source OS/2? If only the WIN-OS/2 code could be open-sourced...although I don't think this is legally possible. But the rest of the OS could...along with the wonderful built in REXX support and virtual machine support on x86...these could be some useful contributions to other projects...also, OS/2 would show these other projects what TRUE multitasking, memory management and stability really is like.

Dano!

So what? I'll still use it no matter what.
by Mike on Mon 29th Jul 2002 04:22 UTC

It's rock solid, beautiful, and still has advantages of M$ and Linux.
I've had to reinstall the OS on my wife's Win2k machine twice, once due to a virus, and once due to a corruption of the filesystem.
I've never lost data on a JFS volume. I keep all essential data on it.
I don't care for games; if I do I will buy a PS2 or Nintendo Game Cube. When I do play something, I still like to swing a Links/2 club.
Lotus SmartSuite 1.6 (1.7 too!) and Star Office 5.1a are more than enough office suites to fill my needs, and don't offer stupid assistants.
New M$ licencing proposals scare the pants off me. I don't want to wake up and find I *have* to upgrade in order to access my data.
If I get a hankering to run M$-based software, I will install Virtual PC 4.3.2 - still infinitely safer to run W2k or Win98 in a VM than natively. With a 1GHz+ processor, you hardly notice any lag.
Hmmm - Wife's box just got a new 1.4 GHz processor...
"Honey, welcome to the World of OS/2!"

About Open Sourcing
by Ludovic Hirlimann on Mon 29th Jul 2002 04:53 UTC

IBM cannot Open Source OS/2 because M$ would never let them do it. Remember in the beginning OS/2 was a collaborative effort between IBM and a Redmond based Software compagny. Some part of the source tree are imho (c) M$.


--
http://islande.hirlimann.net

Open Sourcing / eComStation
by Jörg Skottke on Mon 29th Jul 2002 07:17 UTC

OS/2 Warp 4 has no more M$ code, it has been removed and since 1996 the code belongs to IBM only. The problem with open sourcing OS/2 is that there are still about 200 companies that contributed to OS/2 (This information was given by O. Mark (IBM) on Warpstock 2001). They delivered components but never turned the code over to IBM. So the problem is not M$ but a number of companies with intellectual properties that are out of scope for IBM. Some of the companies don't even exist anymore.
eComStation is basically an OS/2 4.5x with enhancements and sold as a branded product by Serenity Systems International (SSI). Many people see it as a possibility for OS/2 to survive. SSI aims at small businesses and has the intent to deliver a rock solid up to date operating environment with an optimized ease of use and minimum tco. SSI cooperates with a large group of people (the eCS community) who contribute ideas, code, additions - open source development controlled by a company. SSI is considered a "large customer" in IBM's perspective and has the possibility influence the future of OS/2 (eCS).
The initial release of the eComStation was "not what i wanted it to be" (Kim Cheung, SSI, Warpstock 2001 Europe) and had a lot of problems. Many delays combined with a couple of flaws in the (really nice looking) installation routine left an ambivalent impression, but they are making progress.
With a couple of important projects going on (VirtuaPC by Innotek, Mozilla by Mozilla.org (IBM) and XWorkplace by Ulrich Möller et al, project ODIN (Innotek) as well as lots of small projects that address a lot of shortcomings in the original IBM code) there is indeed a good chance that OS/2 will make it for the next years to come.

What about the plain old CP's?
by Sabahattin Gucukoglu on Mon 29th Jul 2002 07:52 UTC

OK, so EComStation will see, in the views of some, the continued survival of OS/2. What about IBM's upgrade technique of service levels? Does it really have use, will it keep with current technologies, or is it really just the end of the road? Even now you can't force OS/2 Warp4 CP2 onto a 20 Gb Hdd for lack of specialist support. That's gonna turn out a major barrier for the casual upgrader. Will it die? Will EComStation make the final one-and-only representation for this world-class OS? Thoughts?

OS/2 support
by Oliver Stein on Mon 29th Jul 2002 07:55 UTC

Just because it was mentioned earlier ;)
http://www.innotek.de/products/virtualpc
This lets you run OS/2 on top of Windows and vice versa.

How much does eCommStation cost?
by some guy on Mon 29th Jul 2002 08:37 UTC

I tried finding out once but if I found the right links, they must have been on pages this old PC couldn't load.

OS/2 lovers...
by Marco Radossevich on Mon 29th Jul 2002 09:36 UTC

...please sign the online petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/OS24FREE/

Still does the jobb....
by Kim Haverblad on Mon 29th Jul 2002 13:45 UTC

How often haven't one heard that people have to reinstall windows for any number of reasons (and this list can be made long). I as most people uses Windows when needed but I still have a OS2 workstation as my primary system. No hazzle with virus and applications that tend to crash the system so often. Since the possibility of using DOS, W16, W32 (using the Odin code) and as well not to forget Java applications this system will run for many years more ; ie there is lots of applications to be used within OS2 (and yes including native 32-bit OS2 code as well).

Still getting people to try out OS2 isn't that hard after all. Most people have had virus problem or have had a system that just crashed one time to many. ...

Kim Haverblad
http://www.os2world.com

Re: IBM has to
by Brad Clarke on Mon 29th Jul 2002 14:01 UTC

"nobody byes tandems anymore"

Yeah right!!!!

Tandems (now called HP NonStop servers) are still selling strong, and are one of the most reliable server systems available. They are used regulary in banking, telecommunications, hostpitals, and stock exchanges.

IBM Can Open Source OS/2
by Evil Mind on Mon 29th Jul 2002 14:39 UTC


IBM can open source OS/2. We can ask them to at least open source all the source they can, and the community (or possible ecs makers) will take care of building replacements for the "third parties" components.

I know that IBM will definitive hear the bigger customers. The strategy will be to ask the banks, and companies that uses OS/2 to make a petition to IBM to open at least the source that belongs to IBM. Lets talk to the bigger OS/2 customers and explain them the benefits that they will earn open sourcing OS/2.

So, do you know any big customers ?? want to ask them to do a formal petition ?

Re: IBM has to
by Ludovic Hirlimann on Mon 29th Jul 2002 15:29 UTC

"Tandems (now called HP NonStop servers) are still selling strong, and are one of the most reliable server systems available. They are used regulary in banking, telecommunications, hostpitals, and stock exchanges"
Yes but nobody buy them. Tandem only sells upgrade and new systems to the same clients. New cients do NOT buy tandem, that's what I meant.

O/S2 why?
by ~Seedy~ on Mon 29th Jul 2002 17:32 UTC

Its obvious from reading these threads that O/S2 has gained a lot of support.. but that a lot of it is from people who loved the platform in its earlier years and want to stick with it.

I'm afraid I can see few compelling reasons for choosing O/S2 over , say, x86 Linux, but many reasons not to ( limited driver and software support )

Not that it shouldn't be given a free run, preferably on an opensource licence....

Dvorak: Is IBM Toast?
by Drongo on Mon 29th Jul 2002 18:56 UTC

Worth reading. It made me stop and think about whether all the IBM hype that has occurred since Gerstner took over is justified. Link: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,367800,00.asp

Re: Dvorak
by Bayerwerke on Mon 29th Jul 2002 20:07 UTC

In my opinion, John C. Dvorak is the most mentally short-sighted technology commentator I have ever read. I believe he makes criticisms of Microsoft products for the single purpose of being able to point back at them to "prove" that he does not devoutly worship at the Windows temple.

...
by rajan r on Tue 30th Jul 2002 05:53 UTC

I've had to reinstall the OS on my wife's Win2k machine twice, once due to a virus, and once due to a corruption of the filesystem.

Perhaps if you have gotten a anti virus package, you wouldn't have got this. Besides, what file system are you using? If you say FAT32 (which seems obvious cause you have OS/2 and therefore you need FAT32 to read Windows' drives), then it is mostly your fault. FAT32 is as unstable as a rodeo bull :p

OS/2 truely was and still is the best operating system for x86 based systems, which is what limited the OS.

Maybe back then OS/2 was great, now it is a bunch of old code.

also, OS/2 would show these other projects what TRUE multitasking, memory management and stability really is like.

Apparently, most OSS projects now what is multitasking, memory management and stablity really is like. Heck, Linux and BSD have better multitasking, memory management and stablity.

Lotus SmartSuite 1.6 (1.7 too!) and Star Office 5.1a are more than enough office suites to fill my needs, and don't offer stupid assistants.

You can disable Clippy, and in Office XP, it is already disabled by default. And for sure you use don't do much office work, as the stuff you mentioned, especially SMartSuite, is lame compared to Office.

New M$ licencing proposals scare the pants off me. I don't want to wake up and find I *have* to upgrade in order to access my data.

You are just plain paranoid. The licensing plan is for companies. Corporate discounts would only be given to companies buying in bulk now if they follow Microsoft's upgrade plan, which means everytime there is a new version, the company must get it.

If I get a hankering to run M$-based software, I will install Virtual PC 4.3.2 - still infinitely safer to run W2k or Win98 in a VM than natively. With a 1GHz+ processor, you hardly notice any lag.

You probably never notice a lag because never use Windows alone. Besides, if you are logical, nothing would happen to your installation. Don't open attachments that you didn't ask, defrag your drive every week (you could just on it before sleep, it isn't that bad), and get a good firewall, like ZoneAlarm. Besides, if OS/2 did become famous, I bet the problems you mentioned would be apparent.



What?
by Dano on Tue 30th Jul 2002 06:42 UTC

>>also, OS/2 would show these other projects what TRUE multitasking, memory management and stability really is like.

>>Apparently, most OSS projects now what is multitasking, memory management and stablity really is like. Heck, Linux and BSD have better multitasking, memory management and stablity.

rajan,

You always paraphrase other peoples threads without really writing some solid theory yourself. My question to you is have you ever used OS/2? Other x86 OS's can not touch a candle to OS2 in these areas due to the tuned, non-portable x86 assembly code directly used to write the OS. How do Linux and BSD have better multitasking, memory management and stability than OS/2? OS/2 will run rings around these two on x86 in these areas. Not only is the multitasking way more responsive, but in Warp its sheduled properly. As for memory management, OS/2 sessons are virtual machines that are totally isolated from each other. As for stability, OS/2 was the benchmark before anyone ever realized it. It still is used in Banks, Manufacturing, ATM Machines and other applications where mission critical was required. The VM sessions in OS/2 make it impossible for code to bring the system down. Warp is a magnitude higher in crash protection due to bad drivers than Windows NT 4.0. I would put Warp 4 up against an OS in these departments. Maybe you should re-load a copy of Warp on your machine before you make these baseless judgements, even though I also use x86 Linux on a daily basis.

Dano.