Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd May 2008 20:54 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source More often than not, the question arises on OSNews why certain projects or pieces of abandonware aren't released as open source software. Supposedly, this would speed up development, facilitate the growth of a community, all that jazz associated with open source development. Here are four projects I'd like to see released under a MIT license.
Thread beginning with comment 315281
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by blixel on Thu 22nd May 2008 21:27 UTC
Member since:

I'd toss in a vote for OS/2. It's one of those Operating Systems that "holds a special place in my heart" due to the superiority of the technology under OS/2 compared to MS-DOS and MS Windows 3.x/9x.

If you don't happen to know much about OS/2, you should read a bit of history about the Operating System. It's quite interesting.

Reply Score: 11

RE: OS/2
by Zoidberg on Thu 22nd May 2008 23:57 in reply to "OS/2"
Zoidberg Member since:

It would be nice but with so many parts owned by Microsoft in it IBM couldn't open source it if they wanted to...and they don't.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: OS/2
by blixel on Fri 23rd May 2008 00:35 in reply to "RE: OS/2"
blixel Member since:

You're right and I was aware of that. There is also the issue of OS/2 having been taken over by Serenity Systems International (eComStation) which further reduces the possibility of it being open sourced.

EDIT: Fixed minor typographical error.

Edited 2008-05-23 00:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: OS/2
by Phloptical on Sat 24th May 2008 13:53 in reply to "OS/2"
Phloptical Member since:

Don't hold your breath for IBM to open OS/2. There's way too much shared licensing and technology with Microsoft for that to happen, even if Big Blue wanted to.

OS/2 died a quiet death, and should be allowed to rest in peace.

Reply Parent Score: 2