Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 9th Jan 2010 22:52 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
OS/2 and eComStation We're already nine days into the year 2010, and yet, eComStation 2.0 has not yet been released. The final release should've been released before the end of 2009, but December 31 came, and no release. Luckily, the eComStation team has released a statement, saying that the final release is definitely around the corner.
Thread beginning with comment 403476
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by cerbie
by cerbie on Mon 11th Jan 2010 00:54 UTC
cerbie
Member since:
2006-01-02

That almost makes me want to need an excuse for OS/2 ;) . I remember OS/2 Warp, and it was a great little OS back in the day. I didn't know the ongoing release/support situation, until today.

If they are not exaggerating features and compatibility too much, that is all kinds of awesome.

Edited 2010-01-11 00:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by cerbie
by truckweb on Mon 11th Jan 2010 02:17 in reply to "Comment by cerbie"
truckweb Member since:
2005-07-06

If you need a "Better DOS than DOS" or/and "A better Windows 3.1 than Win 3.1" then YES, OS/2 could be for you.

The point is, in 2010, for *normal users*, other than retro-gaming (DOS), OS/2 has nothing good to offer. We don't need Win 3.1 anymore. What we do need is better hardware support (current hardware), and if you game just a little, you will need DirectX.

The GUI of OS/2 feels old, like Windows NT old. With Windows 7 and OS X and new KDE 4, OS/2 PM is tired and need a good refresh.

Don't get me wrong, I can understand a business needing OS/2 to support legacy code that could cost a bundle to re-write. But for anybody else, it's time to move on... IBM did a less than wonderful job price wise and marketing wise back in the day, and they let Microsoft win.

Edited 2010-01-11 02:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by cerbie
by cerbie on Mon 11th Jan 2010 03:13 in reply to "RE: Comment by cerbie"
cerbie Member since:
2006-01-02

The cool bits are managing compatibility, but still making it a clean system to develop on--that unsexy stuff that doesn't catch the eye.

As a fan of Openbox, I'll apathetically shrug regarding "modern" GUIs. Everyone is only just now catching up to the millennium (IE, BeOS), with Apple doing the best (having NeXT to work from), and Haiku being close behind. Well-thought-out integration > bolted-on features, every day of the week, twice on Sunday, and--being a Southerner--twice on Wednesday, too.

As a developer, I think I would like working with an updated OS/2 system. There are many types of legacy systems, running various different ways, that would probably be quite a drag, but I don't think OS/2 would be one of them. Especially not when it's been updated to work with newer hardware and software.

Edited 2010-01-11 03:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by cerbie
by frajo on Mon 11th Jan 2010 09:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by cerbie"
frajo Member since:
2007-06-29

I can understand a business needing OS/2 to support legacy code that could cost a bundle to re-write. But for anybody else, it's time to move on...
For everybody there are things you want to change once a year.
And for everybody there are things that you don't want to change once you've found them to be trustworthy.
It's everybody's personal choice into which category his/her OS belongs.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by cerbie
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 11th Jan 2010 10:38 in reply to "RE: Comment by cerbie"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The point is, in 2010, for *normal users*, other than retro-gaming (DOS), OS/2 has nothing good to offer. We don't need Win 3.1 anymore. What we do need is better hardware support (current hardware), and if you game just a little, you will need DirectX.


You obviously never worked out in the real world. DOS programs are ridiculously widespread still, at least here in The Netherlands. The tellers at my previous job (I quit exactly one year ago today) were DOS programs, for instance. We ran them on Windows 98, but I would've preferred running them on eCS.

DOS is also still big in the embedded world due to its simplicity. I'm no developer, but eCS allows you to run endless DOS instances side-by-side, which should come in handy when developing stuff.

Reply Parent Score: 1