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 403490
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: eCS 2.0
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 11th Jan 2010 05:58 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: eCS 2.0"
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Its not on top of Dos, rather the other way around. It an os that can run dos compatible programs, even better than NT could. Its a fully fledged, decent Operating system, not at all like the 9x branch of windows that was really sorta kinda based on dos. But yes, similar to NT ( NT was not based on dos, its New Technology.. NT) in that NT is also not a gui on top of dos, but can run some dos programs.

Basically, you'r confused, but I'm not sure I did a very good job of un confusing you. good luck.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: eCS 2.0
by OSGuy on Mon 11th Jan 2010 06:36 in reply to "RE[5]: eCS 2.0"
OSGuy Member since:
2006-01-01

Basically, you'r confused, but I'm not sure I did a very good job of un confusing you. good luck.

hehe thanks for that Bill. You actually did a very job at clearing things up. Yes, I was already aware of how NT works. Basically NT completely eliminated the need for DOS and it just emulates it now within the GUI.

Based on your explanation, OS/2 is the same. The confusing thing though is the need for AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS as these are purely needed for DOS, which makes me think before OS/2 starts, DOS starts too.

Edited 2010-01-11 06:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: eCS 2.0
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 11th Jan 2010 14:30 in reply to "RE[6]: eCS 2.0"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah,they are there simply for dos compatibility. I think I remember seeing those in early versions of NT too, but its been a while.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: eCS 2.0
by gberry on Mon 11th Jan 2010 19:46 in reply to "RE[6]: eCS 2.0"
gberry Member since:
2010-01-11

For a little more clarity, remember that Microsoft used to work for IBM and they co-developed OS/2. IBM did much of the heavy lifting, IMHO. When the companies parted ways Microsoft renamed their copy of OS/2 'Windows NT'. Window 7 is in fact Windows NT version 6.1 according to the kernel used. So eCS and Windows 7 have a common ancestry.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: eCS 2.0
by rcsteiner on Tue 12th Jan 2010 23:25 in reply to "RE[6]: eCS 2.0"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

The OS/2 CONFIG.SYS shares the name with the file used by DOS (mainly for historical reasons), but the contents are quite different.

AUTOEXEC.BAT is only used in OS/2 Virtual DOS Machines, which are independent processes running under the OS/2 kernel which emulator a DOS kernel and the core DOS device drivers (mouse, serial, and so on). It can be named anything, really, and each VDM can have its own.

Not that much different from running DOSEMU under Linux except for the fact that DOSEMU isn't as well integrated with the system in most Linux distros, and OS/2 VDMs are somewhat more flexible still.

The OS/2 Windows subsystem (WinOS2) also runs in a VDM. It isn't a Windows API translator ... it's a licensed and partially rewritten copy of Windows 3.11 with various fixes applied that runs as a DPMI client inside a VDM.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: eCS 2.0
by rcsteiner on Tue 12th Jan 2010 23:28 in reply to "RE[6]: eCS 2.0"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

OS/2 is a text-mode OS with a preemptively multitasking kernel much like Linux is, and Windows NT is, although OS/2 (and eCS) can be booted without a GUI at all, while I'm not sure how possible that is even with newer Windows variants.

While its commands do share a history with DOS (it was initially developed by MS and IBM back in the days when DOS was the common OS for x86 PCs), it has a number of commands which DOS does not. And you can always use an alternative shell like bash if you want. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 2