Slashdot Mirror


IBM's OS/2 Strategy for 2003

Landreth writes "OS2World.com reports that IBM has released their OS/2 strategy for 2003. They appear to be pushing the WebSphere Software Platform as well as client and server upgrades to Warp 4. The report can be viewed at IBM's website."

15 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Funny that an OS which /. has been reporting as being dead for years is apparently still being updated.

    -t

  2. Getting OS/2 by bjb · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I've been wondering for the last few years, who still uses OS/2? Forget companies who have legacy software running on it, I mean does anyone actually use it on their personal machine? I mean regularly; enough to validate upgrades.

    The bigger question I have, however, is that I never really had a chance to play with OS/2, and I always wanted to see what it was like. Is it even publically (preferably freely) available for a weekend hobbyist like myself who just wants to kick the tires?

    --
    Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    1. Re:Getting OS/2 by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't use it, but I ran it for quite some time.

      Most GNU and free software apps have been ported to it at one time or another. GCC, Xfree86, Mozilla, all were ported long before they were ported to Win32.

      It still has a heap of useful software apps, and it has some things which Linux has been working on since at least 1995.

      Like:

      • Smooth True Type font integration and management
      • Easy printer setup and support
      • Support for multiple simultaneous streams of audio (without the lag of ESD, or kludging about with multiple audio devices presented by one card)
      • Win16 application support (who cares if it doesn't fully or even partially support Win32, neither does Linux)
      • A desktop environment with a good clipboard

      It lacked:

      • A slick security model on the filesystem
      • Multiuser support
      • Good marketing and incentive for companies to develop native apps.

      The GUI also had a message queueing problem which prevented apps from responding when one app seized the queue.

      In the late days of BBSes, OS/2 was the prefered platform. You could strip out the GUI and the multitasking was very good. Desqview was the only competitor in that field, Linux was too new and strange for the BBS world -- BBSes were a PC phenomenon. Unix and variants were part of an educational and business world which didn't cross into the PC world.

      IBM never released the package for free (short of betas back in the early '90s), and now I believe it costs a fortune to get a copy... if you can get it at all.

    2. Re:Getting OS/2 by Micah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have a copy of Warp 4 and Visual Age C++ for OS/2 that I'll almost certainly never use again. Would be willing to sell for cheap+shipping.

      I loved OS/2, but it is what helped convince me that Free Software is SO important. I put quite a bit of effort into learning OS/2, hoping it would take off, and learned a lesson when IBM stopped pushing it. You just can't put much hope in non Free software! Linux is, fortunately, immune to being ignored by its manufacturer the way OS/2 (and BeOS) was.

  3. Re:who honestly cares by reaper20 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On the otherhand if I was a past OS/2 customer I would be pretty happy with the length of support by IBM so far. You gotta hand it to IBM on this one, they supported the product as long as the customers needed, and that's pretty rare in this day and age of forced upgrades.

    I mean, they even have OS/2 Mozilla - at least they weren't told their systems were out of date and force them to upgrade every 18 months. (Oracle/Microsoft).

  4. Change of plans.. by Plutor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought IBM's OS/2 plan for 2003 was kill it. Why has this changed?

    1. Re:Change of plans.. by silvaran · · Score: 5, Informative

      It was corrected on a slashback. The EOLs are mostly for hardcopy documentation and other bundled software, not for OS/2 itself.

  5. Re:who honestly cares by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then again... For IBM keeping it's customers happy is the most important thing of all. Regardless of if that means supporting OS/2 or any other legacy platform.

    Beta was better technology, but somehow we all got stuck with VHS... Superior technology can't always win.

    Granted, OS/2 is a different story. But in both cases it's about earning ones salary... which is always done by keeping the customers happy.

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  6. Re:So why use OS/2? by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Maybe they just like it better. You know, the way it works. The GUI. etc.

    Where did this crap come in choice is a bad thing? EVERY time someone mentions a new OS, or in this case a resuccitated old one, the same old "Why do this, when Linux does blah blah blah and Windows does narf narf narf" arguments come up.

    Notice how nobody ever protests when GM or Ford comes up with another car. "But why get this 'Grand Marquis' thing when a Sable can already get you from A to B in comfort."

    But choice in OSes. Oh no, that's terrible! We must consider that evil!

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  7. Zope, Mailman, Apache/2, PHP-Nuke, Rsyncd by tsikora · · Score: 5, Informative

    and Sendmail all on OS/2 Warp Server for e-Business and every bit as solid as Linux.. and faster. 32-bit BSD TCP/IP stack, et.all The UnixOS/2 Development team has been making OS/2 a world-class server entry.

    --
    -- Ted tsikora@powerusersbbs.com
  8. Re:who honestly cares - apparently you by pigfukr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apparently you, since you did make it a point to read the responses to the posting and post one yourself.

    I am using OS/2 right now, the only thing I reboot to windows for is gaming. I am using the version of OS/2 that was released in 2002. As "obsolete" as you think it is, it is still a far better desktop OS than Linux. Linux is not ready to "take over the world" at all in that aspect.

    OS/2 is still a fun OS to dink around with. If the linux open source community comes up with any nice software it's only a short time before the OS/2 guys port it over. We have almost everything that Linux has due to the simplicity of porting linux-->OS/2.

    --
    pigfukr
  9. I save big bucks with OS/2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    all the desktops in my architecture practice run OS/2, the servers run linux, and we have one copy of windows running on VMWare. I set up the os/2 boxes when warp connect appeared on the scene, ('93?) and have never looked back. Other than updating Os/2 to warp 4 our software upgrade costs have been virtually zero. They are zero because we don't run windows programs. We are never forced into an upgrade situation.We use a mix of DOS (oh the horror!) OS/2 and linux GPL programs.The last versions of many DOS programs before the big switch to windows (word perfect, quattro pro, generic cadd etc) were really very good pieces of work. OS/2 allows perfectly stable multitasking of these programs.

    We use HOBlink to add an X server to the OS/2 desktop, and now we can also use OS/2 as a thin client for various Linux programs.

    Nothing crashes. we don't get viruses, nobody is playing games when they should be working, and picking up additional copies of programs we need is trivial on e-bay.

    That being said, our backup plan is to migrate totaly to Linux if OS/2 ever really dies. The only thing keeping us from doing that now, is lack of a good Reasonably inexpensive CAD program that runs on Linux.

    We are just going to skip the whole windows think

  10. Re:who honestly cares - apparently you by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Gnome's archetecture is very similar to the OS/2 workplace shell. The main advantage of the workplace shell over gnome right now are all the SOM objects that are implemented on it. OS/2's desktop is its greatest strength but also its greatest weakness -- it's very easy to corrupt (Some days it seemed like all you had to do was look at it funny) and then you'd lose all your object relationships that all your apps carefully installed.

    It'd be interesting to implement clones of the OS/2 workplace objects for Gnome. I'm kind of surprised that someone hasn't. Personally though, I don't like icons on my desktop so I remove the file manager functionality from Gnome, and a lot of those objects only really make sense on the desktop.

    When I was working on-site support, we had a very specific order in which you HAD to install the various OS/2 and Windows applications that the company needed on each desktop. If you didn't follow that order, you'd end up trashing something (usually the workplace shell) and having to start from scratch. Of course, my primary interaction with OS/2 was when someone was having a problem with it.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  11. Re:Zope, Mailman, Apache/2, PHP-Nuke, Rsyncd by Listen+Up · · Score: 5, Informative


    I'm sorry, but OS/2 has never been and will never be a "world-class server entry". It's not multiuser, doesn't scale onto multiprocessor boxes, requires reboots after software installs/upgrades, relies too heavily on the desktop for administration, and just generally isn't stable enough for the corporate server.

    TROLL What a bunch of total crap. OS/2 was SMP enabled from 2.11 (or 2.1 I believe) and scaled almost flawlessly linear as the number of processors grew. As a matter of fact, the OS/2 SMP model was one of the best models ever created and to this day is an example of how proper SMP should be done. OS/2 also ran services the same as Unix did, although with a slightly different model. Didn't know how to use REXX, eh? I used to work for a company (Lands End in USA) that used OS/2 for three 800 person 24-hour call centers and almost never was there a problem with OS/2. And when there was, it never stopped business. It chugged along like a tank. For even larger settings, you would combine OS/2 and an AS/400 or S/390 and have an unbeatable combination. The GUI was single threaded in the end (although extremely powerful), but command line OS/2 was as much Unix like as you could want and with all of the power you could handle. I could talk about OS/2 for hours, but the fact is is that you a an idiot troll, and if you knew anything about OS/2 Server and OS/2 Advanced Server you would realize how much of an idiot you look like.

  12. Re:Zope, Mailman, Apache/2, PHP-Nuke, Rsyncd by benzapp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sheesh, the OS/2 GUI was great but not necessary. I ran a multinode BBS for years command line only. Especially in 1993 when 8 megs of ram cost some serious cash, using 2-3 megs for the GUI was unnecessary. Its funny you profess such knowledge because OS/2 had few GUI tools for administration. Almost all were command line and cable of being manipulated via REXX scripts. There were some GUI front ends, but most sucked and no one used them. As for the reboots, only Ring 0 drivers required a reboot, like Installable File System drivers. But, even Linux requires that. Oh wait, you need to recompile the kernel to that. *duh*

    OS/2 SMP has always supported up to 1024 processors , and still is one of the best examples of multiprocessing today, better than Windows and Linux. You forget that IBM practically invented multiprocessing and in the early 90's with the slow advancement of CISC processors it really seemed like multiprocessing was the way for performance gains. I remember going to Comdex in 1994 seeing OS/2 2.1 SMP running on 128 processors. They ran this great image editing tool called Colorworks which was highly SMP enabled, the performance gains were amazing. Today however, the only amazing multiprocessing machines are IBM Power4 machines. Everything else is a toy. 2, 4 processors. BFD

    --
    I don't read or respond to AC posts