Slashdot Mirror


Keeping the OS/2 Flame Alive

nanday writes "Ever wondered what happened to OS/2? With IBM officially abandoning the operating system last year, users are relying on a third party version of OS/2 -- and, increasingly, using free and open source software to keep it alive." From the article: "According to Haverblad, the main reason that users stay with OS/2 is for 'features that Windows and Linux don't have yet.' He singles out the REstructured eXtended eXecutor (REXX), an interpreted programming language known for its ease of use, a 'rock solid kernel,' 'excellent multitasking,' and low system requirements. Haverblad also claims a lack of viruses and spyware and, referencing a report on OS/2 Warp Server by Secunia, fewer security vulnerabilities." Newsforge is also an OSTG site.

18 of 316 comments (clear)

  1. REXX was also available for Amiga...and others... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Informative
    "...the REstructured eXtended eXecutor (REXX), an interpreted programming language known for its ease of use..."

    REXX was also available for Amiga...and others...
    See: http://rexxla.org/Links/

  2. Let it go man! by gasmonso · · Score: 5, Funny

    I suppose there are people using the abacus too.

    http://religiousfreaks.com/
  3. Security Problems... by Manip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering the timeframe OS/2 was developed in, and its complexity excuse me if I don't believe it is secure. Most of the software from that timeframe has been shown to have a LOT of security problems, primarily because the training, and tools to discover holes didn't exist at the time.

    Plus a complete OS that is secure? ... I don't think so... Linux, and BSD, in their lifetimes have had lots of security problems, particularly as they have grown in popularity.

    If OS/2 was released OpenSource tomorrow and got popular you'd have it with the MOST security venerabilities by years end I guarantee it.

    The ONLY reason OS/2 /appears/ to be secure is because it isn't worth any one's time trying to crack it.

    1. Re:Security Problems... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Barring a few stupid corporations (*cough* Diebold *cough*), most ATMs accept extremely limited input, and have a very narrow range of possible actions they can take with that input, so there really isn't much to gain by hacking an ATM, and no real way to do it, because it's not really set up for that, and isn't running other, exploitable, services.

      Now, those Diebold machines that run Windows, on the other hand...I've seen screenshots of those things after a bluescreen, with the browser up, and the media player going. I'd bet there was a way to get them to spit out their complete internal cash supply. That's a good 250k, if it's full. Can you insert a buffer overflow on the back of an ATM card?

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  4. viruses by blue_adept · · Score: 4, Informative

    Haverblad also claims a lack of viruses and spyware.

    um, having a lack of USERS tends to do that.

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
  5. REXX by Shag · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to code in REXX in 1989.

    It was pretty handy for scripting, useful as "glue" between different things and all that.

    By 1989 standards, mind you.

    I think modern things (like AppleScript/Automator) can probably do everything REXX could ever do, and more, while being more readable to us humans.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  6. Re:NT kernel by cnettel · · Score: 4, Interesting
    OS/2 shares a few design decisions with the NT kernel. The NT kernel used to have a "personality" (just like the Posix and the more famous, Win32, one) to run a small subset of OS/2 console applications in Windows NT. At one point, of course, NT was supposed to be primarly an OS/2 successor, instead of a Windows 3(.1) one. This means that a lot of data structures and so on are similar, where it really doesn't matter, just to make it familiar to user application developers.

    BTW, what's "unsolid" about the NT kernel itself?

  7. Obligatory Bill Gates Quote by ribuck · · Score: 5, Informative
    "I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating system, and possibly program, of all time. As the successor to DOS, which has over 10,000,000 systems in use, it creates incredible opportunities for everyone involved with PCs."

    -- Bill Gates, from "OS/2 Programmer's Guide" (forward by Bill Gates)

  8. Re:Rock Solid Multitasking? by NullProg · · Score: 4, Informative

    I developed for OS/2 for about 7 years. Yes the kernel had threads and a solid multitasking support but the flawed design of Presentation Manager (PM) caused a single rogue app to lock up the desktop and making it useless. The single message queue that IBM designed in PM, was one of the worst technical design decisions ever made. There added many workarounds to kill rogue apps but the results were pretty unreliable.

    It was fixed in 1996 with the release of version 4. Microsoft owns the copyright on PM, not IBM.

    Enjoy,

    --
    It's just the normal noises in here.
  9. OS/2 died on August 17, 1995 by mr_majestyk · · Score: 5, Informative

    On that day, OS/2's architect, Gordon Letwin, posted USENET message explaining why the system was doomed in the market. After that, it was all downhill.

  10. OS/2 Petition by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think it's worth pointing out this petition over at OS2World.com (which is still accepting signatures), asking IBM to release the source of OS/2.

    There are apparently some legal issues -- the most frequently cited one is that IBM might not hold copyright to all the code, since the project was originally done in collaboration with Microsoft and Corel -- but the request is that IBM open up all of the code that it has available and can legally release, and note what parts it can't, so that they could be re-implemented.

    I'm not sure it's ever going to happen, but it sure would be nice if it did.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  11. Re:The problem is... by AaronLawrence · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, those old versions of browsers are really painful.

    --
    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
  12. A terse reply by I+Like+Pudding · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ever wondered what happened to OS/2?

    No.

  13. Keeping the OS/2 Flame Alive by Eric+Damron · · Score: 5, Funny

    OS/2 is the crappiest OS ever!

    How's that for keeping a flame alive?

    Joking... just joking...

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  14. ATM machines & OS/2 by harshmanrob · · Score: 5, Informative

    80% of the ATM machines in North America are running OS/2 right now. I'd call that one hell of an install base. I know this becuase my company does remote IT support for several banks, including one that plans to be the largest financial institution by the end of 2007. In that bank, a civil war is being fought between the Wintel and Unix/Linux side to decide what these ATM machines will run when IBM drops support. I do not know about you, but it scares the crap out of me to put in my ATM card and the next thing I see is a blue screen. That is when Mr. Crowbar will have to take over.

  15. Re:REXX was also available for Amiga...and others. by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Informative
    Is available for most OSs as there are free implementations of it. But in OS/2 was very tighly integrated with the OS, in a way that gives to that implementation extra value.

    Another thing i liked a lot about OS/2 is the WPS, that maybe by now there are better desktops, but back then was wonderful, still waiting some of their features in modern desktops like KDE.

  16. Argh OS/2 Story... Must... Post... by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I started with OS/2 with my first job. I had to travel around a lot and my boss ended up buying a 486 laptop for me. Now I was used using real operating systems from the various schools I'd attended and was not satisfied with Windows. I looked around for a real operating system to install on the laptop. SCO was my first choice but their OS cost mid 4 digits and the look and feel sucked. BSD was kinda scary back then and the only way I could find a distribution was to order a bunch of tapes. So I ended up installing OS/2. It was pretty nice -- I could work on the 3 DOS programs my company maintained for dogtracks in 3 separate windows, play most Windows games and had a spiffy interface. Workplace shell, for all everyone complained about it, was nifty. It was object oriented and allowed casading folders and a lot of other functionality that Windows 3.0/3.1 didn't.

    I ended up working for IBM doing OS/2 technical support after a couple of years. IBM really did have a highly rated support line despite the fact that out of all the people training with me, I was the only one who'd ever used the system. After about a year on the phones, they promoted me to electronic forum support, where I answered questions from users posting on CompuServe. Remember CompuServe? We had quite a presence there. I specialized in REXX and networking, although I would frequently hit the other forums as well.

    I was also an advocate for the OS because it really did suck less than Windows. In fact, it sucked less than Windows right up until the Windows XP/ME timeframe. In many ways, the OS/2 interface is still superior to Windows. I attended a couple of COMDEXes with Team OS/2 and attended several local Team OS/2 events at ham fests and things like that.

    At its peak, OS/2 had an estimated install base of 10,000,000 users despite the PCCO's refusal to pre-install the OS on systems for customers. We're all familiar with why they didn't -- Microsoft would revoke the volume discounts for any manufacturer preinstalling a competing OS on systems being sold. That was one of the nails in the OS/2 coffin. Others included the attitude in IBM that PCs weren't real machines and if you wanted a real OS you should be running AIX, the refusal of engineering to fix several really annoying little bugs, and several other factors as well. The two most annoying bugs were the tendency for the Workplace Shell to become corrupt (Binary registry files and all that...) and the single system input queue which would allow one application to hang the entire shell. Half-assed hacks were made to work around both problems, but they were half-assed and sucked.

    Around 95, I saw the writing on the wall for OS/2 and downloaded a copy of slakware 1.0 off the Internet. I've been using Linux ever since then.

    As for its advantages, REXX was an advantage over the DOS batch file language, but honestly what isn't? Perl, ruby and python all provide similar features and you're far more likely to find someone who knows how to write in one of those than in REXX. REXX was also quite limited, possibly even intentionally crippled, in what it was capable of doing. Interacting with the WPS and GUI components was always a pain in the ass, if not completely impossible. Network communications was impossible with the version of it that I used.

    The OS/2 kernel WAS rock solid outside its third party drivers, and as far as I know no one ever managed to write a virus for it. The WPS was always the biggest draw but IMHO IBM ruined it after OS/2 2.0 or 2.1. It was hideous in Warp 3 and later. Gnome kind of looks like the WPS -- very similar object desktop concepts, and the WPS used an early version an object system similar to CORBA to provide access to desktop objects. I never really liked icons on my desktop to begin with, so I don't really miss it all that much.

    Inside IBM most of the OS/2 people I knew switched to Linux after IBM killed the system. There might still be a few hold-outs lurking in the bowels of the company, but most of the stuff you need for t

    --

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

  17. Re:The problem is... by AppyPappy · · Score: 4, Informative

    The greatest thing about OS/2 is that it is rock solid and stable. My OS/2 would stay up for months at a time. can't even get Linux to do that in a desktop environment. It had great graphics for the time and applications didn't stomp on each other. I could even run DOS games while I compiled code on my fire-breather 386. I When they finally moved us to Windows, it was hard times. Windows blew up constantly. If you played a DOS game while you compiled, it would freak out like a prom date in a Hummer limo.

    I still have a copy of Warp in the closet of old-school stuff. eBay baby.

    --

    If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem