Slashdot Mirror
Death Knell for OS/2 Client
markhb writes "I hate to be the one to submit this story, but the end may finally have arrived for the OS/2 client. Stardock Systems announced today that IBM will not allow them to OEM a client package, and that IBM has no plans for, or strategic interest in, a new OS/2 client. Is anyone ready to get the source for SOMObjects and implement EA's and the Workplace Shell in Linux?"
interface leaves much to be desired????
Try any of this in windoze:
1) Move the thing a shadow (shortcut) points to in OS/2, and the shadow (shortcut) still knows where it is...right down to config.sys entries.
2) Do the above with a whole group of things
3) Change the colors for every element of an application using OS/2's system color pallette and drag drop. No need for ANY code to be written to take advantage of this feature...it's all in the OS/2 core SOM/DSOM model.
4) All containers from EVERY OS/2 PM application can be SHARED AMONGST THEMSELVES!!! For example, I could use the PMView file selector that does nice thumbnails (The thumbnails actually become a part of the actual image file through EA's) to drag a thumbnail to a folder's background image container...voila! I just changed that folder's background image! With an application that the OS didn't know anything about!
5) TEMPLATES! I can create, say, an FTP Folder just by dragging an FTP Template to the place I want to make it. Yeah...I can see FTP servers as if they are a folder on my desktop...THAT is REAL internet integration, Microsoft!!! (And was done a year or two before you thought of it) Other templates exist for EVERY OBJECT you can use under OS/2.
6) REXX Scripting. Unlike Linux, we only have one main scripting language...but it is used for everything and is consistent....Take for example ZOC, PhotoGraphics Pro, GTIRC.... If you prefer PERL...it can be embedded in REXX!
7) Consistent context menus. OS/2 has had RMB context menus since long before Microsoft thought of them. You see...In OS/2's WPS, EVERYTHING is an OBJECT. ANYTHING you can do with an object will appear on it's context menu.
8) An interface that MAKES SENSE! The right button to drag, left to select makes sense! You don't accidentally move things that way!
I'm sure others can add much much more, but these are the things you are missing. You obviously didn't take the time to learn the WPS and how it works...assuming that the Windows interface is somehow 'right'
Since people are having problem with the link:
---
From: "Brad Wardell"
Subject: Judgement Day results
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:46:45 -0400
Lines: 50
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Message-ID:
Newsgroups: stardock.os2
Path: prospero.stardock.com
Xref: prospero.stardock.com stardock.os2:2342
NNTP-Posting-Host: brad.stardock.com 209.69.142.81
In 1998, Stardock took the position that if IBM had no current or projected
plans for a new fat OS/2 client, that it was in the interests of OS/2 users
and the computing community in general that a third-party should work with
IBM to license OS/2 technology on an OEM basis and make a new client
available.
To that end, late last year, Stardock prepared a business plan and opened
negotiations with IBM. The wheels of bureacracy grind slowly, but eventually
it was up to "IBM" (executive level) to make the ultimate call on
proceeding.
For the past 6 months, Stardock and IBM have been working closely together
in hammering out the details of an OS/2 client. Everything from potential
names down to which minute components would or would not be included. These
meetings included multiple in-person meetings with IBM staff and executives
here at Stardock's office complex in Livonia Michigan.
With an agreement in principle in place, the last major hurdle was this week
in which the IBMers in favor of our proposal (mostly in Austin) presented
their case to IBM as a whole.
The call has been made -- there will be no new client from Stardock and IBM
has indicated that they have no plans for an OS/2-based client of their own.
Though IBM indicated Stardock had the strongest proposal, they have decided
that it is currently not in IBM's or their customer's interests to license
any current OS/2 technology on an OEM-basis.
There was never any discord between IBM and Stardock over financials,
technical viability, target market, or the like. IBM has simply finally
made the decision that a new OS/2 client would be in conflict with their
strategic directions.
Stardock would like to extend a special thanks to all the IBMers (and in
particular Ken Christopher and Timothy Sipples) who went above and beyond
the call in working with us and going to bat inside IBM. Remember when you
meet folks like them, who are and have been intimately involved with OS/2,
that their hands may be just as tied as yours when the IBM Corporation as a
whole sets policy.
Everything that could be done was done.
Brad
---
Brad Wardell
Product Manager: Object Desktop & The Corporate Machine
http://www.stardock.com
---
---
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
First, this does NOT mean the death of OS/2, or of the client. You can STILL buy OS/2 Warp 4, and it STILL works great. I won't waste your time touting the benefits of OS/2 Warp 4, but they do exist. I'm perfectly happy with my three computers at home running OS/2 Warp, and I know of a lot of cool software that's being developed and will be relaesed over the next six months (and beyond). In fact, I'm not even sure I'd buy Warp 5 if it did come out. If I did, it'd be mostly to show my support.
Second, even if Stardock did come out with a Warp 5 (or whatever they'd call it) client, it would be more for marketing than technology. Any Warp 5 client created would be based on the Warp 5 server, and the only thing that would be different between Warp 4 and Warp 5 is the addition of SMP support. Considering that only 1% (at most) of computers out there have SMP support, it wouldn't help much. There would be no real new technology in Warp 5. There won't be any support for Windows 95 apps or anything major like that. Anyone could take Warp 4 today and create a CD that installs XFree86, EMX, Gimp, Star Office, Object Desktop, and whatever else is currently available, and it would be identical to Stardock's Warp 5.
Why? Stardock, since they won't have the OS/2 source code, can only do so much (i.e. nothing). And if IBM releeased a new client instead, they WOULDN'T add any new features that don't already exist in Warp 5 server.
So in the end, 99% of everyone who uses Warp 4 and has downloaded the standard add-ons is already running Warp 5.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
I work @ big blue(i even used to work on OS/2 TCP, no flames please!) OS/2 is not dead or close to it. There's not a whole lot of development going on the client side, but the server side is making lots of blue money. And lots of big customers are still using it. Just b/c your neighbor doesn't run it at his house, doesn't mean his it's not in his IS data center at work churnning away. My own team got paid a cool million to write a interface for os/2. Like I said not much new development, but if a customer is willing to fund it we'll do it! (about dos, check out PC DOS 2000, still alive thanks to some bucks or Y2k lawsuits i dunno) http://www.software.ibm.com/os/dos/
OS/2 used a CMD.EXE shell, which was a little closer to a typical unix shell. True, it didn't have filename completion (though 4OS/2 did), but it had a nice history feature completely unlike DOS/WinDOS. And it had a nifty F1 help feature in its shells.
Its command set was similar, but not quite the same. And HPFS had true long filename support, and you could always use the long filenames (unlike 95, which half the time balks when I try to use the readable name). Plus it had an extensive help system that was fairly well crossreferenced.
Of course, it had ReXX as its scripting language which, even though I still can't write a script without taking a lot of time to look up syntax and the like, really tied everything together. It could manipulate anything in the system (including the GUI) through built-in extensions to the language. Want something to do foo? You could write some code, compile it to a dll, and rexx could use it like it was built-in. Try doing that with daim-bramaged batchfiles. :-)
If by "windows like" you mean "square windows, some borders, standardized buttons", then yes. Presentation Manager is still THE best OOUI that I've ever used. Everything I found about it was consistent.
It had some type of support, IIRC, but I was always the only OS/2 user around, so I never really found out. There WAS the ability to telnet and FTP to it (especially in 3.0 on, when they included TCP/IP), so you could do a lot that way.
Sure, there were a lot of problems, namely hardware support, and available software apps. But the hobbes archives made a lot of the difficulty go away. And a lot of GNU stuff had been ported to OS/2.
Comparing the PM with X is like comparing apples and oranges. PM was fairly well tied to the underlying OS, but in a good way (there were replacements, even text mode ones, which came out rather quickly). Under X, the WM mostly just handles window placements, iconifying, etc. The PM WAS your system. And everything about it was stored in a registry or in the filesystem. I don't quite know how to explain the difference, it's really something that you need to experience.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken