I like, and still use, OS/2, in the form of ArcaOS, but it and windows still 
have lockout issues.

I would certainly have liked for IBM to open source SOM, DSOM and WPS, but I'm 
not sure that there would have been any value in an open source PM, unless the 
SIQ problem was really solved. I would love to have WPS support for, e.g., KDE.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of 
René Jansen [[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: AWS Outage Analysis: December 7, 2021

Hi David,

> On 12 Dec 2021, at 05:29, David Crayford <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 12/12/21 4:10 am, Tom Brennan wrote:
>> People say OS/2 was far better in design, operation, and security than 
>> Windows, but it's gone now.
>
> I worked a company in the 90s who used OS/2 Warp IMO it was terrible. Under 
> the covers it had preemptive multi-tasking, memory protection etc so was a 
> far better kernel then Windows but the GUI sucked. Major issues were that it 
> would hang, crash and was totally unreliable. All the useful applications 
> were written for Windows so when MS crippled compatibility OS/2 was 
> effectively dead. Then Microsoft hired Bill Cutler from VMS to head the 
> Windows NT team who knew a thing or two about fault tolerant operating 
> systems. Windows NT was the final nail in the coffin for OS/2.
>

I beg to differ here. This might have been true before IBM fixed the event 
queues. The single event queue in Presentation Manager (which I think is the 
hang thing you refer to, was there because Gates forced IBM (which knew better) 
to implement that, of course Windows got multiple event queues later, which did 
not help through and including Windows 98, which was still DOS with lipstick on 
it, including really terrible memory extension technology which I hope nobody 
suffered. It was Dave Curler (not Bill) who redesigned the Windows OS based 
(actually took some of the design that DEC did not let him Implement). The most 
advanced thing imho of that was interruptible interrupts. Windows NT was an OK 
OS until, in 4.00, someone took the very questionable decision to move graphics 
and its drivers from user space to kernel space, reputedly because of a few 
percent more performance in gaming. After that, it was less reliable.

I run Arcae Noa Blue Lion sometimes, but that is more to see if Rexx code is 
still compatible - this includes NetRexx. In my opinion, Linux could have 
gained the desktop if IBM would have been wise enough to open source the 
Presentation Manager and SOM implementations (which, by the time, also ran on 
RISC but hardly left the building before being killed). If that incurred paying 
MS some money, that would have been fine. There was enough to pay to Red Hat to 
only gain the server side back, to enable the hybrid cloud business.

OS/2 failed in the eyes of naive users mainly by confusing startup time with 
performance, (which was mostly the file system, HPFS, an MS effort) and by 
IBM’s failure to give enough stuff to the developer community. Which is a 
constant factor - don’t complain about students not knowing z/OS if you do not 
hand out study systems. I agree that in its early times there were some issues, 
but this also goes for OS (MVS,z/OS) - I remember it falling over at least 
three times a week in the early eighties. Even when OS/2 had its problems, it 
was a lot better then the alternatives, like TopView, Windows or Desqview.

Best regards,

René.

>
>> Sometimes the "best" system is simply what everybody else is using.  Got to 
>> go now because I just put in a betamax.
>
> Amen /\ Linux was no match for Unix systems such as AIX but because it was 
> free and open source it exploded in popularity. Now it runs on billions of 
> machines from mainframes to routers. Same for the C programming language 
> which is fundamentally flawed but free compilers were made available so it 
> became ubiquitous.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to