The original plan was that IBM would do OS/2 for high-end PC's and M$
would do Windoze for low-end PC's, and they would be compatible. But M$
(greedy Bill Gates) wanted the whole market, so they sabotaged the
compatibility and screwed IBM and OS/2.
Very unfortunate, since OS/2, especially the later "Warp" releases, were
quite nice. In an alternate timeline where OS/2 remained alive and
popular, Linux achieved far less popularity than in our timeline.
Having used both, I would say OS/2 and Linux are comparable in function
and ease of use (both much better than Windoze).
Jim Hartley
Mark Wallace wrote:
The guys were talking about it but I couldn't remember if it was part of
a meeting or not. I am not really into it, either. I just thought that
my internet search was giving me misleading information.
But thank you for satisfying my curiosity. I thought that it was
something completely different, that it was designed to be a replacement
for Windows by the computer manufacturers.
Mark
On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 19:59 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
On 07/28/2010 07:53 PM, Mark Wallace wrote:
I did a google search but am concerned that the information about OS2 is
either dated or slanted.
Search results revealed the following. Somebody please comment on the
accuracy.
OS2 is not totally open source because some of the code that it uses is
Microsoft proprietary code. Although something called OSFree is being
developed, it is not ready for prime time. That means that it is not
GPL.
OS/2 isn't open source, or linux, and is also finally no longer
supported by IBM, so probably way too off topic for this group / list.
It might make a good dinner time discussion if you are there next week.
-Sean
--
_______________________________________________
Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org
http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug
Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium
Aug 4 - Samba
Sep 1 - BOINC
Oct 6 - Creating Firefox Extensions
