OS/2 Community Tries Bounty System 293
Grayskull writes "The OS/2 and eComStation community are trying to get open source software ported to that platform by opening bounties and allowing people to chip in with prize money. Currently the most important open bounties are Java 6 port, Icon routines in OS/2, VirtualBox port, Extend multimedia and OpenWengo ports."
Open source the OS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Or... (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. OS/2 is dead, guys. Where have you been?
OS/2 has all kinds of really neat features. In many ways, it's still a signpost of things to come. Unfortunately, it's all built on top of a kernel that incorporates all the mistakes/oversights of early 80s programming techniques.
Re:Open source the OS (Score:3, Insightful)
And more people will port Open Source software to it.
Not really. There are loads of open source OSes out there, and only the big and famous ones get a substantial amount of developers, and developers tend to contribute where their code will have more probabilities of being used (that is, big, established OSes). It's kind of a chicken and egg problem
I'm not sure that this is the place for bounties.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bounties make a certain amount of sense as a means to reward the efforts of people who work on projects of community interest, and they might even direct the attention of people who are likely to be working on something in any case in the direction you want it to go. They aren't a way of hiring programmers(not at this size anyway), they are only an added motivation for the already interested.
Does an OS used primarily by a dwindling number of corporate legacy customers, often in semiembedded applications, really have a large enough pool of already interested contributors? The fact that OS/2 is closed isn't an automatic kiss of death for community involvement with a legacy system(just look at Amiga and BeOS); but OS/2 doesn't have anything like the charisma or fanbase, and it is too young and modern to appeal heavily on nostalgic grounds(unlike, say, C64).
Perhaps this will work for them, if so, great; but I have to wonder.
ReactOS, Wine (Score:5, Insightful)
To make matters worse, it is pretty much succeeded by Windows NT, which means any re-developed open source OS/2 clone will be irrelevant, as it will be like ReactOS, but years behind. And let's not forget Wine, of course. I generally love how people can get enthusiastic about vintage operating systems, to the point where they develop clones of them, it's really heart-warming generally, but the OS/2 community I somehow never really understood.
Re:Open source the OS (Score:2, Insightful)
The OS in encumbered by crap from Microsoft and COUNTLESS other contributors
It can be done, but you would need to take a BSD approach to it. That is, people who have (legal) access to the source would need to rewrite/replace all those components for which they can't obtain permission to release.
So it would take a legally limited pool of developers a lot of time and effort, all to open source an operating system that hasn't been updated since 2001. All-in-all, possible, but unlikely to be worth it.
Re:What does OS/2 offer today? (Score:3, Insightful)
Simple. It works well for what most users do.
- The UI in WinXP is very inconsistent and horrible once you're used to a more consistent UI. There's not much debate here, WinXP is hardly the epitomy of fine UI design except maybe for the most rabid Microsofties.
- No virus, no spyware.
- Full command-line power with easy to use GUI. Try this with Linux or Windows. Keep a link to a file on your desktop, now drop down to the command line and rename the original file. Used to break Linux, it might try to search now, Windows will try a search if it's similar. OS/2 has no such problem, the 2 are automagically linked.
- A real GUI for the OS. Come on, Linux is very pretty (I use Ubuntu everyday at work), but there's a lot of inconsistencies and at heart, it's still basically a X-Window manager. You think it's great, but not after you've used a real GUI. (Dang I wish GNOME or KDE would _copy_ from some of the best GUI's).
- OS X is a possibility, but you have to buy Apple hardware only.
- It's not a resource hog. I can fit my OS and all my applications (Yes, including OpenOffice 2, GIMP and everything you need under the sun) in a couple of GB if you wanted to.
Let's face it, most people (and that would not be people in Slashdot) just check their e-mail, browse the web and write up the occasional document. OS/2 does that easily and simply. I have to use WinXP and Linux (and Solaris and HP-UX and...) at work, but I'll fully switch when Linux or someone else gets their act together. All the alpha-blended, draggy morphing windows in the world won't make a great UI if the _behaviour_ isn't there.
If you need to get an updated, currently supported, purchasable version of OS/2, you can use eComstation.
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:4, Insightful)
it's really heart-warming generally, but the OS/2 community I somehow never really understood.
Fanboys, perhaps?
Barrier to entry (Score:4, Insightful)
As i understand it, OS/2 still costs money to obtain...
So there's very little incentive for a hobbyist programmer to obtain a copy just to play with... The only people using it, will be those who are stuck with it for legacy reasons, it won't gather any new users.
There are several niche open source OS's out there, and there's no barrier to stop people downloading them to try (i regularly download new builds of AROS, Reactos, Syllable etc)
NEWs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of these bounties were created in 2005.
Re:What does OS/2 offer today? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not that Linux is the end all-be all, but if you want open source apps, go run the open source OS.
Most of your points are spot-on, but this is ridiculous. There's plenty of open source software on every platform, not just open source ones. I can go get all sorts of open source apps for Windows, or even OS X, neither of which is open source. "Open source" is not a platform, it's a development philosophy which can be executed anywhere.
Re:Wtf (Score:4, Insightful)
Ooh, the Win16 layer reprise: Having the Win16 support in OS/2 was a major contributor to its downfall since there was no reason for vendors to make native apps when they could make Win16 apps and sell to both Windows and OS/2 users.
OS/Who? (Score:1, Insightful)
I know Bill Gates had both Windows and that on his plate but he threw it out. What is it doing around 18 years later? That has GOT to be one obsolete OS. Hello! That's must be what happens when you live in a basement too long, you turn all Morlok-like and put out bounties to get a harvest - any harvest - in. It must be a sad day on Black Rock for OS/Who?
Re:You should all be ashamed (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not fair to make fun of OS/2.
We're not making fun of OS/2. We're making fun of the losers who wont admit to themselves that the ship has sailed.
Instead of this (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead of this, why not offer rewards to port the interesting bits of OS/2 over to Linux. Pick whichever X server is closest to OS/2, create a fork, and start reworking it.
OS/2 is basically dead at this point. IBM no longer tries to sell it to consumers, and there isn't enough hardware support for current systems.
Instead of being stuck of a dead-end OS, drag it into the modern era. If you port it to run on top of Linux, then you automatically get newer device drivers, the possibility to run on non-Intel hardware, free development code (gcc, gdb, etc), and a huge quantity of existing software.
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:3, Insightful)
The interesting thing about OS/2 community is, it is very hard to find any clueless fanatics. Even in 1995, unless you claimed a completely stupid thing like "MS-DOS is better than OS/2" or "Windows 95 is 32bit", they (especially team os/2) would listen.
I am on OS X now and I can't find quality ezines, communities like OS/2. I find myself sometimes posting as AC to Apple related stories since I am sick of fanatic community.
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it is really hard for some people to understand that not everyone disliking Windows likes Linux or FreeBSD.
If one remembers these are the people who paid more than Windows 95 to IBM and the fact that OS/2 was/is a commercial operating system, it will be easier to understand.
I notice a lot of the OS/2 community migrated to Apple OS X. On the other hand, some people could be still happy with OS/2. It is not Windows 95 or 98, it is a 32 bit operating system still having some software released. One can have both OS/2 on a PC and PS/3 for games.
Re:You should all be ashamed (Score:3, Insightful)
Really d-bag? How has Linux gone past cli and gui concepts that are implented in Windows, Mac OS X, other Unices? He was just disparaging Windows in case you have reading comprehension problems.
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably worked better on OS/2! I think all replacement shells play havoc with Windows. Too many poorly documented APIs to screw up with.
Re:They should port the OS/2 API to Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
What... the... hell? Linux has always prevented userland applications from doing these things, as have modern versions of Windows.
Re:ReactOS, Wine (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're under the impression that Windows NT somehow succeeds the 32-bit OS/2 clients released by IBM, then no wonder you don't understand the OS/2 community that survives -- you think we still use the old 16-bit POS that was created in the IBM+Microsoft days. Methinks not. :-)
OS/2 still has advantages in process prioritization and multithreading that neither Windows now Linux can touch, and you can feel the difference on old enough hardware. OS/2 responds quickly where WinNT 4, Win2K, and various Linux variants will hesitate and/or pause when performing tasks. With modern hardware this isn't as important, since you can throw enough hardware at the problem, but not everyone wants to trash the older hardware they have lying around...