×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

609 comments

Hey! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069550)

It ain't dead until Netcraft confirms it!

Re:Hey! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069576)

what a shame.. os/2 had so much potential

Re:Hey! (4, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069590)

That's right. I don't care what IBM says about it; I want empirical evidence. Has anyone counted the number of Usenet posts about OS/2?

Re:Hey! (5, Funny)

darkpixel2k (623900) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069728)

4.

1. I heard they were killing OS/2.
2. Yeah, me too!
3. F*ck OS/2
4. Grow up, retard.

Yeah. Four posts.

Re:Hey! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069712)

Noooooooooooooo !!!!!!

Re:Hey! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069747)

It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle [198.62.75.1] could reanimate the corpse at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dead.

Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines? (5, Interesting)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069557)

Last time I checked, large numbers of ATM machines ran OS2, which is why you don't see the BSOD when you go to grab some cash.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (1, Informative)

TheOriginalRevdoc (765542) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069587)

OS/2 may not show the BSOD, but it does crash from time to time. Even in ATMs. It's hard to find an O/S that never crashes.

That's not a big deal, though. A friend told me that he lost his ATM card late one stormy night, when the ATM crashed and rebooted mid-transaction. That was when he found it was a Unix box... because the boot messages came up on the monitor...

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069600)

I hate thinking of ATM machines - I can never remember my PIN number.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069612)

Want me to send it to you in an IM Message?

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (2, Funny)

hullabalucination (886901) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069621)

Your PIN number is 1583. Write this down and for goodness' sake, don't reveal it to another living soul.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (2, Insightful)

maotx (765127) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069604)

IBM has posted a migration page to help OS/2 users easily switch to Linux.

Sounds like Windows [daimyo.org] will have competition on an even wider base.

Any cost predictions for such a wide migration? OS/2 is on a fairly wide range of ATMs as it is.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (1)

Losat (643653) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069623)

Don't the ATMs still run OS/2 1.x? Or have they been upgraded ages ago?

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069629)

I entered my PIN number into an ATM machine, and took out $60 dollars.

I know, I should STFU up...

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (5, Funny)

Guy Harris (3803) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069721)

I entered my PIN number into an ATM machine

Did the ATM machine run Windows 2000, which is built on Windows NT technology?

I know, I should STFU up...

Only if you're posting over a DSL line.

Think of the marketing IBM wasted (1)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069677)

OS/2 runs ATM machines?

In an age of worms and malicious programs, you never hear of ATM's getting hacked.

Too bad IBM did not try and market OS/2 as the secure OS. Then again, once you throw services on any OS, they all become equally vulnerable. Put a web server and database on Linux, hook it up, broadcast, and it can be hacked. Just like windows.

Then again, I bet it is a stripped down version of OS/2 that runs ATM's. There is no need for a full OS. What will people do? Play a game of solitare at the ATM? Email someone?

Re:Think of the marketing IBM wasted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069706)

You clearly don't understand the definition of OS. Solitare is not part of the windows OS, it's a piece of bundled software. The OS is just the kernel and core programs needed by the system.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (5, Informative)

cheese_lord (834106) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069682)

For the love of god it's ATM not ATM machine. No one goes to the Automatic Teller Machine Machine

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069732)

For the love of god it's ATM not ATM machine. No one goes to the Automatic Teller Machine Machine

Anybody with a PIN number goes to an ATM machine.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (2, Interesting)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069702)

Last time I checked, large numbers of ATM machines ran OS2, which is why you don't see the BSOD when you go to grab some cash.

And i'm sure they'll still be running OS/2 even after IBM stops selling it.

Re:Won't somebody please think of the ATM machines (2, Interesting)

vought (160908) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069776)

Last time I checked, large numbers of ATM machines ran OS2, which is why you don't see the BSOD when you go to grab some cash.


Er, and they'll keep running exactly as they are doing today until 2045, when BoFA finally replaces the "Watch an ad while we fleece you because you are self employed and have no direct deposit" terminals.

Anyone else use BofA? I personally enjoy having to select Espanol or English every time I use a terminal...even though I've been an English-only customer since 1990 or so.

Thanks, BofA, for making my life easier!

Netcraft confirms it: (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069560)

Netcraft confirms it: OS/2 is...

Oh, nevermind.

I could have sworn he died 10 years ago. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069563)

Who knew that OS/2 was still around?

Wow. Do people still use this? (2, Informative)

ip_freely_2000 (577249) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069564)

I heard OS/2 was big in banking, but I just assumed they had moved off of OS/2 some time ago.

Re:Wow. Do people still use this? (1)

yuriismaster (776296) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069609)

I know Bank of America in Nevada uses it on the teller's workstations. I recently went in and applied for checking, and saw OS/2.

I laughed a little, then just went through the spiel of signing up.

I'm sure BofA has it's own support though, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see them migrate to Linux, possibly with a terminal emulator to get that old 'classic' feel.

Re:Wow. Do people still use this? (1)

croddy (659025) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069625)

the last time I used an AmTrak self-service kiosk, it was running os/2 warp 3.

eComStation [ecomstation.com] has been maintaining os/2 under license from IBM for a few years now.

Correction (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069701)

OS/2 is big in banking.

I have not ever worked on OS/2 ever, I have worked in the banking IT for some 6 yrs now. Though I understand the complexity of the systems and difficulties in moving on to new/better/different technologies, its difficult to understand their total refusal to move out of OS/2 world.

So, at least this should prompt them to think about something new.

Lesson: Do it missionary style if you get a chance, or somebody will do it to you in doggy style.

Quick Question... (5, Funny)

Azadre (632442) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069569)

Is the OS/2 ran on older hardware similiar to what ran Windows 3.1? Should those that run OS/2 just upgrade to 3.1?

Re:Quick Question... (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069659)

It depends which OS/2 you mean. The 1 series is a little lighter than Windows 3.1 and the upgrade makes sense . For 2 or 3 was a competitor of Windows 3.1 and better. If you are going to upgrade you can probably go all the way to Windows 98 or NT 4.0 (though both are worse in any objective sense). I stopped using it after 3.0.

Re:Quick Question... (1)

Losat (643653) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069671)

LOL!
(OS/2 1.x was around when MS just had the awful Windows 2.0. OS/2 and Windows NT have common heritage; OS/2 2.x and Windows NT are roughly comparable (though NT had earlier/better SMP support).)

Year of Linux Desktop (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069574)

It's a sure thing with all those OS/2 users coming over.

Will it be opened? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069577)

Only fair don't you think?

OS2? (4, Insightful)

mutewinter (688449) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069578)

OS/2 is still around? Thats news to me! I guess I'm not a real geek, but that last time I heard anyone used that operating system was in 1995.

In related news... (1)

Atario (673917) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069620)

Apple Macintosh System 6 and Microsoft Word For DOS are being end-of-lifed in a couple of years, so better start having planning meetings on that. You know, as long as you're at it and everything.

Re:OS2? (2, Insightful)

John Seminal (698722) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069636)

OS/2 is still around? Thats news to me! I guess I'm not a real geek, but that last time I heard anyone used that operating system was in 1995.

Same here. I got a free copy of OS/2 from a computer store in chicago back in 93 or 94. Everyone suspected OS/2 was going to die, and I think they were trying to get more people to use it.

The version I had was very much like Win 3.1. Maybe a little nicer. But I could not get software to run on it. If OS/2 would have had games, I would have kept it longer.

It is around the same time I got my HP 48gx calculator. And the HP is still in use.

I wonder what will happend with all the OS/2 code? IBM should publish it and make it public. Maybe someone can use parts of it in non-commercial ways (so M$ does not exploit it).

And what did OS/2 look like after the mid 90's. Were there any large updates? Any MMX stuff? Any DVD support? Any modern stuff added??

Re:OS2? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069689)

I wonder what will happend with all the OS/2 code? IBM should publish it and make it public. Maybe someone can use parts of it in non-commercial ways (so M$ does not exploit it).

Good luck with that. Microsoft helped IBM develop OS/2; how do you think it ran Windows stuff so well? Since Microsoft probably still owns a good chunk of the copyrights, I sincerely doubt you'll ever see it opened

I'd much rather see IBM release their Lotus suite as Open Source - there's still lots of things there that can be of tremendous use to the OSS community (Lotus Notes especially).

Re:OS2? (4, Informative)

jm92956n (758515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069760)

I wonder what will happend with all the OS/2 code? IBM should publish it and make it public. Maybe someone can use parts of it in non-commercial ways (so M$ does not exploit it).

I would love for IBM to publish the source for OS/2, but it won't happen for two reasons:

  1. Because OS/2 was written in conjuction with Microsoft, I'm sure the original agreement with MS prohibits this sort of action (and MS would never agree to it now, especially as the two aren't nearly as cozy as they once were).
  2. Companies that still use OS/2 would apply pressure against such an action if IBM even considered it. The code hasn't been through the same review that Linux has been subjected to, and I'm sure there's an exploit or two in there that could be readily discovered if the code were available (think: "if you ever want us to purchase your services again, don't open-source it").

Re:OS2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069688)

I guess I'm not a real geek,

No, your not. In 1995 OS/2 Warp had 40% market share, but you were too busy sucking on the Nipples of Windows to notice. Have fun re-booting.

Re:OS2? (1)

Shag (3737) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069704)

The last time I personally remember using it was in 1994, in a data-entry temp job. MCI, I think it was, in Iowa City. I don't even know whether it was "Warp" or an earlier version.

But some seriously crufty things live awfully long lives in data processing scenarios; in 1996 I was dealing with AOS/VS II. Yeah. Unfortunately, I didn't know about the undocumented "XYZZY" command in it back then. Shout outs to all the Slashdotters who've used AOS/VS II. I don't think I'm running out of fingers counting you. ;)

OS2 is still in use? (1)

SlightOverdose (689181) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069580)

I wasn't aware OS/2 was still in use anywhere.

Do any slashdotters actually use it? if so, where? (And WHY!?)

Re:OS2 is still in use? (4, Funny)

End11 (740392) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069601)

Because linux is too mainstream now GOD even my mother can use it. To be a REAL geek now you have to use OS/2 and/or punchcards.

Re:OS2 is still in use? (5, Informative)

TimTheFoolMan (656432) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069642)

We wrote a large body of building automation software subsystems in OS/2. There was no easy way to provide the same functionality in Windows, so it was never cost effective to port it.

To this day, we keep the central routing server and all the subsystems in OS/2 boxes that are treated like embedded control systems, and have written Windows 2K-based interface code that proxies everything as BACnet devices.

OS/2 was a good combination of modern OS services (named pipes, threads, etc.) and easy development. Given how simple it was to access serial ports, we could easily interface via DigiBoard multiplexers and such, and could write a new system driver (including reverse engineering time) in less than six months.

I'm the primary contact for IBM in our office, so they've been flooding me with information about porting these apps to Linux, which sadly, may never be cost effective.

I am *very* sorry to see this event, even though I fully understand and appreciate all the factors that led to OS/2's demise. It's like watching a very dependable ship being sent to the bottom of the ocean because it's too expensive to keep it afloat.

Oh well...

Tim

Re:OS2 is still in use? (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069757)

There isn't any information on IBM cutting off Serenity Systems and their eComStation OS/2 variant. That would be a good place for continued support and purchases.

LoB

Re:OS2 is still in use? (1)

richkh (534205) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069648)

My workplace does. It runs the entire POS system on dozens of our stores (anywhere from a few to a few dozen tills.) About 7-8 years ago we switched it over from 3 pieces of IBM big iron to 2 Dell desktops running Warp. Cut our power bills, at least. :)

Re:OS2 is still in use? (1)

aastaneh (899976) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069768)

Believe or not, my boss uses it for a pop3/imap server (Hethmon Bros) Lucky for him, I recently built a postfix-cyrus-web-cyradm setup to replace the forsaken creation.

Shows how much I know... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069582)

I had no idea they still sold it...

Open Source OS/2 (5, Interesting)

katana (122232) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069583)

It's too bad that Microsoft owns so much of OS/2. It would be great to see it released as Open Source. The Open Source OS/2 Petition [os2world.com] is a good start.

Re:Open Source OS/2 (1)

Undefined Parameter (726857) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069754)

You know, I've never used OS/2, but I would have signed that petition had it not been for the fact that I noticed three English mistakes in my first four seconds of skimming that petition. I don't know about anyone else, but that kind of shoddy editing makes me think that perhaps the petition isn't quite serious.

(And for the record, I intend the above as constructive criticism, not insult.)

~UP

So long! (4, Insightful)

Losat (643653) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069586)

I loved OS/2 back in its day! I first grew to hate Microsoft as I watched them try to kill it with "Chicago" vaporware and FUD.
I wonder how the 850M MS just paid IBM over it compares to the damage MS really did.

How about orphaning? (2, Insightful)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069588)

If they won't support it, why not open the source and release it as such?

Re:How about orphaning? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069614)

As other people here have mentioned, OS/2 was originally a cooperative project between IBM and MS (before MS decided to concentrate on its own Windows OS). It might be really hard for them to seperate out anything MS might still have rights too.

Easily switch to linux my ass (3, Interesting)

Zuke8675309 (470025) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069593)

From IBM's "migration page"...
"There are no replacement products from IBM. IBM suggests that OS/2 customers consider Linux as an alternative operating system for OS/2 client and server environments."

They aren't helping anyone switch. They're just saying people should use linux since OS/2 won't be supported.

It used to be Windows... (1)

stoph ct (899877) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069658)

User, did you say you're having problems with OS/2? The answer is simple, just switch to Linux.

Re:Easily switch to linux my ass (1)

croddy (659025) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069661)

well, they're providing documentation [ibm.com], among other things. and honestly... unless you're an IBM customer, you're really not in a position to say what they're offering and not offering.

Re:Easily switch to linux my ass (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069736)

IBM has published a number of development articles on migrating from OS/2 to GNU/Linux. Just because they didn't list them in the press release doesn't mean they don't exist.

LoB

migration strategy (5, Funny)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069594)

To help switch to Linux, they are assigning a different engineer to each of the 12 customers. Talk about service! :^)

Strange Bedfellows (2, Funny)

prosphora (888114) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069602)

In other news tonight Bill Gates and Linus Torvalds were reported to have been involved in a secret conspiracy which...included suckering Steve Jobs into going x86...

IBM support for linux (2, Insightful)

kyndig (579355) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069606)

So, OS/2. May you rest in peace. And please stop scratching the coffin from the inside. It upsets the bereaved
Ahh hah hah hah! :: wipes a tear from eye ::

What I really find interesting is that IBM has offered a migration HOWTO for the OS users, and its to Linux. Always nice to have the big boy support.

Obligatory eComStation Plug (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069617)

eComStation [ecomstation.com], the OS/2 distro. Time to migrate from your Amiga!

Why kill OS/2??? (4, Insightful)

G4from128k (686170) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069618)

I've never used it (maybe it deserves to die) but I'm surprised IBM didn't spin-off OS/2 sales & support as a little services company (with an appropriate slice of the proceeds of the service contracts). If people want to use OS/2, why not sell it to them? If people need support for it, why not sell it to them?

I could understand a company killing a product that competes with its own more modern systems, but how do continued OS/2 sales hurt IBM more than orphaning some existing customers?

Q: Why kill OS/2? A: Support Costs. (1)

Losat (643653) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069681)

If you sell it, you must support it.
Supporting an operating system can be very expensive. Consider all the device drivers and such.

Linux gain (2, Insightful)

mfloy (899187) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069619)

OS2's loss is linux's gain. Is anyone really suprised with this? I think we have all seen this coming for quite some time, and it was more a matter of "when" than "if".

OS/2 is dying? (4, Funny)

debilo (612116) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069626)


As a *BSD user, I really feel great today!

By the way... (2, Informative)

debilo (612116) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069660)

There's an interesting discussion over at OSNews [osnews.com]about this very topic. It seems like OS/2 still has a relatively big fan base, someone mentioned three or four native Mozilla/Firefox ports alone!

Re:OS/2 is dying? (1)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069772)

As a *BSD user, I really feel great today!

Don't cheer too much. It was the fact that there was a lot of "Copyright by the University of Berkeley" in the with OS/2 .h files which made me go with FreeBSD instead of with Linux.

Os/2 Propaganda or accurate user counts (3, Interesting)

WarmNoodles (899413) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069628)

SHAMELESS plug for MOD INFORMATIVE But this site claims to have the un official counts of OS/2 licenses world wide. http://rover.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~meile/los2cl.ht ml [netsurf.de] Discounting the 500,000 set top boxes, apparently their are about 65,535 licensed installations out their. Hmm, maybe this is why os/2 blew its marketing stack.

Re:Os/2 Propaganda or accurate user counts (1, Informative)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069743)

I can't believe someone modded that "interesting". It's a joke, people! 65,535 is the highest value an 8 bit int can hold, and there is no reference to this number on the linked page. That, and WarmNoodles chose the wrong joke: it should be something about integer overflow, not blowing the stack ;)

They didn't say anything about the eComStation OEM (4, Informative)

Locutus (9039) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069635)

So, while it looks like IBM is stopping sales(2005) and general support(2006), OS/2 will still be shipping and supported by Serenity Systems via eComStation.

OS/2 is dead, long live OS/2.

LoB

First TopView, now OS/2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069639)

Does anyone remember TopView? That was an early event-driven OS that ran on top of PC-DOS and was text-only, but had some Windows capability and multi-tasking.

There was a story where someone at IBM put a stack of old TopView boxed copies in the lobby with a sign "FREE Take one".

A week later, they counted and found three more copies in the stack!

I wonder if the same would happen with OS/2?

All kidding aside, I made some good money from the OS/2 lovers out there. They ran conferences that meant something and were informative, and they hired good speakers. In some respects, the OS/2 crowd were like Macintosh boosters in suits, and the OS was worth the crowing. Unfortunately, IBM forgot that Apple ][ were sold as "Visicalcs" and IBM PC/Compaq computers were sold as "1-2-3". OS/2 never had the visibility of having must-be-there business applications.

It's very interesting that IBM is recommending that OS/2 people move to Linux. I've not investigated their migration tools and aides, but this could be the basis for a Windows-to-Linux migration down the road.

One thing I won't miss is Jerry Pournelle calling it "oh ess half".

Re:First TopView, now OS/2 (2, Interesting)

jbolden (176878) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069695)

OS/2 never had the visibility of having must-be-there business applications.

Ah,... Microsoft Lan Manager. Problem was that a PS/2 90 running MS Lan manager server was easy to administer cost about $10k and could replace a $200k AS/400. Had IBM gone for it they could have basically had hte move from expensive servers to cheap servers 5 years earlier and on their OS.

Really? I haven't noticed... (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069653)

Was the article date correct? It wouldn't be the first time that /. posted an article that was dated years ago.

OS X Is Next Inline (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069654)

Steve would love to axe the whole Mac/OS X stuff and go on to focus Apple on trying to expand out from the iPod fad.

After that Windows.

And we will be left with Linux/open source unix implementions as the era of desktop/workstations come to an end.

Quite a shock (2, Funny)

Council (514577) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069657)

This of course came as a shock to the dedicated OS/2 userbase, which had recieved no hints that it might no longer be in the forefrunt of the computer culture . . .

Technically they aren't saying switch to Linux (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069666)


From the page here [ibm.com] it looks as if IBM is saying that OS/2 apps should be migrated to WebSphere.
I'm sure that they mean WebSphere on Linux, but it could as well run on Windows too, or Solaris or AIX.

Apple Officially Kills OS X PPC (0)

VAXGeek (3443) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069669)

"'Big Fruit has hammered the final nails into OS X PPC's coffin. It said that all sales of OS X PPC will end on the 23rd of December this year, and support for the pre-emptive multitasking operating system will end on the 31st December 2006.' Apple has posted a migration page to help OS X users easily switch to Linux."

It's not dead until... (1)

Bin_jammin (684517) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069674)

some really obscure project needs something compiled against a really obscure piece of hardware running it, and has a hardware failure.

wait... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069698)

you mean it's still alive?

'Tis The Season (1)

Eradicator2k3 (670371) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069709)

It said that all sales of OS/2 will end on the 23rd of December this year

Rats! There goes my holiday season although I suppose I could buy some copies on the 22nd as "presents" for the less desirable people on my gift list.

Phone Systems (1)

LordBodak (561365) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069715)

A lot of corporate phone systems run on OS/2, but other than that I don't know of anyplace it's in use still.

I wonder what will happen to some things.... (5, Interesting)

tu_holmes (744001) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069727)

What will happen to some mainframes and tape libraries?

OS/2 is still the predominant OS for managing MVS systems (even the new Z series) as well as tape libraries.

Will they be migrating all current environments into Linux as part of this? Or will they just leave those alone?

I wonder...

os/2 is dead? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13069738)

... they never saw it coming!

Once upon a time.... (1)

pentalive (449155) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069740)

Once upon a time I had to use OS/2 to perform weekly maintenance on the cc:mail post offices the company used.

The maintenance program ran on both DOS and OS/2 but once the post office reached a size limit, OS/2 had to be used becuase the DOS version of the maintenance program would hose things. ( a pointer would roll over to 0 in the middle of the pack operation, truncating the post office at that point..)

I still encounter OS/2 (1)

bigberk (547360) | more than 8 years ago | (#13069741)

I haven't used OS/2 myself, but the *nix software I've created over the years has run on OS/2 after some simple patches (mostly just #define's in the C code). So maybe it's not too difficult a transition from OS/2 to some *nix, such as Linux (why specifically Linux I don't know... BSDs might be more appropriate for industrial use in my opinion). I know that OS/2 is used in banking. It is of course a very reliable platform, but I also have colleagues who very much enjoy using OS/2 regularly. There seem to be more OS/2 fans out there than say BeOS fans
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...