what is os/2. is it still compatable with windows programs. i know 0s/2 2.1 was compatable with windows 3.1 programs but are the newer versions of os/2 compatable with some windows programs?

In a nut shell...

OS2 is what became of what "WAS" supposed to be windows till senor billy gates got greedy, got mad, and IBM told him to take "his" code and go home (which was a good thing).

Sorta like taking your marbles home cuz the kiddies in the school yard dont like how "you" want to take over and play the game, so they tell you to get lost.

In essence OS2 is the project senor billy gates walked out on and then tryed like crazy to copy, but failed cuz OS2 is much stabler and was a 32bit OS waaaaaaay before WinNT ever came out.

Windows is like the plague, everywhere you look there it is infecting another computer, "Not" because its good but because Micro$oft the money leaching machine err company, forces you to buy it by putting it in as many computers as possible, no matter what store you go to or brand of PC ya want, theres the Windoze plague infecting it.

Look at it this way if i wanted to become a billionaire like senor billy gates all id have to do is the same thing he does, Lets see, i could Bottle all the water in the planet and "MAKE" you pay me for water, or i could suck up all the air in the world and store it and "MAKE" you pay me to breath air.

He does the same thing, shoves his crappy Operating System in as many computers as possible, so the average person (who knows little about computers and wouldnt know about changing their OS) has no choice but to buy a PC with his garbage code, practically "MAKING" you buy his Windows OS.

Heh i call him Senor Billy Gates cuz i have this goofy picture of him in a Mexican Fiesta Hat with a Cigar LoL!

Thank goodness for OS2 and others, Linux, MacOS, Etc, who fight the good fight to give the public choices.

Let Freedom Rein!!

ok so this post got outta hand and went a little long Ohh well!! its the truth like it or not.

OK now that Bill has been bashed, what good is OS2 beside for the banks that have to run it (I know BB&T does) how would OS2 Warp benefit me over Windows 2000, Linux, ect. I tried BEOS but it had problems addressing my memory (I have 1.5 gig) just like 98 did so I went to 2000. If you use this OS would you let me know?

Thanks

Sounds as though you've already figured out what IBM has been saying for some time now: OS/2 is not a platform of the future. As you may have read between the lines in the first response, OS/2 was originally a collaboration between IBM and Microsoft, first released in the late 80's.

When MS and IBM broke up the partnership, each company retained rights to the commonly developed code. As you've noted, IBM offered an option to run 16-bit Windows code starting with version 2. And when Windows NT came out a couple of years later, it included a compatibility mode to run 16-bit OS/2 code and the ability to access the OS/2 "HPFS" file system. MS didn't trumpet this cross-platform compatibility at all. In fact, they did what they could to hide it. When NT 4.0 came out, those of us using both companies's OS's had to patch NT with and old file from Win NT 3.51 named (get this!) PINBALL.SYS to continue the HPFS compatibility.

Overall, if you're not supporting an OS/2-based home-grown software system for a company's internal use (as I am), or another specialized application already on OS/2 (like bank cheque sorting machines), you'd better be a rabid hobbiest to want to get into the world of OS/2.

OS/2 was well-designed (for its day). The problem, as I see it, is that it's position in the marketplace was not determined strictly on its own merits. Like Beta VCR's compared to VHS, it was a superior product that lost out to market pressures.

This has (as you've read) led to some bitter feelings among those who signed on early and may have even been part of an IBM-organized group of volunteers called "Team OS/2" who proselytized for their favorite OS.

I prefer to keep my computing product preferences and my religion separate.

OS/2 is probably the most stable operating system ever made. A whole lot better than that piece of crap, Windows 9x. Memory management is superior compared to 98. OS/2 has true multitasking and 32-bit support, meaning that applications rarly crash and when they do crash, they don't bring down the whole operating system like in 98. The only reason why I use Win98 is because a lot of my programs require it and I have a older version of OS/2(Version 2.1). Like what SickofBillyG said, Windows 9x is basically garbage code. I like Win31 better than 98. Do you know how superior OS/2 is. In the OS/2 DOS Environment, I installed Windows 3.0. It runs better under OS/2 than under its orginal environment. Under DOS 5, I had only 458KB free when running in real mode. When running under OS/2 in real mode, I have 458KB free plus 2 megs of EMS. You can Run Windows 1.x under OS/2. I'm testing Windows 286. I'm going to use OS/2 to run my Dos and Pre-Win9x Software.Last night, I tested OS/2 and Win286. You cannot run Win286. Does anyone know where I can get Warp 3.

RKix its quite easy to get a lot more conventional memory than 458k in dos 5. Hell I got only a little less than MS Dos 6.22 with some tweaking. Using only built-in files too.

Its fun playing with old kit. Especially if you don't have the disposible income required for the latest OSs PCs.

The question should be what is 9x?

An the answer is a "broken" version of OS/2.

To see for yourself, download the 9x DDK and grep for OS2 occurrences, there are plenty of references, especially in the kbd driver.

There is an ongoing effort to provide win32 support under OS/2 Warp 4, by the open source group netlabs under the project name odin32. They are making strides but still has a long way to go. A better approach would be to implement an addon similar the way IBM implement OS/2 Warp-without-Windows (WOW) which require Windows 3.1x disks to install the windows 3.1x support. Using a similar method, Win32 support could be added by incorporating certain files from the Win 9x cd's. IBM implemented OS/2 Warp WOW, to avoid the additional licensing they were pay Micr$oft to include windows support with OS/2.

OS/2 was design to open and customized.

When I did run Windows 3.0 within OS/2 I had 458KB AND 2MB of Extended Memory. I do not have a old computer, so I use a Toshiba Laptop with a Intel 266MHz Proccessor. OS/2 1.0 and 1.1 will not even work on the computer. My Windows 98 hard drive was running out of space so I deleted my OS/2 Partition. During the weekend, I redid the partitions and I reinstalled OS/2 and created a Win95 partition. On the Win95 partition, I can run Windows 1.0 and Windows 2.0 in a Win95 window.

Ok, yes I do agree with bashing ol billy, but give the guy some credit, apple came out with the true graphical interface long berfore microsoft, I mean look at the first version of windows as compared to the first version of Mac, well I guess you'll see the difference, yes mac had more graphics hey 256 colors to be exact, and what did Micro$oft have a pile of dog crap, that sucked for a windowing environment. But I do give the guy some credit, he was the last horse out of the gates(lol) when it comes to graphics(GUI), but yet he's the last one on top!!! Kinda redundant don't you think??
He is a genius, a stupid jerk, hey the anti-crist for that one, I mean he stole the first version of dos they ever made, although so did apple, but he keeps doing it, but a genius none the less, I personally hate windows, but since I didn't get into the other os's till later in life, I'm stuck with alot of windows progs, I hate it too. But the fact remains, he's rich and we're not..!!

I mean think about it, of course the system is crappy, I mean in the long run, dos was way better than windows, a lot more reliable..But if windows didn't have all these gliches in it, there would be no need for upgrade!!! The reason that NT and 2000(NT) are so much more realiable, is because in those systems he doesn't program in the gliches, why would he, the only people who use them are corporations, and they have to upgrade when new versions come out, if they didn't they would fall so far behind it wouldn't even be funny..So what am I trying to say, simple, the reason windows is so falty is because he programs in alot of the system gliches to make people upgrade to his new systems, it's the only way they will...!!!

But then there are us die hard OS fans, who want something a little more realiable, hey for that matter amiga was more realiable than windows is, but that's another story for another time..In the end of the world when billy owns everything, and everycomputer in it, the world will come to us, supercomputer users, and ask for our help, the wounderful men and women who use the real os's(OS/2,Linux,FreeBSD,UNIX,Suse, Solaris, and all the other awsome os's I forgot to mention), the ones who's computers haven't been taken over by the virus called ....WINDOWSSSSSS....

I mean if you think about it, what system do all the major corp. use in this world, it's not WinNT, it's not 2000, it's not even XP(God forbid, please), most of them use Linux or Solaris, and of course only the best(and the ones with the most money) use the God of them all, UNIX..What does this tell us, well one thing, if major corps. and all the hackers in this world don't use windows, I mean all the people who really know something about computers, then why would we???? Because we are too lazy and sometimes stupid to actualy sit down in front of our computer and configure it manualy, yes it is time consuming, and sometimes makes you feel stupid, but your computer will love you for it afterwords..

Short, Windows sucks, and all of the other true 32bit systems, RULE the SKY's of the electronic world!!!!

Let's not let bill gates win this fight, use something other than windows, please?????