#353 From: "Daniel Caetano" <djcaetano@...>
Date: Sun Mar 3, 2002 8:49 pm
Subject: My point of view... djcaetano
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
People (Developers and Users),
I've be reading all postings on FreeOS mail list
(which I had created to join people - not to lead -
but it didn't work by several reasons) and some days
ago I read about this new list.
I registered to it and as I'm used to I started to
read the initial (and the latest) posts.
I'm afraid the project fall down in the same pit
as FreeOS had fallen... a sad thing that take away
my motivation.
Guys, I'll tell a history for you all.
Some months ago, Be Inc. almost gone bankrupt due
to the fact it cannot "fight" with M$, even with a
superior Operating System (in several aspects even
better than OS/2). Then Be found the only way to
avoid this problem on selling everything (including
BeOS) to Palm.
Palm directors as fast as they can said they would
discontinue BeOS. The BeOS developers would be
incorporated to PalmOS development, and Be was
discontinued since that time. The users were simply
ignored.
Some time ago, the same history: BeOS code leaked.
Someone got it and caused a major problem. Someone
thought on using it on the OBOS (Open BeOS) development.
After many ethic discussions, they decided to not use
the original BeOS code to develop OBOS... but sometimes
they "take a look" on it. The OBOS project is up and
running. Somewhat slowly, but I think in some time they'll
have something.
Why am I saying this? Well... I know that some pieces of
OS/2 were leaked some years ago, but it seems that a little
time ago most of base code was leaked. Interesting. This
code was available on some of the most known OS/2 Warez sites.
It disappeared from most of them. But I think a lot of people
got it. It's copyrighted material and CANNOT be used without
license of IBM, not even to build temporary things with
some note on the license. It simply can't be used that way.
Also, it cannot be distributed. In fact, it's a crime to
distribute it, since every piece of it probably has a copyright
notice. It's not a crime own it, though.
So, those that already have the code should keep it by
themselves and make a rudimentar documentation, and answer
questions when needed, peeking into the code. Anything
different from this would be illegal. A detailed document
can be created, but then IBM can argue that the info used
to build osFree was obtained on illegal ways.
Notice that IBM itself can be prosecuted by the code
leak, since probably there is code *not* from IBM there.
And IBM will be very happy to have someone to blame on.
I'm not naive. This code was not "stolen". It was
probably intentionaly leaked by some IBMer that like
OS/2 and want it to contnue living, in despite of "IBM
Management Directions". I think this guy had done it
right. It's up to us to use the code as a way to kill
doubts, not as a base. Following this path, IBM or
any other enterprise will hardly have a proof to go to
the court.
I don't know who owns the code, and do not want to
know. I hope only these guys keep it in secret and hope
they have the sufficient knowledge to look for something
when necessary and "inform" the comunity in a casual way.
It's illegal? Maybe. But it would be also on other ways.
Cloning only the known facts of OS/2 would never bring a
10% compatible OS. And even "empiric tests" are considered
reverse engineering, which is as illegal as using leaked
(not stolen) code.
I agree that lots of things must be rewritten on OS/2. So,
a scratch approach can bring us a lot of advantages. But will
take a lot of time. But it'll take forever if no one starts
it. And now, with a place to look on details of the
implementation when needed, there is no reason to consider
it an impossible task.
I think it's wise get a uK such as MACH or any other and
implement OS/2 on top of it, but I do not like the idea of Linux,
for reasons I had already pointed several times on FreeOS, and
I do not want to start another discussion (because this was the
reason I lost my motivation that time).
I do not want to generate a flame war, but I think Linux is
not good enough, and thats all.
The driver availability is not a point. Linux has a small
number of drivers also, and they'll be even smaller in the
future. Linux has already start to suffer the effect of
"saturated media". The press headlines do not point Linux
anymore. Something similar to what happened to OS/2 Warp
in 1993 to 1995. A big "boom" then a dark time.
I do not think Linux will perish, I do not think it's
development will be stalled. I just think once the fever
had gone away, only a small numbers of developers will
continue supporting it (maybe even smaller than today's
OS/2 support, because no one will pay to Sci-Tech develop
drivers, as IBM had done).
I think there are talented guys to develop an OS/2 clone
(and *this* was the reason I started the FreeOS... to look
forward and see if the list could join people capable of
it). Of course it'll take time. But if the OS is developed
wisely, it'll work for a long and long time. I think the
initial approach may focus "general compatibility": standard,
keyboard, VESA video, and this kind of thing. Even sound is
not something we should worry about in the initial stages,
but when it become needed, implement a simple digital driver.
Specific hardware should be implemented only in the future,
since most of the OS will not work in the initial stages,
and in the future the hardware will be different from today's,
turning any effort on drivers to actual hardwares a unwise
way to use the time.
And I think the driver should be a new model. And uK allows
us to have drivers in a higher level, easy to program, portable
and better: more than one driver model can be implemented.
None of these benefits are taken on the Linux approach that
is bluring every OS/2 project.
I hope someone start to do something. I really can't. I'm
not capable of starting such a project. I can help, but not
start it.
If real work will be done, count on me. But don't count
on me on discussions about abstraction of OS programming,
alien programming languages that do everything alone and
doing the work of ten years of a million of men with
10 mens in 2 months. I'm not an academic. And not was those
that created OS/2, BeOS or even Linux.
Just my 2 (hundred) cents about this topic.
[]'s
Daniel Caetano
djcaetano@...
..."A necessidade de criatividade e' o que contribui para a
mudanca. A criatividade mantem o criador vivo." (Frank Herbert)
http://soulmatrix.dynodns.net/ - This OS/2 system uptime is 0 days 12:09 hours.