11 ms·

Well, Microsoft put OS/2 and BeOS out of business, and nearly did the same for Apple. While this was happening, FreeBSD and Linux emerged as excellent Unix var

by loudmax 10y ago

Well, Microsoft put OS/2 and BeOS out of business, and nearly did the same for Apple. While this was happening, FreeBSD and Linux emerged as excellent Unix variants, so when Apple and Google went to look for their own OSs to deploy, they leveraged what was already available. If you're looking for alternatives, there is stuff being developed. Google's Fuscia is intriguing, and there are other non-Unix kernels from other organizations in the pipeline. IMHO, the difference this time around is that the web is the new compatibility target. If you design a new OS today and manage to get a full working web browser with javascript and Web Assembly, you'll be in good shape.

digi_owl 10y ago
Lets not forget that Google bought Android, it didn't start as a in-house project. Rubin and crew had picked Linux as their base, and Java as their main dev environment, before being bought by Google.
- dep_b 10y ago
  Two classic mistakes with 20:20 hindsight. Linux makes updates more complicated because of it's monokernel and Java well.....Oracle....
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    There wouldn't be any problem with Oracle if they didn't try to scam Sun. There are lots of companies selling JVMs, many of them with extensions, and none of them got sued. Why? Because they play by the rules, instead of trying to be different. And at least on those platforms I can make use of proper Java 7 and 8 features, not the cherry picked ones on Android.
    - Oletros 10y ago
      Apache Foundation tried to scam Sun?
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Nice game of words. Google was pretty much aware that GPL with Classpath exception was only for Java SE, not targeted at embedded deployments, but paying the license required for embedded deployments was too expensive apparently. According to Gosling, Sun would have sued Google if they still had any money left on the bank, instead Jonathan decided to make the public support announcement, angering quite a few folks internally. His blog posts are no longer live, but old references are quite easy to find.
yuhong 10y ago
The fun thing is that OS/2 could have put DR-DOS out of business if MS didn't turn OS/2 2.0 into an entire fiasco.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  The way I remember it, I would need to buy an expensive IBM with PS2 architecture to be able to use OS/2 properly, instead of the 386 I got with Windows, so lets not forget that IBM didn't managed the whole situation properly.
  - yuhong 10y ago
    That was always a myth, of course.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      What was a myth? Me saving around 500€ on today's money, because I got to use my savings on a no name OEM PC running DR-DOS/Windows 3.1, instead buying an IBM PC with OS/2 2.0?
      - yuhong 10y ago
        OS/2 never required a PS/2.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        Well it required on the tiny city I was living in the early 90's, where getting OS/2 2.0 meant buying an actual IBM PC instead of a PC compatible. OS/2 was offered as option instead of IBM PC DOS + Windows. Actually you just made me search for the model I had as option, the IBM PS/2 Model 35 SLC.
        yuhong 10y ago
        Hopefully you noticed that this PS/2 model did not have Microchannel.
georgeecollins 10y ago
But Apple and IBM (and some others) spent years and millions of dollars coming up with an alternative. And they ended up with FreeBSD and Linux. You could say the software development was badly managed in many cases, or the business case wasn't there because of the app-OS dependency. But I think the fact that everybody failed implies a failure to come up with something better. And therefore a lack of progress,.
pjmlp 10y ago
> Microsoft put OS/2 Actually regarding OS/2, IBM had lots of blame as well. They didn't managed the whole situation properly and trying to use OS/2 to get back into the game of selling their own PS2 architecture didn't help win the hearts of the buyers. I would have had to pay almost 500 € extra, on today's money to get a PC capable of running OS/2 properly, instead of the one I got with Windows 3.1.
- vram22 10y ago
  I had read that OS/2 Warp was considered a pretty good OS technically, though I don't remember the details now, as to what made it an improvement over Windows. I remember that PC Quest, an Indian PC magazine, gave out OS/2 Warp on a CD [1] in one issue. [1] They often bundled a CD with lots of free software with their magazine issues, e.g. different distros of Linux, server software, utilities, etc. All free or trial software, usually. I remember they bundled the QNX OS once, and I installed it and tried it on my PC. It was very light and fast, had a GUI too - Photon, IIRC. They might even have bundled BeOS once. I think I tried installing that too, but it did not work on my PC.
  - digi_owl 10y ago
    OS/2 existed for quite a while before Warp came about. Warp was IBM trying to salvage a sinking ship more than anything else. http://www.filfre.net/2016/08/ibms-new-flavor/ http://www.filfre.net/2016/08/ibms-new-flavor/ OS/2 was to go along with the PS/2. A update on the PC platform that was much more bespoke IBM compared to the largely assembled from off the shelf parts that was the PC/AT.
    - vram22 10y ago
      >OS/2 existed for quite a while before Warp came about. >OS/2 was to go along with the PS/2. A update on the PC platform that was much more bespoke IBM compared to the largely assembled from off the shelf parts that was the PC/AT. Yes, I was aware of those points, that Warp was a late or last version of OS/2 and that IBM tried to make the PC architecture closed with the PS/2 line - after it being originally open with the PC (which was what led to its success as a platform, due to the adoption and all the clones and extension cards and software for it). Had read about it. That doesn't change the fact that Warp had good reviews. Didn't try it out personally though.

by loudmax 10y ago

digi_owl 10y ago

Lets not forget that Google bought Android, it didn't start as a in-house project. Rubin and crew had picked Linux as their base, and Java as their main dev environment, before being bought by Google.

dep_b 10y ago
Two classic mistakes with 20:20 hindsight. Linux makes updates more complicated because of it's monokernel and Java well.....Oracle....
- pjmlp 10y ago
  There wouldn't be any problem with Oracle if they didn't try to scam Sun. There are lots of companies selling JVMs, many of them with extensions, and none of them got sued. Why? Because they play by the rules, instead of trying to be different. And at least on those platforms I can make use of proper Java 7 and 8 features, not the cherry picked ones on Android.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    Apache Foundation tried to scam Sun?
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Nice game of words. Google was pretty much aware that GPL with Classpath exception was only for Java SE, not targeted at embedded deployments, but paying the license required for embedded deployments was too expensive apparently. According to Gosling, Sun would have sued Google if they still had any money left on the bank, instead Jonathan decided to make the public support announcement, angering quite a few folks internally. His blog posts are no longer live, but old references are quite easy to find.

yuhong 10y ago

The fun thing is that OS/2 could have put DR-DOS out of business if MS didn't turn OS/2 2.0 into an entire fiasco.

pjmlp 10y ago
The way I remember it, I would need to buy an expensive IBM with PS2 architecture to be able to use OS/2 properly, instead of the 386 I got with Windows, so lets not forget that IBM didn't managed the whole situation properly.
- yuhong 10y ago
  That was always a myth, of course.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    What was a myth? Me saving around 500€ on today's money, because I got to use my savings on a no name OEM PC running DR-DOS/Windows 3.1, instead buying an IBM PC with OS/2 2.0?
    - yuhong 10y ago
      OS/2 never required a PS/2.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Well it required on the tiny city I was living in the early 90's, where getting OS/2 2.0 meant buying an actual IBM PC instead of a PC compatible. OS/2 was offered as option instead of IBM PC DOS + Windows. Actually you just made me search for the model I had as option, the IBM PS/2 Model 35 SLC.
        yuhong 10y ago
        Hopefully you noticed that this PS/2 model did not have Microchannel.

georgeecollins 10y ago

But Apple and IBM (and some others) spent years and millions of dollars coming up with an alternative. And they ended up with FreeBSD and Linux. You could say the software development was badly managed in many cases, or the business case wasn't there because of the app-OS dependency. But I think the fact that everybody failed implies a failure to come up with something better. And therefore a lack of progress,.

pjmlp 10y ago

> Microsoft put OS/2 Actually regarding OS/2, IBM had lots of blame as well. They didn't managed the whole situation properly and trying to use OS/2 to get back into the game of selling their own PS2 architecture didn't help win the hearts of the buyers. I would have had to pay almost 500 € extra, on today's money to get a PC capable of running OS/2 properly, instead of the one I got with Windows 3.1.

vram22 10y ago
I had read that OS/2 Warp was considered a pretty good OS technically, though I don't remember the details now, as to what made it an improvement over Windows. I remember that PC Quest, an Indian PC magazine, gave out OS/2 Warp on a CD [1] in one issue. [1] They often bundled a CD with lots of free software with their magazine issues, e.g. different distros of Linux, server software, utilities, etc. All free or trial software, usually. I remember they bundled the QNX OS once, and I installed it and tried it on my PC. It was very light and fast, had a GUI too - Photon, IIRC. They might even have bundled BeOS once. I think I tried installing that too, but it did not work on my PC.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  OS/2 existed for quite a while before Warp came about. Warp was IBM trying to salvage a sinking ship more than anything else. http://www.filfre.net/2016/08/ibms-new-flavor/ http://www.filfre.net/2016/08/ibms-new-flavor/ OS/2 was to go along with the PS/2. A update on the PC platform that was much more bespoke IBM compared to the largely assembled from off the shelf parts that was the PC/AT.
  - vram22 10y ago
    >OS/2 existed for quite a while before Warp came about. >OS/2 was to go along with the PS/2. A update on the PC platform that was much more bespoke IBM compared to the largely assembled from off the shelf parts that was the PC/AT. Yes, I was aware of those points, that Warp was a late or last version of OS/2 and that IBM tried to make the PC architecture closed with the PS/2 line - after it being originally open with the PC (which was what led to its success as a platform, due to the adoption and all the clones and extension cards and software for it). Had read about it. That doesn't change the fact that Warp had good reviews. Didn't try it out personally though.