Research Stream: Examining Presentation Manager - Revision history

Seal331: fix typos

2023-02-15T13:02:36Z

fix typos

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:02, 15 February 2023
Line 170:		Line 170:

	=== Hardware Compatibility Issues ===		=== Hardware Compatibility Issues ===
	Getting OS/2 to run on period correct hardware is difficult at best. In general, compatibility at best is hit or miss, and very few period correct systems have enough memory, and processor ~~powerto~~ actually run OS/2 in any significant fashion. Even with the correct system, installing 4 to 12 MiB of memory in a 286-class system is not a trivial undertaking. Furthermore, success on installation entirely depends on if you are using the correct edition of OS/2, and your system is sufficiently close enough to an IBM machine, that the very limited set of built in drivers will cover you.		Getting OS/2 to run on period correct hardware is difficult at best. In general, compatibility at best is hit or miss, and very few period correct systems have enough memory, and processor power to actually run OS/2 in any significant fashion. Even with the correct system, installing 4 to 12 MiB of memory in a 286-class system is not a trivial undertaking. Furthermore, success on installation entirely depends on if you are using the correct edition of OS/2, and your system is sufficiently close enough to an IBM machine, that the very limited set of built in drivers will cover you.

	In short, unless you have a OEM release, don't expect anything but the bare basics to work. Even in emulation, getting OS/2 working on a 286 is a non-trivial undertaking. As of writing, I'm still dealing with getting an IBM Model 30 286 in good enough shape to try and run it on real hardware. While I can't speak specifically what a "new in box" experience might have been like in 1987, what I can say its distressingly common for OS/2 to simply hang on startup with no debugging messages. While this was also true of OS/2 1.0, this problem persisted throughout the entire 16-bit era, and no doubt formed many of the negative opinions made about OS/2 in this time period.		In short, unless you have a OEM release, don't expect anything but the bare basics to work. Even in emulation, getting OS/2 working on a 286 is a non-trivial undertaking. As of writing, I'm still dealing with getting an IBM Model 30 286 in good enough shape to try and run it on real hardware. While I can't speak specifically what a "new in box" experience might have been like in 1987, what I can say its distressingly common for OS/2 to simply hang on startup with no debugging messages. While this was also true of OS/2 1.0, this problem persisted throughout the entire 16-bit era, and no doubt formed many of the negative opinions made about OS/2 in this time period.
Line 233:		Line 233:

	=== Win OS/2 ===		=== Win OS/2 ===
	Win OS/2 didn't exist until OS/2 2.x, although it is possible to install Windows 3.0 in the DOS compatibility box, something ~~methoned~~ in the Windows 3.0 README, and is officially supported.		Win OS/2 didn't exist until OS/2 2.x, although it is possible to install Windows 3.0 in the DOS compatibility box, something mentioned in the Windows 3.0 README, and is officially supported.

	== Gallery ==		== Gallery ==
Line 363:		Line 363:
	Install on MS OS/2 1.3 done at 25Mhz for patience reasons ...		Install on MS OS/2 1.3 done at 25Mhz for patience reasons ...
	</pre>		</pre>
			<references />

NCommander: Removed protection from "Research Stream: Examining Presentation Manager"

2023-02-14T21:09:45Z

Removed protection from "Research Stream: Examining Presentation Manager"

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:09, 14 February 2023
(No difference)

NCommander: /* Deferred Questions */

2023-02-14T21:00:38Z

Deferred Questions

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:00, 14 February 2023
Line 111:		Line 111:
	These questions are better suited for future livestreams ...		These questions are better suited for future livestreams ...

	* How does Windows 2.x compare Presentation Manager in OS/2 1.1? ~~===~~		* How does Windows 2.x compare Presentation Manager in OS/2 1.1?
	* How does the Windows 2.x development environment differ from Presentation Manager?		* How does the Windows 2.x development environment differ from Presentation Manager?
	* How does Borland Sidekick compare between DOS and Windows?		* How does Borland Sidekick compare between DOS and Windows?

NCommander: /* Is Presentation Manager an upgrade over the TSHELL interface? */

2023-02-14T20:46:33Z

Is Presentation Manager an upgrade over the TSHELL interface?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 14 February 2023
Line 62:		Line 62:
	As far as graphical systems went, in a consumer market, OS/2's main competition in this era would have been Microsoft Windows, Apple's Macintosh, and Commodore's Amiga platform, as well as general UNIX efforts in the form of Xenix, SunOS, and others.		As far as graphical systems went, in a consumer market, OS/2's main competition in this era would have been Microsoft Windows, Apple's Macintosh, and Commodore's Amiga platform, as well as general UNIX efforts in the form of Xenix, SunOS, and others.

	Originally, as part of the OS/2 SDK efforts<ref>https://www.os2museum.com/wp/os2-history/os2-beginnings/</ref>, Microsoft provided beta builds of OS/2 1.0		Originally, as part of the OS/2 SDK efforts<ref>https://www.os2museum.com/wp/os2-history/os2-beginnings/</ref>, Microsoft provided beta builds of OS/2 1.0 up until its final release. Early builds including the prototypes of the Presentation Manager were also shipped through this program up until OS/2 1.2 from what I can see.

	=== Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS? ===		=== Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS? ===

NCommander: /* Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS? */

2023-02-14T20:44:11Z

Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:44, 14 February 2023
Line 66:		Line 66:
	=== Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS? ===		=== Why would you buy OS/2 over DOS? ===
	''This question was came up during livestreaming the drafting of these notes. Understanding why you would buy OS/2 is an important step in understanding the market.''		''This question was came up during livestreaming the drafting of these notes. Understanding why you would buy OS/2 is an important step in understanding the market.''

			This is a somewhat subjective question, but the two main markets for OS/2 were developers trying to future proof their products, and corporations looking for a platform to build applications on. Microsoft appears to have mostly catered to the developer market, with the release of the OS/2 SDK and generic non-OEM releases, while IBM appeared to only care about customers who simply needed a smaller alternative to their mainframe and minicomputer lines of systems, and which price was not necessarily an objection.

			IBM's extended editions of OS/2 very much point to a company that is trying to achieve vertical integration within the market, and it did find some success in these fields. Rather notably, OS/2 is still actively supported in 2023 by Arca Noae, and it is still in production use in places, such as powering the New York City Subway Metrocard payment system.

	=== How did people buy OS/2 ===		=== How did people buy OS/2 ===

NCommander: /* Win OS/2 */

2023-02-14T20:35:56Z

Win OS/2

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:35, 14 February 2023
Line 229:		Line 229:

	=== Win OS/2 ===		=== Win OS/2 ===
	Win OS/2 didn't exist until OS/2 2.x, although it is possible to install Windows 3.0 in the DOS compatibility box, something ~~met honed~~ in the Windows 3.0 README, and is officially supported.		Win OS/2 didn't exist until OS/2 2.x, although it is possible to install Windows 3.0 in the DOS compatibility box, something methoned in the Windows 3.0 README, and is officially supported.

	== Gallery ==		== Gallery ==

NCommander: /* Questions Asked and Answered */

2023-02-14T20:34:29Z

Questions Asked and Answered

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:34, 14 February 2023
Line 104:		Line 104:
	* 3COMM 3+Share		* 3COMM 3+Share

	=== ~~How does Windows 2.x compare Presentation Manager in OS/2 1.1?~~ ===		=== Deferred Questions ===
			These questions are better suited for future livestreams ...

	=== How does the Windows 2.x development environment differ from Presentation Manager? ~~===~~		* How does Windows 2.x compare Presentation Manager in OS/2 1.1? ===
			* How does the Windows 2.x development environment differ from Presentation Manager?
	~~===~~ How does Borland Sidekick compare between DOS and Windows? ~~===~~		* How does Borland Sidekick compare between DOS and Windows?

	== Interesting Timestamps ==		== Interesting Timestamps ==

NCommander: /* Migration and Forward Compatibility */

2023-02-14T20:32:07Z

Migration and Forward Compatibility

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:32, 14 February 2023
Line 226:		Line 226:

	Unfortunately, this SDK does not appear to have been archived, but copies of the example binaries have survived to the current day. It is also possible to run arbitrary Windows binaries ontop of OS/2 1.2+ by using the WLO loader and a pre-existing Windows 3.0 NE binary. As a proof of concept, FLAGGEN, a program that displays the Progress Pride flag using GDI primitives written in 2022, can be run ontop of WLO to create a de facto native OS/2 version.		Unfortunately, this SDK does not appear to have been archived, but copies of the example binaries have survived to the current day. It is also possible to run arbitrary Windows binaries ontop of OS/2 1.2+ by using the WLO loader and a pre-existing Windows 3.0 NE binary. As a proof of concept, FLAGGEN, a program that displays the Progress Pride flag using GDI primitives written in 2022, can be run ontop of WLO to create a de facto native OS/2 version.

			=== Win OS/2 ===
			Win OS/2 didn't exist until OS/2 2.x, although it is possible to install Windows 3.0 in the DOS compatibility box, something met honed in the Windows 3.0 README, and is officially supported.

	== Gallery ==		== Gallery ==

NCommander: /* Windows Libraries for OS/2 */

2023-02-14T20:30:41Z

Windows Libraries for OS/2

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:30, 14 February 2023
Line 220:		Line 220:

	==== Windows Libraries for OS/2 ====		==== Windows Libraries for OS/2 ====
			[[File:Progress Pride running under WLO.png\|thumb\|Progress Pride running under WLO]]
			''There is a dedicated article related to [[Windows Libraries for OS/2]] on this wiki, see there for more information''

			As part of its promises to developers, Microsoft said that it would be quick and easy to port Windows applications to OS/2. As a proof of concept, Microsoft released a special port of core Windows libraries to OS/2, including USER, GDI, and KERNEL DLLs. These work identically to the Windows versions, and the WLO example applications are merely ports of the Windows 3.x binaries to OS/2, with a corresponding SDK.

			Unfortunately, this SDK does not appear to have been archived, but copies of the example binaries have survived to the current day. It is also possible to run arbitrary Windows binaries ontop of OS/2 1.2+ by using the WLO loader and a pre-existing Windows 3.0 NE binary. As a proof of concept, FLAGGEN, a program that displays the Progress Pride flag using GDI primitives written in 2022, can be run ontop of WLO to create a de facto native OS/2 version.

	== Gallery ==		== Gallery ==

NCommander: /* OS/2 1.3 - The Bugfixed and Actually Usable Release */

2023-02-14T20:24:34Z

OS/2 1.3 - The Bugfixed and Actually Usable Release

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:24, 14 February 2023
Line 203:		Line 203:

	=== OS/2 1.3 - The Bugfixed and Actually Usable Release ===		=== OS/2 1.3 - The Bugfixed and Actually Usable Release ===
	OS/2 1.3 was the last version we looked at on stream, and has few if any user visible changes in it. Primarily, this is more of a service pack or bug fix release, but while running on a 286, there is a rather notable improvement in performance. It's also been documented that 1.3 fixes many of the race conditions and other bugs that happen when running on a system faster than a 33Mhz 386, and thus is the most usable of the 16-bit versions.		OS/2 1.3 was the last version we looked at on stream, and has few if any user visible changes in it. Primarily, this is more of a service pack or bug fix release, but while running on a 286, there is a rather notable improvement in performance. It's also been documented that 1.30.2 fixes many of the race conditions and other bugs that happen when running on a system faster than a 33Mhz 386, and thus is the most usable of the 16-bit versions.

	Rather notably, Microsoft OS/2 1.3 was used as the basis for the first versions of Microsoft LAN Manager, which was later incorporated into Windows NT. As such, things like Windows domains actually started life ontop of OS/2 1.3, and there are significant kernel differences, because this was the only version of OS/2 that Microsoft developed without much input from IBM. For example, Microsoft OS/2 1.3 supports LADDR storage drivers, which were also possible to backport to OS/2 1.2, and were used as the basis for the Windows 95 "Dragon" block layer.<ref>https://www.os2museum.com/wp/ladders-and-dragons/</ref>		Rather notably, Microsoft OS/2 1.3 was used as the basis for the first versions of Microsoft LAN Manager, which was later incorporated into Windows NT. As such, things like Windows domains actually started life ontop of OS/2 1.3, and there are significant kernel differences, because this was the only version of OS/2 that Microsoft developed without much input from IBM. For example, Microsoft OS/2 1.3 supports LADDR storage drivers, which were also possible to backport to OS/2 1.2, and were used as the basis for the Windows 95 "Dragon" block layer.<ref>https://www.os2museum.com/wp/ladders-and-dragons/</ref>