Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
If you had bought or built a computer in the last three to five years, what size hdd/sdd do you WISH you had started out with for Arca Noae 5.1x?

I'm asking because I don't want to buy something too small but at the same time I'm on a budget and I don't want to over spend.

I still have my licenses for WP Office for Windows and Lotus Smartsuite for Windows so I'm going to install both of them (really all I want from them in WordPerfect for Windows and Lotus 1-2-3 and not the rest of the suites. Plus I have maybe 20 DOS games including Links LS 386 through Links LS 98 that I want to install. Plus of __course__ DOOM, Quake, and all of the games and modules for those from that era. Oh, and I also have the install Describe disk but I don't think I still have the license number for it so if I need that I'm out of luck for that.

I also hope to relearn C/C++ for OS/2 and also JAVA again for OS/2 programs. I plan on creating some for myself and I hope to (eventually?) help out on any OS/2 projects other people are working on understanding that I would have to make sure any programming I did perfectly fit in with the style and INTENT of what they are making.

I also plan on connecting other internal or external HDDs/SSDs to be able to boot from Haiku which is an open source version of BeOS. Haiku will need reasonably at the VERY most a 6 GB partition. The OS is very small and in 1995 it could run 24 videos at the same time and you could RAPIDLY click from one video to the other and the sound would INSTANTLY switch to the newly clicked video. Meanwhile Windows was at version 3.1 and could run ONE video at a time and OS/2 was version 1.x and could run only one video at a time. And that was on standard PC hardware. Their custom built "BeBox" had two processors (total - WOW ... lol) and could run more than 64 videos at a time. AND you could turn off and on CPUs to see the difference having more than one CPU did to performance which was more than double. However, it was lacking WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Describe, and ALL of the DOS and Win 3.1 programs we liked, loved or tolerated back when.

But then I got a invite to see a new product IBM was announcing and showing off which was the Beta for OS/2 2.0 and I was ABSOLUTELY TOTALLY blown out of the water for what OS/2 2.0 could do. We got a disk with one license and I took it back to work, installed it on the same hardware but doubled the RAM to 4 MB (WOW - 4 MB) and what they showed me at IBM wasn't something that MIGHT be able to do, it did everything they said and was ROCK SOLID even with DOS and Win 3.1 programs that I used which DOS and Win 3.1 couldn't claim or do.

OS/2 replaced FOUR computers, two DOS, two Win 3.1 computers that I did all of my work on. Even with the BETA version of OS/2 2.0 I could do everything I did on FOUR computers but now with ONE and I did it FASTER and I no longer had to worry about the system hanging or crashing or ... well anything bad 99% of the time for what I personally used it for.

I programmed (I worked for a mortgage company and I was the #2 programmer) in C, I wrote up the emails that we sent out to everyone as far as what to expect with updates and answers to common questions people were asking, I had about a dozen spreadsheets I kept updated, I created digital versions of legal documents, I ran batch files which took updates from the Escrow and investment group to pushed those out to the Home Loan Centers (HLCs) and pulled updates for new and updated mortgage applications for customers. We had 13 remote locations and the batch files ran during the night and were FASTER and had FAR, FAR, FAR less (almost none) disconnections on the dial-ups to those locations (we didn't have leased phone lines to them yet) while the batch files running on DOS crashed and looped picking up where the pushes and pulls left off starting after the last complete record). AND AND AND AND I learned that I could connect to four locations at the same time (obviously with four modems connected to four serial ports) and push and pull all the data from the 13 remote sites even faster.

And people wonder why I fell in love with OS/2? How many reasons do you need? :)  Anyway, if you installed Arca Noae on a hard drive and found it too small and it was 512 GB or bigger and it wasn't big enough, WHY wasn't it big enough and what size did you need to run Arca Noae

I'm looking to buy a 512 MB SSD right now. Is that too small? What size hdd/sdd do you WISH you had started out with for Arca Noae 5.1x?
32
Programming / Theme Manager - Font Size
« Last post by Martin Iturbide on March 06, 2026, 02:53:17 am »
Hello

Like two months ago Alessandro Cantatore gave me the source code of Theme Manager to open source it as GPLv3.

I published it here:
https://github.com/OS2World/UTIL-WPS-ThemeManager

I don't know if someone can take a look at it to recompile it and try to change the font size to adhere to the OS/2 standard.

It will be great if in the future Theme Manager can eventually be integrated to Styler, since they are kind of related.

Regards
33
I haven't seen anything about anyone running ArcaOS 5.1 virtually on a Mac but I will look for that or maybe someone is doing it with UNIX/Linux and maybe I can do it that way in the future. But I would MUCH rather work with people in any way that I can to help create a 64-bit version of OS/2 which can run everything the 32-bit version can run PLUS run native 64-bit OS/2 apps too. (The odds that Microsoft would agree to let us run 32-bit/64-bit Windows apps on OS/2 is close to negative one billion or lower but who knows, anything is possible.)

You can't run ArcaOS, or any X86 OS, virtually on a newer Mac, different CPU architecture and virtual means mostly using the hosts CPU. You have to emulate it and there are people running ArcaOS in Dosbox-X of all things. QEMU can also do the job. Someone did at point boot ArcaOS 5.1 on real hardware on an Intel Mac.
As for a 64 bit OS/2, the CPU architecture does not allow mixing 16 bit and 64 bit code, and our kernel is largely 16 bit along with things like device drivers at the low level and still some of the API.
So need a new kernel, device drivers, some API updated, even cmd.exe is 16 bit. And even then old 1.x software would not run, same with DOS and Win16. A huge job.
34
Applications / Re: OS/2 - Graphic User Interface - Desktop - Personal Experiences ?
« Last post by JTA on March 05, 2026, 01:20:03 am »
Not trying to convince you to run windows ... the host os can be either windows or linux. The host os, if windows, is stripped of everything that MS does to it to make it objectionable ... at this point, it's more of a service. If host os is linux, it's like running a "server" version, so it's also stripped down.

These days, even mac is linux, so there's no reason it can't be the host os. And yes, I believe folks have used mac versions of virtualization to run ArcaOS. The goal is to bypass OS/2 limitations on modern hardware, where said limitations just won't go away.

Again, many folks live with all the problems of OS/2 or ArcaOS natively on modern hardware, with OS/2 pulling that modern hardware back into the past, or not supporting it to much of a degree. Nothing wrong with that, if the limitations are acceptable ...

When you have time (and if you haven't done so allready), you'll enjoy all the threads where folks try to envision 64-bit OS/2, or such ... the barriers are formidable, the numbers (of users) are small (I think more folks are using WinXP thru Win7 than will ever use OS/2 variants), and dev is most likely reducing down (perhaps to zero).

I do my best to help fight this tide with AToF, which could feasibly help turn that tide ...

In any case, best of luck with however you choose to run OS/2!

35
Applications / Re: Lost / Missing Software for OS/2
« Last post by Sabon on March 05, 2026, 12:34:30 am »
Thank you
36
Applications / Re: OS/2 - Graphic User Interface - Desktop - Personal Experiences ?
« Last post by Sabon on March 05, 2026, 12:26:53 am »
Thanks JTA for your reply to my comments.

1) I don't do Windows ... PERIOD! If it is the last thing on earth will no other option for computers would STILL not use Microsoft products. And yes, I realize that Microsoft and IBM created OS/2 together. But it is plainly obvious that the best parts of OS/2 didn't come from Microsoft or Windows '95 and all future products would have been to the current versions, SIGNIFICANTLY better. Even if I was fine with MS up through say Windows 7, everything they have done with Windows 10 and 11 would have me rather eating the most disgusting things possible would be something I would rather do than use 10 or 11 and eventually if you use Windows, you would have to use their newer OS. So no, MS not happening in my house/computers.

2) When IBM said they weren't going to continue to work on OS/2 back in the 1990s my main OS was OS/2. I tried out over a dozen different Linux distros and they were like riding a Harley where there is just too much maintenance. I like OS/2 because it is like a Honda car/motorcycle. You do a little bit of maintenance and it will run forever. I spent over 500 hours working with different distros of Linux so it wasn't like I put my toe in but jumped in and really learned it and I never came to love it or really much like it compared to OS/2.

3) Which led me to other operating systems where I spent a LOT of time trying out BSD, FreeBSD, etc., etc., etc., and again, too much work when I wanted something that "just worked" like OS/2 did. Well it *mostly* just worked. Much more so than UNIXs including Linux.

4) All of which led me to Apple in 1998 when I bought my first Apple computer, a Bondi Blue iMac.

At the time I was doing a lot of video importing and editing and burning to DVDs and uploading to the internet where I managed quite a few websites. OS/2 allowed me to automate a LOT of what I did on websites using REXX which I've never been able to replicate on any other OS. Mac OS Classic was tolerable but Mac OS X was coming out and I tried the first versions of it and it is my third favorite OS behind OS/2 and BeOS (an open source version of BeOS named Haiku is 64 bit and stable but they are still limited on applications, the latter part like OS/2 but much more limited.

Anyway, I've been sticking with Apple since then until late 2020 when I bought my last iMac because they don't make 27" iMacs anymore and I am holding out on Apple until they build a new 27" iMac (or larger) which sounds like never.

5) I'm retired now and I don't have to do Windows anymore so I'm not going to. So with Apple not building 27" iMacs anymore I started looking around for alternative OSs which got me thinking about how much I loved ONE OS significantly more than any other and that was OS/2. Which led me to buying my first PC since the late 1990s and I'm in the midst of getting all the hardware I need to build my OS/2 (Arca Noae) computer and I've got almost everything I need. I'm waiting on a package for an internal HDD for my computer and then I should have everything I need. Hopefully everything I need.

It's not easy going from Mac to OS/2 because they don't support new Mac hardware for part of the process (which I hope someone can update to stop another door being in the way of anyone using a Mac that might be interested in "alternative" OSs from trying it out. All it takes is an uneven floor for some people to turn the other way and a door (non supported hardware) (I'm talking about the creating of a bootable USB stick for Arca Noae using a Mac).

I haven't seen anything about anyone running ArcaOS 5.1 virtually on a Mac but I will look for that or maybe someone is doing it with UNIX/Linux and maybe I can do it that way in the future. But I would MUCH rather work with people in any way that I can to help create a 64-bit version of OS/2 which can run everything the 32-bit version can run PLUS run native 64-bit OS/2 apps too. (The odds that Microsoft would agree to let us run 32-bit/64-bit Windows apps on OS/2 is close to negative one billion or lower but who knows, anything is possible.)

37
Applications / Re: OS/2 - Graphic User Interface - Desktop - Personal Experiences ?
« Last post by JTA on March 04, 2026, 09:15:37 pm »
WRT Sabon's many recent comments and thread posting, and specifically to "where now, OS/2?":

Current OS?2 problems:
  - platform ... it's 32-bit, and this won't easily change
  - hardware (running os/2 native), device drivers (wifi, etc.), and so on ...
  - software ... little to no new native apps, but much porting of unix/linux apps to os/2

and much more. Searching this and other forums points out the many problems with OS/2. That said, there is still much that can be done with it, and I think it will last quite some time.

What I do to solve all the above problems, is:
  - run a host os (Win10) ... solves all 64-bit, device driver, etc. type of problems
  - run virtualbox on this host os ... run any os in a vm, and more than one ... test anything, forever
  - run one or more OS/2 (ArcaOS) in vm's ... solves many os/2 ram, fs, wifi, etc. (guest additions)
  - run Winflector on host os ... 64-bit apps on host os are delivered into OS/2, in a window.

My original notes on all this are in the virtualization subforum ... AToF threads ... this should carry us on OS/2 long into the future. Perhaps it will give us time to get some form of OS?2 to 64-bits.

Specifically for developers, you can run multiple OS/2 vm's, perhaps one that is compiling, while your main OS/2 desktop is serving up your desktop of daily stuff. Host OS is running in the background, doing everything else on your 64-bit machine ... yep, Win10 is in effect, slaved to OS/2 and doing things for OS/2.

If you (or anyone) think there is some problem that AToF can't solve, or that doesn't have a modern workaround, please let me know (in a new thread, in the virtualization sub-forum).

I use AToF daily, finally getting the most out of my 64-bit, 64gb ram, and SSD's machine, running OS/2 (ArcaOS). I test all kinds of weird OS's ... from early dos, win, os/2 version, thru linux/unix, on up to mainframe os's ... all of them in vm's under the host os, and it all just works. None of the OS's know that they aren't running natively, but they have access to the modern world.

Many on this forum want to run OS/2 (ArcaOS) natively, as the host os ... nothing wrong with that, other than it is very problematic. Arca Noae's efforts are huge in this area, and we get a version of OS/2 that will carry us far, if you can work around or look past those problems.

ArcaOS works very well for me in a vm. But, I can't run natively, so a host os, virtualbox, winflector, and everything else in one or more vm's is my answer to every single one of OS/2's problems, as described in this forum. This will carry me way into the future, and OS/2 will continue to do everything I need it to do, via the AToF system.

Hope this helps ...
38
Applications / Re: ArcaOS is the best multitasking system there is
« Last post by RTAN on March 04, 2026, 07:52:51 pm »
I hope you have a great time getting into ArcaOS and revitalising your own OS/2 interests. Whilst waiting for the D/L DVDs, bear in mind that you can actually install via USB memory stick if you have a spare one of those to hand:

https://www.arcanoae.com/wiki/arcaos/obtaining-arcaos/

Scroll down to:
Creating a bootable ArcaOS USB stick for installation

Hope that helps!

Richard.
39
Programming / Re: Compiling uchardet
« Last post by TeLLie on March 04, 2026, 07:25:30 pm »
Hi

You better turn this of in cmake.symbols

Line 21 add
 AND NOT OS2)

Regards Tellie
40
Programming / Re: Dipping my toes into OS/2 programming!
« Last post by Martin Iturbide on March 04, 2026, 02:25:55 pm »
Hi again
  • .... Some of these look pretty intimidating from the books on Bitsavers!
Just in case here we have a list of OS/2 Development book, I guess it will be better to start with the newer ones.
-- https://www.edm2.com/index.php/List_of_OS/2_Software_Development_Related_Books

Regards[/list]
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10