ArcaOS without a future?

[baden.ku...@gmail.com]

I just read this today:
https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/10/hobbes_os2_archive_shut_down/
If that was not bad enough, the comment from Lewis Rosenthal sealed my diminished expectation for continued OS/2 feasibility:

=================================================
Hmmm... As a guy who uses ArcaOS as his daily driver, I might take
exception to your comment about being in denial... ;-)

Instead, I use Linux when I have to (web conferencing) and stick to an OS
with no telemetry and a stable, consistent desktop experience.

It all depends upon what one needs to do, I guess.
=================================================

So, that is why there is no WiFi nor functional WWW browser in ArcaOS. The lead guy trying to promote and sell an OS in 2024 doesn't even attempt to have it connect to anything?

Sad!

[Dave Yeo]

Resources, particularly money, as well as programmers skilled in OS/2.
Dave

[baden.ku...@gmail.com]

Hi Dave:

Thanks for your response. I am a man who believes much more in deeds than words. Arca has had an internet eternity to deal with a shituation which directly cripples their and OS/2's success. When the top dog has enunciated zero interest in providing vital OS components, what can we do? That strategic blunder just prepares us all for a quicker OS demise, but I do appreciate his unprecedented candor.

I am personally not immediately debilitated, for as soon as I initially installed Arca a long time ago, I hacked in xwlan from my ECS for my WiFi. Due to to great uncompensated efforts from individuals such as yourself, we still have SeaMonkey and Firefox. Note that both these wireless and browser components are *essential* and have nothing to do with Arca. The problem is that both legacy components are continually being depreciated, and I more often have situations where I am forced to use a different OS. xwlan now often has problems seeing and/or connecting to newfangled access points, and the browsers often do not function to varying degrees on many sites. The same tale has been often told by many former users, with perpetual deteriorating utility, there comes a day when OS/2 is relegated to the closet.

What is the prognosis? The sane one dictates that we abandon OS/2. I was hoping to die using OS/2, but now it looks like I will live longer, and OS/2 will die sooner. I still have not used any OS that comes close to sufficing. The world seems to have moved onto 64 bit, a serious challenge for us. Web pages will soon be surpassing 1 GB. I guess a VM is a band-aid, but the major part of my computer work is on-line. I also dread the day that I have to move to new hardware and software, as I know it will take months to recuperate acceptable comfort. I have had it too easy and too good for the last 30 years.

I still have faith in technical solutions. Why cannot xwlan be modified to provide contemporary functionality? I just received a big message from Roderick Klein enunciating the problems developing a new wireless stack. Why is that misdirected avenue even pursued? Why cannot a simple 32 bit native OS/2 browser with basic functionality be developed? How much effort has been wasted on chasing evolving external libraries? We do not require all the burdensome accompaniments and multimedia support. We need an honest appraisal from an accomplished browser developer. Possibly it is totally a lost cause.

thanks,
Baden

[a....@a1.net]

baden.ku...@gmail.com schrieb:
> Hi Dave:
> ...
> ....I hacked in xwlan from my ECS for my WiFi. ....

What need you to 'hack in'? Wasn't it that easy than installing the .wpi? You can even
export your profiles from you old machine and import in into the installation. Any
problems with that?

>
> ...I was hoping to die using OS/2, but now it looks like I will live longer, and OS/2 will die sooner.

I really hope so ;-).

...
> ... Why cannot xwlan be modified to provide contemporary functionality?

Depends on what you define contemporary functionality. If you mean mimic the behavior what
other OSes do today then one answer would be, cause no one needs it. No current wifi
driver -> no need for xwlan. But even if we had newer wifi drivers I fear no one will
catch up all the changes in wireless technology and UI expectations that were happening
the last 15 years. I fear not even the interface to the driver (usually genmac) which was
defined more that 20 years ago will be sufficient to current needs/hardware. So the
answers are many - no need, no driver, no motivation, no resources for a complete new
solution instead xwlan, only a few developers who can compile the current xwlan and even
less who like do it, ...

> .. Why cannot a simple 32 bit native OS/2 browser with basic functionality be developed?

Ask yourself, why can't you do it by yourself? I think the same arguments are valid for
the waste majority of the other OS/2 users too.

Regards,
Andi