Should IBM release OS/2 as open source?

The news that IBM will stop selling OS/2 is not surprising. What is surprising, to me at least, is that there are users who still care about OS/2 (apparently quite deeply) and are asking IBM to release OS/2 as open source.

The news that IBM will stop selling OS/2 is not surprising. What is surprising, to me at least, is that there are users who still care about OS/2 (apparently quite deeply) and are asking IBM to release OS/2 as open source.

Obviously, it's not as simple as all that. IBM doesn't own all the code in OS/2 outright, and it may not make a lot of sense for IBM to release OS/2 under an open source license, anyway. IBM has a vested interest in seeing users move to systems that it supports, so an "OpenS/2" might not be in IBM's best interests.

What does OS/2 have that other OSes lack, these days? The last time I used OS/2, in the mid 90's, I didn't find the OS compelling enough to switch from Windows to OS/2. I'm not sure that OS/2 has accrued any killer features in the last decade that can't be found in either Windows, Linux, Mac OS X or one of the BSDs. (I know, I know, Mac OS X is also a BSD.)

Is anyone still using OS/2? If so, why? Are the OS/2 groups just clinging to the past, or is there something compelling about it that I'm missing? I'd really be interested in hearing what the OS has that we still need today. Maybe if there are specific features in OS/2 that Linux could use, IBM could be persuaded to crack open some of the code.  

Newsletters

You have been successfully signed up. To sign up for more newsletters or to manage your account, visit the Newsletter Subscription Center.
See All
See All