Pale Moon for OS/2

[Moonchild]

OS/2 based computers are still heavily used in a few industries

And without exception, every single of those computers have a single purpose to exist, and will be limited to that purpose. That is completely outside the realm of general computing. If that would be the criterion then you may also want to target old mainframes. Seems the expression of the day, today, is: "So elated that you could, you didn't stop to think if you should"

As for ArcaOS: it is good for the aforementioned fun/nostalgia, but it is inherently limited in what it can do because OS/2 is just at its core far from a modern operating system. Just because people continue to sell licenses for it doesn't mean it has a place on current internet-connected desktop computers. Great if you need a 16-bit environment for some ancient software to drive museum-grade hardware, but once again not really for general computing in an inherently internet-heavy world.

So, energy better spent elsewhere. But if you insist: fork away!

[mopskarel]

OS/2 based computers are still heavily used in a few industries

And without exception, every single of those computers have a single purpose to exist, and will be limited to that purpose. That is completely outside the realm of general computing. If that would be the criterion then you may also want to target old mainframes. Seems the expression of the day, today, is: "So elated that you could, you didn't stop to think if you should"

As for ArcaOS: it is good for the aforementioned fun/nostalgia, but it is inherently limited in what it can do because OS/2 is just at its core far from a modern operating system. Just because people continue to sell licenses for it doesn't mean it has a place on current internet-connected desktop computers. Great if you need a 16-bit environment for some ancient software to drive museum-grade hardware, but once again not really for general computing in an inherently internet-heavy world.

So, energy better spent elsewhere. But if you insist: fork away!

Im not sure how is it with OS/2, but that Windows 98 SE (on wich it runs) really not haves sense today, it cant correctly work on anything usable today (i ran it on a LGA1155, but it was halfly broken, Core2 maximally). But i think, win2k maybe no (there arent much drivers for today hardware), but at least XP or Vista still have sense today. Some people are still using them, if i know on Vista will be possible to have updates until 2026, why was support from main branch removed when modified can run there well? (btw with OCA on XP unmodified pale moon worked, on vista with kernelex no). (I´m on Windows 7 x64)

[andyprough]

Yes, but you need another computer to run it (or at least Raspberry Pi). Browservice im using on my Pentium 3 500 MHz satellite with 64 MB RAM and AMD486DX2 66MHz with 16 MB RAM. Also on NT 3.51 VM. But for a Core2Duo computer wich can work separately today its bad.

Oh, I get it, you already have a perfectly workable way to browse the web but because you have one machine that's more powerful running OS/2 you want to be the awesome hacker dude that ports a modern browser to run directly on it. I get it, I've been there - more power to you. I truly hope you are successful and get some well deserved recognition.

I'd personally start with Netsurf - that browser can be made to run on darn near anything. Or a bigger and more manageable challenge would be getting a WebKit browser running - once again, it seems to port to just about anything.

[mopskarel]

Yes, but you need another computer to run it (or at least Raspberry Pi). Browservice im using on my Pentium 3 500 MHz satellite with 64 MB RAM and AMD486DX2 66MHz with 16 MB RAM. Also on NT 3.51 VM. But for a Core2Duo computer wich can work separately today its bad.

Oh, I get it, you already have a perfectly workable way to browse the web but because you have one machine that's more powerful running OS/2 you want to be the awesome hacker dude that ports a modern browser to run directly on it. I get it, I've been there - more power to you. I truly hope you are successful and get some well deserved recognition.

I'd personally start with Netsurf - that browser can be made to run on darn near anything. Or a bigger and more manageable challenge would be getting a WebKit browser running - once again, it seems to port to just about anything.

I know, i know that its impossible, it was just a idea (or i can just run it on that pc in a VM wich will have running linux and browservice on that). (but then ivyflow3r (who ported to 98) is too awesome hacker). Also, with browservice is problem that there not works right mouse button and isnt possible to download files with adress bar disabled.
I once wanted to try build a version of the browser, and i didnt managed to do even that, i know only c# a bit. More sense will have to learn how to edit browservice and try to make that right mouse button (but still i think impossible for me).

[andyprough]

with browservice is problem that there not works right mouse button and isnt possible to download files with adress bar disabled.

Does the links2 terminal browser work at all with OS/2? You can download from web page links with links2 in my experience, either directly or by copying the link into a wget command. You are probably never going to have the perfect experience on an OS that does not have modern support for general desktop use.

Sounds like a fun challenge. I'll have to play around with OS/2 myself a bit one of these days, I love bringing up different OS's and trying them out. I thought TempleOS was about the most interesting one I ever saw. Most, like Haiku and Debian Hurd, are re-packaging so much stuff from GNU/Linux that it doesn't really feel terribly new once you get it up and running. Plan9 is probably the next one I'll try, and maybe I should cue up OS/2 after that.

[mopskarel]

with browservice is problem that there not works right mouse button and isnt possible to download files with adress bar disabled.

Does the links2 terminal browser work at all with OS/2? You can download from web page links with links2 in my experience, either directly or by copying the link into a wget command. You are probably never going to have the perfect experience on an OS that does not have modern support for general desktop use.

Sounds like a fun challenge. I'll have to play around with OS/2 myself a bit one of these days, I love bringing up different OS's and trying them out. I thought TempleOS was about the most interesting one I ever saw. Most, like Haiku and Debian Hurd, are re-packaging so much stuff from GNU/Linux that it doesn't really feel terribly new once you get it up and running. Plan9 is probably the next one I'll try, and maybe I should cue up OS/2 after that.

I didnt even had OS/2 anytime installed, i just was trying to install it on my 486 pc but there was some problem if i remember.

[andyprough]

I didnt even had OS/2 anytime installed, i just was trying to install it on my 486 pc but there was some problem if i remember.

Duly noted.

[Walter Dnes]

A 16-bit OS like OS/2 or ArcaOS will not work on TODAY'S WEB. It can address... wait for it... 16 MEGAbytes of memory. Many modern webpages eat up more than that. Forget about Youtube videos at 1080p, let alone 4K.

I have ArcaOS at home in a QEMU VM and run Galactic Civilizations for OS/2. Hard to believe it was released over 30years ago https://www.stardock.com/products/gcgold/

[dbsoft]

For what it is worth, I was part of the team that ported Netscape and Firefox to OS/2... that is where most of my contributions were. Mike Kaply did most of the commits.

I still support my software on OS/2 and have OS/2 virtual machines, I had considered bringing back OS/2 support for UXP as a side project, but there is just too little personal time and not enough benefit since at this point being 32-bit it doesn't even make sense to run it directly on hardware as a user system.

Edit: Also people in this thread seem to think it is a 16-bit OS, and while early versions of it were, it was the first 32-bit desktop and all the versions being sold today are 32-bit.