Re: eComStation (off topic) {warning: long-ish reply}

["J. R. Fox" jr_fox@xxxxxxxxxx]

Nathan Sivin wrote:

> I have looked at the eComStation web pages. They suggest that the
> OS is attractive for people who want a web-centered,
> server-centered OS for what may or may not turn out to be the
> next step in computing.

That may be one facet of it, and how they are marketing it, but it is
essentially OS/2 Warp 4.5 (compared to the prior 4.0 level kernel, at
least up until Fixpack 12). And, as David mentioned, it comes with a
streamlined installer and lots of bundled software. A lot of former
shareware for the OS has become freeware, and much application s/w
continues to be ported over from Unix / Linux.

> The site does not explain, just as Linux sites do not explain,
> whether it is possible to install this OS for use by people who
> use the old-fashioned single PC,

Yes, it is appropriate for a standalone workstation, of reasonably
recent vintage. This is a pretty advanced OS (in the way that NT was
quite a bit more complex than W95/8), but much of the usage will be
familiar to anyone who ran DOS and Windows for awhile. Some setup
issues can be a bit more complicated, but once set up you should find
much greater stability than you are used to from the Win side. You
will probably also find it far more accessible and polished than
Linux.

> and do what they do on the
> Internet--a minor part of their day--over a POTS line. As for
> most residents of the US, the alternatives in this area are a
> cable connection that is no faster than phone modems once a lot
> of people sign up, and an incompetent DSL connection that
> promises something faster but that hasn't delivered for most of
> the local users I know.

My experience in SoCal may be quite different than what is available
from your local providers, but DSL service here -- while far from
flawless or trouble-free -- still leaves Dial-Up modem service in the
dust. Ditto for most of the cable providers here. Your local ISPs
would have to be a whole lot worse than ours for this not to hold
there too.

> I have no interest in running a network or a server, and am
> unwilling to maintain heaven knows how much disk space for a
> program 90% of which I have no interest in using.

Disk space requirements: this will usually be a fraction of what the
MS operating systems need. I can still image *any* of my OS/2
partitions for backup onto CD. My NT partitions long ago became too
large for that to be practical.

The OS offers a consistent UI (user interface), and a launching pad
for the app.s that you run. And that's about all that it does. You
(generic "you") should choose the one that supports your needs. MS
has built an empire on the pretense that an OS can be "easy" to learn
and use. Of course, there are always tradeoffs . . . like
reliability and "fix-ability," when things go wrong.

> to install eComStation as a single-user workstation? What are the
> resource requirements for that?

I have ECS, but won't proceed with installation until after some
hardware upgrades (that I was going to do anyway), which are unlikely
to get done for at least several weeks. I'm mostly talking through
my hat here, but I wouldn't install this to less than a P-II with 128
meg. of RAM. A faster processor and more RAM would be a plus, but
not essential. My Warp 4 partition is around 500 meg., including
about 200 meg. of headroom for the swapper file (which I leave alone,
even though it never grows beyond the default 2 meg. on my system,
because I have 256M. of RAM). I would assume that ECS runs a bit
larger. I keep the vast majority of the app.s in a separate
partition, which helps keep things more manageable. (I hate the
system bloat of Win, which dumps everything in a mammoth C:, and
drops countless untracked .DLL files into a few directories, all of
which complicates any backup or trouble-shooting strategies.)

Full disclosure, and something you should know: ECS drops the
FDISK-based partitioning model for the use of a new system called LVM
(Logical Volume Mgr.). This has a relatively small significance if
ECS is the only OS on your system, but very serious implications if
you are going to be running a multi-boot, multi-OS system. At a
minimum, you will have to toss FDISK and any FDISK-like utilities
(e.g., Partition Magic), and only use LVM for adjusting partitions.
To do otherwise could seriously screw up your previous
drive-lettering scheme, thereby rendering other pre-installed OSes
inoperable. It is necessary to read through all relevant
documentation before-hand, to be sure of what you are doing. Or have
someone who knows what they are doing handle this for you. Having
good backups ahead of time is also highly recommended, particularly
for your data.

> And how about its hardware
> support, which the web page didn't go into?

I think there are for-pay support plans with the distributor, which
won't be cheap. But try calling Redmund for support, either. At
least in this case, I can tell you that there are plenty of
knowledgeable users online who can and do provide free assistance of
a very high calibre. I have paid an NT guru $85./hr., for *many*
hours, to install, fix, & support that platform, vs. saving probably
thousands for technical assistance on the OS/2 side. Let me know if
you want a good starter list of where to look.

> If anyone can answer the same questions for any Linux
> distribution that supports a wide range of hardware and does not
> require a six months' learning curve, I'd be delighted to learn
> that too.

I very much doubt that one can achieve this set of requirements for
the Linux platform. From what I've heard, Linux has come a long way,
but it still ain't easy.

Hope this was of some use.

Jordan