From client server to Network Computing...OS/2 Warp, the right launch pad.

Celebrity Corner

VOICE - The Win32-OS/2 Binary Project Q&A

Edited by Chris Wenham

On November 19th, VOICE (Virtual OS/2 International Consumer Education) held a Question & Answer session with representatives of one of the most exciting and promising projects to happen for OS/2. The Win32-OS/2 Project's goal is to create a program that will literally convert a Windows 95 or Windows NT application (one that uses the Win32 API) into a native OS/2 application. This is not a tool for use by developers only, since it does not require the original source code of the program you wish to convert. This is a tool intended for regular users like you and me to operate. In this event, held on IRC (Internet Relay Chat), OS/2 users took the opportunity to ask questions about this project and learn more from the people directly involved.

This log, edited for the web, is a complete transcript of the event. The only editing made was to clean the general "noise" of IRC, reformat it for presentation, correct obvious typos, and rearrange the occasional answer given out of order. Only Timur Tabi and Peter Fitzsimmons's nicks were simplified, the rest (like "MADodel", "DynoMutt" and others) are as they appeared on IRC.

Published in OS/2 e-Zine! with permission.

* * *

Timur: OK, I'd like to make a few statements before we get into questions. First, the web page has been updated -- we can now convert small MFC applications. Next on the list is comctl32.dll, which is a DLL that is used by almost every major Win95 app. Once that's converted, there should be a significant number of new apps that can be converted. Second, I'd like to introduce Peter Fitzsimmons, who is also on the team.
Peter: howdy
Timur: Third, my role in this project is little more than the web page maintainer and Warpstock speaker. Calling myself the "spokesmodel" was perhaps a bit pretentious :-) The person doing all the real work is Sander Van Leeuven (sp?)

DynoMutt: Is there currently a list of successfully converted Windows apps?
Timur: no, there is no list really
Peter: the type of apps we have working are some of the ones that come with NT 4.0 -- Solitaire, Freecell, Notepad.
Timur: the number of apps we can convert is so small that we haven't tried to make a list. We have not put into place a procedure where we can test several apps. Until we do, I hesitate to provide a list.
Peter: We also have a few stdin/stdout (non-console command line) apps working.

GamerX: Does Open32 help in the conversion of Win32 applications?
Timur: it doesn't help in the conversion of the app, but it is NECESSARY to run the converted app
GamerX: Because of the Win32 functions it emulates?
Timur: yes -- so the more API's are in Open32, the more apps we can run
Peter: there are 100's of win32 api's that we simply "redirect" to pmwinx.dll (the open32 dll)

nando2: Is there a working converted 'Wordpad' for OS/2? (I ask because it uses MFCnnn.DLL = Microsoft Foundation Classes)
Timur: Peter can answer that for certain, but last I checked, wordpad was not working
Peter: I don't know about wordpad.

Timur: again, the biggest stopping block at this point is comctl32.dll -- which handles all the cool controls like toolbars and stuff

TheSeer: Is there or will there be a support for ATM fonts. I know ATM is an "extra" product for Windows...
Timur: I'm confused by that questions, OS/2 already supports ATM fonts, doesn't it?
Peter: TheSeer: yes

Terrulen: Can we then assume that the new Open32 APIs in FixPak 3SE and FixPak 5 will open even more apps for conversion, or speed up your work?
Timur: terrulen: yes, it will. However, we still don't have a list yet from Lotus or IBM what those 50 new API's are

Abraxas: Timur (re: ATM) The Seer just wondered since some Windoze-Apps can't work with the ATM.. and ATM is not "natively" included into windows..
Peter: Abraxas: I have written open32 apps; they can use ATM fonts. So our converted apps can too.

Sleekit: (Looking further into the future here, but) Will running Win32 programs increase system overhead? If I'm running OS/2 in an ISP, and I need to run a Win32 (perish the thought), will I have to be concerned about slowdowns?
Timur: well, the converted apps are just like normal OS/2 apps that use Open32. Just like SmartSuite
Peter: Sleekit: the first open32 app you run starts a small background process
Sleekit: So, no massive drain on memory?
Timur: so there's the overhead of loading a couple large DLL's into memory, but other than that, there is no performance hit
Peter: Sleekit: for the registry.
Timur: look at the size of pmwinx.dll -- that will be how much additional space you need

GamerX: Do you know if or when some samples applications will be made available, like solitaire ported from NT 4.0?
Timur: we are NEVER going to make any converted apps available. That is a copyright violation
GamerX: How about freeware with source code applications? Such as those covered by the GNU copyleft?
Timur: well, perhaps, but I see little point in that
MADodel: Just the tool to convert them then?
Peter: GamerX: that's an idea
Timur: yes, we'll only provide the tool to convert them. How you use that tool is your business. Keep in mind that some licenses prohibit you from running your app under non-MS operating systems.

WrightC: Timur or Pfitz, I'm curious as to how these tools would actually help a large Win32 application be installed... does it convert the installation program 'on the fly'? Or would we need to have all dll's and exe's somehow already uncompressed?
Peter: wrightc: the idea right now is you install the app under Win95/NT, and then convert it... but it is possible that SETUP's will be done later.
Timur: our immediate plans are to require that you install your app under Win95/NT on another partition, and then you boot OS/2 and access those exe's and dll's and convert them.

Dargon: Are you looking for volunteers for helping with the coding of the project?
Timur: no, we are not looking for any more volunteers.

Dark: Is it a full conversion to a native OS/2 executable (open 32, etc.), or is it a partial conversion with lots of "patches" to force it to work under OS/2?
Timur: no, it's a full conversion. However, we need to supply the full Win32 API one way or another, whatever Open32 doesn't provide, we have to provide ourselves. These additional API's are located in various DLL's that we call the "supplemental DLL's"
Dark: OK. So it will be slower than native NT ?
Timur: it's as fast as an Open32 app. It's as fast as SmartSuite

TheSeer: will the converter automatically find all used DLL's or do we have to start the converter for each library.?
Timur: no, it will not find them. We may provide additional tools to help you locate them, and perhaps even automate the process. But for now, it's all manual.
Peter: TheSeer: an "on the fly" converter is in the back burner

Klaus: TimurTabi: Do you know when/if IBM will fix this "512MB RAM" problem of the OS/2 Client (so that it would be possible to port the MS Office) Or do you have found any way to avoid the "512MB RAM Problem?
Timur: I get different answers to this question depending on whom I ask. I personally have not heard anything promising in this regard. My guess is that IBM will feel pressure from its customers that are using this converter, and they will eventually fix the problem.
Peter: Klaus: if we can get Word running on SMP (where there is > 512mb) support, I will get that fix put in the kernel.

_grey: TimurTabi: has IBM reacted to any of your initial successes? Have you received any aid or offers of help from IBM or any third parties?
Timur: I personally have had no communications from IBM.
Peter: _grey: yes. There's even one ibm'er on the team
Timur: pfitz: having an IBM'er on the team is NOT the same thing as official contact from IBM

nando2: timur and pfitz: Are you guys working with, or have any of you contacted DAVID REICH?, he's one of the of the brains behind (DAX/DAPIE/OPEN32). His e-mail is 76711,632 (CIS) or (dunno if he's still in IBM)
Peter: nando2: yes. he's still at ibm, but not the mgr of DAX (but he has helped anyway)

Barmaley: Are Open32 APIs slower than native OS/2 APIs? If so, how much?
Timur: good question. I think overall they're slower, but there may be some that are faster here and there.
Peter: In general, open32 is damn good! Some open32 apps run faster on OS/2 than Win95/NT.
Timur: Trust Peter -- he knows better than I

Terrulen: Where is the bulk of the work being done? On the supplemental DLLs?
Timur: the bulk of the work now is in the DLL's.

darkstar: Timur: what plans do you have to make it available? Free?
Timur: yes, IT WILL BE FREE.
Peter: darkstar: it will be free for the end user anyway.
Timur: one thing I want to mention is that the converted EXE's and DLL's are often MUCH SMALLER than the originals

nathana: First, how long to you 'spect it to be before an alpha or beta or demo version is released, and how long do you guesstimate it will be before the final thing is done? Also, will any source code be released to the public? GA.
Timur: nathana: I don't have any availability dates. Pfitz, what about the source?
Peter: nathana: source code, probably not.

Korig: Could you clarify that the package will be of no use at all if you don't have a copy of Win95 installed on the same machine?
Peter: Korig: you will need Win95, but not nec. on the same machine.
Timur: korig: yes, if you don't have Win95/NT installed, it will be useless. That may change in the future, though

DynoMutt: What version of DirectX are you converting? also: is Win16 a subset of Win32, and if so, will Win16 be convertible too?
Timur: dyno: directx support is WAY down the road. Win16 apps WILL NOT be supported
Peter: DynoMutt: OS/2 already runs 16-bit win apps. Our project is only for pure 32-bit exe's and dll's.

Sleekit: I'm interested in your opinions on whether or not this will become a major draw for OS/2's upcoming versions in the end user market
Peter: Sleekit: maybe, but our focus is the corporate market.
Timur: sleekit: yes, I see all sorts of users, from SOHO to enterprise, either sticking with or switching to OS/2 because of this tool. Peter is more interested in the corporate, whereas my interest is in the SOHO.

os2hq: Okay, thanx. Timur, what about Win32s 1.30 support? It's a real sticking point with me.

Timur: Win32s is a 16-bit thing -- we're not touching that. Win32s is for Win-OS/2. This project is completely unrelated to Win-OS/2

nando2: My main interest is CD-R programs, does open32 include a 'bridge' to turn windows 'aspi32' request to the OS/2 aspi manager? or would you have to convert ASPI32.DLL as well?? I heard open32 already includes winsock32 calls
Timur: nando2: There is no limit to what we can do. It's all a question of time.
Peter: nando2: Not sure about aspi.

WrightC: Do you know how long it will take (rough estimate) before this toolset will be developed enough so that high-end applications (like Desktop Publishing programs) can be converted?
Timur: WrightC: Again, we have no availability dates.
Peter: WrightC: There are only a few of us really doing any coding, and are all volunteers. It will be a few months at least -- if it is even possible.

timtim: Have [Microsoft] been in contact /contacted ?
Timur: timtim: no, we don't care about MS, and they haven't contacted us (to my knowledge)
Peter: the only "official" contact we've had from any companies are large OS/2 shops that want to use the product. IBM and MS have not contacted us officially.

nando2: Can you confirm then if winsock calls ARE included in open32?
Timur: I don't think winsock is in Open32, but pmsock is just like it
Peter: nando2: someone just did the winsock stuff. It is done/
Peter: oops, I was wrong about winsock. (quoting from "VeV:") "No it's not done. I had hoped for 70% this week, I'll only have about 40% (for wsock32)."

ulthar: Is it possible that I will be able to code win32 Visual Basic programs under OS/2 as I now do win16 VB programs?
Timur: ulthar: do you mean can VB be converted to an OS/2 app?
ulthar: yes, Timur
Timur: perhaps, but it's just like any other major app: we don't know for sure how long it will take to convert any of them. Right now we're still in code-frenzy stage. We know we have lots of DLL's and API's to provide, so we're not even measuring our progress.

Terrulen: How long ago did you start working on this project?
Timur: terrulen: about six months ago. pfitz?
Peter: Terrulen: june

trix: I may have missed a lot... but is this just going to be a development package? or something anyone can use?
Timur: no, this is for END-USERS only

Dark: OpenGL games are going to be the future of gaming pretty soon. (For our generic 3d first person ones anyway). Will OpenGL win items be converted using this utility? As I understand some corporations are NOT going to convert and market OS/2 versions of some games. (Quake II may be one of those mentioned not porting)
Timur: dark: we have someone working on that already :-)
Peter: dark: we have someone who WILL work on that would be more accurate I think. If we can't get the basics working, the other stuff will be wasted time.

PHS: Any idea how to handle removed relocation records AKA based loading. Particularly when this goes beyond OS/2s process address space ?
Peter: If an object (code/data) is not relocatable, and does not fit in OS/2, it will not work. We had a hell of a time just getting the ones that did fit in the address space to work! And ended up with a kludge, but it works.
PHS: Thought so :) Any other incompatibilities that will prevent certain executables from running at all ?
Peter: There are still some things have not done (like memory mapped files) that might cause problems. There is also the "user excretion" problem

trix: what about developing win32-OS/2 apps? WIll there be libraries available to those of us who would like to develop compatible apps?
Timur: trix: we will make our DLL's available to developers, if they want.

WrightC: Would it be possible for a non-OS/2 ISV to write an app in Win32, then convert it with your tools *after Compile*, and voila -- instant OS/2 app?
Timur: Yes. However, that OS/2 app will lack OS/2-specific features like WPS integration

codehd7: pfitz: you mentioned that source code will not be released. is it a definite No and what are the reasons please?
Peter: codehd7: this is a long story, and requires you to listen to the "mission statement." In the beginning (before Timur, so I don't know what he thinks) it was decided that the best thing for all OS/2 users was to keep large companies using OS/2 So the target is apps that will keep large companies from switching from OS/2 to NT. IOW, word processors, presentation programs and spreadsheets. It has also been my experience that large companies do not use "freeware" or "shareware" (in general) and they also don't like things that "hackers have the source code to." So the best thing that could happen (for OS/2) is for us to get this thing to work and present it to IBM and have them bless it and release it.
Timur: pfitz: or even better, make it run on the fly and add it to a FixPak!

Dirk: Timur/Peter, great project. Just curious if you have any funding and if not, could it help speed development?
Timur: dirk: no funding, and it wouldn't help either.
Peter: dirk: some people need compilers.
Timur: that's true. some people do need compilers.

mandie: timur: weren't there some ppl at Warpstock that wanted to help with funding?
Timur: I think so, but I didn't pay much attention, since I didn't think we needed any money

WrightC: When a Win32 app is converted with the tools, will it lack all integration with the WPS, or will there be a way to hook some WPS functionality in?
Timur: It will lack all the OS/2-specific stuff.

Dark: Several other's have asked similar things, but... Is there anyway we can help you to keep the project going smoothly? Asking corporations for support. Mailing, being around for help, etc.?
Timur: dark: not for the time being. it's still to early. the best thing that you can do is tell big companies that are switching to NT, "Hey, wait! look at this stuff!"

Barmaley: If a Windows compiler will be converted, how is it expected to work?
Timur: Just like an OS/2 compiler.
Barmaley: But it will still generate win exes, right?
Timur: No, it generates OS/2 exe's
[Editor's note: this is actually incorrect; Timur corrects himself later in this transcript.]

Projects: And if IBM doesn't bless and release it?
Peter: Projects: then I suspect we will have to set up some sort of body to sell it (since large companies insist on paying for software -- so they get support)

nathana: Are you saying that you are relying on IBM to release this? And if they decide not to, will you release it anyways?
Timur: We're not relying on IBM for anything

Sleekit_: I'd like to ask (if you two have one) what the process entails for the user to convert and run a program.
Timur: That's answered on the web page -- basically just do "pe2lx winapp.exe os2app.exe" and that's it. The same for the DLL's

PolyEx: If this is a project that is asking for volunteers, why is it not set up with a GNU lisc. etc... would this not speed up development?
Timur: Polyex: we're not asking for volunteers.

PHS: Do you plan to release the PE2LX + Thunks source code ? Perhaps for someone to tailor a ELF2LX from it ?
Peter: No
Timur: No, we will not release our source
Peter: I can only see the source being released if no one wants to support it.
Timur: like pfitz said, some companies don't like the security risks that it would allow.

ulthar: What are your thoughts regarding the fact that this is user-driven rather than IBM-driven? Is OS/2 getting more like Linux in that regard?
Timur: ulthar: I don't think so. I don't look at this any different than XFree/86. In fact, since the source code won't be available, it's not even like that either.

PolyEx: So this is a commercial product?
Timur: Polyex: no, it's not commercial. Although Peter says that some companies will expect a formal support/purchase mechanism before they consider it. we'll leave that to someone else.
Peter: Timur: the big OS/2 shops are banks, insurance cos, etc.... they don't screw around when it comes to support!
Timur: Peter: yeah, but who will support them? Not us!
Peter: Timur: if IBM doesn't, we might! Maybe not you... and that would probably only happen if the product is a market failure (no one big wants it)

Caveman: My company uses a lot of CAD software on NT. I hope you will be able to do these types of programs also.
Timur: caveman: only time will tell. But I think CAD software would be easier than Office '97

Klaus: Large companies will have a problem with Win32->OS/2, because patched Software may not be legal and definitely unsupported , and support is (imho) more important for big companies than the software features.
Timur: Well, that's their problem.
Peter: Unsupported yes, illegal? I don't think so.
Timur: Peter: well, what if MS says, "you can only run Office under MS OS's?"
Peter: Klaus: as long as they have a valid license for the win32 s/w, I don't see what the problem is. They are not reverse engineering it.
Peter: Timur: I'd like to read such a license agreement (just before I mailed it to the DOJ :)

codehd7: Timur/pfitz: perhaps Brad Wardell (Stardock) would take over the project officially once it's in that stage???
Timur: I don't know if that's a good thing.
codehd7: timur: I'd think it's better than giving it to IBM
Peter: Stardock? over my dead body!

MADodel: Any chance you will make this free to the individual user, but on a commercial basis for corporate users?
Timur: yes, it will be FREE!!!! FREE !!!! FREE !!!!!!!! Free for corporate users too, if they want.
Peter: if ibm takes it, it will be "part of OS/2" -- so not really free.

tandie: I have a q:... will you be looking for beta testers? and if so, what will be the mechanism for application?
Timur: I don't think we're going to have a closed beta
Peter: I imagine it will be an "open beta"

Caveman: I understand 16 bit is the past & 32 bit is the future, but why no 16 bit conversions?
Timur: because we don't care.
Peter: because open32 is 32-bit

MADodel: So who was the originator of this project?
Timur: Sander I think
Peter: let me get his full name
Timur: I know the idea was floating around the internet for 1-2 years already.
Peter: Sander van Leeuwen (

Dark: Is it possible when testing this program, that the new libraries and executables could severely damage our current setup? Or, are all the libraries used completely new, and not modifications of current ones used by OS/2?
Timur: They're completely new
Peter: One of them comes with OS/2: pmwinx.dll, as well as the registry daemon. The rest are new, and have The same names user under win32 (kernel32.dll, user32.dll, etc.)
Timur: But we're not touching those
Dark: OK. But, no serious changes (like kernel modifications)
Timur: No.
Peter: We don't patch any OS/2 code, but we do patch the converted code a little bit

nando2: I have read that IBM has included, or was going to include, OLE support into OS/2 for SmartSuite (since lotus uses OLE and never liked OpenDoc). could any of you confirm this? (ole into OS/2 FP3SE and/or Open32). If it is, it would save you a lot of work and trouble. And a second simple one to save time: are you going to create a mailing list for this project so we can learn about your progress? If not, does someone from VOICE volunteer to create one?
Timur: nando2: I heard that Lotus ported part of OLE to OS/2, but I doubt we'll be able to use that. And no, I have no plans for a mailing list.

TheSeer: Question to the copyright-stuff again: What about if it's prohibited to modify the stuff... I think creating an OS/2-exe is kind of doing a modified copy of the win-exe..?
Timur: We're not modifying anything.
Peter: The idea of a exe converter was Sanders (so simple, but I never thought of it! everyone else was thinking "emulator")... Sander started it, drafted me and a few others -- but still 80% of the work is sanders
Timur: What we're doing to the EXE is the same thing that the computer does when it loads it into memory. .

TheSeer: Timur: you (?) said before some DLL's are even smaller... ??!
Peter: Because of .exe compression. It's a trick :)

DaBull: How much overhead will win32->OS/2 require and how much of a performance hit?
Timur: No overhead, and it might even be faster.
Peter: You only convert the app once; after that it is native OS/2. Open32 is _really_ slow at a few tings (GetPixel()) for example, so it depends on the app.

Caveman: What if MS or 3rd party was relying on a bug in their original libraries?
Timur: Well, then it won't work
Peter: Since you're converting the original libs too, the bug comes with it :)
Timur: Unless the bug is in Open32 or in our DLL's as well
Peter: Unless you are talking about bugs in the win32 api.
Caveman: such a deal
Timur: pfitz: I think he is
Peter: In which case IBM has already programmed in the bugs they know about.
MADodel: Let's hope IBM codes as bad as Microsoft then
Peter: We are relying on our converter to supply major parts of the system --- for example, winhlp32.exe, comdlg32.dll, and comctl32.dll. They will all be converted by you.

tandie: Q: what about apps requiring directx? how will they be ported over?
Timur: tandie: we'll need to port DirectX ourselves, I think. That might be too much work, and some of it, like dynamic resolution changes, might not even be possible.

DaBull: what category of appls are you initially testing . i.e. WP, spreadsheets, graphic, DB's, etc.?
Peter: Small apps. notepad, solitaire, sample apps we wrote or from the toolkit

Caveman: I'm sorry if this was already covered but what about games. By getting office working will this mean some games might convert as well?
Timur: Well, directx is the clincher. It's a tough thing to convert, since it's device-specific. Again, we have no idea what will and what will be convertable, and when they will be convertable.
Caveman: I was thinking of Kali and Red Alert for 95
Peter: Games are not the target....
Caveman: I understand that, I was wondering whether the calls are similar at all.
Peter: But we won't go out of our way to break them.

nando2: OK: Is much of the 'graphics' api calls (the win32 equiv of GPI) already done in Open32?. I wonder if MGI's decision not to release PhotoSuite for OS/2 (on the app sampler CD) was because of buggy gfx support in Open32 or simply because IBM screwed up their commitments? (I'd like some of you to comment on this). (DON'T BOTHER with DirectX for me btw it's for games and I don't care and most business don't either :)
Peter: I did the PhotoSuite port. It was mainly because ibm screwed them
nando2: What a surprise. :) do you have a save-enabled ver then? :)
Peter: Yes, probably the only one on the planet :)
nando2: highly illegal to distribute, but worth millions to OS/2 fans ;). OK thanks
Peter: nando2: if you send me the millions, I'm sure I'll take the chance :)
nando2: (wonder if it could leak like Doom/2 or Quake/2 ;)
Peter: MGI knows the PhotoSuite would have been leaked by me -- that's why I can't do it. You can save stuff to the clipboard (in the demo version) and save it from another app.

PHS: Will PE2LX be (script) extensible in any way ? Let's say an EXE requires a certain NT-API which I could implement myself, could I integrate it into the whole Win32-OS/2 system or will I have to bug you ? :)
Timur: you'd have to bug us, because all the API's are in DLL's that we control. You can't just slap them into some random DLL, they have to be in the RIGHT dll.
PHS: Timur: I'm not talking about the DLLs since I could do the thunking, etc.. myself. Can I have PE2LX to "forward" the entries for me ?
Peter: There is a way around it. You can use a "forwarder entry"
Timur: you could use DosReplaceModule
PHS: So how do you map the Win32 imports to OS/2 imports where the DLL names do not match ?
Peter: You'd use FWDSTAMP on our dll to fwd it to yours
Timur: But we would prefer it if you let us incorporate the change into our DLL's
Peter: Even though open32 supplies many functions, they are in the wrong dll -- as you just said -- and they also have a different calling convention, so all of the api's go through our dll's.

Barmaley: Timur: you said, a converted Windows compiler will generate OS/2 exe's. Just curious, how will you tell it to do so? Will you hook the disk access functions used by the Windows compiler and rebuild the generated file on the fly?
Timur: no, a converted windows compiler will generate windows exe's. Actually, the converted windows LINKER would generate the windows exe's

Dark: Will there be any serious changes to Windows 98 that could render the converter useless? Or, are those unknown at this moment?
Timur: useless? No. Win98 is just Win95 plus a dumb new shell and maybe some more API's. Until there are Win98-only apps out there, it should not be a problem.

nathana: One more Q... are you planning on releasing a beta version, or only a final version?
Peter: There will be a beta

PHS: You're working on the common controls ? Will you do a release (headers) for use in apps other than PE2LX ? I'd like to know whether I'll get neat toolbars, etc.. for my apps.
Peter: phs: those will be converted by you
PHS: pfitz: I meant whether I could use YOUR comctl32 for MY OS/2 apps :)
Timur: WE won't have a comctl32
Peter: No, that probably won't work
PHS: Timur: Oh, I c. You have me to convert the original one...
Timur: YOU will make your own comctl32
Peter: phs: it's conceivable, but not likely that you can use the converted dll's.

nando2: are there any other groups (maybe for unix?) working on some 'free win32 api' where you could get code/info from?. (or Win95 emulators?). (BTW: never do release source, it could help *nix platforms gain some advantage over OS/2 and none of us want it :)
Timur: There's nothing stopping us from looking at the source of WINE to learn how to implement an API that's not in Open32. Copying the code would violate the GPL. But it's not like anyone would notice.
Peter: Timur: I thought wine was a x86 emulator that runs the real win16 stuff?
Timur: pfitz: I think WINE is a Win32 emulator.
nathana: Timur: Actually, at this point, I think WINE is a Win16 emulator, with plans to do Win32 soon...

PHS: pfitz: According to the updated SMP.INF the current Warp Server 4 SMP Kernel has high-memory support. Although I guess it won't provide contiguous memory across the 512MB segment.
Peter: Right -- there is a gap we can't use...
Timur: Updated SMP.INF?!?!?!
Peter: MS word loads at 800mb, which is outside the gap
PHS: Timur: smp.inf, 983712, 96/11/06 -- well updated ...

nando2: how big is the current package? (dlls and the exe converter)?
Timur: It could easily fit on a floppy
Peter: Zipped, ~512k
nando2: that certainly makes it better than Java (at least to download <g>)

At this point the moderated Q&A session came to a close and the channel was opened up for "free-for-all" discussion. We did not log this portion of the event, however.

* * *

Chris Wenham is a freelance web designer, writer and Englishman who now lives in Endicott, NY. In the past he has written comedy, sci-fi, Pascal, Rexx, HTML and Gibberish. He has been using OS/2 exclusively for the past 2 years.


[Our Sponsor: BMT Micro - Registration site for the best OS/2 shareware applications available.]

Copyright © 1997 - Falcon Networking ISSN 1203-5696