The murky future of windows
-
My first job in '89 was C / QNX, and QNX was also my first OS love affair (my PC at home was running DOS 3.1 at the time, there's simply no comparison). As much as I love QNX, it got bought out by RIM / Blackberry a year or two back. Given that they're currently in meltdown, I'd be nervous about the implications for QNX. Pity.
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
Oh XXXX that looked good too :sigh:
-
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS. Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers. Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something. MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time. I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express..... Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
I wouldn't worry about it until there's a real cause to worry. Microsoft has made a lot of mistakes and leadership there is a mess. However, at this time I don't see anything that leads me to believe anything other than they're just trying to be a "me too" on the cloud bandwagon. (A subject for a whole other discussion probably best placed in the Soapbox.) The APIs may not be elevated in discussions like they once were, but it's still there.
-
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS. Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers. Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something. MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time. I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express..... Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
I personally like Fedora Linux. It is very user-friendly, and is very light on resources (especially using the LXDE 'spin').
Getting information off the Internet is like taking a drink from a fire hydrant. - Mitchell Kapor
-
Please refer to earlier post NutZ!!!
glennPattonWork wrote:
Please refer to earlier post NutZ!!!
Does this come with English subtitles? :)
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
-
Oh XXXX that looked good too :sigh:
glennPattonWork wrote:
Oh XXXX that looked good too :sigh:
No clue what you're talking about. Clearly, I need more coffee.
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
-
I personally like Fedora Linux. It is very user-friendly, and is very light on resources (especially using the LXDE 'spin').
Getting information off the Internet is like taking a drink from a fire hydrant. - Mitchell Kapor
I'm sorry, did you just use Linux (or any other *nix) and user-friendly in the same sentence? I think my brain just rebooted. These operating systems were never meant for mere mortals.
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
-
Actually it does... you just have to have the right versions. RedHat makes a ton of money on their support side, they actually have a huge building close to where I work.
A friend of mine says RHEL is also really bad about be trapped with old versions of things. Obsolete versions of Python and GCC are his biggest complaints. The former for lacking newer language features, that latter for a bunch of usability (debugging???) related improvements that after years of GCC devs saying they're impossible or are too low priority to ever be implemented suddenly found themselves being implemented after they were launched in Clang/LLVM.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
I'm sorry, did you just use Linux (or any other *nix) and user-friendly in the same sentence? I think my brain just rebooted. These operating systems were never meant for mere mortals.
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
"Syntax error: Missing not operator."
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
"Syntax error: Missing not operator."
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
Panic!
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
-
A friend of mine says RHEL is also really bad about be trapped with old versions of things. Obsolete versions of Python and GCC are his biggest complaints. The former for lacking newer language features, that latter for a bunch of usability (debugging???) related improvements that after years of GCC devs saying they're impossible or are too low priority to ever be implemented suddenly found themselves being implemented after they were launched in Clang/LLVM.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
They sure don't provide the latest and greatest that's for sure... but I think they have a good middle ground of stability and newer stuff. Latest and greatest has it's own headaches, like my Ubuntu machine that wants to do updates every day, half of which require a reboot (something that Ubuntu has become bad about).
-
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS. Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers. Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something. MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time. I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express..... Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
I'm working with Beckhoff[^] which is a German Brand which allows me to program and control our machines under Windows. If I would need to work with Linux I would go for B&R[^] (Bernecker and Rainer) which is a similar Brand which Works with Linux. Both brands offer the complete solution: Hardware and software. Don't know if this could help you, but...
[www.tamautomation.com] | Robots, CNC and PLC machines for grinding and polishing. [YouTube channel]
-
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS. Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers. Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something. MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time. I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express..... Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
I laughed a little. Because you have to create your own BSP for Windows Embedded, you are looking for another operating system for which you'd have to... create your own BSP.
Matt McGuire wrote:
These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected...
No they aren't. Seriously, where did you come up with that? Windows Embedded/Compact work just fine disconnected. They work find headless. Moreover, they have end-of-life dates way beyond many alternatives. They are easy to configure and very easy to write for. As for alternatives; for non-hard real time, check out eCos[^]. If you have to do hard real time programming, check out the offerings from Green Hills[^].
-
glennPattonWork wrote:
Oh XXXX that looked good too :sigh:
No clue what you're talking about. Clearly, I need more coffee.
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
Sorry, all looked saw/read RIM Blackberry...and ran, sorry!
-
glennPattonWork wrote:
Please refer to earlier post NutZ!!!
Does this come with English subtitles? :)
Christopher Duncan Author of Unite the Tribes: Leadership Skills for Technology Managers Have Fun, Get Paid: How to Make a Living with Your Creativity The Career Programmer
Sorry Blackberry RIM, made me say a bad word :sigh:
-
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS. Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers. Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something. MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time. I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express..... Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
Personally I don't care what Microsoft does. Knowing, naturally, that I have no influence over any direction they take. And about any future course in any realm pivoting on news from them about this or that, I ignore. Hardware, the thing about which I think you REALLY mean to say something, has been around for ages. How is a software company going to kill that? Earplugs. To keep the annoying news from infiltrating the porches of the ear. Shades. To keep the blitz of gaud-awful electronic krap and it's shiney blithering unlessness at visual bay. And off you go.