Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
- To: MLUG Members <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Subject: Re: [MLUG] Opera is now free (as in beer) (fwd)
- From: Jonathan King <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:35:50 -0500
- Delivery-date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:36:00 -0600
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hpg07T9X1nXAvURZz16zRPYdP9FAT0yQwOtH2HSNLjVrParfQ42BlYop44mZWHtH3Vp4fiqQxcQTofMLbun32PMqWtTTYbejFZL8y2RmlMbbYq9pxoPVuUbEx8WqvKn82boLoASsIWkOgNgqATxxIRV/L9ytzoA2r/KBoqRCayY=
- Envelope-to: EMAIL:PROTECTED
- In-reply-to: <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- References: <EMAIL:PROTECTED> <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Reply-to: MLUG Members <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Sender: EMAIL:PROTECTED
On 10/30/05, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, James Brockman wrote:
>
> > It will be interesting to see if Linux RTOS distros can catch up, or if
> > QNX can manage to stay ahead thru innovation. I won't place any bets
> > either way, myself.
>
> Apparently some people say that QNX is faster than Linux. If that's true,
> it could make a big difference in some applications.
Last I knew was 4 years ago, and, at that point, RT Linux was
completely painful to use, while QNX had been around for a decade or
more (and our project went down in flames for other reasons, but
that's another story). If you need "hard" real-time, you really do
need a real-time OS. But I should point out that computers have now
gotten so incredibly fast and so much more reliable (really, at least
if you configure them correctly) that most "soft" real-time uses
probably don't require a specialized OS per se.
jking
_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members