Vista arriving 2007

[cavanami]

Yes, a waste in energy to argue about os's.

 

One thing that grinds my gears...MS can put out a defective product and the world buys it!

What happened to QC? Pride in the product?

 

Now we see a trickle down effect in that many other companies put out crap and then tell you to upgrade to get the fix...at your own cost

 

Whatever...

[SoiledCowboy]

From Wikpedia

The shuttle uses five identical redundant IBM 32-bit general purpose computers (GPCs), model AP-101, constituting a type of embedded system. Four computers run specialized software called the Primary Avionics Software System (PASS). A fifth backup computer runs separate software called the Backup Flight System (BFS). Collectively they are called the shuttle Data Processing System (DPS).[citation needed]

 

 

Atlantis deploys landing gear before landing on a selected runway just like a common aircraft.The design goal of the shuttle DPS is fail operational/fail safe reliability. After a single failure the shuttle can continue the mission. After two failures it can land safely.

 

The four general-purpose computers operate essentially in lockstep, checking each other. If one computer fails, the three functioning computers "vote" it out of the system. This isolates it from vehicle control. If a second computer of the three remaining fails, the two functioning computers vote it out. In the rare case of two out of four computers simultaneously failing (a two-two split), one group is picked at random.

 

The Backup Flight System (BFS) is separately developed software running on the fifth computer, used only if the entire four-computer primary system fails. The BFS was created because although the four primary computers are hardware redundant, they all run the same software, so a generic software problem could crash all of them. This should never happen, as embedded system avionic software is developed under totally different conditions from commercial software. For example, the number of code lines is tiny compared to a commercial operating system, changes are only made infrequently and with extensive testing, and many programming and test personnel work on the small amount of computer code. However in theory it can fail, and the BFS exists for that contingency.

 

The software for the shuttle computers is written in a high-level language called HAL/S, somewhat similar to PL/I. It is specifically designed for a real time embedded system environment.

 

The IBM AP-101 computers originally had about 424 kilobytes of magnetic core memory each. The CPU could process about 400,000 instructions per second. They have no hard disk drive, but load software from tape cartridges.

 

In 1990 the original computers were replaced with an upgraded model AP-101S, which has about 2.5 times the memory capacity (about 1 megabyte) and three times the processor speed (about 1.2 million instructions per second). The memory was changed from magnetic core to semiconductor with battery backup.

 

One lousy mb of memory for each 8086 processor and they can fly a space shuttle...768mb in my trusty laptop and it creaks along running MS operating systems...

I've still got an old box, now running Caldera Linux, originally ran RedHat, extremely well on very old and way outdated Pentium hardware.

Previously used to run the RedHat Linux on an ancient 686 with 32mb of RAM and it fair blasted along, animated desktops running etc etc...it really showed up just what a miserable effort the MS OS attempt really was and still is!

[unit731]

 

" I disagree for Win 2000."

 

Yes, my bank still uses Windows 2000. But I doubt if they use it for photo or video editing.

 

.

[OCgringo]

Problem is with a new operating system all the other companies will "update" their old software . and somewhere down the line your perfectly working set-up will not work anymore,

 

How many websites have you tried to go to that will not open because ypu do not have the latest program

 

OC

[unit731]

" I disagree for Win 2000."

 

Yes, my bank still uses Windows 2000. Works great for this small bank. But I doubt if they use it for photo or video editing.

 

.

[shygye]

Vista is one bastard of an OS. An OS should be,

1) Reliable

2) Small footprint (uses minimal resources)

3) Secure

 

Prepare for a swarm of bugs and security problems.

[carlton68]

Unit,

 

let's say you do your video editing with Adobe Premiere and your photo editing with Adobe Photoshop. Two very good programs, and they don't give a shit whether they are running on Win 2000 or Win XP. And that counts for the most programs running on both platforms.

 

The marketing told that Win XP is great for video editing because they added Movie Maker. The Operating systems abilities in regards of video editing has not changed, it's just that they added a small program which unfortunately uses .wmv format.

You are free to repeat Microsofts marketing slogans but it won't hurt to start thinking for yourself.

 

In Windows XP there is a function to disply the Windows version number. Funny thing, it will read 'Windows 2000 Build xxxx' or something like that (sorry, I'd have to restart to activate it and get the exact expression. I don't want to restart right now).

[Mekong]

I have been mostly working with Sunsoft UNIX for the past 20 years.

Very stable with features that MS still has "stolen" and this is a 20+ year old OS!

It does not have all the GUIs and graphics but it is dependable, not rebooting every few days. It runs for months/years without any rebooting.

 

What OS do they use at NASA for the space ships? This OS runs for years without rebooting. It is a flavor of UNIX not MS.

 

MS is working to get better but they have a ways to go before...IMO

 

Cavanami,

 

Knowing the systems that you work (or have worked on) I am suprised by your anti MS stance. GE MK V was DOS based, but MK VI is Windows.

 

Every major DCS Vendor nowadays, Honeywell, Yokogawa, ABB, Foxboro, Emmerson etc is using Windows for Operator Consoles and Engineering Workstations and I have never encountered any problems with it, unlike in the early days of the industry when Vendors tried to develop their own OS.

 

 

 

[kamui]

latest news from the Vista:

 

On a conference Kevin Johnson from MS could not confirm that Vista will be ready in time....

 

Microsoft continues to give itself room to further delay the release of Windows Vista. At its annual Financial Analyst Meeting on Thursday, Kevin Johnson, co-president of Microsoft's Platforms & Services Division, said that while Vista development remains on track for now, Microsoft won't ship the OS until the company thinks it's ready.

"There is no data that says we're not going to make the November business availability," Johnson said, speaking to analysts and media on Microsoft's Redmond, Washington, campus. However, he said that the company continues to evaluate Vista "milestone by milestone" and will ship the product "when it's ready" rather than according to a hard and fast schedule.

[cavanami]

The underlying OS is QNIX. Very stable and predictable. QNIX, made in Canada, is a good OS.

What you see is MS, but it is only the GUI.

 

What I am referring to are the apps that now run on MS where in the past they ran on UNIX.

 

When they did the port over from UNIX to MS, it wa ugly. MS was not happy doing what the UNIX did without a burb. We finally got enough patches and work-arounds to make a system. We started with NT 3.51, which was better then Win 3.11, but not stable enough for mission critical apps. NT 4.0, was a solid system, but all too soon put to the wayside. Win 2000, was NT with PnP. No need to mention 95, 98, or ME, although 95 is still running and doing OK on closed system.

XP, not too impressed as it seems to have lost some things that NT and 2000 had no trouble doing, like killing a process.

 

Killing a process in UNIX, easy and works. XP, I get many that require a reboot, grrrrrrrr.

Just a pet peeve.

 

...the world has voted, and M$ is winning.