Embedded.com FUD - Embedded

This is a discussion on Embedded.com FUD - Embedded ; Has anyone else seen this load of FUD on embedded.com? http:// embedded.com/columns/guest/207402542 I expect more from them than to publish attack ads (from one of their major advertisers, no less) disguised as articles. okalex...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Embedded.com FUD

  1. Embedded.com FUD

    Has anyone else seen this load of FUD on embedded.com? http://
    embedded.com/columns/guest/207402542

    I expect more from them than to publish attack ads (from one of their
    major advertisers, no less) disguised as articles.

    okalex

  2. Re: Embedded.com FUD

    On May 9, 12:02 am, okalex wrote:
    > Has anyone else seen this load of FUD on embedded.com? http://
    > embedded.com/columns/guest/207402542
    >
    > I expect more from them than to publish attack ads (from one of their
    > major advertisers, no less) disguised as articles.
    >
    > okalex


    Yep. Saw it last week and sent an response CCed to all embedded
    engineers, I know, that may be duped by this. Here is an extract...
    "Motivation of this article is to put doubt on the minds of embedded
    Linux adoptees. I think a bit of perspective is called for .
    G...hills sells very expensive embedded software systems which have
    been approved for safety critical systems such as aircrafts and heart
    implants. .....[some confidential pricing stats]...
    These prices would be ok for a safety critical system. However most
    embedded products out there are none safety critical (eg: microwaves,
    routers, phones …etc) and since embedded Linux came to the market, it
    has been cutting in to the profitability of G...hills and other
    embedded software houses. So I see nothing new in this attack on
    embedded Linux (heck its like what Microsoft tries to do). On top of
    that this guy is selectively pushing propaganda about other major
    embedded houses......
    Sure I wouldn’t use embedded Linux for a safety critical system; But
    it’s good enough for a high reliability system."


+ Reply to Thread