REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007. - Linux

This is a discussion on REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007. - Linux ; HangEveryRepubliKKKan wrote: > > "High Plains Thumper" wrote >> "Stability is the number-one concern and our operations span the region, >> so there is always someone using the systems," Wheatley said. "We've had >> 100 percent uptime with Linux and ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007.

  1. Re: REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007.

    HangEveryRepubliKKKan wrote:
    >
    > "High Plains Thumper" wrote
    >> "Stability is the number-one concern and our operations span the region,
    >> so there is always someone using the systems," Wheatley said. "We've had
    >> 100 percent uptime with Linux and management notices the difference."

    >
    > Linux Losing Market Share to Windows Server
    > By Peter Galli
    > October 25, 2007


    You already cut-n-paste this article in another post. Please be less
    redundant with your trolling.

    Thanks in advance,

    Thad


  2. Re: REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007.

    HangEveryRepubliKKKan wrote:
    >
    > Microsoft isn't a player in the embedded market. But then who needs an OS
    > for imbedded functions?


    If you have to ask that question then you have no idea what the embedded space
    is like today. I'm currently doing Linux kernel hacking for the cable/satellite
    industry. The type of embedded equipment needed to do digital video on demand
    is definitely NOT something you would implement purely in hardware. It would
    take forever to get the product to market, it would be an order of magnitude
    more expensive then the competitors, have less functionality, and be less
    upgradeable. The same logic applies in the other embedded fields I've worked
    in (aerospace, automotive, and medical scanning equipment).

    Cheers,

    Thad


  3. Re: REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007.

    HangEveryRepubliKKKan wrote:
    >
    > wrote
    >
    > Clearly not. Now tell us why you need the overhead of a huge and bulky
    > OS.


    Ignoring for the moment that working on embedded OS's is all about
    making them NOT bulky... one could ask the same thing about all the
    mundane things that people do on desktop systems. You certainly don't
    need a 2 or 3 GHz system and all the bloat of Windows to do a bit
    of word processing or surf the web, and I assure you that handling
    hundreds of digital cable channels plus video on demand is a bit
    more demanding than that.

    But really, it comes down to cost and time to market. While you
    probably could build something that uses only DSPs and FPGAs and
    firmware that is something less than a full OS, you would be an
    idiot to build something from the ground up like that when off
    the shelf components and software can do the job at a tiny fraction
    of the cost and development time.

    But you are certainly welcome to prove me wrong by forming an
    embedded systems startup company and trouncing the current
    players with your superior insight. >

    Cheers,

    Thad


  4. Re: REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 10th of November, 2007.

    After takin' a swig o' grog, thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > HangEveryRepubliKKKan wrote:
    >>
    >> wrote
    >>
    >> Clearly not. Now tell us why you need the overhead of a huge and bulky
    >> OS.

    >
    > Ignoring for the moment that ...


    The OP is a freaking idiot,

    > working on embedded OS's is all about
    > making them NOT bulky...


    The OP is just trolling. No one here could be that ignorant of the wide
    range of scale in Linux systems. Not even a goofy putz like
    "HangEveryRepubliKKKan".

    > But really, it comes down to cost and time to market. While you
    > probably could build something that uses only DSPs and FPGAs and
    > firmware that is something less than a full OS, you would be an
    > idiot to build something from the ground up like that when off
    > the shelf components and software can do the job at a tiny fraction
    > of the cost and development time.
    >
    > But you are certainly welcome to prove me wrong by forming an
    > embedded systems startup company and trouncing the current
    > players with your superior insight. >


    You are casting pearls before swine, Thad!

    (And no, I don't mean that all of COLA are swine, just the blithering
    idiot behind the "HangEveryRepubliKKKan" pseudonym).

    --
    Tux rox!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3