C
Curt Wuollet
Hi Alex.
Alex Pavloff wrote:
> Have you considered the fact that while Windows is a suboptimal control
> platform, its a decent desktop OS well suited for programming packages
> and the like? My new project is using Linux. However, I have no plans
> at this point to spend the large effort needed to port the programming
> enviroment to Linux because, well:
Yes Alex, this is a most thoughtfully considered position. And Linux is an even better environment for programming packages and quite usable for control. especially with extensions. And because it can be improved by people who want it to be an even better control platform and tailor made for the automation market, inside a year, there would be no comparison. In contrast, it is unlikely Windows will ever go in directions that make it more suitable for our particular needs. Indeed, as far as I can tell, all the changes seem to be in the wrong direction.
> 1) I have never run into any of my customers that use Linux on their
> desktops
And you never will if the monopoly gets their way.
> 2) Selling software to the Linux market is a problem because, well, they
> aren't used to paying for it.
You wouldn't be selling to the Linux market, most of them are singularly unconcerned with automation and controls. You would be selling to the automation market where downtime is expensive and MS licensing and policies are a PITA. Decreased cost couldn't hurt either.
> Curt, here's your problem. You sit there, tell everyone that Microsoft
> and all the stuff they use right now sucks, and tell everyone how you
> can solve all your automation problems with a 386 running Linux, a
> tie-wrapped ISA board, and plenty of elbow grease. Good for you and
> your customers, but... err... if you can do that err.... you're aren't
> going to be buying any software or hardware.
I'm obviously not your target candidate. I make my living solving the problems not addressed with OTS stuff. And I haven't said MS sucks nearly as often as the folks here that use it. I have said that they are a monopoly and have successfully wiped out just about any choice in this market segment. I respectfully submit that I am about restoring choices in a market that would benefit greatly from having some. Given a supported, realistic, alternative, competition would soon solve many, if not most, of the problems we see here. Without that alternative, folks will always have to simply accept whatever misery is visited upon them. Such is the case with monopolies. If you don't like the reliability of your local power company, you can generate your own, but it's not much of a _real_ choice.
> The current user base of Linux is highly technically inclined, not
> afraid of programming, and willing to build rather than buy. Automation
> vendors like myself aren't going to jump until we have solid indications
> that people will actually BUY our software if sold for Linux.
This is the "chicken and the egg" problem. I'm pretty sue you won't see this indication as long as there are no comparable Linux products for them to buy.
>>Notice
>>what happened to Wince once there was competition from the
>>embedded Linux folks :^)
>
> Bull. Windows CE (or whatever they're calling it) was giving priority
> because they wanted to take the lucrative handheld market away from
> Palm. Linux has only shipped on, what, one PDA (Sharp Zaurus). People
> flashing their IPAQs with a mostly-working linux distribution
> competition does not make.
And they are giving it away out of kindness? And showing source? That doesn't sound like it was induced by pressure from their proprietary comtemporaries.
I'm not sure why some folks look at my intent as evil or driven by malice. If you can think of a downside for having choices, I'm all ears. I simply want _all_ of us to be able to do automation and controls work with a more reliable, more flexible and adaptable OS that solves a lot of automation world problems. It's better engineering. People will buy better, more reliable, solutions if they become available.
Regards
cww
Alex Pavloff wrote:
> Have you considered the fact that while Windows is a suboptimal control
> platform, its a decent desktop OS well suited for programming packages
> and the like? My new project is using Linux. However, I have no plans
> at this point to spend the large effort needed to port the programming
> enviroment to Linux because, well:
Yes Alex, this is a most thoughtfully considered position. And Linux is an even better environment for programming packages and quite usable for control. especially with extensions. And because it can be improved by people who want it to be an even better control platform and tailor made for the automation market, inside a year, there would be no comparison. In contrast, it is unlikely Windows will ever go in directions that make it more suitable for our particular needs. Indeed, as far as I can tell, all the changes seem to be in the wrong direction.
> 1) I have never run into any of my customers that use Linux on their
> desktops
And you never will if the monopoly gets their way.
> 2) Selling software to the Linux market is a problem because, well, they
> aren't used to paying for it.
You wouldn't be selling to the Linux market, most of them are singularly unconcerned with automation and controls. You would be selling to the automation market where downtime is expensive and MS licensing and policies are a PITA. Decreased cost couldn't hurt either.
> Curt, here's your problem. You sit there, tell everyone that Microsoft
> and all the stuff they use right now sucks, and tell everyone how you
> can solve all your automation problems with a 386 running Linux, a
> tie-wrapped ISA board, and plenty of elbow grease. Good for you and
> your customers, but... err... if you can do that err.... you're aren't
> going to be buying any software or hardware.
I'm obviously not your target candidate. I make my living solving the problems not addressed with OTS stuff. And I haven't said MS sucks nearly as often as the folks here that use it. I have said that they are a monopoly and have successfully wiped out just about any choice in this market segment. I respectfully submit that I am about restoring choices in a market that would benefit greatly from having some. Given a supported, realistic, alternative, competition would soon solve many, if not most, of the problems we see here. Without that alternative, folks will always have to simply accept whatever misery is visited upon them. Such is the case with monopolies. If you don't like the reliability of your local power company, you can generate your own, but it's not much of a _real_ choice.
> The current user base of Linux is highly technically inclined, not
> afraid of programming, and willing to build rather than buy. Automation
> vendors like myself aren't going to jump until we have solid indications
> that people will actually BUY our software if sold for Linux.
This is the "chicken and the egg" problem. I'm pretty sue you won't see this indication as long as there are no comparable Linux products for them to buy.
>>Notice
>>what happened to Wince once there was competition from the
>>embedded Linux folks :^)
>
> Bull. Windows CE (or whatever they're calling it) was giving priority
> because they wanted to take the lucrative handheld market away from
> Palm. Linux has only shipped on, what, one PDA (Sharp Zaurus). People
> flashing their IPAQs with a mostly-working linux distribution
> competition does not make.
And they are giving it away out of kindness? And showing source? That doesn't sound like it was induced by pressure from their proprietary comtemporaries.
I'm not sure why some folks look at my intent as evil or driven by malice. If you can think of a downside for having choices, I'm all ears. I simply want _all_ of us to be able to do automation and controls work with a more reliable, more flexible and adaptable OS that solves a lot of automation world problems. It's better engineering. People will buy better, more reliable, solutions if they become available.
Regards
cww