Where do we go from here?

C
I fear the future will be very much like the past. The obsession with Microsoft has inhibited progress for decades and none of the majors are moving quickly to change. Observe that much of the data passing in even the newest products takes place with technology that even Microsoft has declared obsolete long ago. The intense activity required to simply keep up with the forced upgrade mill saps much of the vitality that could be spent on innovation and refinement. That is not to say there won't be progress, but expect it to come from non major sources. No matter how excellent these are, it will be difficult to crack the walls of the Tower of Babel to produce any significant change in the industry. This arena actively works against change. Sooner or later though, one of the majors will, forced by loss of share or simple stagnation, break the mold and attempt something different and of they succeed to any significant extent will actually spur acceptance of new ideas. Or some small outfit will come up with something great that leverages the advantages of the non Microsoft world and disrupts the status quo. It's the dark side of lock in. Making it as difficult as possible to change cuts both ways. None of the majors has the agility to deal with change.

Regards
cww
 
I have to agree with you that this fascination with Windows by hot shot IT college boys or Management in Suits that say Windows is the way to go with everything is creating havoc in the HMI world.

Keep in mind that to take for example a very robust UNIX system and turn it into Microsoft windows does not make the turbine turn any faster or the paper wind up an sooner on the real.
An operator screen is an operator screen. To spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to rip out a perfectly good HMI and pay to have graphics redrawn in visual basic or dot net is shear lunacy, when the operator gets to stare at the same drawings he had before. Where is the bang for the buck?

The fear is that the companies can not find a reliable source for their aging HMI hardware. But that fear is now gone with a source like Workstations Express. Hard core UNIX companies, that want to be free of upgrades and viruses should take a look at the possibilities with workstationsexpress.com.
 
C
Yes, I remember a Cimplicity demo designed to get us to "upgrade" from the UNIX version to the Windows version. It was slower and would hang and crash during the demo, while the UNIX version just ran until we took it down to blow out the dust and crap, then run for another year. From the demo, you would have to be out of your mind to switch, but they got a lot of the shops to do it anyways, because ????

Obviously, it has nothing to do with function or reliability. I think the pitch was "any idiot can deal with Windows" and by implication, your critical processes. I've seen several examples of where they took that to heart. Indeed some of the pleas we see on this list scare me to death, and make me glad I'm not a worker in those factories.

Regards
cww
 
>I think the pitch was "any idiot can deal with Windows" and by implication, your critical processes. <

Why not run the critical parts on Linux/Unix server and let the user run a Windows client ?

Web based must NOT necessarily mean using a standard web browser. We have developed a Client/Server software that can be used like that but is optimized for HMI / SCADA.

See:
http://pvbrowser.org

Please evaluate our solution and give me your response.
 
In reply to Curt Wuollet: It's funny that the one operating system on the market that is sold as being *the* OS for people who just want use computers without having to learn anything about them is a version of UNIX - Mac OS/X. If MS Windows is so great and UNIX is so hard to use, then how does Apple manage to sell so many computers?

As far as HP hardware is concerned, there is an experimental version of QEMU (CPU emulator) that supports PA-RISC as a guest architecture. Given that, old software that ran on HP workstations should be able to run in emulation on new hardware indefinitely.
 
C
IF, it were up to me, it would all run on Linux. But, until the majors see the light, you would have to roll you own, with a few exceptions :^) It would be interesting if the vendors who used to run on UNIX would port to Linux. Wouldn't be very hard or expensive either. Would need new drivers for modern hardware.

Regards
cww
 
C
Yes, the harder to use part is mostly just MS marketing. Obviously, if you can "do MAC" on top of *nix and sell it to Macheads, you can do all the bells and whistles needed. I don't think very many people on this list would have any problems with Linux if they made any effort at all, or for some reason _had_ to learn it. I've certainly struggled more with some PLC software.

Regards
cww
 
I like and use Linux on one of my machines, but I'm geeky enough to enjoy command line programming when I need to, and can troubleshoot drivers and write code. The real problem I have with Linux is the same problem I have with most open source systems-- they are all buggy as hell. Mozilla is having terrible trouble with Firefox add-ins, Dhrupal is having a classic fail meltdown, as is Joomla. Wikipedia is a casual user's interface nightmare from hell.

If I could be assured that these back end issues wouldn't crop up as problems, failures and security vulnerabilities, I'd not give a rodent's posterior what OS the HMI or whatever is written in, and I don't think most users would care much either.

All they want is for something to work when they want it to, with a high probability of it continuing to do so for the projected lifecycle of the device or system, which is upwards of 30 years on average now in automation installations.

Walt Boyes
Editor in Chief
Control and Controlglobal.com
www.controlglobal.com
Mailto:wboyes [at] putman.net
Read my blog SoundOFF!! At www.controlglobal.com/soundoff
 
Ah, yes. The best trolls are the classic ones. I've seen that one used a few times. If you want cww to bite on it though, I think you'll have to add something about what a terrible programming language C is and how all programs written in it are doomed to failure, etc. etc. Perhaps add something about Perl, as I think he's used that as well.

To turn back to the original (revived) topic, I notice that Nathan Boeger seems to have dropped a couple of topics on us (here and in another posting) and then vanished. He brought up some interesting points though, which I think deserves some serious discussion.

To give this a bit more focus, I'll add some questions of my own.

1) What do people think of web based HMI? Pros? Cons? Perhaps good for some applications but not others?

2) What about doing an HMI client directly in the browser with AJAX, versus a Flash/Java/Silverlight/ActiveX plug-in? (The latter methods really just use the web browser as a downloader for the application).

3) XML versus JSON versus anything else?

4) Does anyone think the automation vendors will start using hosted web applications for any of their development software? Would the idea that the vendor could then just turn that software off at will make anyone nervous about the long term maintainability of their automation systems?
 
C
I would not suggest any of those for control purposes. Or for that matter, critical content applications. Everything about webcrafting is in continual flux and probably will be in the future as well, as everyone searches for the slickest look and the fastest methods to create pages. But, if you step back from the edge, there are stable, well tested tools that would serve well for industrial projects. And using that well defined subset would probably ensure a low incidence of browser issues as well. The good thing about FOSS for this is that I can continue using Mozilla 1.X as long as I wish. Even if I upgrade the OS. If I need to change I can do it on my schedule. I did a test and RedHat 4.0 will still load and run on a new machine. That's pretty old. And given the breakneck development pace, Linux won't be without problems, but I can fix all so far and no one can tell me I can't run any version there has ever been. You do have to live with some change. I think you would agree that the changes in the last few years have been phenomenal and very much for the better. Especially for non-dinosaurs, But the dino stuff is still there for us.

Regards
 
C
Hi Michael

> Ah, yes. The best trolls are the classic ones. I've seen that one used a few times. If you want cww to bite on it though, I think you'll have to add something about what a terrible programming language C is and how all programs written in it are doomed to failure, etc. etc. Perhaps add something about Perl, as I think he's used that as well. <

You know that just about everything would disappear if all the C apps did. At some level almost all become C based :^) I'm more agnostic about perl, the last I heard they were installing the kitchen sink API.

> To turn back to the original (revived) topic, I notice that Nathan Boeger seems to have dropped a couple of topics on us (here and in another posting) and then vanished. He brought up some interesting points though, which I think deserves some serious discussion.
>
> To give this a bit more focus, I'll add some questions of my own.
>
> 1) What do people think of web based HMI? Pros? Cons? Perhaps good for some applications but not others? <

More important, what do the vendors think about Web Based HMI? Will the AB/RA patent situation cloud the waters forever?

> 2) What about doing an HMI client directly in the browser with AJAX, versus a Flash/Java/Silverlight/ActiveX plug-in? (The latter methods really just use the web browser as a downloader for the application).
>
> 3) XML versus JSON versus anything else?
>
> 4) Does anyone think the automation vendors will start using hosted web applications for any of their development software? Would the idea that the vendor could then just turn that software off at will make anyone nervous about the long term maintainability of their automation systems? <

It would sure make for interesting contract talks and keep legal dept's busy. There is a strong trend for these issues to be user driven, everywhere else but in automation.

Regards
cww
 
Web based systems!

User Driven software apps!

Single dimensional thinking.

What is really needed, and is very much on the horizon, are systems and software applications that self generate structured information by using virtual knowledge and data to drive more complex data.

Until then, the computer and any application it may run, can best be
described as a rather simplistic aid to human endeavor.

Bob
 
In reply to Bob Pawley:

But the software will still have to communicate with operators, maintenance and engineering personnel, managers and supervisors, etc. You'll still need a display and input devices (keyboard, mouse, touch screen, etc.). Regardless of how the application itself is generated, the same HMI questions remain.
 
W

William Sturm

Curt,

Which patent are you specifically referring to? Is there one that is much more onerous than all of the others? I was a little shocked to see how many patents RA is applying for. Talk about stifling innovation, I guess I have a fresh reason to dislike them.

Bill Sturm
 
W

William Sturm

I've just started looking at this stuff recently, but I like the idea of using AJAX in the browser for an HMI, rather than downloading a program that requires a plugin or other software to be installed. What would be nice are real vector graphics in a browser. (SVG???)

XML is kind of fat, but it very common and open, so it is really best at this point (IMHO).

I don't think people will used hosted applications for mission critical systems, not yet anyways.

Bill Sturm
 
I work very often with up to date tools where i have a high working performance like windows,office 2007, visual studio 2009,RDP, wikipedia..

But then i also have to work with different scada tools, i always feel like i'm going back 10 to 15 years.

=> no object orientation,
=> no drag'n' drop support for the user,

=> inflexible systems
=> support intensive
=> for everything you need expensive courses
=> closed (no open access to the eng. data)
=> not for information working environment like the "internet/wikipedia" generation need (i was talking about information, not the code on the plc ;-) )

=> also why is opc ua not opensource ????
 
In reply to Max: I suppose that SCADA tools feel like they are from 10 or 15 years ago because the market leaders today *are* from 10 or 15 years ago with just incremental improvements since then.

As for OPC UA, not even the specs are open. The business though is all about selling proprietary drivers to plug into proprietary programs so they can use proprietary protocols. Where is the incentive to be open?
 
C
They contend that they own the whole idea of displaying PLC data on a web page. And they were granted a patent. That was ages ago, so I don't have the data on this machine. I imagine google would find it.
Example of what a great idea software patents are.

Regards
cww
 
C
> Which patent are you specifically referring to? <

Here's one, This one is authored by Ken Crater: US /Patent/ 5805442
And two assigned to Schneider: US Patent 7062335, 06732191

Indeed there are so many that I would need to look a lot harder to find the RA/AB one.

But that is exactly the point. Slog through these and see how much you want to risk coding a Browser based HMI. At any time these deep pocket types could do you in. And although the display of PLC data
seems rather obvious today and among us, the USPO is still using quill pens and is most efficient when granting patents in areas where they have no knowledge.

And these may even be defensive patents to stave off a battle of titans. But, they effectively stifle anyone without the means to game the court system from trying to compete. One of the many reasons for the glacial pace of change in automation.

Regards
cww
 
C
I would add:
As long as people buy the closed stuff :^).
There is the answer in a nutshell, when closed = no sale,
there will be change.

Regards
cww
 
Top