Re: Linux V embedded MS. I need a paper that refutes this:

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 17:46:03 GMT, nico@xxxxxxxxxxx (Nico Coesel)
wrote:

The Real Andy <will_get_back_to_you_on_This@xxx> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:13:40 GMT, nico@xxxxxxxxxxx (Nico Coesel)
wrote:

The Real Andy <will_get_back_to_you_on_This@xxx> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 03:27:43 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"The Real Andy" <will_get_back_to_you_on_This@xxx> wrote in message
news:n4akl2lhpmf6ik4q21pak9juhrvct73a84@xxxxxxxxxx

http://www.embedded-forecast.com/EMFTCD2003v3.pdf

Under what circumstances? You'd need to offer a *** load of specifications
to make a sane decision.

I am in a huge fight with management regarding the design of a 100k+
product. I am against using an OS altogether. Regardless, i need
papers, that is what management want to see.

It is at a high level design stage, so specs are pretty light at the
moment. I dont intend this to be MS V Linux deabate.

I welcome crosspost to relevant groups.

This should definitely help:

http://www.lecroy.com/tm/ServiceSupport/DSOsecurity/default.asp?menuid=42

I had a lecroy cro that spent all its time in the shop with front end
noise problems. I have no confidence in there ability to design
hardware, let alone software.

Perhaps (whooops, I just bought a second hand LA314H), but the last
thing you want is a product that needs updates from Microsoft and/or
can't be connected to a network together with other Windows machines.

That IMO is a bad design. If they wanted it to be a PC with scope
attached thats how it should be designed. That way it can be safely
patched and can even update itself automatically.
.

Quantcast