Sign in

username:

password:



Not a member?

Search piclist



Search tips

Subscribe to piclist



piclist by Keywords

12F675 | 16F628 | 16F84 | 16f877 | 16F877A | 16F88 | 18F458 | ADC | AVR | Bootloader | CAN | CCS | CRC | EAGLE | EEPROM | ICD | ICSP | IDE | JDM | LED | Macros | Microchip | MPLAB | PCB-CAD | PIC10F | Pic12f675 | PIC16F84 | PIC16F84A | PIC16F877 | PIC18 | PIC18F452 | PicBasic | PICC | PICSTART | PWM | RS-485 | RS232 | SMT | SPI | UART | USART | USB | Wireless | Wisp628 | Xilinx

Discussion Groups

Discussion Groups | Piclist | Was really OS bashing... Re: Re: 16F88 bootloader

A discussion group for the PICMicro microcontroller. Also called the Microchip PIC, this list is dedicated to the use and abuse of this fine, simple, microcontroller. Close to topic posts are welcome, ie. general electronics.

Was really OS bashing... Re: Re: 16F88 bootloader - Dave Mucha - Aug 13 1:04:00 2004


--- In , "Kevin Van Winkle" <kvwinkle@h...>
wrote:
> Honestly guys, if you can get linux, bsd or whatever your working
on to
> where you pop in a CD and it loads and configures right with no
knowledge of
> the kernal, libraries, dependancies, etc., you have a winner.
As I see the 'problem' is that the guys in the OS software know
should dictate a motherboard, a video card, sound card and so one.

Then just offer the simple install CD that will work on that MB on
that Video card, on that sound card....

In otherwords, if you go middle of the road, you get it easy. if you
want some cutting edge video, you have to learn the OS to install it.

IF, and here is the thing soooo many people can't wrap their minds
aroud. IF, the software guys laid out that spec, the motheboard
guys would meet it !

If you notice, they all meet the spec for getting windoz to work.

AND, they would all be better off ! and they know it.

It's that lack of leadership or authority. since the OSF if in many
ways against authority, they cannot bring themselves to lay out that
spec.

All they need to do is to spec ONE set of stuff, it would sell in the
aftermarket more than any other set of hardware, meaning it would get
the attention of other MB makers....

Maybe someday... Dave




(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Re: Was really OS bashing... Re: Re: 16F88 bootloader - Chad Russel - Aug 13 11:15:00 2004

Duh, I think that is what I said. IBM had control, when they let go,
all hell broke loose. No one owns the archtecture to take control of
it, it is purely market driven at this point. What the comsumer wants
someone will supply. Compatiblity is not a concern.

Chad
--- Dave Mucha <> wrote:

> --- In , "Kevin Van Winkle" <kvwinkle@h...>
> wrote:
> > Honestly guys, if you can get linux, bsd or whatever your working
> on to
> > where you pop in a CD and it loads and configures right with no
> knowledge of
> > the kernal, libraries, dependancies, etc., you have a winner.
> >
> >
>
> As I see the 'problem' is that the guys in the OS software know
> should dictate a motherboard, a video card, sound card and so one.
>
> Then just offer the simple install CD that will work on that MB on
> that Video card, on that sound card....
>
> In otherwords, if you go middle of the road, you get it easy. if you
>
> want some cutting edge video, you have to learn the OS to install it.
>
> IF, and here is the thing soooo many people can't wrap their minds
> aroud. IF, the software guys laid out that spec, the motheboard
> guys would meet it !
>
> If you notice, they all meet the spec for getting windoz to work.
>
> AND, they would all be better off ! and they know it.
>
> It's that lack of leadership or authority. since the OSF if in many
>
> ways against authority, they cannot bring themselves to lay out that
> spec.
>
> All they need to do is to spec ONE set of stuff, it would sell in the
>
> aftermarket more than any other set of hardware, meaning it would get
>
> the attention of other MB makers....
>
> Maybe someday... > Dave

=====
My software has no bugs, only undocumented features.
__________________________________





(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Was really OS bashing... Re: Re: 16F88 bootloader - rtstofer - Aug 13 11:20:00 2004



So, you would eliminate innovation by simply saying that the OS can
now and forever only operate on a given platform, sort of like VMS.

Do you really want to use that old IBM PC circa 1980? If it wasn't
for the success of Microsoft at developing software that can run on
divergent hardware that is exactly where we would be. The true
genius is in the hardware abstraction layer where Microsoft clearly
lays down guidelines for hardware/driver design.

Linux has that problem today - every time I decide to give it
another chance something doesn't work. The last try was Debian
about 3 months ago and it wouldn't handle the embedded sound
system. Fortunately, it was essentially free.

Actually Red Hat 7.3 worked pretty well except Konqueror, the only
decent web browser on Linux, can't handle secure sites. How can
they even claim to have a browser if it can't handle secure sites?
Mozilla is a joke and Netscape is obsolete. In general the
underlying OS was ok albeit damn difficult to get set up. It will
never make prime time until you can literally drop a CD in the
drive, boot and install without intervention. Then Red Hat decides
that upgrades will have a fee (or be difficult to get) and the
kernel is updated so often it is hard to keep up. I had 3 systems
running Red Hat so its not like I didn't give it a shot - heck, I
started fooling with this when 386BSD was first released back in
1991 or so and have gone through a few iterations. It has never
compared well with Windows and the Office suite - never.

Windows XP does not crash - period! I have it on 5 machines at home
and 3 run continuous for months on end without a problem. And on my
personal machine I run everything from IE to the Microsoft Office
Suite to Xilinx Web Pack for FPGAs - a gigantic software package.
Applications may crash but XP stays up! I had an NT 4.0 server at
work that ran for years without shutting down. If it wasn't for
planned electrical shutdowns I wouldn't have even remembered we had
the server - well, except for random tape backups. And that was
true of all the other servers on site and there were a bunch. In
fact, it was true for all the NT 4.0 workstations as I recall.

I wish Linux well but I'm going to stay with the marketplace
leader. That's where success is judged - in the marketplace.

We should probably get back to PICs - the Microsoft bashing is so
tiring... > As I see the 'problem' is that the guys in the OS software know
> should dictate a motherboard, a video card, sound card and so
one.
>
> Then just offer the simple install CD that will work on that MB on
> that Video card, on that sound card....
>
> In otherwords, if you go middle of the road, you get it easy. if
you
> want some cutting edge video, you have to learn the OS to install
it.
>
> IF, and here is the thing soooo many people can't wrap their minds
> aroud. IF, the software guys laid out that spec, the motheboard
> guys would meet it !
>
> If you notice, they all meet the spec for getting windoz to work.
>
> AND, they would all be better off ! and they know it.
>
> It's that lack of leadership or authority. since the OSF if in
many
> ways against authority, they cannot bring themselves to lay out
that
> spec.
>
> All they need to do is to spec ONE set of stuff, it would sell in
the
> aftermarket more than any other set of hardware, meaning it would
get
> the attention of other MB makers....
>
> Maybe someday... > Dave



(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )