embOS anyone?

hello:

has anyone used embOS? i have searched high and low and did not find
any good reviews of the very interesting RTOS. also, anyone know which
is better, embOS or FreeRTOS? now, apparently, one is not allowed to
compare FreeRTOS with any other RTOS, so, i dont want anyone to
violate any licenses.

FreeRTOS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeRTOS
[...]
The exception also prevents users from comparing FreeRTOS with other
RTOSs, except with permission from the author.
[...]

very difficult to find any good reviews of embOS.

Segger Microcontroller Systems
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segger_Microcontroller_Systems

thank you every time to everyone who helps, i am simply humbled by
their generosity, spending time in unselfish fruitful activities.

Top Questions to Ask your Supplier Before Choosing an RTOS (PDF)
http://www.quadros.com/pdf/ChoosinganRTOS.pdf

Operate Free: Unicoi Systems Eliminates Licensing Fees From Its
Leading Fusion RTOS
http://www.unicoi.com/press_center/unicoi_eliminates_rtos_license_fee.htm

Aaron
--
{
  Don Henley, Dirty Laundry: i could have been an actor but i wound up
here...
  mobile, streaming, web, inet, voip: Microsoft Silverlight bad
Macromedia/Adobe Flash YouTube FLV dies
  OSI CHILL: simple, true protocols with no overhead
  idea for Ireland: fone receiving multi-vendor satellite cellular Sky
etc TV based on Fusion RTOS
  optimized solid-state RAID bypassing disk interfaces.
  full-speed cacheless CPU.
  self healing networks, multi-vendor universal CPU 2000.
  thick pipes into homes 2002.
  SDLC Loop simulation in PowerPoint.
  client-srver relay chat from Psion PDA serial to PC UDP to notebook.
  ptr offset manipulation in C++ avoiding unnecessary class overhead.
  voice over data CMC 1989
  2D Bresenham's in assembly optimized to use XOR instead of ADD.
]

ArystorAaron wrote:
> hello:
>
> has anyone used embOS? i have searched high and low and did not find
> any good reviews of the very interesting RTOS. also, anyone know which
> is better, embOS or FreeRTOS?

Micrium's uC/OS-II is better.

now, apparently, one is not allowed to
> compare FreeRTOS with any other RTOS, so, i dont want anyone to
> violate any licenses.
>
> FreeRTOS
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeRTOS
> [...]
> The exception also prevents users from comparing FreeRTOS with other
> RTOSs, except with permission from the author.
> [...]
>

Without comparing it to any others, I can say that I looked at it and I was 
not impressed.

-- 
Scott
Validated Software
Lafayette, CO 

ArystorAaron wrote:
> hello:
> 
> has anyone used embOS? i have searched high and low and did not find
> any good reviews of the very interesting RTOS. also, anyone know which
> is better, embOS or FreeRTOS? now, apparently, one is not allowed to
> compare FreeRTOS with any other RTOS, so, i dont want anyone to
> violate any licenses.
> 
> FreeRTOS
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeRTOS
> [...]
> The exception also prevents users from comparing FreeRTOS with other
> RTOSs, except with permission from the author.
> [...]
> 

I am not sure from the licence page if this restriction is valid - it 
looks like you can consider FreeRTOS as pure GPL if you are not 
interested in the exception, and then there is no restriction on how you 
use the software.  However, the name "FreeRTOS" is trademarked, so then 
you could be restricted from publishing comparisons that use the name.

There is certainly nothing to stop you doing your own private 
comparisons - it's only publications that bother people.  As it says on 
the FreeRTOS website, such restrictions are very common - it is too easy 
to make a product look bad (intentionally or by mistake) through odd 
configurations, alternative choices of compilers, synthetic benchmarks, 
etc.  Additionally, there is no "better" for software like an RTOS - it 
depends entirely on *your* needs, so *you* are the only one who can make 
a sensible comparison.

> very difficult to find any good reviews of embOS.
> 

This should be an indication of something...


As to which RTOS is better, it depends on your needs.  You must first 
decide if it has the features you need -  do they support your devices 
and your tools?  Pricing and licensing are important too - embOS looks 
like it is licensed per developer for a given target and toolset, while 
FreeRTOS uses a modified GPL or a paid (per project, IIRC) version.


FreeRTOS is very popular, and the author posts regularly in this 
newsgroup.  I'm sure he'll be able to give you more information here.

> FreeRTOS is very popular, and the author posts regularly in this
> newsgroup.  I'm sure he'll be able to give you more information here.

Yes - I saw the post but considered myself to bias to provide a reply (btw 
Scott from Validated Software sells products based on uCOS/II).

Although, actually, I tend to be quite honest in responses as I'm not trying 
to sell you anything :o)

-- 
Regards,
Richard.

+ http://www.FreeRTOS.org
Designed for microcontrollers.  More than 7000 downloads per month.

+ http://www.SafeRTOS.com
Certified by T�V as meeting the requirements for safety related systems.

FreeRTOS.org wrote:
>> FreeRTOS is very popular, and the author posts regularly in this
>> newsgroup.  I'm sure he'll be able to give you more information here.
> 
> Yes - I saw the post but considered myself to bias to provide a reply (btw 
> Scott from Validated Software sells products based on uCOS/II).
> 
> Although, actually, I tend to be quite honest in responses as I'm not trying 
> to sell you anything :o)
> 

I'd imagine you get many more OpenRTOS and SafeRTOS customers from happy 
FreeRTOS users, than you would from trying to sneak in adverts in c.a.e!

You are biased, but honestly and openly so.

mvh.,

David

On Feb 27, 8:51=A0pm, David Brown
<david.br...@hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote:
> FreeRTOS.org wrote:
> >> FreeRTOS is very popular, and the author posts regularly in this
> >> newsgroup. =A0I'm sure he'll be able to give you more information here=
.
>
> > Yes - I saw the post but considered myself to bias to provide a reply (=
btw
> > Scott from Validated Software sells products based on uCOS/II).
>
> > Although, actually, I tend to be quite honest in responses as I'm not t=
rying
> > to sell you anything :o)
>
> I'd imagine you get many more OpenRTOS and SafeRTOS customers from happy
> FreeRTOS users, than you would from trying to sneak in adverts in c.a.e!
>
> You are biased, but honestly and openly so.
>
> mvh.,
>
> David

ignore this bitching

On Feb 27, 2:59=A0am, ArystorAaron <arystor.aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hello:
>
> has anyone used embOS? i have searched high and low and did not find
> any good reviews of the very interesting RTOS. also, anyone know which
> is better, embOS or FreeRTOS? now, apparently, one is not allowed to
> compare FreeRTOS with any other RTOS, so, i dont want anyone to
> violate any licenses.
>
> FreeRTOShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeRTOS
> [...]
> The exception also prevents users from comparing FreeRTOS with other
> RTOSs, except with permission from the author.
> [...]
>
> very difficult to find any good reviews of embOS.
>
> Segger Microcontroller Systemshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segger_Microco=
ntroller_Systems
>
> thank you every time to everyone who helps, i am simply humbled by
> their generosity, spending time in unselfish fruitful activities.
>
> Top Questions to Ask your Supplier Before Choosing an RTOS (PDF)http://ww=
w.quadros.com/pdf/ChoosinganRTOS.pdf
>
> Operate Free: Unicoi Systems Eliminates Licensing Fees From Its
> Leading Fusion RTOShttp://www.unicoi.com/press_center/unicoi_eliminates_r=
tos_license_fee...
>
> Aaron
> --
> {
> =A0 Don Henley, Dirty Laundry: i could have been an actor but i wound up
> here...
> =A0 mobile, streaming, web, inet, voip: Microsoft Silverlight bad
> Macromedia/Adobe Flash YouTube FLV dies
> =A0 OSI CHILL: simple, true protocols with no overhead
> =A0 idea for Ireland: fone receiving multi-vendor satellite cellular Sky
> etc TV based on Fusion RTOS
> =A0 optimized solid-state RAID bypassing disk interfaces.
> =A0 full-speed cacheless CPU.
> =A0 self healing networks, multi-vendor universal CPU 2000.
> =A0 thick pipes into homes 2002.
> =A0 SDLC Loop simulation in PowerPoint.
> =A0 client-srver relay chat from Psion PDA serial to PC UDP to notebook.
> =A0 ptr offset manipulation in C++ avoiding unnecessary class overhead.
> =A0 voice over data CMC 1989
> =A0 2D Bresenham's in assembly optimized to use XOR instead of ADD.
> ]

You did not state what kind of application, what kind of bisness, what
processor, your connection to the project (in-house developer? project
manger? consultant?).

emBos is good for genral perpose embedded, IAR resell this as
=91PowerPac=92.

I think then choosing an RTOS to fit an application there are three
things to check:
1.	Ecosystem available
2.	Technical ability/performance
3.	Licensing
Note that cost should not be considered at this point.

So to start:
1.	Ecosystem available: Use an RTOS, not just for the API but so you
can quickly snap in code modules that work alongside.  Take advantage
of Ports (BSPs) that are off the shelf.  Consider the middleware
services available from the RTOS provider and the services you will
need now AND in the FUTURE.  For example: you do not need a USB Host
for now, but the marketing department is playing with the idea of
adding USB memory stick uploading, USB Host is not the kind of
software you want to write or have to integrate a non-matching stack
by hand as it could take weeks.
Your check list might go:
*RTOS
*File system in FAT 16 for SD card
*USB device in HID class
*TCP/IP with FTP service only
*Graphics lib available for possible qVGA LCD that boss wants me to
add in v2.0

2.	Technical ability: Check if the stacks and RTOS services live up to
the performance you need.  Some TCP/IP stacks work better then others,
some USB are =91good enough=92.  You will find the actual footprint of the
RTOS on most good quality ones pretty much the same and 2k bytes will
be the least of your worries
3.	Licensing:
Different products have different licenses: GNU, Per product, Per
developer seat.
Understand what is required by the GNU license when you incorporate
this and country restrictions, Select per product for a single product
being developed by a large number of developers (such as a large
medical device), select per developer seat for a wide product range
from a few developers (such as industrial PID controllers or
something).


I will do some evaluation for you:
1.	Micrium, Very good ecosystem from Micrium, very wide range of ports
and BSPs  many components (USB, TCPIP, CAN, Modbus, FS,  LCD so on)
and support from third parties, per product licenses, reasonable
technical performance (read the book)
2.	emBos, reasonably good ecosystem from Segger, many ports and BSPs,
some third party support a lot of components, per seat licenses , very
good technical performance
3.	GNU based offerings very poor ecosystem, inconsistent ports or
services, licenses can be very restrictive, some good technical
ability from the kernel but middleware service vary widely.

Note that all of these RTOS are only for low availability
applications.  For high end see products with MMU support and process/
message based operation.

It is pretty easy to clear to say that GNU offerings are free but you
spend a week or more getting BSP and middleware services in place and
possibly futher in the future

FreeRTOS.org wrote:
>> FreeRTOS is very popular, and the author posts regularly in this
>> newsgroup.  I'm sure he'll be able to give you more information here.
>
> Yes - I saw the post but considered myself to bias to provide a reply
> (btw Scott from Validated Software sells products based on uCOS/II).
>
> Although, actually, I tend to be quite honest in responses as I'm not
> trying to sell you anything :o)

Yes, I do and I apologize for leaving off the disclaimer.  I try to include 
it when a question like this comes up.

(Disclaimer:  Validated Software is a supplier of Safety-critical Validation 
Suites for uC/OS-II and other embedded products)
-- 
Scott
Validated Software
Lafayette, CO 

good evening Richard:

On Feb 27, 4:15 pm, "FreeRTOS.org" <noem...@given.com> wrote:
> Yes - I saw the post but considered myself to bias to provide a reply (btw
> Scott from Validated Software sells products based on uCOS/II).

ha ha. i understand Richard's response and also understand that Scott
really believes.

thank you,

Aaron
--
{ trusting the airlink fully. playing games. violations of one
person's privacy is unfair }

good evening Sirs:

thank you for the many responses. anyone know Fusion RTOS?

On Feb 28, 1:31 pm, bigbrownbeastiebigbrownf...@googlemail.com wrote:
> You did not state what kind of application, what kind of bisness, what

i apologize. i cant give too many details. its part of a storage
processor. i think that LSI HBAs also use ARMs. i am an engineer of
Arystor Limited (http://www.arystor.com/).

 > I think then choosing an RTOS to fit an application there are three
> things to check:

did all that. now making the final selection. problem is that not many
opinions are available on embOS and FreeRTOS. i know that Micrium uC/
OS-II and ThreadX are respected.

> So to start:

good useful information. thank you.

> 3.      Licensing:

interesting because its vital. there's the GPL. most commercial RTOSs
have no royalties but licenses depending on how many pieces the RTOS
is used in. can be quite expensive. embOS is different because its a
per-developer license.

> I will do some evaluation for you:

that is very kind of you. we reached similar conclusions, but more
specific to our application.

> 3.      GNU based offerings very poor ecosystem, inconsistent ports or
> services, licenses can be very restrictive, some good technical
> ability from the kernel but middleware service vary widely.

with GNU, you are on your own. unless you choose the excellent
Crossworks Tasking Library (CTL) from Rowley. even Raisonance uses
GNU.

> It is pretty easy to clear to say that GNU offerings are free but you
> spend a week or more getting BSP and middleware services in place and
> possibly futher in the future

exactly. you develop everything. FreeRTOS has a port for GNU on
STR75x. if there is no direct port for your MCU, you will have a tough
time porting the assembly language parts and linker scripts from RVDK/
IAR to GNU.

GNU has an advantage: you can easily transfer Das UBoot with its
inbuilt GNU Makefile system. with IAR/RVDK, changing Das UBoot is
tricky. i like GNUARM (http://www.gnuarm.org/) which is great and
easier to use than other GNU ARM toolchains.

has anyone heard or used Fusion RTOS from Unicoi? its completely
license free, tiny, ported to ARM7 and seems to be great.

Operate Free: Unicoi Systems Eliminates Licensing Fee From its Leading
Fusion RTOS
http://www.unicoi.com/press_center/unicoi_eliminates_rtos_license_fee.htm

Fusion RTOS
http://www.unicoi.com/free_rtos.htm

Unicoi State Park and Lodge
http://www.gastateparks.org/info/unicoi/

thank you once again,

Aaron
--
{ Garbage In, Garbage Out }