- Posts: 3362
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
- Location: Earth
I think Chris has some point here. There are more strict definitions. Linux was meant to be Unix like.
Chris. I spent decades designing a virtual computer come deterministic real time operating system, and redesigned everything around/connected to it, that and reading decades of new scientist and other publications to a certain extent, is why I appear to know so much (you either know it or can figure it out). But then MS says they spent 100 man years developing the latest version of windows with all the addons, and I said I was only one man and my plans to implement the operating system over the next 2-3 years wasn't going to cut it compared to all the extra functionality in the latest windows, and as I was getting sick at that stage, gave up. Still the fastest most efficient and accurate real time design I have ever come across. The problem with Linux people (this is from many years back) if you object to using Linux personally in real time use, they get offended like Linux can do anything, and with reference to meager knowledge that it can do something. I am so appalled at the state of operating systems in the consumer market, big clunky unreliable half baked things so often. I want to replace them with a cutting edge solution. As much as I try to help android with suggestions, and they implement some form of them, they don't seem up to doing it. MS has done certain things nicely, but my hopes they would get there have been dissapointed. Linux is, I don't know, I dint even bother following them, but from what you say, they are not up to it either. The standards committee are better to get funding to get real time people to rewrite Linux sections to get it up to the standards and lock that in with the Unix code, to stop things drifting and maintain the same result time code base, even if they have to fork it away from the main kernel effort. They also then could add this code to the Linux code of android and as an edition to Java/Java script open sources (I know it breaks some of those standards efforts, but compatable cross functionality is more important). That would help alleviate a lot of issues.
If I were to do my own stuff again (feeling a bit better) I would be planning to add all sorts of my own stuff to hardware, like alternative IO to USB. As much as I like the whole pci-e to Thunder Bolt and USB idea for uniformity, they have many physical problems and restrictions. Even the latest Thuderbolt is not really an improvement, but tied to the lame USB, and not keeping up with pci-e (at some stage PCI-e is going to have to stick with shorter line lengths to increase speed, that won't stretch accross longer external cabling. Hopefully optical tech will rescue that, but I could do a more uniform universal optical technology right now and sell adapter's and devices. The other technology I'm looking at developing, could transfer well beyond terrabits per second over a home cable. The recommendations I put out at the time of USB 3/TB was for a much more flexible system with simple modes suitable for external sensing interface, that could be used in any low functional capacity, even direct software sampling, and channeling etc so, it would be a miminal fuss programming wise to sample through in embedded electronics. With my own interface that is possible without approval process. I also had an idea for dynamic interface configuration that would allow bare pins to function as a lot of different interfaces including chip and external interfaces, and be reconfigurable. You could hook up a flash, memory chip, USB to the same pins. The whole idea was to make various things, including a table top full of processing circuites with these pins along the edges where things could be attached too. Of courses we are not talking about top end x86 chips, but much lower power. Good for magnetic processing technologies, but this you could literally form rectangular boxes with, they are do low energy. Still, for the time an array of tens of thousands of low energy processors was possible.
Chris. I spent decades designing a virtual computer come deterministic real time operating system, and redesigned everything around/connected to it, that and reading decades of new scientist and other publications to a certain extent, is why I appear to know so much (you either know it or can figure it out). But then MS says they spent 100 man years developing the latest version of windows with all the addons, and I said I was only one man and my plans to implement the operating system over the next 2-3 years wasn't going to cut it compared to all the extra functionality in the latest windows, and as I was getting sick at that stage, gave up. Still the fastest most efficient and accurate real time design I have ever come across. The problem with Linux people (this is from many years back) if you object to using Linux personally in real time use, they get offended like Linux can do anything, and with reference to meager knowledge that it can do something. I am so appalled at the state of operating systems in the consumer market, big clunky unreliable half baked things so often. I want to replace them with a cutting edge solution. As much as I try to help android with suggestions, and they implement some form of them, they don't seem up to doing it. MS has done certain things nicely, but my hopes they would get there have been dissapointed. Linux is, I don't know, I dint even bother following them, but from what you say, they are not up to it either. The standards committee are better to get funding to get real time people to rewrite Linux sections to get it up to the standards and lock that in with the Unix code, to stop things drifting and maintain the same result time code base, even if they have to fork it away from the main kernel effort. They also then could add this code to the Linux code of android and as an edition to Java/Java script open sources (I know it breaks some of those standards efforts, but compatable cross functionality is more important). That would help alleviate a lot of issues.
If I were to do my own stuff again (feeling a bit better) I would be planning to add all sorts of my own stuff to hardware, like alternative IO to USB. As much as I like the whole pci-e to Thunder Bolt and USB idea for uniformity, they have many physical problems and restrictions. Even the latest Thuderbolt is not really an improvement, but tied to the lame USB, and not keeping up with pci-e (at some stage PCI-e is going to have to stick with shorter line lengths to increase speed, that won't stretch accross longer external cabling. Hopefully optical tech will rescue that, but I could do a more uniform universal optical technology right now and sell adapter's and devices. The other technology I'm looking at developing, could transfer well beyond terrabits per second over a home cable. The recommendations I put out at the time of USB 3/TB was for a much more flexible system with simple modes suitable for external sensing interface, that could be used in any low functional capacity, even direct software sampling, and channeling etc so, it would be a miminal fuss programming wise to sample through in embedded electronics. With my own interface that is possible without approval process. I also had an idea for dynamic interface configuration that would allow bare pins to function as a lot of different interfaces including chip and external interfaces, and be reconfigurable. You could hook up a flash, memory chip, USB to the same pins. The whole idea was to make various things, including a table top full of processing circuites with these pins along the edges where things could be attached too. Of courses we are not talking about top end x86 chips, but much lower power. Good for magnetic processing technologies, but this you could literally form rectangular boxes with, they are do low energy. Still, for the time an array of tens of thousands of low energy processors was possible.
aIf you are not truthfully progressive, maybe you shouldn't say anything
bTruthful side topics in-line with or related to, the discussion accepted
cOften people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them
bTruthful side topics in-line with or related to, the discussion accepted
cOften people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them