If I read Scott's original posts correctly, the compelling reason is a
roughly $1 billion multi-year project was started and the OS physically
cannot be changed out until that many year project is over. The UI can
be updated and new functionality added.
You get such projects in the industrial controls world. Generally custom
device drivers for custom devices that are part of a production process.
It is too expensive in terms of down time and development costs to
switch to a new OS version.
If memory serves he is talking about chip fabrication. Downtime is most
likely measured at > $1 million per day.
In the medical device world it is almost impossible to change out an OS
without having to go down the "new product" approval process. That is
lengthy and expensive.
You can, because the design of the device mitigates RISK the UI could
pose to patient safety/health, change out the UI library and go down the
"minor enhancements" (I forget the correct name) FDA approval path. This
is by no means free, but it is far less expensive and time consuming.
If you __have__ to open the hood for a regulatory change, like the
service password example I gave, most companies will try to freshen up
the screen library to get better graphics and performance improvements.
Every performance improvement can help extend battery life.
On 3/26/2021 10:13 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
I still haven't seen any convincing argument on why you expect to use a
brand new Qt with ancient compilers/OSs?
--
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593 (cell)
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
