[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > It was certainly not my intention to begin or participate in a flame contest
> > over this. I simply asked what I thought was a very straightforward,
> > logical, and meaningful question... and I'm still looking for a direct
> > answer. Perhaps this is the wrong forum. From private replies I've
>
> Well, Russ, I don't know the embedded market as you do, but I
> don't think MSDOS is a good choice for this market. I'm sure there
> are a lot of embedded OSes out there that are better than MSDOS;
> however, there's also the problem that REBOL implementation
> probably assumes a 32 bit system, so it would not easily be ported
> to 16 or 8 bit systems.
>
I am not sure you fully understand Russ. DOS was just one example, but he sees
possibility of Rebol becoming also language sutied well for various microCPU,
microcontroller usagaes, which are often programmed in Basic or Assembler. It
would not require OS! It would not require TCP/IP. I think I know what he does
mean, as our astronomy group started development of own CCD camera, where
microchip programming is the issue. It would be nice to use REBOL-like syntax
language for it too. REBOL is about unification of aproaches. There is many chips,
many programming aproaches to them -and - it's another real bussiness oportunity.
We are talking about companies like Atmel, Tohsiba, Analog Devices, etc. I would
suggest REBOL Technologies to investigate such market. Think about it - REBOL
everywhere. I saw software implementation of I2C protocol, would be nice to have
in REBOL, and - IT IS DEFINITELY ABOUT COMMUNICATION (MESSAGING) ..
My two cents :-)
-pekr-
>
> Ciao,
> /Gabriele./
> o--------------------) .-^-. (----------------------------------o
> | Gabriele Santilli / /_/_\_\ \ Amiga Group Italia --- L'Aquila |
> | GIESSE on IRC \ \-\_/-/ / http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/ |
> o--------------------) `-v-' (----------------------------------o
