>
> I have to justify my decission of using RTLinux instead of another
> realtime operating system in my MSc project. Basically my reasons are
> the known advantages of Linux:
> - Popularity
> - Free software (we spent a lot of money in hardware so I couldn't
> sustain this very much if a censor points this out)
> - Free support
> - Open sources
> - Independence from companies
> "The RTLinux Manifesto" remarks the advantages of MERT's decoupling of
> realtime part and non-realtime part. Is still RTLinux the only OS that
> uses that approach? (apart from RTAI, of course).
> Could you help me with aditional reasons to support my decission?.
> I have seen WindowsNT 4.0 mentioned as a realtime operating system. Can
> it really run hard realtime user tasks?.
>
Dear Ivan Martinez,
I saw your note on RTL-digest asking if NTv4 can run hard realtime. The
answer is "not without kernel mod.s."
Don (a co-worker) examined this question when a project he was working
on required hard realtime to control a laser deflector device used in
generating a laser trap .. cool stuff.. he found that NT could not
perform nearly as well as RTLinux.
Take a look at this writeup for more details:
http://www.uvm.edu/~dgaffney/bmes99/
Don and I were just talking about this earlier today and I learned that
you can get a kernel for NT which runs NT OS as a low priority. I ask ..
But why bother?
---- Steve Work ----
tel:802.656.7867, fax:802.656.0747
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Postal mail: Dept. Molecular Physiology,
D212 Given Medical, UVM
Burlington, VT USA 05405
-- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/rtlinux/
