Slashdot Mirror


QNX RTP Running on iPaq

An anonymous reader sends in: "iPaq just got new gracious looks. QNX microkernel and the gracious Photon micro GUI did wonders to iPaq. Get a sneak preview here. If you are in Boston next week, be sure to drop by Embedded Systems Boston to try your hands at the qPaq... ;)"

30 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. Beautiful. by Glytch · · Score: 2

    In another article, I had said that PDAs were pretty much useless.

    I take it all back. :)

    1. Re:Beautiful. by garcia · · Score: 2

      it still looks half-useless.

      we have seen several *VERY* pretty pics there, but are there enough applications to actually make this a viable choice over WinCE (which IMO looks like hell compared to this)

      I would love to run something other than WinCE on my Cassiopeia... I am almost sickened everytime I turn the damn thing on. It is very slow and ugly and it gives me little desire to use it.

      Maybe QNX has found its niche ;)

  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. wow by enrico_suave · · Score: 2, Redundant

    holy jimeny christ that looks cool! *drool*,
    *wipe*,
    *drool*...
    *checks online checking balance*,

    *cries*

    E.

    --
    Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
  4. So when are they going to be *real* machines? by Uruk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These PDAs are getting neater and more powerful every day, but when are they going to be real machines?

    I mean, eventually we could have a setup where you would buy a full size monitor and keyboard for office and home, and then just buy one little Super PDA to plug the monitor and keyboard into to use as a full PC. If they can get wireless networking down into that size package (which I'm sure they will eventually) you'd even be able to network without current crappy PDA packet modems or anything like that.

    --
    -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
    1. Re:So when are they going to be *real* machines? by FFFish · · Score: 2

      You wanna check out the Psion Netbook, then.

      It's got the useful applications. Colour 640x480 screen with instant zoom/reduce, so that you can make real use of the workspace. Instant-on. Etc.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
  5. Wow, wish I kept that iPaq now... by jcostom · · Score: 2
    I won one in a contest. After trying, and I mean really trying to use it, I couldn't "de-Palm" my brain, and the lack of organization in WinCE just didn't agree with me. SO, I sold my iPaq and got a Palm m505.

    Now I find myself wishing I'd kept it for this. :(

    --

    The unsig!
    1. Re:Wow, wish I kept that iPaq now... by Locutus · · Score: 2

      Geesh, get a TRGPro or a Handera 330. Granted if you NEED color this isn't a choice. But the TRGPro had CF support for years. Now the Handera 330 has the CF slot and the SD slot.

      I wish those idiots from Redmond would stop messing with Bluetooth. They have the press dis'ing it left and right. Pretty soon you will ONLY have 802.11 for good wireless and the device will HAVE to be large and bulky cause of the higher requirments.

      There is a Bluetooth SD card coming this fall so that m505 isn't wasted of all you wanted it for was wireless ( wondering why you bought it if it didn't do what you wanted? ).

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    2. Re:Wow, wish I kept that iPaq now... by Locutus · · Score: 2

      My thought is that it's a step in the direction we want to go. If we jump head first into 802.11 then we have to wait another 3-5 years for technology to shrink enough so we still have a light pocketable device at a reasonable price ($200 or less).

      It took Microsoft over 6 years to come up with an adequate multi-threading OS and it requires almost 4 times the hardware of IBM's OS/2. If you don't think multi-threading and stablity are important then you've never had the pleasure of using a system that had these. Anyway my point is that we shouldn't be forced to wait til nano-hardware is available so that we can run some bloated OS and have wireless connectivity.

      IMO, Microsoft is afraid people will start using their PDA's and PDA enabled phones to store their data. THEY want to control and charge you for use of YOUR data and they need the Windows hammer to beat that into you and every vendor who tries to do otherwise. 802.11 puts too much of a load on the smaller PDA's. Handera can do it but it takes
      4 batteries and a large slot (CF). I believe that the Bluetooth for Palm will be on a SD card.

      There is this thing called UWB that has potential for both your constant connected lan (ala 802.11) and is supposed to light weight/low power (ala Bluetooth). If we have to wait years then let's have what works now and move later.

      I hope 7feet is on the low side. 15feet would be fine IMHO. 15feet would allow for a home to have pretty full coverage where you would want it (livingroom) and the reception area of business's, or restaurants. If you need a full blown computing platform with wireless then 802.11 comes in. That's my take on it.

      Thanks for your thoughts.

      LoB
      (The collective didn't run Windows but was virus prone. Go figure...)

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  6. Input How ? by johnjones · · Score: 2

    how is input done ?

    I see for the shell that a keyboard popup is there

    BUT for normal apps how is it done? for X their is Xscribble from the boys and girls at CRL (compaq) which is standard part of the handhelds.org distro and palm of course have the dedicated part of screen with WinCE vendors chouseing how they do it

    how about voice input ?
    now that would rock if only IBM recompiled their Linux ViaVoice for StrongARM I bet a bunch of vendors would be real intrested
    WinCE already has this in their beta builds but its very much like the Apple Voice control (which is kind of funky) but I find that the Apple Implementation is sensitive to background noise and depends on what Mic you have: in my mind I can see the people shouting at their organisers to "mail, oh e-mail, post , arrrch how do I pick up mail ??" (-;

    I really cant see how they are going to do it on QNX

    any details ?

    regards

    john jones

    1. Re:Input How ? by variable · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is an application running called ipaq_input. It takes care of resizing apps and coming forward when they need/want input (handwriting, keyboard, etc). You can see from the screen shots that it is forward when the URL area is in focus and the terminal always requets to have the input area present.

      --
      ........ "The faster I go, the behinder I get" - Lewis Carroll
  7. Re: QNX, why bother? by Bodero · · Score: 4, Flamebait
    You should hear our embedded systems engineers laughing or crying about "Real Time Windows CE" depending on whether they chortling at it's response times, or miserable about being forced to use it respectively.

    Your laughter is borne out of ignorance. Everybody publishes OS times for their OS when running in kernel mode only (which offers zero protection from processes run amok). But CE and EPOC don't run in that mode--you can't on these platforms since they're open and could be running malicious code.

    To wit, look at QNX (http://www.qnx.com/products/os/qnxrtos.html#Perfo rmance) and On Time (http://www.on-time.com/index.html?page=rtk45.htm) . Great numbers, but only for kernel mode operation.

    For protected systems using the MMU, it seems all the big players don't publish numbers. Why? Because this is a tough environment and the numbers look like shit. QNX offers nothing on their site about their Neutrino product performance. Neither do Mentor or Wind River.

    Even the RT Linux folks are flaky here. http://www.zentropix.com/support/document/helpdox/ rtai.pdf claims they can deliver a 4 uS average interrupt response time with 13 uS of jitter, resulting in 17 uS worst case interrupt response time. This is on a 233 MHz Pentium II.

    Microsoft are claiming 7.5 uS worst case ISR latency on a 90 MHz Pentium II for CE (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/real_pe rf.htm). We're seeing similar numbers on a StrongARM platform at a similar clock.

    Clearly, CE is probably on par with the QNX/PSOS/VRTX crowd.

    So, until Symbian actually publish some numbers on their interrupt performance, we can assume that, like code size, they are merely FUD'ing the industry.

    As for the topic at hand, however, it's wonderful to see something like QNX running on iPac, maybe make one worth getting after all ;)

  8. Uh, excuse me? by Danborg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...but isn't this supposed to be a PDA? Look at the screenshots again... look at the 10 apps.... where is "Calendar"? -- where is "Contacts"? -- where is "E-mail"? -- where is "To Do List"?

    Beautiful OS, but clearly not an organizer.

  9. PDA != organizer. by aussersterne · · Score: 3

    The definition of PDA == organizer is far too restrictive. After all, PDA is supposed to be a 'personal digital assistant' or 'personal data assistant' or something else involving 'personal' and 'assistant.'

    An assitant assists, in whatever a person needs done with data when on the move. That does not mean calendar, contacts and to-do for every person; some people do other stuff with data and with their lives. Should they not have PDAs? The Palm crowd especially seem violently opposed to devices assisting anyone but executives who have too many meetings to keep. I for one am glad that the PocketPC has become more flexible, so that it can assist everyone to some extent, rather than only assisting the rich, anal executive in the expensive suit.

    Keep your Palm, but I have no use for it. I will, however, continue to use PocketPC/WindowsCE.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  10. the problem is installation by mj6798 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I think this is another existence proof for a nice, non-Microsoft OS on the iPaq. I'm not quite sure why I would want to run it, though: Linux for handhelds is quite functional (even if its icons are not as nice), and it is free, open, and standard.

    The biggest problem I have had with running non-WinCE operating systems on the iPaq is the installation, which is a very laborious and slow process that takes hours to download stuff over the serial line. What is really needed is the ability to overlay a new OS from Flash and/or to install a new OS by clicking on an application in Flash memory. Or, of course, Compaq might finally preinstall Linux on the iPaq; even HP will be shipping a Linux PDA.

    1. Re:the problem is installation by variable · · Score: 2, Informative

      QNX on the iPaq will be free for personal use, QNX is a POSIX based OS (from the outset, so things like threads are not a hack onto the side of a UNIX kernel), and, to top it all off, it runs really well on the iPaq. :)

      --
      ........ "The faster I go, the behinder I get" - Lewis Carroll
  11. Re: QNX, why bother? by variable · · Score: 5, Informative

    First of all - those numbers are for QNX4 (our previous generation kernel, x86 only). The iPaq is running QNX6. And we do have numbers - I am not sure if they are posted on our website yet or not but they are going to be made with each and every release. And yet another thing - QNX isn't your average monolithic kernel. There is no "kernel" mode for timings that mean anything. Everything is based on a message passing infustructure (from device drivers to networking to filesystems to the GUI).

    --
    ........ "The faster I go, the behinder I get" - Lewis Carroll
  12. Filesystem? by be-fan · · Score: 2

    When are they going to fix the QNX filesystem? It runs real bad on every machine I've tried it on (and it is #1 on the qnxstart.com wishlist). Eventually, people are going to put those cool IBM microdrives on their PDAs and start noticing the deficiencies of the filesystem. They have Dominic Giampalo (of BFS fame) working for them, so what's he doing?

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    1. Re:Filesystem? by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Actually, as far as I can find, the only thing that has been fixed is that the old libc (which wrote a few bytes at a time) has been replaced by a new one from Dinkumware. Nothing drastic, though.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  13. QNX? QPE! by marm · · Score: 2

    QNX on iPAQ looks sweet...

    But I don't see anything that the Qt Palmtop Environment doesn't do already, and with similar style and panache.

    Not to mention that QPE has a web-browser available FAR in advance of anything on any other handheld platform - Konqueror/embedded which has the full KHTML rendering engine that normal desktop Konqueror has, but with a UI optimized for a handheld's screen.

    Of course, I shouldn't have to mention that both QPE and Konq/e are fully-fledged GPL'ed projects, which I'm pretty sure QNX isn't, last time I looked...

  14. Re:More info? by A+Commentor · · Score: 2

    Doubtful they will release it for the public.. Companies typically do things like this to get the press, but they don't want the development/support costs to get everything ironed out into an actual product.

    They will likely get a bunch of press/developer interest in QNX at the Embedded Systems Conference in Boston..

    --

    Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com

  15. QNX is definitely cool by pinkpineapple · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have been running QNX for a while now. I recently got a PictureBook with a Transmeta chip and decided to use the machine with QNX. Since MS does want people to dual boot, I zapped their OS and put QNX instead. I am pretty happy with the machine. Needs a few more drivers (working on the camera support) but things are running smoothly. It's a very reliable OS. I just wish they would do a port to the iBook too.

    --
    -- I feel better now. Thanks for asking.
  16. Re:QNX? QPE! by TheeAlien · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have two different replies for you; one to why QPE is not better, and one about your GPL zinger....

    Firstly reasons to chose QNX over QPE for your iPaq...

    (1) QPE has alot of legacy attached to it.

    (2) Qt applications can already run fine in QNX so all they really need is a recompile to work.

    (3) It's cheeper to develop on QNX then QPE.

    (4) It's bulky, really bulky - QNX can run quite comfortably in 5 megs of RAM - QPE requires much more.

    (5) It's prettier... sorry, it just is.

    Now the GPL issue..

    Sorry to tell you but the GPL is not a good thing (TM).

    Software on the QNX version of the iPaq can use the GPL if the author desires, however many real embeded developers have a great dislike for it (for many reasons). In fact, I'd like to tell you a little story.

    Back before QNX 6.0 was released to the public QNX uses ALSA for sound... for it seemed like a good idea at the time - "simply tweek the drivers and recompile for QNX" said the QSSL engineers "It'll make our jobs alot easier!" they said.

    But it diddent! See, many of the big audio corporations had what is known as "propritary hardware", and in order to have a real, fully-accelerated driver they'd have to relase all their secrets to the public and their competition.

    QSSL soon figured out the problems with this; Is it better to have an OS that has rocking sound with a few-closed source drivers or an OS with okay sound and a couple of problematic drivers beacuse big busness dosent wana share technical specs?

    So, the poor old QSSL engineers rewrote the sound system from the ground up so it wouldnt be tainted (yes, thats the right word - tainted) by the GPL. Now big busness likes them! As they can make driver or submit secret information to QSSL under a NDA for them to make excellent drivers, plus most of the sound system is open-source (download the Audio DDK and see for yourself). It's really a win-win situation.

    And remember - Many pats of QNX -ARE- open-source (not just the sound system!), and the open-source parts (for the greater part) can be used for both comercial and non comercial purpose, but are not GPL'ed.

    One must NOT confuse the GPL and the open-source philosphy, as they are two different things.

  17. Just no use at all .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The embed platform interrest is define both by the quality of the OS and a powerfull dev-kit.

    The quality of the OS is important for the end-user, but the power of the dev-kit is important for the dev costs (easiest is the dev time, cheapest is the application).

    But this was yesterday statement .... today, a new OS just blast all this and change the init data !

    SavaJe (a Lucent spin-off) released betas of XE, their OS for StrongARM.

    What's the difference ... simply cristal clear : dev process is speedlight fast !

    What's the trick ?

    Just one word : it's Java !

    Ok, i heard Java "friends" that says, : "but how can you expect to run a java application on such a device ?"

    I will add, it is not simply a java platform compatible but GUIs applications are also written in Swing !

    The same "sceptics", can say not : "Gosh ! Are you kidding ?"

    And there i must add : and it is damned fast !

    You don't trust me, just go to www.savaje.com and download the latest beta of XE and set it up to you iPaq ....

    But beware, it's a drug-like : once you get into no way out !

    Ok, so about the specs :
    - It's fully Java2 SE 1.3 compliant
    - It is also JNLP compliant (cf JavaWebStart and JNLP)

    Just imagine : your develop you application, click on deploy as JNLP, the type-in the URL on your ipaq and voila : the application is running on it !!!

    For those who still consider that Java is just one more stupid language and not a complete new way of programming ... they ckeck XE and you will be part of the fun.

    Of course XE still lack some features (only few CF & PCCard supports), no IRDA at this time ... but the Java part is pretty impressive !

    XE for me is quite interresting in a enterprise architecture as it offer a great opportunity to leverage all the skills and legacy systems available. Creating a mobile device application has never been so easy !

    As a conclusion, XE just prove that when stilled peoples work on something then impossible things can became true.

    Don't get me wrong, Linux is the greatest OS for PC desktop applications ... but who can expect a whole bunch of application there when using XE we already GOT them ?! It's Java babe :)

    Please note that i am sure this message will be moderate down as it will hurt the /. linux-geeks as were my previous posts related this topics :( Thanks for the censorship ... )

    4R34'.

  18. Open source? by be-fan · · Score: 2

    I thought that I saw somewhere that QSSL was making parts of QNX open source? Anybody hear anything about that? An Photon Linux port would really rock. Photon has tons of features, is really small and fast, and the fonts and UI graphics look orgasmically good. QNX's kernel is nice for embedded systems, but on the desktop (which RtP tries to support) it is kinda flaky due to an anemic VM and filesystem. For example, it doesn't support paging directly, an app has to be coded with it in mind. Great for RT, but for GCC.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    1. Re:Open source? by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Anemic VM and filesystem? The VM and filesystem are fine - it'd be good if you gave a real example of how they were bad (the one below dosent count as I nip it in the bud...).
      >>>>>>>>>
      How 'bout these?

      1) The filesystem is as slow as molasses. Untarring an archieve takes twice as long as on Linux. Throughputs above 10MB/sec (on my 7200RPM drive that gets 27MB/sec in Linux) are hard to come by. Apparently, something in libc has been fixed with 6.1, but the underlying FS problems are there. Also, no journeling, no softupdates, no features of any kind.

      2) The VM cannot keep an mmap()'ed file in sync with with the disk if you use read/write to modify the file. That tells a lot about the deficiecies of the underlying implementation.

      3) The VM and buffer-cache are not integrated. This was a big fault of BeOS's, and really hurt its I/O performance. BeOS and QNX are apparently the last big OSs without a unified buffer-cache/VM.

      As for "nipping" the swap problem, you haven't. You still have to call munlockall(). So you either have to modify program source, or (if you have binary programs that don't call it) just live with it. Also, it was apparently put in just to support GCC, so I wouldn't be too sure that the underlying impelementation is very good.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    2. Re:Open source? by be-fan · · Score: 2

      I suggest you to take a few readings on qnx.com about realtime OS and you'll know what does it take to make a realtime OS.
      >>>>>
      I think you missed my point. I never said anything about QNX in the embedded space, I was talking about RtP in desktop space. According to QNX's docs, RtP is competing in desktop space. In that space, speed is more important than determinism. Maybe QNX doesn't want to fork the OS or change its deterministic policies, but then they shouldn't be competing in desktop space!

      PS> Yes, all modern FSs should have journeling. Its not the fsck that matters, but the fact that in order to achieve good consistancy, it must use synchronus writes to the disk for metadata. That why the old BSD's without softupdates were so slow for compiling and untarring (very metadata intensive uses) and which is why QNX is slow for the same tasks.

      PS2> QNX RtP really isn't used in nuclear reactors. QNX4 is used for those tasks. So far, the only thing QNX RtP (or QNX6 in general) has been used for embedded devices, which don't have the same life-or-death requirements of determinism that do nuclear reactors.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  19. Oh Yes! by fm6 · · Score: 2
    I'm old enough to remember when QNX was first introduced. They actually claimed to provide reasonable performance on an 8086! More than that, clustering was a basic feature, so you could boost performance just by accumulating hardware. (Skeptical? CTOS used the same approach and worked very well.) Quite an appealing alternative to DOS.

    Alas, high licensing costs prevented most people (including me) from giving it a try. Never captured a wide audience, but they always seemed to find enough fringe markets to survive.

    Ironically enough, Linux has given QNX a second stab at becoming a mainstream OS. At least, that's the attitude the QNX marketeers are taking. Instead of viewing Linux as competition, they've decideded it's a source of Posix-knowledgable programmers. One can but hope...

  20. Yes! by cluening · · Score: 2

    If I could go out and get one of those little things running QNX and Photon instead of WinCE, I might have reason to move past my wonderful Palm device - Manos, the Handspring of Fate... That thing looks really slick and quite exciting

    --
    Posted from the wireless couch.
  21. Re:Gracious?? by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 2

    Can anyone please tell me how the hell the adjective "gracious" is justified in this context??

    Perhaps he meant graceful. Either way, he way overused a two-dollar word. He should have said: "The Ipaq just got a new graceful look with QX microkernel and the elegant Photon micro GUI".

    Then again, this is "news for nerds" not "news for over-educated literate-types".

    Nyuk

    --
    by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.