Consumer Electronics Industry: Linux is the Future

securitas writes "The New York Times is carrying a Reuters story about Linux as the software of choice for consumer electronics. At the world's largest consumer electronics show, the IFA trade fair 'the first Linux products are already on show and more will come soon, companies said.' The reason? Linux is freely available, widely embraced and profit margins in the consumer electronics business are one or two percent at best. The math is simple. The industry push comes from the members of the Consumer Electronics Linux Forum (CELF), that includes Sony, Philips, Matsushita/Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson/RCA and Toshiba. The CELF was previously discussed on Slashdot. Mirrors at Silicon.com and CNet News."

Comments

Close!

[El]

Actually, Embedded Linux is the present! I am this very minute putting the finishing touches on embedded Linux code shipping in a projector! Sorry, WindRiver -- guess you aren't the Micro$oft of the embedded world after all!

Re:Close!

[Jaysyn]

Oddly enoughy Microsoft isn't either.

The thing I'm wondering is, if Microsoft had stuck to doing one or two things that it did well (OS & Productivity Software) ,improving upon them, and not being such control freaks, would Linux be as popular as it is today?

I realize that Linux wasn't written to compete with any company, but could MS' zealotry been its downfall in the server & embedded market?

Jaysyn

Re:Close!

[El]

The problem with WinCE is that 95% of the embedded products out there don't really need a GUI. Compatibility with Windows GUI code so you can prototype on a PC is the only real advantage of WinCE. With Linux you can also prototype on a PC without all the overhead. (Unless you need a GUI, in which case X is probably has more memory overhead than the WinCE GUI).

Microsoft's mistake was insisting on "NT everywhere", i.e. that the same OS architecture should work for huge parallel servers and for SOHO routers. Why doesn't Linux have the same problem? I think it's because Linux is a lot more modular; it's easier to strip out much of the kernel at compile time, so it will boot out of and run with much less memory.

Another mistake Microsoft made was abandoning support for anything other than x86 architecture, making Linux the natural choice for ARM. MIPs, power PC... basically for all the processors that aren't as power-hungry as the x86.

Re:Close!

[mark_space2001]

Just curious (and this is a serious question):

Why Linux instead of BSD? If it were me, I'd be concerned that GPL would require me to release some part, or maybe all, of the special code written for the embedded device. I don't want to get into a GPL debate, just assume that someone wasn't careful and did write their code in such a way that it was deamed to be covered under the GPL.

Why take that chance, why not use BSD instead?

Re:Close!

[El]

Our value added is in user space (seperate processes), so we don't have to release it. Also, Linux is more widely supported in hardware drivers, protocols, etc. Also, there's dozens of flavors or embedded Linux, while the only embedded BSD is owned by WindRiver. Nothing against WindRiver; they just want a minimum of $100,000 before they'll do anything for you.

Re:Close!

[drinkypoo]

Another mistake Microsoft made was abandoning support for anything other than x86 architecture, making Linux the natural choice for ARM. MIPs, power PC... basically for all the processors that aren't as power-hungry as the x86.

This is very much like the post I would have liked to have written. While I was reading it though, I started to think about the future, which is kind of fun because you can make shit up. One thing I didn't make up though is that a friend of mine once told me that people would run Unix on their microwaves (they did not say what kind, I think it was cute that they said Unix) because it's all you'll be able to get. It must have been Charlie. Okay so that sounds like horseshit, but there are devices that were pretty neat but fell off the market due to lack of demand that no one is making any more, I recall some voice synthesis chip that had a phoeneme lookup table and you could record your own samples, stick them in a prom, and you could make a speech synthesizer sound like you, or anyone else for that matter, and it went away. (It might be back by now.)

So think about all the crazy shit we can do now, how fine our processes are in general. Only the best fabs can do the really tiny stuff but everyone's processes are getting smaller, so you can make chips cheaper. The packaging is getting cheaper all the time too, though it's already pretty damn cheap. I mean think about how inexpensive assorted little chips are today. Whip out your good old BG Micro catalog and you can get assorted basic ICs for fifty cents, stuff that I personally have paid five bucks for. An XPORT with a 186 chip in it is $50, and that's a whole frickin computer. I mean if you had that and a terminal, you could get a few simple network apps on it. Actually, that sounds like a really fun project, now if only I could afford an XPORT :P

So how long is it going to be before consumers are paying ten bucks for some little microcomputer that comes with Linux on it and is smaller than the battery you attach it to? It can't be THAT long. And in quantity they'll be maybe five. Really you can do the job of controlling a microwave with a really nice interface with a pic today, but they keep promising us dirt-cheap oled displays so I'd assume people are going to want to have touch-sensitive video interfaces in even low-end appliances within a few years. Okay, maybe more than a few, but you know it's coming...

Anyway, people are making really low power x86 processors now, so the fact that people are still teaching programming them in assembler in schools since x86-based systems are inexpensive and readily available (most everyone has one already, so you kind of have to teach it for now) means that we likely WILL see embedded NT make a comeback. It will become more useful as the hardware becomes cheaper and cheaper. Old designs that people are interested in using don't go away; some magic research and bing! here they come again. You have to wonder what chips you've seen recently that somewhere inside of them contain an Am386 or something similar. Old cores never die, they just get chopped up into bits.

Re:Close!

[El]

Good point that I neglected to point out... yes, if you've got a $5 CPU, you're not going to want to pay $50 for a software license for it... all the more reason to use embedded Linux or BSD.

Re:Close!

[Luke-Jr]

All software should be open source anyway. And for drivers, why not GPL it at the same time?

Re:Close!

[sg_oneill]

Actually, Embedded Linux is the present! I am this very minute putting the finishing touches on embedded Linux code shipping in a projector! Sorry, WindRiver -- guess you aren't the Micro$oft of the embedded world after all!

You bet its the present! One of my previous jobs was building controlers from camera pan/tilt systems. We figured we could value add by getting Axis's dev kits and building from there(the side benifit getting mjpeg digitisation). Mine Gott! it was good. Being able to just shopping cart for open source bits to all whack together and put in the box, and the whole vibe of "You show me yours we'll show you ours" sorta sharing made it such a fast process.

The tragedy was, that while we where doing real work, the MS kids would be trying to sell us on signed drivers and shit. I actually felt embaressed for em, cos they *really* didnt get the market.

Re:Close!

[sg_oneill]

This is what AXIS does. Most of the stuff for its camera servers is linux (either 2.2/4 or ulinux) with a boa server running the http, and busybox most of the userland.
What they do then is have 'drivers' that sit in userland that they dont opensource.

This however IS slightly shitful, as it makes it impossible to rebuild the system (to do a value add to the boxes). I've had *MANY* an arguement with those cats over this. (Hint Axis: Dont sign NDA's if your doing business with customers who wont sign em either!)

Re:Close!

[sg_oneill]

I'll also add while I'm at it, that the job I had allowed me to have a fair degree of experimentation space (research is damn cool work).

The surprise on my bosses face when I showed those little camera arm controllers logging on to the NT domain (samba) was worth a million dollars. It was one of those "golly I'm smart" days.

Infact I just flipped an option on the kernel compile;)

Never did finish that python port tho.

Re:Close!

[ibbey]

If it were me, I'd be concerned that GPL would require me to release some part, or maybe all, of the special code written for the embedded device. I don't want to get into a GPL debate, just assume that someone wasn't careful and did write their code in such a way that it was deamed to be covered under the GPL.

The GPL only requires you to release your changes if you are actually changing GPL'd code. User space code (applications, modules) does not need to be released under the GPL simply because the underlying OS is. If this were not the case, Oracle (for example) would now be open source simply because it has been released on Linux.

Contrary to Microsoft FUD, the GPL is -not- infectious. You must actively choose to contaminate your code with GPL'd code in order for your code to fall under the GPL.

Re:Close!

[rat7307]

As an aside,,, Thse AXIS cameras/video servers are da bomb...

I use them and Cyclades linux based terminal servers at work just to piss of the resident MCSE's!!!

Plus they are way cool!!

Our design gurus claim we ship an all MS platform then I cough and point out that the most reliable parts of the system are actually running the penguin!!!

Re:Close!

[mark_space2001]

I understand the GPL, and I've worked on serveral embedded systems, including ones using WindRiver as the OS.

Let's say that you aren't writing a 100% userspace OS, and you have your own hardware. Let's say you want to redo the networking code. Strip out SMP. And remove the virtual memory support because your system doesn't have a hardware MMU. Oh, and your memory layout is funky and you have to rewrite some of the start-up code (or most of it).

Why not just use NetBSD instead? Not every embedded device is a PC clone. (Actually, IMHO, if your device is a PC clone, it's not embedded.)

Your brief explaination says to me that Linux is in fact not useful unless you have an Intel or AMD cpu and a standard PC architechure.

Re:Close!

[ibbey]

Let's say that you aren't writing a 100% userspace OS, and you have your own hardware. Let's say you want to redo the networking code. Strip out SMP. And remove the virtual memory support because your system doesn't have a hardware MMU. Oh, and your memory layout is funky and you have to rewrite some of the start-up code (or most of it).

Well, in such a case, BSD might be an appropriate option. Of course, since many projects won't require such massive rewrites, your assertion that Linux is inadequate for the task based on this limitation is flawed.

In addition, even if you do need to do the rewrites, what's wrong with giving something back to the community? You seem to be arguing that you want the software for free, but you aren't willing to give any improvements back. Remember, any proprietary code can easily be written in such a way that you do not need to GPL it, so it's not like you are giving away trade secrets. If the GPL is unacceptable, why not chose some proprietary (& expensive) solution instead?

Your brief explaination says to me that Linux is in fact not useful unless you have an Intel or AMD cpu and a standard PC architechure.

I have no Idea where you got that since the word Linux doesn't even appear in my post, other then as the example I cited when I mentioned Oracle. I described the GPL, and it's effects on user-space code. That has nothing to do with it's usefulness on non-x86 platforms.

Note also, I DID NOT say not to use BSD. I did say that your interpretation of the GPL is flawed (an assertion that I stand by), but you are correct that you should consider both options before you decide what to deploy.

Now, as to why the CELF chose Linux over BSD, I suspect it is exactly -because- of the GPL. Imagine you are Sony. If you want to form a strategic partnership with Matsushita, you want to make sure that you get as much out of it as they do. If they were to choose BSD as the platform, there's nothing to force Matsushita from disclosing any improvements they make-- In which case, why should Sony? With the GPL, all parties are required to disclose improvements, so they all get an equal benefit. If you're only considering the short term, you may be right that BSD would be a better option, but if you are thinking five or ten years down the road (which you aren't, but these companies seem to be doing), Linux is the right choice.

Good news

[geekmetal]

Low cost and the freedom to tweak the software are reasons why eight of the world's largest consumer electronics makers, including the numbers one and two Sony Corp and Matsushita of Japan, have set up an alliance to develop and promote Linux for consumer electronics products, last month.

I just hope all these corporation continue to respect GPL and not find a way to tear Linux apart. Just a little caution needed after what happened to UNIX.

Re:Good news

[garcia]

the big problem (and the reason that the companies are using it) is that they can exploit Linux for their own financial gain without giving us anything back.

While it's nice to say that Linux runs these devices, I would also like to see that fucking code get into the kernel somehow.

The reason Linux is as good as it is is because of the community. Linux programmers made the kernel the way it is OPENLY.

These companies are going to use what has already been developed and then they aren't going to continue adding those features to the kernel to be worked on by others.

Again, I am glad to see Linux is running these things, but I would prefer that Linux be made better openly by these companies embracing it.

Re:Good news

[Abcd1234]

Presuming, of course, that they're making any substantive changes to the kernel code base that anyone is actually interested in. After all, most of the modifications they do make are probably very specific to the hardware they're using, etc, and hence aren't that useful to anyone outside the company.

Re:Good news

[garcia]

eh, I don't know about that. We have already found uses for 1000s of devices that now run some OS (that people left for dead). Why wouldn't we want to know how it worked so that it could be improved?

Re:Good news

[Abcd1234]

Perhaps, but do we really care if that code gets into Linux? Do you really want a bunch of patches in the Kernel that allow it run on a specific set of hardware in a particular DVD player?

My point is that unless these companies are making interesting architectural changes to the kernel, or otherwise improving it in a way that more than just a few people care about, what difference does it make if they release their changes or not?

Re:Good news

[penguin7of9]

These companies are going to use what has already been developed and then they aren't going to continue adding those features to the kernel to be worked on by others.

If they ship the software as part of their hardware, they have to make the source available.

Re:Good news

[jellomizer]

Woah there Cowboy. Their actually helping Linux without ever returning a line of code. The main barriers that are holding back Linux are not technical but social issues. The truth is most people don't care about the license just as long it is not to restrictive. But people have a tendency of following the leader (Or those big companies) when possible. With a lot of the Big boys using Linux it is helping get the word out about Linux and as well in the far future when these imbedded devices start to really standardize Linux has a better chance of being ported to meet the standards then any property format. Once standardization occurs Linux is there to stay in the imbedded market just like Windows is on the Desktop (I Feel imbedded electronics will replace desktops as a common means of computing far faster then it will take linux to win on the desktop). So basically every one who uses Linux is supporting it, even if they are not giving all their code to the public.

Re:Good news

[PD]

The reason is that these companies are using Linux for a reason. Don't look at the situation as "us" and "companies". The companies are users too. They choose Linux sometimes for the same reasons that we choose Linux.

What are those reasons? The ability to get a great product for low cost, the ability to change that product, and the ability to distribute the modified product.

A company that makes a device, such as a robot, isn't in the operating system business. Even if the extensions that allow Linux to run on robots don't get into the vanilla kernel, it's still a benefit to cause those extensions to be released under the GPL.

To continue using the robot example, if Sony make a robot running Linux, and releases their patches for the robot Linux kernel, then Samsung could use the robot Linux as the foundation for the Samsung robot. And vice-versa. The reason that these companies win in that situation is that they are not in the business of selling Linux, and Sony and Samsung do not compete on the basis of how bad-ass their Linux product is. They compete in the robot marketplace.

It makes perfect sense for these two companies to cooperate on the Linux kernel, because they don't compete there. It would not make sense for these two companies to GPL the applications that distinguish their individual robots however. If Sony were to make special modifications to the Linux kernel that implemented trade secret robot algorithms, they would be doing something wrong; those pieces belong in user space, not kernel space.

Re:Good news

[IM6100]

Only if they've made changes to the Linux code.

If they take a stock kernal source tarball, configure and build, and add in their code as a stand-alone application, they're under no obligation whatsoever to release any source at all. They can point to the source for the stock Linux they incorporated into their product.

And if enough people whine and holler, they can just use NetBSD instead.

Re:Good news

[penguin7of9]

They can point to the source for the stock Linux they incorporated into their product.

No, they can't. That option is only available under Section (3c) of the GPL, and it doesn't apply to commercial entities.

If they modify the Linux kernel, or any other LGPL/GPL software, they have to make the modified source available, period.

They don't have to make the source available for any software that doesn't link with GPL'ed code, and that is they way the GPL was intended to work.

And if enough people whine and holler, they can just use NetBSD instead.

That, too, is as it should be. Fortunately, the GPL seems to strike a good balance between the needs of the Linux community and the needs of these kinds of companies. Otherwise, they it would be the CEBSDF, not the CELF.

Re:Good news

[korgull]

Most of these companies are making consumer electronics and their core business is selling devices, not software.
Software has always been a cost factor that they are trying to reduce. If that succeeds with the help from the open source community I would be surpriced if these companies didn't provide at least some parts as open source although it may be not in the interest of the company.
Perhaps when providing open source would bring these companies some benefit (not only in form of money but also product support from the open source community) these companies would be willing to provide sources.
Also open source is a little strange in this case as you're looking at software development for hardware that is in development. The open source community can only access the hardware when it's already on the market so it doesn't make much sense to provide cvs access to sources in development stage for example although this could be an interesting development :-)

Re:Good news

[IM6100]

Did you even read what I typed? I said that they take a stock linux kernal source tarball. They run configure on it, they build.

They make no changes whatsoever to the kernal source. Unless they need to, and then they disclose the source for those changes.

And there's nice functionality built into the linux kernal these days to implement binary plugin module device drivers.

It's pretty much a design decision for the company to decide wether or not they want to disclose source.

Re:Good news

[antiMStroll]

I wonder if those who don't respect the GPL will be attacked by competitors. IP is IP, protected by the GPL or in a more traditional form, and in the current business environment as much a weapon as an expression of innovation. If GPL because deeply ingrained into the economy expect those who don't respect it to be called to the carpet, not because competitors have any love for the license or its ideals, but as a lever against a competitor.

Re:Good news

[Anonymous Coward]

Please don't use the word exploit. That implies that your not supposed to take the kernel and do whatever you want with it. As long as they make their changes public on code they are externally distributing there should be no problem.

"These companies are going to use what has already been developed and then they aren't going to continue adding those features to the kernel to be worked on by others."

So what's wrong with that? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for getting companies to add to the kernel, but even they use mainline kernels and then save billions that doesn't obligate them to anything. That's what is great about linux.

Re:Good news

[Tim C]

The truth is most people don't care about the license just as long it is not to restrictive.

No. The truth is most people don't even read the licence, and wouldn't care what it said if they did.

They'd have the same attitude that they do to copying CDs, or speeding - "sure, *technically* it's illegal, but what're the chances of getting caught? And besides, they can't lock everyone up, can they?"

Linux will only replace Windows on the desktop when it's better in ways that end users care about, and all they care about is getting the job done.

Re:Good news

[penguin7of9]

Did you even read what I typed? I said that they take a stock linux kernal source tarball. They run configure on it, they build.

Did you even read what I wrote? It is your assertion that they can just "point to the source" that is wrong. If they ship a Linux kernel, even unmodified, they must make the source to that kernel available. That matters because while they may not have modified the code, someone upstream may have, and because it lets users run the kernel on that hardware.

And there's nice functionality built into the linux kernal these days to implement binary plugin module device drivers.

No, the functionality is not "nice"; if it were, we wouldn't have to upgrade our complete set of modules every time we install a new kernel.

The Linux binary module interface needs a lot of work. But whether or not that work gets done should be purely a technical issue. If people don't want companies to develop closed-source binary modules for Linux, then the Linux license should simply be changed to not allow it.

It's pretty much a design decision for the company to decide wether or not they want to disclose source.

You say that as if it's a bad thing or as if it's anything new. The GPL is doing exactly what it was intended to do. If people had wanted different obligations on the part of users or companies, they would/should have used a different license.

Re:Good news

[IM6100]

No, the functionality is not "nice"; if it were, we wouldn't have to upgrade our complete set of modules every time we install a new kernel.

You don't get it. It's 'nice' for the developers integrating the embedded Linux solution, because their 'binary driver module' can remain closed source and just drop into a stock linux kernal. It matters to them not a single bit wether it works with any other version of stock linux kernal. And for their purposes, they can recompile a new closed-source binary module if and when they switch to a new kernal build or version. From the point of view of the embedded developers the binary module interface is a complete non-problem.

As to the issue of the company 'pointing to a source' or having that stock source tarball on an FTP site somewhere... It's completely irrelevant. We're talking about the tarball that anybody can download from any website that serves out stock linux kernal source tarballs. Sure, they can put it on their web site. Nobody cares either way, except for someone who just wants to hassle embedded linux device vendors for a formality.

Re:Good news

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it hard to fathom how anyone could think Linux could be torn apart by a few companies.

Many of these companies are calling the software they are using Linux, though there are only a few lines of Linux code. Why? Linux is a name people are familiar with.

Linksys tried to keep GPL'd code used in their routers proprietory, but a public backlash soon put an end to that.

Re:Good news

[xmda]

Seems like thay have at least good intentions. From the CE Linux Forum site:

The CE Linux Forum (CELF) is an industry group that is focused on the advancement of Linux as an open source platform for consumer electronics devices. The CELF intends to operate completely within the letter and the spirit of the open source community. The CELF is a place to come and discuss various issues that are of particular importance to the CE industry. Through an open process, the CELF members will clarify and codify certain requirements to be addressed by the open source community. Thereafter, the CELF will evaluate any open source submissions as to their effectiveness and responsiveness to the requirements. Open source submissions accepted by the CELF Architecture Group and Steering Committee will be incorporated into the CELF source tree, which itself is open to the public.

Through this open process, the CELF intends to leverage the benefits of the open source community and process to maximize the re-use of common solutions to common problems and thereby create a foundation on which the CELF members and others can build compelling networked products. We welcome you to join the CELF and work with us to realize an open platform for compelling new consumer electronics products.

Re:Good news

[crapulent]

Only if that software is GPLed. So, that means the kernel, and any GNU user space utilities. However, if they wrote their own kernel module, they don't necessarily have to release any code for that, and any userspace programs can be written and released under any license they choose. Remember that glibc is LGPL which means simply linking against it does not cause that code to become "tainted."

For a good example of this, just look at Tivo. They make available the source to the kernel, plus a few minor patches, but they don't release the code to their actual core Tivo app, since that's not a GPLed work. If Tivo had to release their source for their core Tivo app, it would radically change their business model, since anyone would be able to compile and run their own Tivo. (Yes, you can do that now but you'd be doing it with someone else's code, not the Tivo code.)

Now if glibc were covered by GPL and not the LGPL, this would all change.

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have to subscribe. There's a direct link to the story on the reuters.com.

Re:Makes no sense

[El]

It's only $32 for each embedded Linux device... which is still silly, since SCO claims it's the multiprocessor support that's infringing! Yeah, I'm sure most all toasters are using multiprocessor support!

Math

[mopslik]

Linux is freely available... The math is simple.

SCO-math aside...

Good to hear, though. I've been happy with my little Linux-based MP3 player for years now.

Re:Math

[xtermz]

I know it involves giving in to the bullying, but since we got so many corps standing behind linux, perhaps they should all chip in, buy-out, and subsequently dismantle SCO.

Re:Math

[Znonymous Coward]

Good to hear, though. I've been happy with my little Linux-based MP3 player for years now.

How about a URL?

Re:Math

[hawkbug]

Nah, a buy out is giving in. Litigate the hell out of them, until they are bankrupt. Each major US company that currently supports linux could each take a whack and tie them up in court for a year a piece, or something fun like that.

Re:Math

[Billly Gates]

I don't know.

A SCO Xenix based MP3 player with a +$699 price tag with constant rebooting, freezing, and disk corruption sounds pretty good for me right now.

Re:Math

[DaveAtFraud]

The SCO-math is probably what got Darl and company all exited. Think about all those thousands if not millions of Linux based consumer products and SCO thinks they can extort a licensing fee for using Linux on them. If they were to win their case, Darl and company would probably end up with more money than Bill Gates for doing nothing but filing a few lawsuits. Liability lawyers have been known to take up cases on a contingency basis with a lot less chance of winning, not as much money at stake and less legal basis. The odds are still better than the lottery.

There's a reason I keep calling SCO management "a bunch of ex-ambulance chasers." They've graduated to the big time.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

I know it involves giving in to the bullying, but since we got so many corps standing behind linux, perhaps they should all chip in, buy-out, and subsequently dismantle SCO.

And when they've done that, I also will have a company claiming ownership of Linux code that they can buy out and dismantle. In fact I can have a new company for them to buy out every week if they enjoy that sort of thing.

Seriously, what possible advantage could there be to doing that? You think making SCO's shareholders rich will discourage others from doing the same?

Re:Math

[caluml]

Linux is freely available... The math is simple.

It's a shame that companies only seem to like it because it's free. It's better than the alternatives for a lot of reasons, and only one of them is the price.

Re:Math

[Anonymous Coward]

Hah! Nice try, McBride, but we're on to you.

Re:Math

[drinkypoo]

I don't know of anyone who ever ran Xenix on a machine powerful enough to decode an mp3 in realtime. I'm sure some people have done it, though, as their 386s and such died.

The real point of this comment, though, is to comment on the stability of Xenix, which is extreme. I had a crappy ol' 286 and Xenix upon it, and it never ever crashed. Not even a little bit. I used it as my exclusive machine for quite some time, while I was still in the learning phase of using Unix. (I mean, you're always learning, but I was new.)

Re:what's with all the links?

[Anonymous Coward]

Somehow I think slashdot readers are smart enough to find Sony, Philips, Matsushita, Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson, RCA, or Toshiba websites without the useless plethora of links

Are you sure about that?

Re:what's with all the links?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you read people's posts on slashdot?
I think these links are needed.

Well, I'll feel a lot safer

[cyberchondriac]

If everything in my home will eventually be computerized, I'd want something open source based, just to guard against snooping, as if not having my fridge give me a blue screen of death wasn't reason enough.
I'd guess maybe the cookie jar won't be the only thing with cookies in it though.

Re:Well, I'll feel a lot safer

[Chicane-UK]

I think the old 'fridge giving you the BSOD' argument is pretty flimsy these days.. Windows has really got its act together, and doesn't fall over anywhere near as much as it did in the Windows 9x days. I have seen a few BSOD's with Windows XP, but they have almost always been hardware faults that caused them.

Though Windows still has a long way to go.. as it has progressed through 2000, into XP, and now into its Server 2003 guise, it seems to have become more of a blackhole of frustrating little glitches.. the kind Microsoft is renowned for. If you enable this option and click this, then this option breaks itself and you have to reinstall this service and apply Q314453a.exe to resolve it. Great.

So don't mistake this as an "I love Windows post" - believe me, I really do not. But slagging Windows off for the famous BSOD is not really as viable any more.. slag it off for its classic ability to fuck you over with stupid glitches and unusually erratic behaviour when you least expect it ;)

Re:Well, I'll feel a lot safer

[Gareman]

I was at Fry's, a California electronics store, a week ago and was surprised to see a computer-enabled refrigerator; only $2000. I pushed a few buttons and the display promptly froze up. There was no keyboard, so I unplugged the refrigerator and plugged it back in. On bootup it disappointingly displayed the Windows 98 login screen.

Re:Well, I'll feel a lot safer

[IM6100]

That sounds like an U.L. to me. At the bare minimum, an refrigerator with Windows 98 embedded in it would have the splash screen disabled.

Re:Well, I'll feel a lot safer

[cyberchondriac]

Either that, or it wasn't really a refrigerator - I've seen some pretty extreme cases with experimental cooling systems for sale in commercial outlets lately :-)
In any case, the main point of my post up above was about the possible invasion of privacy, not so much about crashing.

Hmm

[ciroknight]

Won't all computers end up being embedded devices? I mean really think about it. Why would you load the OS on to a hard drive when you could easly put it on a hardware level and put all the programs on the disk. Makes a lot of sense because you save so much disk space, and at the same time, the OS is more secured against accidental deletion and file corrupting viruses.

So I treat this as the ultimate victory for Linux. The next generation of computers is wireless and mobile and trying to keep everything secure. Firmware Operating Systems is the solution; hail the next coming of a great era, the wireless/linux revolution!

Re:Makes no sense

[jared_hanson]

Yeah, I'm sure most all toasters are using multiprocessor support!

They better be! I like to make at least two pieces of toast at a time.

QNX

[levik]

I always somehow thought that QNX was the OS of choice, since it was smaller and more stable.

I mean sure devices like Tivo which can download patches from the server once a week may not really care, but what about something that's stuck with whatever OS it leaves the factory with...

Is linux really "there" yet?

Re:QNX

[Baki]

If you use Linux for a dedicated purpose, there is no need to get the latest patch every week.

Just take some linux baseline, develop your device with it, test it well and ship it. Since dedicated devices use only a fraction of Linux functionality, it is possible to thoroughly test and make the chance for required patches very small.

Re:QNX

[agrippa_cash]

Linux is free and open and Tivos aren't mission-critical, (except during long award shows and sporing events). Also the 2.6 kernel lets you take certain core parts of the kernel out if they won't be used in your embedded environment, thus helping with the size issue.

Re:QNX

[sharkey]

Tivos aren't mission-critical, (except during ... sporing events)

Man, you REALLY need to take sex ed again.

Re:QNX

[warpSpeed]

I always somehow thought that QNX was the OS of choice, since it was smaller and more stable.

IIRC QNX is strictly an intel based OS. While super-reliable, it is not portable.

Re:QNX

[rusty0101]

Of concern would be the licencing costs associated with QNX. When the manufacturers are talking about 1 and 2% profit margins, even $1 per device (on a $1000 device) is 5% of a 2% profit. Worse for devices in the $50-$200 range.

Compared with rolling your own distribution of Linux that has only the features you want in the hardware you send out, with a one time charge for the development tools if you choose to use them, and you can see that there is a large potential for savings.

Quick back of the message calculation. 200,000 units at $500 each is $100 million revenue. Profit of 1% is $1 million. $2 per unit is $400,000, or 40% of what would otherwise be profit. Actual numbers would very based upon the per unit licencing cost of QNX, though I would be surprised if QNX was asking as little as $0.50.

Just my thoughts, you may have different estimates.

-Rusty

Re:QNX

[BiggerIsBetter]

Not even close. It runs on x86, PPC, ARM, SuperH and MIPS.

Re:QNX

[drightler]

> What hardware does QNX Neutrino support?

The QNX Neutrino RTOS supports numerous processors from the x86/Pentium, PowerPC, ARM, StrongARM, XScale, MIPS, and SH-4 processor families. In addition, the QNX Momentics development suite provides board-support packages for a large variety of reference boards.

QNX(R) Neutrino(R) RTOS FAQs

Re:QNX

[Indian]

Two things:

1. No one "owns" linux.
2. No single supplier issues.

With QNX, there is always the risk that some one (may be a competitor - say Sony or Philips etc. or even M$) would buy them and leave their customers in a limbo. Anyone remember pSOS?

With linux they don't have those worries.

Re:QNX

[ScriptMonkey]

No, but I remember DOS. That sure was a P.O.S OS...

Re:QNX

[Anonymous Coward]

"When the manufacturers are talking about 1 and 2% profit margins, even $1 per device (on a $1000 device) is 5% of a 2% profit."

$1 is 5% of $20?? ;)

Re:QNX

[rusty0101]

"$1 is 5% of $20?? ;)"

Um, yes it is.

-Rusty

DVDs...

[Sphere1952]

Does that mean DeCSS is legal now?

Re:DVDs...

[Anonymous Coward]

DeCSS has nothing to do with Linux. It's just an algorithm that could be used on any OS.

Re:DVDs...

[tuffy]

Does that mean DeCSS is legal now?

It might not be already, depending on where you live. But DeCSS has little to do with the Linux kernel itself; it's quite possible for some DVD-licensed company to use official DVD decryption software running on Linux without requiring the release of any source code. And DVD recording hardware (as mentioned in the article) won't need to use DVD encryption for that task at all.

Re:DVDs...

[Sphere1952]

ok...I give up on trying to get humor points.

Re:DVDs...

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you should try saying something funny.

Wait a minute....

[theblacksun]

Didn't I think this several years ago? By golly I think I did, and I doubt I'm alone. And just because its printed does not mean its true, especially in technological predictions. Truman lost remember, and so did Gore... Wait a minute...

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[bsharitt]

Or you could click on the Reuters link instead of the NYTimes one.

Re:Makes no sense

[gregmac]

It's only $32 for each embedded Linux device...

No, it's free, under the GPL, until SCO proves otherwise in a court of law.

Of course, if you pay your protection money on time, the SCO goon- excuse me, lawyers - won't have to break your leg- I mean, take you to court.

Penguin Vibrator

[wumpus188]

I especially liked "smart vibrator" part. Like this one?

Re:Makes no sense

[Jason1729]

Generating the heat to toast the bread still takes a few CPUs. Intel and AMD are working on their next-generation chips that should be powerful enough to only need a single CPU to toast bread.

Jason
ProfQuotes

No shit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Consumer Electronics Industry: Linux is the Future

No shit..... I came to this conclusion 10 years ago.....

Linux Inside

[ErrorBase]

Who is designing the sticker ?

Smart Vibrators?

[SWroclawski]

Linux runs on smart vibrators?

That's too much information for me...

Re:Smart Vibrators?

[Izeickl]

As long as her box lets me get root access she wont need it! If your really lucky she might open up a backdoor.

Re: Smart Vibrators?

[Black Parrot]

> Linux runs on smart vibrators?

It did until they found out about the patent on plug-ins.

Re:Smart Vibrators?

[NanoGator]

"Linux runs on smart vibrators?"

Didn't realize Linux finally has a joystick driver!

Re:Smart Vibrators?

[Anonymous Coward]

an in-bed-ed system?

Re:Smart Vibrators?

[YetAnotherDave]

Hah, I'll have my girlfriend using linux yet...

Fe Fi Fo Fum I smell the blood of a troller dumb

[TheScienceKid]

The original reads "Linux, currently a software system mostly used to power big servers and personal computers, is also now emerging as a small set of computing code to drive devices like mobile phones, remote controls and TVs." this Arrrrchive reads "Linux, currently a software system mostly used to power big servers and personal computers, is also now emerging as a small set of computing code to drive devices like mobile phones, remote controls and smart vibrators." and undoubtedly contains more idiocy. Please, don't subscribe to trolls.... vote them down with your modpoints, for gods sake.

Re:Makes no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

one processor is enough to make two freaking pieces at once, retard

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[Znonymous Coward]

...smart vibrators.

I highly doubt that Linux runs on smart vibrators.

Re:what's with all the links?

[Anonymous Coward]

and why does the Sharp link go to the USA-only site, you fascist bastards !?

Re:what's with all the links?

[greenhide]

Should be:

Somehow I think slashdot readers are smart enough to find Sony, Philips, Matsushita, Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson, RCA, or Toshiba websites without the useless plethora of links.

Close!-Biz Opportunity?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I've thought of starting a business using SBC's (Single Board Computers) and Embedded Linux to make what Donald Norman title "The Invisible Computer." That would be basicaly Linux Appliances for the SOHO market.

Of course as anyone can see the market appears to be saturated, from Linksys on down.

Or I could do customized Knoppix distributions (OpenGroupware comes to mind).

So any input from the "/." crowd is welcome.

Viable? Crazy?

Re:Close!-Biz Opportunity?

[El]

What I want to see is an SBC with InfraRed, 100MBit and power-over-ethernet support. Small monochome display support. Use it to replace my existing thermostat with a device in each room that controls lights/heat/Air Conditioner/phone/audio for that room. Receiver for universal remote control, yet all networked to a PC so I can turn on the lights from another room, or another continent (with an HTTP server in the PC). Oh, and each device should contain both an XML/HTTP server and client, so they can talk to each other. Extra points for MP3 playback support, but not in the low-end unit. Carry around a web pad with wireless support, and you could control everything from anywhere. Also like options for interfacing with sprinkler system and home security (smoke detectors and alarms), and for opening and closing windows and curtains (part of temperature control).

On a related topic, I've come to the conclusion that all audio devices should have USB ports (think of carrying your music between your home and car on a USB memory stick or external USB drive, depending on how much music you want to carry).

See... it really hasn't all already been done!

Consumer Electronics Industry: Linux is a Failure

[Jucius Maximus]

Yes, that is what a read on first glance ;-) It made me take a double-take!

Interesting

[tmark]

includes Sony, Philips, Matsushita/Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson/RCA and Toshiba.

What I find interesting is that many of these companies are selling consumer electronics that use OTHER OSes than Linux. So, what exactly does this context mean when they call Linux "the operating system of choice" ?

Re:Interesting

[korgull]

That means that they have done developments based on Linux over the past few years but not put it into market yet. Perhaps now they think it's mature enough to do this to replace their existing products.
I would considder this is to be quite a big step and it's quite remarkable that so many companies share this idea. It takes quite an effort to get so many big companies in line and therefore may be part of some long term strategy.

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[Znonymous Coward]

Although if it did, that would be the sniz night!

sorry to reply to my own post

Knobbix?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not so sure, I think that if you were in the business of marketting smart vibrators, why not use embedded Linux? Knobbix anyone?

Totally unnecessary karma-whoring comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Since the Reuters link does not require a subscription, the NYT subscription is irrelevant, so parent post is unnecessary.

I'm assuming Reuters can take a slashdot-induced load, of course.

The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[YetAnotherName]

Seems appropriate to revive this classic at this time:

Once upon a time, in a kingdom not far from here, a king summoned two of his advisors for a test. He showed them both a shiny metal box with two slots in the top, a control knob, and a lever. "What do you think this is?"

One advisor, an engineer, answered first. "It is a toaster," he said. The king asked, "How would you design an embedded computer for it?" The engineer replied, "Using a four-bit microcontroller, I would write a simple program that reads the darkness knob and quantizes its position to one of 16 shades of darkness, from snow white to coal black. The program would use that darkness level as the index to a 16-element table of initial timer values. Then it would turn on the heating elements and start the timer with the initial value selected from the table. At the end of the time delay, it would turn off the heat and pop up the toast. Come back next week, and I'll show you a working prototype."

The second advisor, a computer scientist, immediately recognized the danger of such short-sighted thinking. He said, "Toasters don't just turn bread into toast, they are also used to warm frozen waffles. What you see before you is really a breakfast food cooker. As the subjects of your kingdom become more sophisticated, they will demand more capabilities. They will need a breakfast food cooker that can also cook sausage, fry bacon, and make scrambled eggs. A toaster that only makes toast will soon be obsolete. If we don't look to the future, we will have to completely redesign the toaster in just a few years.

"With this in mind, we can formulate a more intelligent solution to the problem. First, create a class of breakfast foods. Specialize this class into subclasses: grains, pork, and poultry. The specialization process should be repeated with grains divided into toast, muffins, pancakes, and waffles; pork divided into sausage, links, and bacon; and poultry divided into scrambled eggs, hard- boiled eggs, poached eggs, fried eggs, and various omelet classes.

"The ham and cheese omelet class is worth special attention because it must inherit characteristics from the pork, dairy, and poultry classes. Thus, we see that the problem cannot be properly solved without multiple inheritance. At run time, the program must create the proper object and send a message to the object that says, 'Cook yourself.' The semantics of this message depend, of course, on the kind of object, so they have a different meaning to a piece of toast than to scrambled eggs.

"Reviewing the process so far, we see that the analysis phase has revealed that the primary requirement is to cook any kind of breakfast food. In the design phase, we have discovered some derived requirements. Specifically, we need an object-oriented language with multiple inheritance. Of course, users don't want the eggs to get cold while the bacon is frying, so concurrent processing is required, too.

"We must not forget the user interface. The lever that lowers the food lacks versatility, and the darkness knob is confusing. Users won't buy the product unless it has a user-friendly, graphical interface. When the breakfast cooker is plugged in, users should see a cowboy boot on the screen. Users click on it, and the message 'Booting UNIX v.8.3' appears on the screen. (UNIX 8.3 should be out by the time the product gets to the market.) Users can pull down a menu and click on the foods they want to cook.

"Having made the wise decision of specifying the software first in the design phase, all that remains is to pick an adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An Intel Pentium with 16MB of memory, a 300MB hard disk, and a SVGA monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking, object oriented language that supports multiple inheritance and has a built-in GUI, writing the program will be a snap. (Imagine the difficulty we would have had if we had foolishly allowed a hardware-first design strategy to lock us into a four-bit microcontroller!)."

The king wisely had the computer scientist beheaded, and they all lived happily ever after.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[penguin7of9]

The second advisor, a computer scientist, immediately recognized the danger of such short-sighted thinking. [...] "With this in mind, we can formulate a more intelligent solution to the problem. First, create a class of breakfast foods. Specialize this class into subclasses: grains, pork, and poultry.

Sorry, but that's probably an industrial programmer/analyst, not a computer scientist. Object oriented programming ceased being at the cutting edge of computer science many years ago.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[IM6100]

His 'job title' doesn't matter. He's been beheaded.

The engineer, meanwhile, has the code for the 4-bit microcontroller locked down, all the QA testing has been done, and the first-release mask programmed parts are due back from Hitachi next Tuesday.

It's a plastic PQFP part that manufacturing can just solder onto the board.

Don't request the source code on CD. It's 4-bit assembly language and you just wouldn't understand...

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[Talinom]

Yes, but does anybody want any toast? How 'bout a bagle?

Seriously though, how many of you imagined a SCO monkey standing at the door writing down company names (Sony, Philips, Matsushita/Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson/RCA and Toshiba as mentioned above) to put on their "to sue" list?

Perhaps they will attempt to use their wonderful SMP capabilities to sue in parallel. I want a front row seat for the backlash when SCO's computers, telephones, PDAs, microwave ovens, VCRs and other electronic devices "mysteriously" stop working.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[drinkypoo]

Or if you were both an engineer and a computer programmer, you'd probably slip a pic chip in there and a couple of sensors, perhaps one for moisture and one for temperature, and it would still only cost twenty bucks. Long live assembly language.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[penguin7of9]

His 'job title' doesn't matter. He's been beheaded.

Perhaps you don't understand that the piece is an allegory, rather than a description of a real event. For an allegory, the job title is all that matters since it compares the profession of "engineer" with the profession of "computer scientist".

The engineer, meanwhile, has the code for the 4-bit microcontroller locked down, all the QA testing has been done, and the first-release mask programmed parts are due back from Hitachi next Tuesday.

Yes, and given the quality of code engineers commonly produce, the microcontroller will probably go into an infinite loop when the user sets the toaster to "zero", the toaster will catch fire and burn down the house.

Engineers should not do programming of any kind--they simply lack the qualifications and training. And industrial programmers always need more education and need to get less religious, in order to catch up with the state of the art.

As for computer scientists, a lot of them are working furiously on creating tools to let people build reliable, saef, flexible, power-efficient embedded system using fewer gates than even a 4-bit microcontroller uses.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[IM6100]

Yes, and given the quality of code engineers commonly produce,

Whoops. We're right back up to the allegory again.

How about you go over there and write some specifications and fancy documentation while we finish the code. You can use all your latest 'scientific' methods to produce test cases for the QA people to use. We'll have code for you to test in a little while.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[penguin7of9]

Yes, and given the quality of code engineers commonly produce,

Whoops. We're right back up to the allegory again.

Quite correct: I am making a point about engineers in general. If all you have is an engineering education, you shouldn't be writing software because you really don't know what you are doing.

How about you go over there and write some specifications and fancy documentation while we finish the code. You can use all your latest 'scientific' methods to produce test cases for the QA people to use. We'll have code for you to test in a little while.

How about you go over there and do your silly architectural drawings and load calculations while I just get some stuff from Home Depot and slap together your new house quickly? It will be done much faster and cheaper. Really.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[Anonymous Coward]

The engineer already wrote the code for a 4-bit microcontroller, isn't that good enough? :)

Well, thank goodness you didn't say "let's put linux in there..."

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[IM6100]

The architectural drawings and load calculations are all established and common knowledge. You do NOT have to hire an architect to build an everyday home.

Thanks for making my point.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[Anonymous Coward]

The architectural drawings and load calculations are all established and common knowledge. You do NOT have to hire an architect to build an everyday home.

Indeed, you can also build an everyday home by buying the plans off the shelf. Or you can build an everyday home by hiring a contractor with the necessary training. But if you have someone with no training draw up the plans and build it, your house will likely crumble.

Engineering education is not guaranteed to include software development training. Therefore, an engineer is not a good person to hire for software development unless he has additional training and experience.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[ivan256]

Engineers should not do programming of any kind--they simply lack the qualifications and training. And industrial programmers always need more education and need to get less religious, in order to catch up with the state of the art.

There you go mixing up Programmers with Computer Scientists. Here's a hint: they're two different things. Computer scientists use programming languages as a tool. They are not necissicarily programmers first. Far too many people have this misconception and either wrongly have poor opinions of perfectly good computer scientists, or have way too high of expectations of programmers who can't do design work or math.

Incidentally, electrical engineers doing digital design are in the same situation. They write code, and they use it as a tool to express their designs. The only practical difference is the the level of abstraction.

Re:The Computer Scientist and the Engineer

[Anonymous Coward]

You're one of those freaky people who like UML, aren't you...

Re:what's with all the links?

[tmark]

More than that, what is the purpose of linking to these companies ? Corporate behemoths that they are, with websites to match, you're surely not going to find anything at the linked-to URLs that will illuminate this story.

And the success is...

[Rinikusu]

Because the consumer doesn't even know the damn things are running Linux. The manufacturers are doing a great job of taking Linux and producing custom interfaces (when needed) for their products so the average user doesn't even know they're running Linux. Maybe the desktop Linux folks should take notice...

Nice possibilities...

[pe1chl]

I have a DVB-S (digital satellite TV) receiver that runs Linux, and I must say it is a very nice box for the computer hobbyist, and probably still quite usable for the normal consumer.

Out of the box one can just use it as a receiver, but once you connect it to your LAN (ethernet) you can browse its contents using SMB (it runs SAMBA) or a web browser. You can edit its configuration files using "vi" over telnet, you can NFS-mount a disk on another system and record movies on it, plug in a USB memory key and backup your configuration, etc etc.

Not all are things that a consumer would want to do, but very nice to have.
I presume not all Linux-based consumer electronics boxes will be as open as this one, though.

What "we" have to avoid, I think, is to criticize manfacturers that use Linux and do not at the same time make the box open to access like described above. Especially bad is to "hack" into Linux-based devices beyond what one can be reasonably expected to do with something you own, and to blackmail manufacturers into releasing information and source code of proprietary parts.

Behaviour like that could quickly make the big manufacturers a lot less enthousiastic about using Linux.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[ebyrob]

What "we" have to avoid, I think, is to criticize manfacturers that use Linux and do not at the same time make the box open to access like described above. Especially bad is to "hack" into Linux-based devices beyond what one can be reasonably expected to do with something you own, and to blackmail manufacturers into releasing information and source code of proprietary parts.

Hmm... You seem to think people don't own what they buy. If manufacturers think they can win market share through lock-in rather than quality product, perhaps "we" need to teach them a lesson.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[pe1chl]

But should that lesson be "DON'T USE LINUX"?

I already said: "beyond what one can be reasonably expected to do with something you own".

Re:Nice possibilities...

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the limit though? If I own something isn't it reasonable to expect I can do anything I want with it?

Re:Nice possibilities...

[Anonymous Coward]

it's not reasonable to expect technical support, repairs under warranty, or customer returns once you crack open a digital appliance and even less reasonable to expect manufacturers to suddenly get all warm and fuzzy about DRM just because their embedded O/S is Linux

Re:Nice possibilities...

[ebyrob]

But should that lesson be "DON'T USE LINUX"?

Perhaps we're thinking of different examples. Personally, I can't think of a single instance where someone bought a device, went home, took it apart and did something truly harmful to the manufacturer with it. Well, aside from review it and publicize the fact it was a piece of crap, but that's protected speech.

So, for me, the "expected limit" would be. Well... there is no limit. What is it I *shouldn't* do with something I buy that isn't already illegal in some context unrelated to the purchase?

Re:Nice possibilities...

[Anonymous Coward]

Assault someone with a rolled-up receipt?

Re:Nice possibilities...

[pe1chl]

For example: a small computer system that runs Linux and can be used to browse the Internet using a subscription that is part of the deal.
You get the system for a very small amount of money and the company expects you to subscribe for a monthly fee to use it.
Then, Linux gurus find out how to use it with their existing Internet account or use it as a plain terminal, and just buy the box and not the monthly subscription.

When a manufacturer would think there is a market for an Internet browsing box using this marketing model, and they use Linux as the OS, the entire techies world laughs and buys only the machine and not the subscription, the next time they probably would not select Linux but something more closed that they maybe can lock down easier or that the nerds will not focus on so much.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[AstroDrabb]

I don't see it happening this way. The process of putting together these types of devices is not performed by some monkey with an IQ of 4. If they develop a product and don't secure it properly, they have no right telling consumers what they can or cannot do with their PROPERTY. Even if they put top notch security into the devices, they still have no right telling a consumer how they are allowed to use that device. If I want to use my new Linux based Tivo as a paper weight, then that is my right. If I want to use it to prop my door open then that is my right. If I find a way to get into it and use it as a nice little web server, then that is my right. I also don't think that any manufacturer would be dumb enough to blame misuse of a product on the embedded OS that they chose. Look at the XBox. People have been hacking that since day one. Does that mean that for the next XBox MS will use a different OS on it becasue some people have hacked it? No. The fact is, is that MOST comsumers do not mess with their products so that they do not break it or void their warranty. It is no different then me going out and buying a new Ford Taurus, taking it apart, finding different uses for the various parts and then telling others about those various uses. Ford won't care, they were already paid for the product. And they have no legal grounds to complain about how I legally used my property.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[pe1chl]

> I don't see it happening this way.

This was no random example. This has already happened.

>It is no different then me going out and buying a new Ford Taurus, taking it apart, finding different uses for the various parts and then telling others about those various uses.

Yes it is different. The difference is that Ford charges you the whole value of your Taurus plus all profit at the time of sale. They hope you will spend more on maintenance, but that is not part of the calculation.

Now look at today's subscription-based electronics. I gave an example, other examples are mobile phones, other mobile gadgets that require some Internet connection service, a game console, etc.
When you get one (nearly) for free and then do not pay a subscription or never buy games, you are actually attacking their business model.
Of course that is their risk, but when this happens all the time they will have to change it.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[ebyrob]

You get the system for a very small amount of money and the company expects you to subscribe for a monthly fee to use it.

Hmm... sounds like the answer is simple on that one. If it costs money to make, don't sell at a loss. If you do, well, you probably won't have to worry about being in business much longer. It isn't the consumer's job to protect stupid and greedy business models.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[pe1chl]

That is not a stupid and greedy business model.
Today's consumers expect a small entrance cost.
Mobile telephony (at least in Europe) has boomed just because of that: you get your phone for free and you pay when you make a call. When you don't make a call it costs you nothing. Consumers like that.
Furthermore, such a model protects the consumer against the risk of the provider going out of business. When they do, the subscription ends and they have no or little investment loss.
This is very important, especially for services where the applicance is mostly or completely useless when the service you subscribe to is no longer available.

Re:Nice possibilities...

[ebyrob]

A good point, and a good reason to write agreements under such a system as "rental" agreements rather than "ownership" agreements.

This blurring of the line between what is "rented"(under someone else's control) and what is "owned"(under consumer control) is a nasty trick. If these companies followed rental/ownership models, then those of us who like to tinker could go out and buy parts at cost that are exactly the same as those parts rented out, with freedom included. Instead, we have companies claiming to "sell" things under what amounts to a rental agreement, and then never offering those same appliances for "sale". This was exactly the kind of thing that got IBM into trouble a few years back, and will likely cause hard-ships for both producers and consumers before it runs its course.

Given all this, it makes your claim that consumers "like" to get their phone for free seem silly since they really don't have much choice. They either pay for it twice, or once via rental agreement.

When you don't make a call it costs you nothing. Consumers like that.

Hmm... maybe that's why I don't have a cell-phone? I make no calls, and pay nothing! Seriously though, consumers want cell-phones with good service that are cheap for what they get. Given that criteria I doubt they really care *how* all that comes together for them. (Personally, I just try to avoid getting reemed by telcos because my ass is always sore from previous encounters)

Mobile telephoney has boomed in the US as well, we just don't have text messaging and some other niceties. In general, folks don't seem willing to pay more for text messaging. So, in this country, telcos decided it was cheaper to keep the text messaging ability out of the industry rather than let it become commodity with little or no bump in service fees. Now that messaging has "slipped in" because of stiff competition we'll probably see it become commodity before long...

Re:Makes no sense

[Angry White Guy]

Especially if it's an AMD. You could cook breakfast on a T-Bird Core!

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[FileNotFound]

Umm yes:
At the sector's largest trade fair IFA in Berlin, the first Linux products are already on show and more will cum soon, companies said.

Re:Makes no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Look way over there. No, farther. Keep looking. Here's some binoculars. See that? Way the fuck out there? It's your sense of humor, now go fetch.

Re:Hmm

[gyratedotorg]

Why would you load the OS on to a hard drive when you could easly put it on a hardware level and put all the programs on the disk.

lets face it. no non-trivial piece of software will ever be 100% free of bugs. when a security hole is found in my os, id like to be able to patch it. i dont see how thats possible if the os is at 'the hardware level' (by this, im assuming that you mean it stored in some kind of rom).

Interesting...

[Moth7]

So if you run Linux on a single processor machine (as is true of many non-webserver deployments) SCO really has no case? I would be interested to see if they could uphold a case against a mass deployment on single processor systems :-\

I already told you so long ago

[civilengineer]

here

Sounds like a good Kung fu movie

[Anonymous Coward]

Your kung fu is strong MonkeySoft, but our bullets are free.

Re:TROLL ALERT

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooops. Sorry, I ment *BSD is DYING!

Re:Makes no sense

[Aliencow]

You just illegally made use of technology patented by me; toaster jokes
Proof!
Never mind the fact that mine is crappier than you, that they're not really related, you still owe me 99$ per time you make a toaster joke!

Subconscious pr0n-messages

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you put in the sub-conscious pr0n-related messages yourself, or were they part of the article:

example:
1. (as already mentioned): "smart Vibrator"
2. "more will cum soon"

Proper spelling is 'come' - 'cum' means something else - more specificaly it means "to squirt the love juice over a loved one"

I didn't read the original article, so I don't know.

In any case it made the article even more interesting!

# of links

[Anonymous Coward]

how many more hyperlinks could you put in the article summary? maybe next time you should link all words over three letters to their dictionary.com definitions!

Re:Hmm

[hawkbug]

Yes, and when the next major buffer overflow for a various piece of software gets found, you'd have no way to fix it, so you'd have to throw away the device. Scary.

Already been done....

[The Jonas]

Follow some of these links for variety of options.

Re:Already been done....

[ErrorBase]

After posting i realised this whould have been done already, so i had to be more specific, i meant not a copy of the intel variant that i have also seen, but something similary recognizable but less geeky like the motherload of the stickers i found on your link (thanks anyhow). The one form Cafepress does come in mind.

Re: You are teh shiz night

[Anonymous Coward]

Heres a guy who is bitter about not getting any karma.

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[SoSueMe]

I highly doubt that Linux runs on smart vibrators.
Isn't that as close as most geeks will get?

Economics trumps ideology

[Anonymous Coward]

The bottom line is that it's always the bottom line with such applications. Companies don't give a flying fig about free as in speech, but free as in beer gets their attention every time.

Re:Economics trumps ideology

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA: Abilty to tweak existing proven code to your specific needs is the selling point mentioned *first*.

Yes, it's still about the botton line, but it's the fundamentally Open nature of OSS (the free as in speech part) that's just a compelling reason -- and the half the reason for the benefits to the bottome line (no royalties is another. But, free as in beer code that you can't tweak would not help them -- your oversimplification is just inaccurate).

I believe..

[bludstone]

...the CHILDREN are our future. Teach them well, and let them lead the way.

This Linux thing is just a fad.

Re:I believe..

[neonstz]

fork();

just wait till next year

[rtphokie]

Linux is the Future

I'm sure I've seen this article many many times over the past several years. Linux zealots are starting to sound like Red Sox fans.

Re:just wait till next year

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux zealots are starting to sound like Red Sox fans.

So when will I see a Linux zealot wearing an extra-extra-extra large "TORVALDS" jersey at a bar, picking fights with everyone?

Re:just wait till next year

[sbillard]

ouch
you bastard
just wait 'till our beloved bosox sweep teh damn yankees this weekend.

don't worry too much though. if the yanks dont do it this year, steinbrenner will fire the best manager in baseball except bobby cox and just buy himself another world series next year with a $300M payroll

Re:just wait till next year

[antiMStroll]

RTFA, the story is that Reuters are now Linux zealots.

Summary of Events So Far

[jd]

• Consumer Electronics Industry: Linux is the future!
  
• IBM and SGI: Linux is the present!
  
• Microsoft: Linux is the past!
  
• SCO: Linux is ours!
  
• Peruvian and German Governments: A Linux for Every Desktop!
  
• SCO: Only if you pay us loads of money!
  
• US Government: Terrorist nations can deploy Linux against us in less than 45 minutes!
  
• NSA: That's ok, 'cos we already use it, and we've made it more secure. So there.
  
• NASA: Oh, and we've made it so Linux can turn trash PCs into supercomputer clusters.
  
• US Government: Erk!
  
• China: Yaaay! We get to build ourselves a supercompuer! We don't have much to use one for, so we'll probably end up using it for beating everyone else's score on distributed.net, and playing massive games of Quake.
  
• Popular press: Linux? That's something those long-haired wierdos use. No story here.
  

If people think the techno world is boring, they should take another look. Some of this stuff really does make "Dilbert" look better than real life.

Re:Summary of Events So Far

[Aiua]

Based upon recent events, you should make a minor correction to one statement above:

IBM, SGI, and Novell: Linux is the present!

Re:Summary of Events So Far

[Anonymous Coward]

>US Government: Terrorist nations can deploy
>Linux against us in less than 45 minutes!

I haven't laughed so much in a while! With all the SCO articles being sparse this week, I needed a good laugh.

Re:Summary of Events So Far

[Nexus Seven]

US Government: Terrorist nations can deploy Linux against us in less than 45 minutes

That was the British government's claim. The US Government claim would go more like:

• US Government: Iraq tried to buy weapons-grade Linux from Nigeria.

Re:what's with all the links?

[OECD]

Somehow I think slashdot readers are smart enough to find Sony, Philips, Matsushita, Panasonic, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung, NEC, IBM, LG, Thomson, RCA, or Toshiba websites without the useless plethora of links.

Darn Skippy! Some of us use lynx after all. That's a lot of down-arrows to get to 'Read More.' Damn GUI-using muttermuttermutter.

Hey, if he wants to spore ...

[burgburgburg]

you should let him. There are a number of /.ers who have a sufficient fungus content (and a concurrent disappeal to the female of the species) that budding/sporing is really their only chance at procreation.

Disquieting, obviously. But what isn't?

Re:Hmm

[garcia]

eh. a few examples...

Nikon Coolpix 775 upgraded from 1.3 to 1.4 via firmware.bin available on nikonusa.com

Garmin e-Trex Vista upgraded (frequently) from www.garminusa.com

Compaq iPaq 3635 OS upgraded in 2002 to the latest available at the time...

Looks like it is already being done. Why would it change?

Re: You are teh shiz night

[Anonymous Coward]

or any head

My Concerns about Linux in general

[Gavin Miller]

Im concerned with major corporations developing it, we're gonna get back to the point where one program will only run on such and such version...and the fact that companies might try to sell it if they could...

Re:My Concerns about Linux in general

[IM6100]

If it's an embedded application, it only needs to run on one version. The version specifically bundled with it on ROM/Flash/Disk storage inside the device. It will be rigorously tested against that specific version, and any and all other versions are irrelevant.

Re:My Concerns about Linux in general

[Anonymous Coward]

Companies do sell linux. Check out Red Hat, Mandrake, SUSE. There's nothing in the GPL that says you have to work for free, it only says you can't restrict the freedom of the end user.

Re:My Concerns about Linux in general

[Gavin Miller]

I think you mis understood me....Im worried that Linux overall will become this way, not as much one device...just the fact that corporations might influence it too much

More news...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.antioffline.com/slashdot.html

Not "lost", ...

[burgburgburg]

the correct description is "wasn't selected".

That's the new way of doing things.

Re:Hmm

[Aiua]

When placing an OS at the herdware level, why not place it in a flash chip such as your BIOS? This way you can patch a securtiy flaw if you would like to, or you can just leave it alone becuase it is working (like many users do with their BIOS).

Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I am so glad the poster helpfully pointed out the URL for IBM Corp.

Re:Thanks

[Epsillon]

I am so glad the poster helpfully pointed out the URL for IBM Corp.

Perhaps he thought that the list of names including IBM may give those blood-sucking fu^H^H^H^Hpeople at SCO pause for thought. A mighty force they make presented together like that...

Re:Thanks

[IM6100]

I remember with nostalgia how the old-school Apple zealots felt they were 'taking on the evile empire' whenever they went into a rant about the evils of IBM.

Then a few years later, OEM drives labeled as being from IBM started showing up inside Macintosh enclosures. A few years after that all the PowerPC hype spun up, which included Apple, IBM, and Motorola (Motorola mostly as a victim as they have better business opportunities to take advantage of than dicksize wars in the desktop processor market).

And now, the strong anything-but-Microsoft coalition, with a VERY vocal contingent of all those Apple zealots, is cheering on big old Monolithic IBM as their savior.

It's pretty damn amusing.

Smart vibrator?

[TWX]

"Linux, currently a software system mostly used to power big servers and personal computers, is also now emerging as a small set of computing code to drive devices like mobile phones, remote controls and smart vibrators."

And who said that Women didn't like Eunuchs?

And then...

[Greyfox]

Janet said: "I don't like a man with too many muscles." and Frank'n'Furter said "I didn't make him for YOU!"

what's left for microsoft?

[r5t8i6y3]

i just got finished explaining to a non-techie friend how microsoft's long-term prospects on the back-end look dim. i also explained how microsoft's desktop presence is also threatened. i then went on to speculate that the future for microsoft might be under-the-hood of consumer electronics devices including disposable PCs (Dell, HP, etc.).

the future doesn't look bright for microsoft's OS business.

Re:Makes no sense

[Have Blue]

Does your toaster support hyperthreading? By which I mean cramming 2 slices of bread in the same slot...

Show them all ...

[burgburgburg]

the beauty they possess inside

Re:Hmm

[vadim_t]

What do you mean by "hardware level"? A hard disk is hardware. A CPU is software. The code in the BIOS is software that gets executed exactly in the same way as any other program. It's just stored on a flash chip instead of a disk drive.

Jingle all the way

[gilesjuk]

Who's writing the catchy jingle?

Anyway I prefer "Penguin Inside" :)

Re:Jingle all the way

[ultraslacker]

Anyway I prefer "Penguin Inside" :)

I don't know, that makes me think of killer whales.

stop worrying

[penguin7of9]

I just hope all these corporation continue to respect GPL and not find a way to tear Linux apart.

If companies wanted to "tear Linux apart", why would they get together in the CELF? The main point of using Linux is to get a market in which programmers and tools can be shared among many projects and companies. If companies wanted their own proprietary embedded operating systems, they wouldn't have to take Linux and hack it up, they could just keep using whatever they are already using.

If some companies end up making proprietary versions of Linux for their own use, we'd still be better off than we are now, since their systems would still be basically Linux and POSIX-based. That at least means they are contributing to the pool of Linux and POSIX programmers. It also means that any externally visible interfaces, file formats, and protocols are more likely to be open and interoperable.

Just a little caution needed after what happened to UNIX.

What killed commercial UNIX was high cost, poor marketing, high hardware requirements, and Microsoft's sneak-attack from the low end. None of those apply to Linux.

Re:Makes no sense

[Tombstone-f]

Actually, the processor can only do one thing at a time. You see the processor must switch back and forth between slices, and of course for system processes. So, while it might seem (to you or even the toast) that both peices are being toasted at the same time, really there is at most one peice being toasted at one time.

Why embedded Linux?

[MoxFulder]

Yep, Linux is great on my laptop and at work, but why is it so great for embedded systems?

I assume that embedded systems don't need the Unix-like environment, and just run a single application. And how much of the Linux kernel do they actually use? Loadable device drivers are out, SMP is out, networking is probably out for a lot of them, filesystems may not be needed...

So what does an embedded Linux kernel look like? How does embedded Linux compare to things like, say, eCos (Red Hat's open source realtime embedded OS).

Re:Why embedded Linux?

[sexylicious]

An embedded linux kernel is really quite small... say on the order of several hundred kilobytes.
The biggest drawback for linux on embedded systems is the fact that the embedded system will need some kind of chip that does memory management. Otherwise the kernel is useless. That's part of the reason that linux is not as widespread as it could be... the equipment has to have the required architecture. Plus the algorithm that linux uses is not suited to most embedded systems that require real-time computations.
On the other hand, there are some useful attributes of linux besides cost. Memory footprint is one.

Here is a thread that is from a conversation with a previous poster and myself. I know I kind of got excited when I found out about the actual memory footprint of linux. As for what I am probably going to use on my next project... that will most likely be CMX-RTX on an ARM processor. CMX's stuff might be worth checking out too.

Personally, I also think there is a HUGE market potential for medical systems.

Re:Why embedded Linux?

[spydir31]

uClinux runs on systems without MMUs.

Is it a really good thing?

[CoolCat]

The only reason they are perfering linux is beacuse they are using free software. Your and mine hard work, they use it for free and what do they give back? nada. Just overpriced devices that are cool for a few weeks and totaly useless..

Re:Is it a really good thing?

[RatBastard]

And so what? That's the way it goes when you give your work away for free. As long as they abide by the GPL, they can do as they please.

Don't like them making money off of your wiork, don't release your work under the GPL.

Re:Is it a really good thing?

[CoolCat]

I dont mind other people use my work, I just expect large companies that use the stuff I write contribute somehow back to the communite... And don't come with they use it, be grateful bullshit...

Unix is the future of computing.

[Qbertino]

It's been that for 30 years.

Re:Close!-Biz Opportunity?-II

[Anonymous Coward]

Hehe. Sounds like X10 on steroids. But you did give me the idea of an inexpensive energy control computer. Slightly smarter X10 modules, coupled with an SBC controllable via a browser. Especially relevant with the recent electrical blackout.

But I do know that when creating a business, one first of all needs a demand to fulfill (what do people really want, or need?). Two one needs to fill a niche that the big boys aren't filling (How many MP3, TIVO, Cable boxes does one need?). Everything after that point is the typical stuff that one has to deal with in any business.e.g. Financing, marketing, distribution, labour, etc.

Re:For those who don't want to subscribe - the tex

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad that this troll seems to have survived the vicious modding regime currently in place.

Talk about Linux

[redcaboodle]

I was in my local photo shop today, collecting some films. Some people wanted to have prints of their digital photos. "No problem" says the photo guy, we just burn those pics from the smartcard onto a CD and send that in to the Lab.
He fires up the burner - a standalone device with a reader for every digital cam storage medium and a built-in burner and... yes.. its a linux boot sequence and the touch-screen app ran on X. This thing needs drivers for a lot of exotic stuff and was up within 15 seconds.
Quite impressive.

FreeBSD Embedded

[straterpatrick]

I'm just wondering why FreeBSD is not used more for electronics. It's as small and fast as Linux and seems to have less copyright issues. I know that has been and is used in embedded devices. I'm just wondering what Linux's advantage over it is.

Thanks,
Strater
strater.ca

Re:FreeBSD Embedded

[IM6100]

FreeBSD isn't as portable as NetBSD, nor is the kind of advantage in hardware support for desktop OSes needed in an embedded device application.

Plus, you're not as likely to hear about products that embed one of the BSD OSes, as there's no reason for the company to disclose they're using a BSD.

There's lots of embedded NetBSD out there.

Give them a sense of pride...

[default luser]

To make it easier!

Microsoft dying; film at 11...

[Anonymous Coward]

People have been making that comment for 10 years, now. When is it going to happen exactly? Tomorrow? 10 years from now? 50? But when it DOES happen you'll be yelling "I told you so!".

More useless gum flapping. Given a long enough span of time, all predictions will come true...

Re:Microsoft dying; film at 11...

[Anonymous Coward]

More useless gum flapping. Given a long enough span of time, all predictions will come true...

I predict that not all predictions will come true.

Re:Microsoft dying; film at 11...

[r5t8i6y3]

actually, i also told this person that microsoft would never die because they are a huge financial entity. i've been simply questioning their ability to remain dominant in the areas they currently dominate.

Re:Hmm

[MBCook]

ROM? Who uses ROM anymore? Most devices use flash for anything that could ever possibly need to be modified (like the OS/kernel). And since Linux can have a VERY small footprint, it'd not like you need any expensive flash memory. If I can buy a 128mb consumer flash storage device for under $30, you can put the linux kernel in a little bit of flash that you probably already have in your design for next to nothing. Besides, how often is there a important secuity hole in an embeded MP3 player or something like that? It's not like a "real" computer where you have to deal with new hardware and such.

Re:Makes no sense

[FrostedWheat]

Yeah, I'm sure most all toasters are using multiprocessor support!

Not all of them.
Would you like some toast?

And if their code isn't part of the kernel?

[RatBastard]

IF there code isn't part of the kernel, and is only "user space" software, who cares? They can create whatever software they want on top of a very minumal kernel and as long as they don't use GPL software to build from, they don't have to release squat.

Let the children's laughter remind us ...

[burgburgburg]

how we used to be

Profit margins

[Ogerman]

This article claims the profit margins for consumer electronics manufacturers is 1-2%. But I've also frequently heard that the total markup-inflated price of CE is typically about 10x the manufacturing cost. So, if a designer wants to sell a stereo receiver that'll cost $500 in the store, the total cost of parts and labor to build it needs to be about $50. So my question, for anyone who may be knowledgeable in this area, is who are the other players in this mark-up game and how does the breakdown look. Obviously the CE manufacturers have large overhead, but certainly this cannot be the whole picture.

I find it especially ironic that an electronics hobbiest such as myself can often build better quality "CE" equipment at lower cost in my basement and using parts purchased in small (non-bulk priced) quantities. Granted, I count the time investment as hobby and education, but shouldn't the big players be able to do a better job with their massive economies of scale?

Re:Profit margins

[rsheridan6]

Profit = gross revenue - expenses. That means all expenses, from the assembly line to the cost of the parts to the truck driver to shrinkage to the engineer to the PHBs to the marketing dept. etc. etc.. you get the picture. Not to mention that the wholesaler and retailer probably get something like 1/2 of the sticker price.

What would your homebrew equipment cost if you had to pay yourself a wage at reasonable market value?

lyric version

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm so embarrased that I have to post this as AC, but as soon as I read the title this (awful) song popped into my head. Sigh. I'm sorry, in advance,.

Sung to the tune of "The Greatest Love Of All", with apologies to Whitney and Bobby's crack dealer.

I believe that Linux is our future
Patch it well and let them re-compile
Show them all the new stuff it includes inside
Give them a sense of pride
when they get it to compile
Let the Windows crashes remind us how we used to be
Now that everybody's searching for a distro
People need someone to ask "HowTo?"
I never found any one to fulfill my needs
Wrong GUI, wrong lib versions, or worse
So I learned to depend on rolling my own

Chorus:
I decided long ago, never to walk in Microsoft's shadows
If I fail, if I succeed
At least I live as I believe
No matter what they take from me
They can't take away my open source
Because the greatest love of all
Is happening to me
I found the greatest love of all
Burned onto that CD
The greatest love of all
Aint easy to achieve
Learning to run Linux
It is the greatest love of all

I believe that Linux is our future
Patch it well and let them re-compile
Show them all the new stuff it includes inside
Give them a sense of pride
when they get it to compile
Let the Windows crashes remind us how we used to be

Chorus

And if by chance, that special app
That you've been dreaming of
fails 'cause of dependency crap
Find your strength in Knoppix

Great

[alexborges]

Now SCO owns my fridge, the tv, the washing machine...etc.

Doesnt it make you shiver to have McBride come in and take your slushie blender from your hands?

Cover them with BBQ sauce!

[RatBastard]

... and through the nasty little kneebiters are the barbie!

Children. It's what's for dinner!

Re:Makes no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

My toaster is a 4-way then????

Re:Hmm

[ciroknight]

by this i mean like my pda, it has a rom chip that is flashable: ie it can be updated but for the most part it is non-editable, making a virus or an accidental deletion of a system file practically impossible...

Another Linux market...

[hahn]

I'm a physician at a large academic hospital. The healthcare area is one that I think Linux is ideally suited for. Few have attempted it and yet, if you look at the potential benefits, it's almost a no-brainer:

- A large hospital will have hundreds if not thousands of computer terminals. Linux could significantly reduce hospital overhead costs, which nowadays is being given a high priority.

- Linux doesn't currently have the virus/worm problem that Windows has. This is majorly problematic for Windows in the healthcare industry where almost any informatics downtime is unacceptable. Healthcare informatics is rapidly turning into a mission-critical enterprise as more and more hospitals depend on their computer systems to deliver information.

- There's no reason healthcare workers couldn't use the StarOffice/OpenOffice Suites for applications. Most users' needs are pretty basic and documents regarding patients are supposed to be held strictly confidential as well.

- Which brings me to the one downside. Few medical informatics applications are written for Linux. Those that have been are open-source and are developed very slowly since very few programmers out there know anything about (or care to know anything about) healthcare informatics application requirements.

Re:Another Linux market...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not just on licensing, but I bet a linux server/thin client model would save a lot on hardware too.

Re:Another Linux market...

[dfnr2]

Actually, the VistA medical informatics software, including medical imaging software, is available from the VA for a nominal administrative fee, under the Freedom of Information Act. I've used the non-imaging component for charting, etc. at the local large VA, and it's really usable. I'd bet it would port to Linux.

Re:Another Linux market...

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Which brings me to the one downside. Few medical informatics applications are written for Linux. Those that have been are open-source and are developed very slowly since very few programmers out there know anything about (or care to know anything about) healthcare informatics application requirements

The only way to correct this is to demand it from the vendors. They'll be sure to bitch and moan, and attempt to label those demanding it as irelevant hippie wackos. But their competitor that then does it, and secures the sale, gets the last laugh.

If you make the technical decisions, you must at least ask to have the features included that you want--ask enough, and the vendor will either begin to offer it as a defensive measure, or you'll purchase from the first competitor that hears your request. When there's only one vendor of a device or an application, sure, there's an issue--but if this feature is more important than other features, someone will eventually fill the void. Ask Quark about losing ground to InDesign, for an example from Mac-Land.

A corollary to this is to not accept bullshit. We have medical devices with attached PCs that we still can't put on the network, since they are unpatchable and therefore vulnerable to Blaster et al. Why we roll over and not demand a 4 hour fix is beyond me--instead, everyone just shrugs their shoulders and accepts the failings of the OS choice. If the vendors can't make their machines operate as advertised within 4 hours, they need to make other choices--and we should be demanding that they do so, or Get Our Money Back, no excuses.

Re:Another Linux market...

[hahn]

The problem being that hospitals cannot simply change vendors on a whim. It doesn't work like any other industry. Once you decide to go with a vendor, it takes some MAJOR pitfalls in that vendor's application to make you change before your next scheduled re-evaluation. Changing informatics vendors for a hospital is not only EXTREMELY expensive, but also time consuming. And the healthcare workers HATE change unless they don't have to learn ANYTHING new or the new software is Tivo-like in ease of use. Which is quite frankly impossible in healthcare.

The vendors out there know that its a bitch for hospitals to switch which is why they're so slow to add features or overhaul outdated systems/interfaces. Also, the available stuff out there ranges from worse to slightly-better-than-bad. Add to that the problem that healthcare workers, having gone through the major pain in the ass of learning how to use a certain program (so many healthcare workers, believe it or not are allergic to technology) do NOT like having new added features every few months or weeks, and you suddenly start to realize why the healthcare industry's informatics infrastructure is stuck in the stone-ages.

Re:Hmm

[quasi_steller]

Most likely the program would be put on an EPROM (Eraseable Programmable Read Only Memory) or better yet an EEPROM (Electrical EPROM), and not just a regular ROM. Remember ROM doesn't mean you can't write to it, it is used to differentiate from RAM (Random Access Memory) where you can randomly read and write to any location in memory. EPROMs and EEPROMs require all of the memory to be erased at once, and all of the memory to be written at once, wich would be ideal for an OS, IMHO.

Man SCO better lose big time or they are doomed

[SuperDuperMan]

If they are working with miniscule profits imagine what the affect would be to pay the SCO blood money for the embedded OS license.

You're right

[nnnneedles]

You're right, it is awful.

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

A CPU is software

A CPU is software? All of my AMD Athalon's and my various Pentium 3's all look like hardware to me. If a CPU is really software then when I buy that new Pentium 4 from NewEgg.com I'll just download it, that should save me on shipping costs!

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I take it you are not a network administrator? I know that when I have security issues with all of my Cisco routers I do not just throw away the device. I put the newest version of the IOS on it.

Re:Makes no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but your sister does 4-ways...

Its, True. My company considered it.

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

We have a "embedded" product whichs is really just an old 500 mghz pc with custom hardware. Right now, its just running romdos. We considered switching it over to linux, but the 3rd party libraries would need to be replaced and a great deal of code rewritten. If we make a completely new version of the product ( from scratch) we would definitly choose linux.

ho hum...

[fussman]

Linux is the Future

It must be a slow day on slashdot.

Linus needs to change the license.

[Anonymous Coward]

He needs to amend the license to make it less restrictive, a Linus Public License of sorts, and to get away from RMS' ranting BS. As it is, RMS seems to think Linux is his baby and only came into being due to him. Linus needs to remind him that it isn't.

No, practical issues are the main barrier.

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Ease of installation and upkeep. Without a dominating distribution, or a standard framework, Windows-like ease of installation will never exist. This is paramount, even for a "Linux-restore disk" option as like on current MS-Dell machines

2) Apps. There has to be games and standard apps available as there is for Windows, and have them in binary format. Compiling should only be an option for those who have nothing better to do, or who don't have significant others (most current Linux users).

Re:No, practical issues are the main barrier.

[ndogg]

These are not barriers because:

1) Does anyone that buys a Tivo or a Sharp Zaurus, which use Linux underneath, have to install the software? No, of course not. These are specific use devices, not desktop or laptop computers.

2) Again, these devices have rather specific uses, and so the company will write the required applications for them. This is a non-issue.

Re:Hmm

[vadim_t]

Brain fart, guess I should get some sleep.

Re:Hmm

[ciroknight]

I mean like a BIOS rom, the software is physically stored on the chip instead of a logical representation on a hard drive. this makes the data much more secure against user stupidity and file modifiying viruses..

Re:Makes no sense

[cbreaker]

Actually, it's where you cut a peice of bread in half and call it two peices of bread.

Re:Hmm

[IM6100]

Only if that particular piece of software is part of your embedded solution. And since your product only uses a small subset of the whole of a Linux OS, you can strip out stuff with potential bugs that you don't use, and very very rigorously test the parts you do use.

Plus, unless you're talking about a very, very high volume product, your firmware will probably be flashed or in a socketed OTP. Masked ROM, let alone masked code right in the embedded controller, is expensive and not commonly used. I bet there isn't a product out there with Linux masked into a chip.

Re:Close!-Biz Opportunity?-II

[El]

Don't forget the power-over-ethernet (IEEE 802.3af), so all I have to do is run Cat5 to it... how many existing SBCs support POE?

IBM 405LP (Low Power)

[rshimizu12]

IBM 405LP (Low Power) We are about to see on of the biggest breakthoughs in Linux embedded devices. Recently Motorola announced the AC970 Linux based phone in Asia. Currently the Windows CE pda and phones have a big power problem. They can only last about 3 hours. IBM has some big alliances in the cell phone chip market. It would make a lot of sense for IBM to incorporate their chip tecnology for cell phones. I think next year we are going to start seeing pda's based upon the 405lp. It would not be improbable for IBM to do a limited production run of let's say 5000 of 405lp and give them to their employees and have them show the pdas to their customrers.

MOD UP +5 INSIGHTFUL

[Anonymous Coward]

Eat my penis slashdot. Eat it up.

Re:Close!-Biz Opportunity?-II

[Anonymous Coward]

"how many existing SBCs support POE?"

Not many

More summaries.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple: Linux is just Unix, which what OSX is.
Lindows: We sell free Linux, for $39.99!
Linus: I invented Linux!
RMS: I invented Linux! And Linus Torvalds!
Al Gore: I invented Linux! And the Internet!
Al Sharpton: Linux robs jobs from Black coders!
India: Linux saves you money, if you hire us!
US ITers: Linux makes us lose jobs!
O.J. Simpson: You crackers are funny!

Why embedded Linux?-MMU

[Anonymous Coward]

"The biggest drawback for linux on embedded systems is the fact that the embedded system will need some kind of chip that does memory management. Otherwise the kernel is useless. "

You should have read the link provided in the previous conversation.

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Small is 32KB, not 2 or 4MB.

Re:Hmm

[vadim_t]

What do you mean by "physically stored"? It's also physically stored on my hard disk. And the BIOS isn't very different from the CompactFlash card I use to carry PuTTY and other things around.

Maybe you mean that not being visible as a disk drive gives it some protection, but that's not that big of an advantage. I mean, under DOS, CD-ROMs and Flash drives aren't visible without a driver either, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

Re:Makes no sense

[Sri Lumpa]

Yes, but SCO claims that up to four-way SMP is not enterprise level so unless you have a 8-way or more toaster capable of toasting 8 slices or more at once then it is not enterprise class and shouldn't count.

FreeMED.

[Grendel Drago]

FreeMED is actually being used in some applications---mostly small physician practices, but some mid-sized hospitals as well. That's a development copy right now, but you can mail the maintainer (unobfuscate email to use) for info about the stable release.

--grendel drago