Embedded Linux Tools Market a Myth?

nadamsieee writes "EETimes is running a story that proclaims that the embedded Linux tools market is a myth The author, Dan O'Dowd, sites variety of problems (challenges?) with embedded Linux ranging from poor real-time performance to lack of broad developer support. Dan concludes: "Considering all of the possible support avenues, Linux support ends up being lower quality and more costly than the alternatives of using a homegrown operating system or purchasing a proprietary one." Maybe Dan should check out the success stories at LinuxDevices.com or perhaps try a more traditional embedded OS that also happens to be Free."

Comments

Look who the author of the article is

[Anonymous Coward]

Dan O'Dowd is President and chief executive officer of Green Hills
Software,Inc.
Green Hills sells compilers and RTOS for embedded
systems. (They have been the market for a long time).
No wonder he does not like Linux.

No kidding

[JoeBuck]

EE Times regularly gives space to marketing droids to flog their stuff, and regular readers know how to distinguish these marketing puff pieces from the very good stuff that the full-time staff writes.

If someone at one of the embedded Linux companies asks, EE Times will probably be happy to give them equivalent space next week to answer.

Re:Your application has to need Linux.

[Apreche]

http://tron.um.u-tokyo.ac.jp/TRON/ITRON/home-e.htm l

Itron, the #1 operating system in the world. Untouchable in the embedded world. Linux is nice because it makes interoperability with the desktop smooth if you have the same OS on both. But in terms of quality ITRON is #1 for a reason other than marketing (which is the reason Windows is #1).

Re:Processor support and realtime

[Svartalf]

In actuality... Anyone considering the use of most of the RTOS choices out there are typically looking at one of the following CPUs:

x86
PPC
ARM
MIPS
Coldfire
DragonBall

The goof-ball stuff usually ends up using the roll-your-own stuff and is not typically used in most contexts because you have to find silicon, find tools to begin with (since it's custom, there's no standard tools- uh, gee whiz, what do you know, you have to build tools, just like he said...), and you have to certify the operation of the damn thing.

It's simpler and easier to use an off the shelf part from one of the usual suspects than to use something else.

Now, having said this, you've got choices, depending on what you want to do because you've got standard tools and standard operating system choices...

VxWorks
QNX
Lynx
pSOS
RTEMS
eCos
Linux

Of the aforementioned, the licensing on the last three are very attractive and depending on what you're trying to do, you really want to use them instead of the others.

The article from the author in question is guilty of lying by omission of key facts in the embedded systems industry. He's right about all of it. But what he doesn't tell you is that for most everything done, you're either not using an OS and using something like a PIC, Z8, or Z80 or you're using a more robust CPU with an OS and much more memory- something that Linux, RTEMS, and eCos do well with on most counts for embedded systems. IF you know what you're doing in the first place- you have do design your code for read-only conditions, etc. in the first place and most of Linux is happy fine with it. I know, I DO embedded Linux stuff. Real time? Don't need it all that often- most embedded devices just need memory and resource management, they don't need rate monotonic scheduling of tasks, etc. Real time is actually bandied about far more than is really, really needed- and worse yet, it's more defined by the box you draw around things. Throw enough CPU and memory Muscle at something and even Desktop or Server NT can be "real time" for the purposes of the definition.

Typical...

[jasno]

Hello, Embedded Developer here.

First, let me point out that the article was written by the president and CEO of Green Hills, a vendor of proprietary development tools and several RTOSes.

Second, let me point out a mistake made by many, many analysts when talking about 'embedded' linux. The 'embedded' market ranges from 8-bit microcontroller based devices, to PC style hardware, to cell phones and set-top boxes, satellites and mars rovers. So it is very difficult to come up with an assessment of any technology that applies uniformly to the entire space.

I've worked in practically every segment of the embedded market(DSP based consumer electronics, 8-bit control systems, headless PC's, set-top boxes, cell fones, networking appliances). I've used a variety of tools/solutions ranging from expensive and proprietary to free and open.

I recently had a client interested in using embedded linux for a cell fone design. They were put off by the $80k price tag for vxWorks, and so they decided to try linux. They were able to squeeze the system down to around 2MB on an ARM9/TI-OMAP. The realtime performance was acceptable. And to support the development they purchased several JTAG BDM debuggers. Its not that they were looking for a free ride, but $80k for a proprietary OS with limited features didn't seem like good business sense.

Also, the support I've received on mailing lists and IRC is above and beyond anything I've ever seen from a commercial vendor. In fact, I used to work for one of the biggest RTOS vendors around, and I found it more difficult to get answers out of my own company than the linux community.

Can you say "bias"?

[El]

Dan O'Dowd is President and chief executive officer of Green Hills Software,Inc.

Gee... don't they sell non-Linux tools? Do you think there is any possibility that the author might have some bias on the subject of embedded Linux tools?