Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Embedded Linux Tools Market a Myth?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the coulda-fooled-me dept.

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."

7 of 290 comments (clear)

  1. Look who the author of the article is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  2. Your application has to need Linux. by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 5, Insightful
    To throw Linux at any and all embedded applications is a big mistake. Unless you need stuff like multiple TCP/IP servers and multitasking, you are better off with a smaller OS. There are millions of DOS-based controllers out there that won't be replaced with Linux anytime soon because they are cheaper than the hardware needed to support Linux. Likewise, PIC controllers can do things cheaper than DOS controllers for trivial tasks.

    There is no one-size-fits-all in the embedded controller market. Linux has it's niche, but it can't fit everywhere.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  3. Re:The author has a point... as far as it goes by lurvdrum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then let Joe CEO take out a paid for support contract - heaven knows there are enough companies getting into the Linux support game now. With all the money he saves avoiding proprietary operating software he can certainly afford it.

  4. Reliable unbiased article, not ! by polyp2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The guy that wrote the article...

    Dan O'Dowd is President and chief executive officer of Green Hills Software,Inc. (Santa Barbara, Calif.)

    Green Hills Software

    Green Hills Software are a large RTOS manufacturer, so of course he is going to say that. Whether or not his statements are true or not I find it difficult to believe someone whose business relies on their own Proprietary OS.

    They also have a not dissimilar marketing bumpf on their website

    our product is so much better than everyone elses!

    nick ...

    --
    Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
  5. No kidding by JoeBuck · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  6. What do you want your heart monitor to run by codepunk · · Score: 5, Funny

    For 200 points what operating system would you like
    your heart monitor to be running?

    1. Linux
    2. XP Embedded
    3. Windows CE

    Survey says.....Linux...

    --


    Got Code?
  7. Right and wrong by Alinraz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, first my quals:
    * I am an embedded programmer.
    * I've used a variety of embedded OSs including both vendor (pay) and home-grown (free except for labor) and Linux.
    * I love Linux. I use it at work and home as my desktop, and at work on servers. I have contributed to several projects including ALSA and gcc and binutils.

    The way I see it, Dan is both right and wrong.

    He's right in that Linux is not approprate for many "true" embedded applications. Most apps have very stringent memmory requirements, don't need most services, and work on severly limited chips (over 70% of all processors sold are 8-bitters). Also, Linux can not meet the real-time reqirements of many applications (feel free to flame me, but it is definately true, despite any "real-time layers" that have been added to Linux). For example, I work on a product that has 512k of SRAM, with a processor clock speed of 156 MHz, and it's "clock tick" has to be less than 40 usec (typical times of Linux include 5 msec). We use an in-house "OS" which isn't a true OS anyway, just a tightly coded main loop in order to meet our requirments.

    On the otherhand, we have another "embedded" project that does use Linux. It is the best OS for the job in this case.

    As usual in engineering, one must chose the right tool for the right job.

    But, for companies that make development tools, we'd be a poor choice on that Linux system because it is highly modded and they'd not be able to support it econommically.

    What it comes down to is embedded projects MUST chose the right tools for the right job, and Linux is not allways the right tool.

    For embedded tools vendors, Linux OSs will be difficult to support for the very reasons that Dan mentions.

    But this doesn't mean that there's no place for Linux in embedded or psudo-embedded applications (psudo-embedded apps look like embedded systems on the surface, but are usually full-featured general purpose systems on the inside. Think TiVo).

    The Linux support I'd like to see from tools vendors is better tools on the Linux workstations. Support gcc and binutils for more processors or optimize the code output better on gcc. Help with gdb, insight and DDD to make your hardware emulators work with them on the workstation. I'm tired of having to keep a dual-boot system just to run VisionClick so I can debug my 5407 embedded systems.