Perhaps in a thriving economy in a huge company it's not as big a deal. But we are not in a thriving economy, budgets are being cut, and state and city tax coffers are in problem.
Like someone else said, it could be the recession is one of OSS's biggest friends. This isn't OSS, but it's a case of a city looking to save money in tough times ditching Microsoft. As long as their decision works they're not going to suddenly go back to MS when there is more money available.
That's the good thing about all these reports about countries and cities abandoning Microsoft: Once someone jumps off the MS train, it's doubtful they'll go back unless things go very bad for them.
Personally, I would like it if I went into my car dealership (Jiffy Lube, whatever), and when they scanned my tires they said "Hey, these have been recalled".
This can be done by the same people looking at the serial numbers on your tires. Sure, it takes maybe 30 seconds instead of 5, but you're paying 20 bucks anyway.
If you want to go high-tech, put some durable barcodes on them. They can be scanned just about as quickly as moving the RFID reader to within 24 inches, but can't be used for "suspect" reasons since you can't scan a barcode on a wheel on a car that is moving.
I laugh myself horse reading all the replies on here from boring middle class school kids that are worried shitless about their privacy. I promise you the government hasn't, doesn't, and won't ever give 2 shits about ANYTHING you do.
After 9/11 and the Littleton high school massacre I'm not so sure that's necessarily true.
they want to believe the government actually has some interest in what they're doing, when in reality, the government couldn't care less."
The government doesn't care what you do as an individual. But when your travels and behavior can be tracked and compared to "the norm" in real time, the computer doing the comparing will be happy to raise the red flag on you.
That and no-one cares what you do now, but if RFIDs allow a way to keep track of you, will the FBI make an effort to AVOID using that information? Will local law enforcement not press for the ability to have their automated system run through the data and see if anyone has exceeded 70mph within city limits?
It's not that anyone cares or wants to use it for these things now. It's the data mining capability that could exist in the future that is scary. "Information wants to be free, and data wants to be mined.":)
I personally would feel more comfortable making purchases online if I knew the SSL certificate was from a verified source and not just some certificate that some Joe Schmoe created.
Why? Getting a phony SSL certificate even from the "big buys" (Verisign, Thawte, etc.) is a piece of cake if you don't mind lying or being unethical. It's not hard to give Verisign the documentation they want even if you dom't have it--as long as you don't mind lying or forging. Someone out to conduct some fraud isn't going to be bothered by this anyway.
If you really trust an SSL certificate--even those issued by Thawte or Verisign--as a key to automatically trust some website with no personal responsibility to make that judgement yourself, you're going to to get burned.
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Verisign and Thawte are NOT what cause my customers to trust me. They trust me because they know me. They trust me because they know people that have purchased from me. Some people (foolishly) trust a website just because it "looks" professional. But virtually no-one trusts a website just because it has a Versign or Thawte logo on it.
Let's put it this way: I had people submitting online orders with credit card information before I got SSL. I had absolutely no security and they trusted me--they even trusted the Internet itself with unencrypted data. Then, after some amount of hassle, I got an SSL certificate with Thawte. I noticed no increase in sales. After a year it was time to renew and Thawte gave me an entirely new bundle of requirements and documents that they wanted just to RENEW me. I said "screw that," cancelled my renewal, and am now happily with Comodo/InstantSSL.
There are many SSL certificate options out there, just like there are many domain registrars out there. And as is the case with domain names, only foolish people with too much money with their hands are staying with Verisign.
Anyone want to put any bets on when Verisign will go out of business? Their customers FLEE because of bad service and high prices, and yet they don't change. Amazing.
For communism to work you need increadibly abundance of wealth.
That's really it, and it's an ironic paradox. Capitalism CREATES wealth, communism CONSUMES it. And that's the problem--capitalism is sustainable, communism isn't. People complain that capitalism isn't fair because some people are richer than others. Some are MUCH richer than others. But it's not a question of fairness, it's a question of sustainability.
Capitalism has existed for thousands of years and is still functioning. We still have poor and there are still are rich, and that's just part of reality. But, as far as I know, no communist society has survived for more than about 75 years, has it? I believe USSR held the record but they went belly-up. China's been communist for about, what, 55 years now? But they're opening up to capitalism and I'll bet that they'll be capitalist within 2 decades.
Point is, history shows that capitalism is sustainable. Communsim isn't.
Inasmuch as open source, OS really is similar to communism. Everyone puts in what they can and takes what they need. As a closed model it might not be sustainable. But it IS sustainable because, in reality, people do it for fun and have other sources of income. Their other sources of income are the "capitalism" that generates wealth, and open source is the "communism" that consumes it (inasmuch as their time). Another word for that is "hobby.":) It just so happens that this hobby produces something of value to the entire world and which may even increase the capitalistic capabilities of others (or self) in the future.
I hate 10-digit dialing. If we need another area code, assign another area code. But to have to dial 10 or 11 digits to call someone across the street is silly.
If we are going with the extended dialing, it should be 10-digit dialing unless it is a toll. If you always have to dial 1 then you have no way of knowing if it is a toll call or not.
In any case, we should certainly re-standardize. One of the most elegant aspects of the U.S./Canadian system for so many years is that a local number was 7 digits, the area code was 3, and you only had to dial 1+area code if it was going to cost you. Now every area has its own approach as to whether you dial 7, 10, or 11 digits and you pretty much have to ask which it is when you arrive. Our system is now as non-standard and non-consistent as the rest of the world that uses variable length city codes and local phone numbers.
Personally, I'd be for creating new area codes. If necessary make the area codes 4 digits rather than 3 since I believe we'll soon run out of area codes. But why in the world do I have to dial 10 or 11 digits to identify the house across the street? It's silly.
I agree. If I remember correctly that's the same loophold (the civil rights thing) that was used to retry the police officers in the Rodney King trial. Like you, I'm not suggesting that the police officers shouldn't have been found guilty. But if they were found innocent, that's it, end of story. Retrying them for the same event should be illegal.
Re:You can appeal an ACQUITTAL in Norway?
on
"DVD-Jon" Faces Retrial
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And shouldn't the justice system be able to say: hold on! That piece of evidence should have been admitted (or whatever the alleged mistake was)
Logically, yes. Practically, no. I don't think anyone is opposed to someone guilty being found guilty and if new evidence is found or an error in the original trial would have resulted in a guilty verdict, logic says the guilty person should be retried.
In reality, once a person is found innocent then that should be it. That's why we (supposedly) can't be tried for the same crime twice. The risk is that if we aren't protected from being retried, we can be retried and harrased for the rest of our lives for strictly political or other reasons. The threat of that can be used to keep people from speaking up against corrupt officials or against people with more money than they that could pay to keep you pretty much on trial for the rest of your life. We aren't protected from being retried to let the guilty get away, but to keep the innocent from being harrased, or the guilty from being harrased after they've "paid their due to society" or whatever.
Unfortunately, ever since the Rodney King verdict I've come to realize that we aren't really protected. First they charged the officers, they got off (for better or for worse), and then after the riots they were retried on other charges. That was BS. Criminals should be charged with the maximum crime for a given event and that's it. I.e., if beating up Rodney King could result in a charge of Assault, Misuse of Police Authority, or violation of his civil rights, they should pick the "most severe" charge and that's the charge. At the very least, all charges for a given event should be filed before the trial starts. To charge the police, get an innocent verdict and then say, "Oh, we'll go ahead and accuse them of violating his civil rights" was completely BS in my opinion. There may be some legal justification for why they could do that, but the *spirit* of protection from double jeapordy was certainly violated that day.
I have an m130 and just last month purchased a Navman m-series GPS adapter. You just slap it onto the back of the m130 and you have NMEA GPS via the serial port. It seems to work great! M130=$230 and Navman=$160. Total price=$390.
That said, what I've found most lacking is good GPS software for the Palm. I wonder if the authors of the GPS software actually use their own software. The best I've found so far is Cetus GPS. What it does, it does well--but there are many "obvious" features missing, IMHO.
Do you have any idea how much data is involved in street maps and route calculations? For a trip through a few states you will need megabytes and megabytes of memory for the data, either RAM or at least HD cache. In either case you're not getting anywhere with 64KB combined RAM.
If you're displaying a map to the user, go for a GUI. If your only concern is accessing megabytes of data then I can assure you an 8051 is more than capable of doing it. Some 8051 derivatives now come with megabytes of program memory and/or megabytes of RAM.
As it turns out, I'm working on a GPS mapping system for the Palm as we speak. I am very aware of the complications and the amount of data involved--and that's with Palm, not a microcontroller. That said, accessing megabytes of memory using an 8051--be it on a hard drive or in memory--is NOT hard.
Me: You can [...] have a network of 10 8051 microcontrollers scattered around the car for under $20.
You: You are kidding, right? That's the OEM quantity cost of the micro alone. What about the support circuitry, PC board, casing, cabling, hardware design and development cost?
I'm not kidding. As long as we're talking about building with any kind of volume you can easily get a network of 10 microcontrollers for less than $20. In many cases, the microcontroller is ALL THAT YOU NEED. That's one of the cost advantages of microcontrollers. You often don't need a whole bunch of supporting circuitry sharing a PC board.
I can tell you that replacing 10 special purpose micro-based computers with one general purpose computer very often IS cheaper, whether you believe it or not.
I believe it, if you are comparing apples to apples. If you're talking about replacing 10 microcontroller with a single microcontroller, sure, it'll probably be cheaper. If you're talking about replacing 10 microcontrollers with a WinCE system that requires supporting circuitry and probably an OS license, I seriously doubt it.
This is only to illustrate that just because that 8051 costs $5 doesn't mean that that reflects in ANY way on the final cost of the product.
It DOEs reflect final COST. Final price to the end consumer is a completely different matter, and I never said an 8051 system would be cheaper to the consumer--although it should be. But it will usually be cheaper to the manufacturer than a WinCE system. Whether they want to pass that savings on to the consumer is a business decision.
The OS won't render street maps or play files. It facilitates low level functions such as allowing both GPS and music player to run on the same hardware at once, it provides the FS and networking code, it (possibly) provides a GUI library, etc.
Right. But if you know up-front which tasks your application requires it is entirely possible that you can do it more efficiently yourself and require less hardware if you omit the OS. And if there's any question about the reliability of the OS (as in the case of WinCE), then eliminating that additional question mark is a good thing.
If you don't use an OS, you have to code the task switching and all other services yourself. These particular services are some of the trickiest and most bug-prone types of code there are.
Yes and no. Yes, they are one of the trickiest and bug-prone types of code there are if you have to plan for every possible contingency and software application that may be running on your OS. It is significantly easier when you know what applications your code is going to have to "task-switch" between. It's even questionable whether it's even "task switching" if the entire system is designed for the combined purpose.
I'm not sure you understand what goes into reading a file from a CD or HD. You don't just issue a command to a CD drive to "play", drives typically require you to read or write a block of data (typically 512 bytes) at a particular location.
Let's not play games and get condescending. Of course I know what goes into reading a CD or a HD.
First, if we're talking about a car and a CD most likely you are *playing* a CD, not reading data off of it. CD-ROMs can be told to "play track X" and forget about it and that will play the music you need to play over the car stereo.
Second, if you are reading data from a CD-ROM or a HD and want to use FAT32 or some other file system, sure, it is more complicated. The application may or may not require one of those complicated file systems.
Drives have no notion of files and directories, they only know blocks.
Thanks, Jedi master, I wouldn't have ever known that. That must explain why none of my CD-ROM code has ever worked! Thanks!:)
Me: Due to the incredibly low cost of microcontrollers, this is going to beat a central WinCE system every time.
You: What can I say, just about every car manufacturer out there is proving you wrong on that.
Ok, how many microcontrollers does your car have? How many WinCE systems? Mine has dozens of microcontrollers and not a single WinCE system. I'd bet that even BMW still has some microcontrollers in their car. That said it seems that designers are still seeing the merits in reliability and cost of using microcontrollers in many critical parts of the vehicle. I fail to see where any manufacturer is proving me wrong. But I look forward to you helping me out with that...
Maybe it will take switching from WinCE to make things more reliable, but they're certainly not ditching the system architecture.
It's a matter of using the RIGHT architecture. But I don't think you're going to see car manufacturers abandoning microcontrollers throughout their vehicles anytime soon. Even if you add WinCE user-interfaces, the real work is going to continue to be done by microcontrollers. They're cheap and historically more reliable. I think cars will go out of fashion before that changes.
But honestly, Windows CE, Windows, PalmOS and Unix are not RTOSes. If you'd mentioned VxWorks, pSOS, OS-9, ThreadX or QNX, I wouldn't have doubted your mad skillz.
Hmmm. Re-read the thread. I never said Windows, Windows CE, Palm OS or Unix where RTOSs. I said they were OSs.
When you say "microcontroller", don't you mean "generic microprocessor core with on-board extras like I/O controllers, etc".
A "microcontroller" is a part whose primary function is to "control" as opposed to "process." If you are controlling EFI, trunk release, key spit-outs, RPMs, etc. these are all perfect functions for a microcontroller. If you are doing heavy calculations, such as extracting signals for the SETI project, then a microprocessor is the best solution.
I'm not saying that a microcontroller is the best choice for every application. It isn't. I wouldn't write or use a version of Word developed for a microcontroller, it's the wrong tool for the job.
The problem here is that too many people seem to think that to get anything developed anymore, you need a fully-functioning OS to make it work. That's wrong. They're killing a fly with a cannon. You don't need a system/part that costs in excess of $20 a piece and requires an OS license when a 50 cent microcontroller will do the job.
Of course, most people in the field DO know this. And that's why when push comes to shove and you're moving a volume of units, the decision will be made to go with a microcontroller that costs 50 cents a piece rather than a microprocessor that is overkill and costs $20 a piece because, when you make a million of them, the microcontroller will have a total cost of $500,000 while the microprocessor will cost $20 million. And that difference in price is more than sufficient to pay the higher salaries for professionals in the field that will make your application work on a 50 cent part instead of a $20 system.
Perhaps, but it is limited in the total amount of addressable memory, and once you add external memory you get into messy issues of paging and crap like that. It's not a 32-bit processor, after all, and the linear address space isn't that large.
Funny thing is, when you ditch the operating system and Microsoft, you'd be surprised what you can do with 50 MIPS and 64k. "32-bit" is by far a requirement for most embedded functions.
According to whom? Experience and statistics would teach you that the more code you write yourself, the more bugs you tend to end up with.
Agreed. But the fact that I've never seen a story about an embedded EFI causing a motor to shut down but HAVE seen many reports of Windows/CE failing would seem to indicate that using an excessive amount of third-party code (in the form of WiNCE) isn't going to cut down on bugs either.
But having lots of micros scattered around an automobile also increases the cost and decreases the flexibility: more hardware, more networking required to get the micros talking to each other, only a limited number of ways in which they can interact with each other.
I don't know how much a WinCE system costs, but if their costs compared to Palm devices are any reference then I'd venture that they aren't particularly cheap. You can, on the other hand, have a network of 10 8051 microcontrollers scattered around the car for under $20.
Consolidating many functions into a single computer is attractive because it can lower costs (especially with off-the-shelf OSs and hardware) and also offers the lure of easy feature upgrades.
You'd have to have a dang-cheap WinCE system to be able to compete with even a network of microcontrollers. And cars aren't (normally) computers that *require* frequent software updates, so this usually isn't going to be a factor. But if it is an issue, most modern 8051s are in-system programmable with on-board flash so there's nothing stopping you from upgrading software.
Well, that's not the type of software they'd be looking to reuse, that would definitely be a custom job. But if you also want the same computer to run your GPS and your MP3 player, how would you do it without an OS?
Neither a GPS nor an MP3 necessarily require an OS. Sure, both can be developed under an OS, but it isn't necessary. An Ateml part exists that includes an integrated MP3 player and that is based on the 8051, no OS necessary. While GPS functions aren't integrated into any 8051 device I know, an external chipset for that would be the best approach (I'm not aware of any WinCE software that deals with the raw GPS signals and calculates positions--everything gets their data from a separate chipset that does the actual work--the results of which can be delivered to a microcontrolelr as easily as it can to an OS).
So, again, neither of these functions require an OS.
A lot if you want to deal with real file systems such as on CDs and DVDs, store mapping data and updates, and do all sorts of other memory intesive things.
You're not going to do the actual CD or DVD "reading" under a microcontroller any more than you do the actual reading under WinCE. WinCE just issues commands to the IDE bus which causes the DVD or CD to "play." A microcontroller such as the 8051 can do that too. In fact, there's free public code that can read/replay a CD-ROM and access an IDE hard drive from the 8051. But, in the end, most likely the 8051 wouldn't do more than "Make the CD player start playing music" just as the WinCE device would tell it to do the same thing.
The fact is, the current approach in the automotive industry is still the best: A network of specific microcontrollers doing specific tasks. Due to the incredibly low cost of microcontrollers, this is going to beat a central WinCE system every time and, at the same time, be less susceptible to Microsoft-based crashes.
How many programmers in circulation can program an 8052 microcontroller?
Quite a few, actually. Have you actually looked? But I'll admit there are more Windows programmers... There are probably more accountants, too, but that doesn't mean they are the right people for the job.
This is the advantage that Microsoft gets in the embedded market. The system may be overkill for most of these applications, but with hordes of developers who have experience with the platform, you can find people to do the work for much cheaper.
And you get what you pay for. Like BMWs spitting out keys, opening trunks, etc.
You're very confused as to what an embedded OS is. I'm not surprised, because you've never worked with one.
Uh, yeah, right. I've only been a consultant in this field for years. But whatever you say.
However, an engine or an office climate control device or a telecoms switch has a lot more variables to work with, and it has to work with them in realtime. A PIC will not do.
Never used a PIC, but there are degrees between PIC and a Pentium. Many people that say "a microcontroller can't do that, you need a Pentium running Windows" are precisely the people that have probably programmed under Windows and probably haven't programmed a PIC or an 8052.
Sure, there are tasks that are not appropriate for a microcontroller. GUI is one of them. If there isn't a fancy GUI, a microcontroller can *probably* do it.
In order to control all your realtime subsystems, are you going to use a fast, hot running, power guzzling CPU running code that continually polls these devices? Or, are you going to use a slower CPU running event-driven code? If you're running event-driven code, how are you going to maintain realtime control over each subsystem?
Interrupts. And even microcontrollers aren't that slow these days, 50 MIPS easy. But I'm sure you knew that.
You've obviously never seen what an engine or a telecoms switch is running.
Telecom, no. But guess what? Many engines are controlled by an Intel 8032-based microcontroller that were designed specifically to control engines. I'm sure you can find more complicated engine controllers, just as you can find WinCE in a BMW. Doesn't mean it's necessary or even the best choice.
For example, the computer in the BMW takes care of the climate control, entertainment system, and lots of other features of the car. It's also running a pretty fancy GUI. You need a fair bit of horsepower for this sort of thing, an 8051 won't do--especially if some of the features (such as music) are done in software.
An 8051 can do all of that, with the possible exception of the GUI. If you insist on a fancy Windows-like GUI you might want to put that on another part, but the 8051 is perfect for the rest of it. There is even an 8051 (from Atmel) that handles playing MP3s with no external parts.
Some of this stuff might be available as simple C libraries that you can link into your code without requiring an OS (or as a pseudo-OS where the app and the OS are one single executable image), but not everything.
Most of it exists, and that which doesn't, you write. You end up with more reliable code. Simply the fact that microcontroller-based applications fail less frequently than CE-based applications is pretty clear evidence of that. Also, those of us working at the assembly level on microcontrollers tend to be a little more careful than Windows programmers--or so it would seem.
A lot more third party software is available for larger OSs such as WinCE and Linux, and these OSs also provide a lot more native functionality that you don't have to code or buy extra, such as a GUI, networking, memory and storage management etc.
Agreed, but how much third-party software is available to control the climate in a BMW? To spit out keys in some situation? How much memory and storage and networking is required in a car? "Think outside the OS."
Again, an OS is best for a system that has to run many different things and those things can't be known ahead of time. A nice, small, embedded system is best for applications where you know what the thing is going to do. Even if a single chip has to control cruise control, air conditioning, EFI, an GPS positioning, that can all be done easily by a microcontroller. You don't need an OS for a microcontroller to attend many tasks at the "same time."
For many, a highly specialized hardware and software platform might still be the best choice, while for others a more open OS is preferable
Agreed. I'd just argue that a car is a perfect example where highly specialized hardware and software would be the way to go.
I would NEVER turn control for that many parts of my car over to a computer... If that means I drive the same old cars for another 50 years, so be it.
How old is your current car? If it's been made in the last, oh, 15-20 years, you've probably already turned over control of many of the parts of your car to a computer. They call it an ECM and it's really a microprocessor, but it's still a "computer."
I'm told my car has 6 computers driving various functions and that to replace them would total $10,000.
That's what it would cost you, after dealer mark-up. A "computer" in a car is normally a "microcontroller," a single chip. So what they're really telling you is that it would cost $10k for 6 chips. And I can assure you that the unit cost of those 6 chips is under a dollar a piece.
If you can cut down the number of computers needed, you can lower the price of your car or increase the profit margin. Or both.
Increase profit margin, if that's possible. Are you really serious when you say they'd charge you $10k to replace the "6 computers" in your car???
The down side to that is that if the single computer fails, all those functions go away.
The problem is when you use OS's like CE it is entirely possible that the single computer will fail. When you develop it all on a microcontroller and get rid of all the fancy BS, you can get everything into a single chip and be stable.
You know, I really think it comes down to keeping Microsoft as far away from anything of any importance. And I say that in all honesty, not just to score points with the anti-MS crowd here.
If you've never built a cost sensitive or limited power/ram/disk/clock application then you just don't think about these things.
I've developed under Windows CE, Windows, Palm, Unix, and 8052 microcontrollers. For reliability I would choose those "platforms" in reverse order. And, yes, development tools, memory optimization, and watchdogs are available for all of them.
OS's are generally for when a single piece of hardware is going to have to do many different tasks. Maybe one user will use it to listen to music, another to burn CDs, another to develop software, another to surf the Internet, etc. Parts inside washing machines and cars, however, are not going to see such variable usage. A washing machine is always going to wash utensils. A car is always going to drive down the road. These are not applications that really require an OS. Some good firmware is all you need.
Using microcontrollers in cars is not new. They've been doing it for over a decade. Only now, when you start contaminating things with OS's such as CE, do you really see a problem.
I don't know where you went, but a) the school will influence the difficulty of your coursework and b) what you get out of school, like pretty much anything else, will depend heaviliy on what you put into it.
True, and obviously a degree from Harvard carries much more weight than a degree of Devry (if you're looking to be a lawyer, anyway). But Regardless of the school, as you say, what you get out of it depends largely on what you put into it. Since "what you put into it" isn't shown on your degree and is pretty impossible to quantify, what good is a degree to "measure" that?
On the other hand, if the work experience of the individual in question is impressive and looks to be what I'm looking for, THAT'S what I'm looking for. At least if the work experience stated is true, that tells me the person can do the job. A degree doesn't tell me anything.
I didn't get my degree becasue someone might want to "see it", but becasue I wanted to learn.
Cool. I got my degree because someone might want to see it. When there's something I want to learn about, I surf the net or read a book and learn it. But it's something that I was interested in or had a reason to learn. There were a bunch of classes I had to take that had nothing to do with what I'd be doing in life, haven't used since, and have--for the most part--forgotten. I didn't take those classes because I was interested in sociology or accounting but because I had to take them to get the piece of paper.
I would have enjoyed learning something in the few courses that I got to take that were actually relevant to my field, but unfortunately in every case I knew more than the instructor--or at least knew more than the level that was to be taught in the class. In fact, I was actually able to skip two classes entirely based on "work experience."
This isn't necessarily the best thing to base a hiring decision on, but it's really hard to have interviews with all of the 5000 people applying for each spot...
Oh, I agree. But I'd certainly narrow down my field of contestants based on work experience first. Then, if two or more contestants had relatively equal work experience, sure, what the heck, go with the college grad. But first and foremost is what the work experience shows he/she can do--and that is more clear from their work experience than from whether or not they have a college degree.
Because you already paid $9 to watch the movie, and so did 40 million other people.
According to IMDB, only 63 movies had worldwide box office totals of $360 million or more. If you look at just U.S. box office earnings, only 5 have ever made more than $360 million. Yes, there are movies that make $360 million, but that is far from the average. In fact, I believe industry executives celebrate if a "normal" movie exceeds $100 million.
It also doesn't matter what the economics of CDs are DVDs are. I'll be the first to admit that the business model of the movies/DVD industry is much better than the recording industry. But in the end, both music and movies are "entertainment" for the customer. Most of us have a certain amount that we can spend on "entertainment" each month and, as a result, we have to make a decision on what we are going to spend our money. As a customer I don't care how or why DVDs cost what they do, I just know I feel like I'm getting a lot more for my money when I buy a DVD.
Fact is, the music industry DOES have to have their CDs compete with DVDs. That's the reality. Actually, the reality is music is now free and the "recording" industry probably has another 5 years of life, maybe 10 if they buy appropriate legislation.
While I agree a university degree means more than a bunch of certifications, and while I *DO* have a B.Sc, the truth of the matter is that no employer has *ever* shown any interest in that.
I got my first job in the industry in 1989 when I was 1-year into my degree and had absolutely no "real" experience, but I was hired as a programmer. That was the first and last time my resume really got me in the door. Ever since then, my jobs have been based on knowing someone or someone knowing my work.
That said, I would truly be hesitant to work at a company that has a policy of tossing any resume that doens't have a B.Sc. Some of the best people I've worked with didn't (and still don't!) have degrees.
What does a degree show? That you can put up with 4 years of BS instead of a few months in the case of a certification. It's not like I learned anything at my degree--I just spent 4 years and thousands of dollars to get a piece of paper that no-one's ever asked to see anyway. A degree means you were protected from the real world for 4 more years while you spent weekends partying and making out with girls. I'm not saying that's a bad way to spend 4 years, but is it any real factor on which to base a hiring decision?
BTW--The analogy of a certification being jumping a 4" bar and a degree being a 12' bar is incorrect. More than anything, a degree just means you were able to jump the 4" bar for 4 years. You don't actually jump any higher.
Which means the electronics controlling the bomb/missile release were completely inadequate for the design. You can't have mission-criticial/life-critical systems that aren't able to handle random interference. So supposedly a bomb was "launched" on a carrier because of electrical interference... Was that the fault of a poorly designed bomb-launching electronics system, or the fault of some sailor below deck who switched on his old tape player?
Likewise, let's be honest... if the avionics of a commercial jet are so vulnerable to random or even organized interference, that's a bad thing. Even if it just makes the plane go off course a little, that's unacceptable. Don't tell passengers to turn off their electronics, fix the dang avionics system to work. Not because we NEED to listen to CD-Players on takeoff and landing, but because anything susceptible enough to be affected by CD-Players is susceptible to many other influences, both random and organized.
I'd agree that laptops shouldn't be used on takeoff or landing for the same reason that tray tables and seatbacks should be in their full upright position--in case of a crash. But a CD-Player? Who cares... In the U.S. they're talking about anti-missile systems on commercial jets, and yet we're to believe that the same commercial jet can't handle a CD-Player being turned on??
Slashdot Mirror
Like someone else said, it could be the recession is one of OSS's biggest friends. This isn't OSS, but it's a case of a city looking to save money in tough times ditching Microsoft. As long as their decision works they're not going to suddenly go back to MS when there is more money available.
That's the good thing about all these reports about countries and cities abandoning Microsoft: Once someone jumps off the MS train, it's doubtful they'll go back unless things go very bad for them.
This can be done by the same people looking at the serial numbers on your tires. Sure, it takes maybe 30 seconds instead of 5, but you're paying 20 bucks anyway.
If you want to go high-tech, put some durable barcodes on them. They can be scanned just about as quickly as moving the RFID reader to within 24 inches, but can't be used for "suspect" reasons since you can't scan a barcode on a wheel on a car that is moving.
After 9/11 and the Littleton high school massacre I'm not so sure that's necessarily true.
they want to believe the government actually has some interest in what they're doing, when in reality, the government couldn't care less."
The government doesn't care what you do as an individual. But when your travels and behavior can be tracked and compared to "the norm" in real time, the computer doing the comparing will be happy to raise the red flag on you.
That and no-one cares what you do now, but if RFIDs allow a way to keep track of you, will the FBI make an effort to AVOID using that information? Will local law enforcement not press for the ability to have their automated system run through the data and see if anyone has exceeded 70mph within city limits?
It's not that anyone cares or wants to use it for these things now. It's the data mining capability that could exist in the future that is scary. "Information wants to be free, and data wants to be mined." :)
Why? Getting a phony SSL certificate even from the "big buys" (Verisign, Thawte, etc.) is a piece of cake if you don't mind lying or being unethical. It's not hard to give Verisign the documentation they want even if you dom't have it--as long as you don't mind lying or forging. Someone out to conduct some fraud isn't going to be bothered by this anyway.
If you really trust an SSL certificate--even those issued by Thawte or Verisign--as a key to automatically trust some website with no personal responsibility to make that judgement yourself, you're going to to get burned.
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Verisign and Thawte are NOT what cause my customers to trust me. They trust me because they know me. They trust me because they know people that have purchased from me. Some people (foolishly) trust a website just because it "looks" professional. But virtually no-one trusts a website just because it has a Versign or Thawte logo on it.
Let's put it this way: I had people submitting online orders with credit card information before I got SSL. I had absolutely no security and they trusted me--they even trusted the Internet itself with unencrypted data. Then, after some amount of hassle, I got an SSL certificate with Thawte. I noticed no increase in sales. After a year it was time to renew and Thawte gave me an entirely new bundle of requirements and documents that they wanted just to RENEW me. I said "screw that," cancelled my renewal, and am now happily with Comodo/InstantSSL.
There are many SSL certificate options out there, just like there are many domain registrars out there. And as is the case with domain names, only foolish people with too much money with their hands are staying with Verisign.
Anyone want to put any bets on when Verisign will go out of business? Their customers FLEE because of bad service and high prices, and yet they don't change. Amazing.
That's really it, and it's an ironic paradox. Capitalism CREATES wealth, communism CONSUMES it. And that's the problem--capitalism is sustainable, communism isn't. People complain that capitalism isn't fair because some people are richer than others. Some are MUCH richer than others. But it's not a question of fairness, it's a question of sustainability.
Capitalism has existed for thousands of years and is still functioning. We still have poor and there are still are rich, and that's just part of reality. But, as far as I know, no communist society has survived for more than about 75 years, has it? I believe USSR held the record but they went belly-up. China's been communist for about, what, 55 years now? But they're opening up to capitalism and I'll bet that they'll be capitalist within 2 decades.
Point is, history shows that capitalism is sustainable. Communsim isn't.
Inasmuch as open source, OS really is similar to communism. Everyone puts in what they can and takes what they need. As a closed model it might not be sustainable. But it IS sustainable because, in reality, people do it for fun and have other sources of income. Their other sources of income are the "capitalism" that generates wealth, and open source is the "communism" that consumes it (inasmuch as their time). Another word for that is "hobby." :) It just so happens that this hobby produces something of value to the entire world and which may even increase the capitalistic capabilities of others (or self) in the future.
If we are going with the extended dialing, it should be 10-digit dialing unless it is a toll. If you always have to dial 1 then you have no way of knowing if it is a toll call or not.
In any case, we should certainly re-standardize. One of the most elegant aspects of the U.S./Canadian system for so many years is that a local number was 7 digits, the area code was 3, and you only had to dial 1+area code if it was going to cost you. Now every area has its own approach as to whether you dial 7, 10, or 11 digits and you pretty much have to ask which it is when you arrive. Our system is now as non-standard and non-consistent as the rest of the world that uses variable length city codes and local phone numbers.
Personally, I'd be for creating new area codes. If necessary make the area codes 4 digits rather than 3 since I believe we'll soon run out of area codes. But why in the world do I have to dial 10 or 11 digits to identify the house across the street? It's silly.
I know many "pedestrians" that weigh more than twice 70 pounds and can go 12mph, too.
Logically, yes. Practically, no. I don't think anyone is opposed to someone guilty being found guilty and if new evidence is found or an error in the original trial would have resulted in a guilty verdict, logic says the guilty person should be retried.
In reality, once a person is found innocent then that should be it. That's why we (supposedly) can't be tried for the same crime twice. The risk is that if we aren't protected from being retried, we can be retried and harrased for the rest of our lives for strictly political or other reasons. The threat of that can be used to keep people from speaking up against corrupt officials or against people with more money than they that could pay to keep you pretty much on trial for the rest of your life. We aren't protected from being retried to let the guilty get away, but to keep the innocent from being harrased, or the guilty from being harrased after they've "paid their due to society" or whatever.
Unfortunately, ever since the Rodney King verdict I've come to realize that we aren't really protected. First they charged the officers, they got off (for better or for worse), and then after the riots they were retried on other charges. That was BS. Criminals should be charged with the maximum crime for a given event and that's it. I.e., if beating up Rodney King could result in a charge of Assault, Misuse of Police Authority, or violation of his civil rights, they should pick the "most severe" charge and that's the charge. At the very least, all charges for a given event should be filed before the trial starts. To charge the police, get an innocent verdict and then say, "Oh, we'll go ahead and accuse them of violating his civil rights" was completely BS in my opinion. There may be some legal justification for why they could do that, but the *spirit* of protection from double jeapordy was certainly violated that day.
That said, what I've found most lacking is good GPS software for the Palm. I wonder if the authors of the GPS software actually use their own software. The best I've found so far is Cetus GPS. What it does, it does well--but there are many "obvious" features missing, IMHO.
I'm working on new software, though... :)
If you're displaying a map to the user, go for a GUI. If your only concern is accessing megabytes of data then I can assure you an 8051 is more than capable of doing it. Some 8051 derivatives now come with megabytes of program memory and/or megabytes of RAM.
As it turns out, I'm working on a GPS mapping system for the Palm as we speak. I am very aware of the complications and the amount of data involved--and that's with Palm, not a microcontroller. That said, accessing megabytes of memory using an 8051--be it on a hard drive or in memory--is NOT hard.
Me: You can [...] have a network of 10 8051 microcontrollers scattered around the car for under $20.
You: You are kidding, right? That's the OEM quantity cost of the micro alone. What about the support circuitry, PC board, casing, cabling, hardware design and development cost?
I'm not kidding. As long as we're talking about building with any kind of volume you can easily get a network of 10 microcontrollers for less than $20. In many cases, the microcontroller is ALL THAT YOU NEED. That's one of the cost advantages of microcontrollers. You often don't need a whole bunch of supporting circuitry sharing a PC board.
I can tell you that replacing 10 special purpose micro-based computers with one general purpose computer very often IS cheaper, whether you believe it or not.
I believe it, if you are comparing apples to apples. If you're talking about replacing 10 microcontroller with a single microcontroller, sure, it'll probably be cheaper. If you're talking about replacing 10 microcontrollers with a WinCE system that requires supporting circuitry and probably an OS license, I seriously doubt it.
This is only to illustrate that just because that 8051 costs $5 doesn't mean that that reflects in ANY way on the final cost of the product.
It DOEs reflect final COST. Final price to the end consumer is a completely different matter, and I never said an 8051 system would be cheaper to the consumer--although it should be. But it will usually be cheaper to the manufacturer than a WinCE system. Whether they want to pass that savings on to the consumer is a business decision.
The OS won't render street maps or play files. It facilitates low level functions such as allowing both GPS and music player to run on the same hardware at once, it provides the FS and networking code, it (possibly) provides a GUI library, etc.
Right. But if you know up-front which tasks your application requires it is entirely possible that you can do it more efficiently yourself and require less hardware if you omit the OS. And if there's any question about the reliability of the OS (as in the case of WinCE), then eliminating that additional question mark is a good thing.
If you don't use an OS, you have to code the task switching and all other services yourself. These particular services are some of the trickiest and most bug-prone types of code there are.
Yes and no. Yes, they are one of the trickiest and bug-prone types of code there are if you have to plan for every possible contingency and software application that may be running on your OS. It is significantly easier when you know what applications your code is going to have to "task-switch" between. It's even questionable whether it's even "task switching" if the entire system is designed for the combined purpose.
I'm not sure you understand what goes into reading a file from a CD or HD. You don't just issue a command to a CD drive to "play", drives typically require you to read or write a block of data (typically 512 bytes) at a particular location.
Let's not play games and get condescending. Of course I know what goes into reading a CD or a HD.
First, if we're talking about a car and a CD most likely you are *playing* a CD, not reading data off of it. CD-ROMs can be told to "play track X" and forget about it and that will play the music you need to play over the car stereo.
Second, if you are reading data from a CD-ROM or a HD and want to use FAT32 or some other file system, sure, it is more complicated. The application may or may not require one of those complicated file systems.
Drives have no notion of files and directories, they only know blocks.
Thanks, Jedi master, I wouldn't have ever known that. That must explain why none of my CD-ROM code has ever worked! Thanks! :)
Me: Due to the incredibly low cost of microcontrollers, this is going to beat a central WinCE system every time.
You: What can I say, just about every car manufacturer out there is proving you wrong on that.
Ok, how many microcontrollers does your car have? How many WinCE systems? Mine has dozens of microcontrollers and not a single WinCE system. I'd bet that even BMW still has some microcontrollers in their car. That said it seems that designers are still seeing the merits in reliability and cost of using microcontrollers in many critical parts of the vehicle. I fail to see where any manufacturer is proving me wrong. But I look forward to you helping me out with that...
Maybe it will take switching from WinCE to make things more reliable, but they're certainly not ditching the system architecture.
It's a matter of using the RIGHT architecture. But I don't think you're going to see car manufacturers abandoning microcontrollers throughout their vehicles anytime soon. Even if you add WinCE user-interfaces, the real work is going to continue to be done by microcontrollers. They're cheap and historically more reliable. I think cars will go out of fashion before that changes.
Hmmm. Re-read the thread. I never said Windows, Windows CE, Palm OS or Unix where RTOSs. I said they were OSs.
When you say "microcontroller", don't you mean "generic microprocessor core with on-board extras like I/O controllers, etc".
A "microcontroller" is a part whose primary function is to "control" as opposed to "process." If you are controlling EFI, trunk release, key spit-outs, RPMs, etc. these are all perfect functions for a microcontroller. If you are doing heavy calculations, such as extracting signals for the SETI project, then a microprocessor is the best solution.
I'm not saying that a microcontroller is the best choice for every application. It isn't. I wouldn't write or use a version of Word developed for a microcontroller, it's the wrong tool for the job.
The problem here is that too many people seem to think that to get anything developed anymore, you need a fully-functioning OS to make it work. That's wrong. They're killing a fly with a cannon. You don't need a system/part that costs in excess of $20 a piece and requires an OS license when a 50 cent microcontroller will do the job.
Of course, most people in the field DO know this. And that's why when push comes to shove and you're moving a volume of units, the decision will be made to go with a microcontroller that costs 50 cents a piece rather than a microprocessor that is overkill and costs $20 a piece because, when you make a million of them, the microcontroller will have a total cost of $500,000 while the microprocessor will cost $20 million. And that difference in price is more than sufficient to pay the higher salaries for professionals in the field that will make your application work on a 50 cent part instead of a $20 system.
Funny thing is, when you ditch the operating system and Microsoft, you'd be surprised what you can do with 50 MIPS and 64k. "32-bit" is by far a requirement for most embedded functions.
According to whom? Experience and statistics would teach you that the more code you write yourself, the more bugs you tend to end up with.
Agreed. But the fact that I've never seen a story about an embedded EFI causing a motor to shut down but HAVE seen many reports of Windows/CE failing would seem to indicate that using an excessive amount of third-party code (in the form of WiNCE) isn't going to cut down on bugs either.
But having lots of micros scattered around an automobile also increases the cost and decreases the flexibility: more hardware, more networking required to get the micros talking to each other, only a limited number of ways in which they can interact with each other.
I don't know how much a WinCE system costs, but if their costs compared to Palm devices are any reference then I'd venture that they aren't particularly cheap. You can, on the other hand, have a network of 10 8051 microcontrollers scattered around the car for under $20.
Consolidating many functions into a single computer is attractive because it can lower costs (especially with off-the-shelf OSs and hardware) and also offers the lure of easy feature upgrades.
You'd have to have a dang-cheap WinCE system to be able to compete with even a network of microcontrollers. And cars aren't (normally) computers that *require* frequent software updates, so this usually isn't going to be a factor. But if it is an issue, most modern 8051s are in-system programmable with on-board flash so there's nothing stopping you from upgrading software.
Well, that's not the type of software they'd be looking to reuse, that would definitely be a custom job. But if you also want the same computer to run your GPS and your MP3 player, how would you do it without an OS?
Neither a GPS nor an MP3 necessarily require an OS. Sure, both can be developed under an OS, but it isn't necessary. An Ateml part exists that includes an integrated MP3 player and that is based on the 8051, no OS necessary. While GPS functions aren't integrated into any 8051 device I know, an external chipset for that would be the best approach (I'm not aware of any WinCE software that deals with the raw GPS signals and calculates positions--everything gets their data from a separate chipset that does the actual work--the results of which can be delivered to a microcontrolelr as easily as it can to an OS).
So, again, neither of these functions require an OS.
A lot if you want to deal with real file systems such as on CDs and DVDs, store mapping data and updates, and do all sorts of other memory intesive things.
You're not going to do the actual CD or DVD "reading" under a microcontroller any more than you do the actual reading under WinCE. WinCE just issues commands to the IDE bus which causes the DVD or CD to "play." A microcontroller such as the 8051 can do that too. In fact, there's free public code that can read/replay a CD-ROM and access an IDE hard drive from the 8051. But, in the end, most likely the 8051 wouldn't do more than "Make the CD player start playing music" just as the WinCE device would tell it to do the same thing.
The fact is, the current approach in the automotive industry is still the best: A network of specific microcontrollers doing specific tasks. Due to the incredibly low cost of microcontrollers, this is going to beat a central WinCE system every time and, at the same time, be less susceptible to Microsoft-based crashes.
Quite a few, actually. Have you actually looked? But I'll admit there are more Windows programmers... There are probably more accountants, too, but that doesn't mean they are the right people for the job.
This is the advantage that Microsoft gets in the embedded market. The system may be overkill for most of these applications, but with hordes of developers who have experience with the platform, you can find people to do the work for much cheaper.
And you get what you pay for. Like BMWs spitting out keys, opening trunks, etc.
Uh, yeah, right. I've only been a consultant in this field for years. But whatever you say.
However, an engine or an office climate control device or a telecoms switch has a lot more variables to work with, and it has to work with them in realtime. A PIC will not do.
Never used a PIC, but there are degrees between PIC and a Pentium. Many people that say "a microcontroller can't do that, you need a Pentium running Windows" are precisely the people that have probably programmed under Windows and probably haven't programmed a PIC or an 8052.
Sure, there are tasks that are not appropriate for a microcontroller. GUI is one of them. If there isn't a fancy GUI, a microcontroller can *probably* do it.
In order to control all your realtime subsystems, are you going to use a fast, hot running, power guzzling CPU running code that continually polls these devices? Or, are you going to use a slower CPU running event-driven code? If you're running event-driven code, how are you going to maintain realtime control over each subsystem?
Interrupts. And even microcontrollers aren't that slow these days, 50 MIPS easy. But I'm sure you knew that.
You've obviously never seen what an engine or a telecoms switch is running.
Telecom, no. But guess what? Many engines are controlled by an Intel 8032-based microcontroller that were designed specifically to control engines. I'm sure you can find more complicated engine controllers, just as you can find WinCE in a BMW. Doesn't mean it's necessary or even the best choice.
An 8051 can do all of that, with the possible exception of the GUI. If you insist on a fancy Windows-like GUI you might want to put that on another part, but the 8051 is perfect for the rest of it. There is even an 8051 (from Atmel) that handles playing MP3s with no external parts.
Some of this stuff might be available as simple C libraries that you can link into your code without requiring an OS (or as a pseudo-OS where the app and the OS are one single executable image), but not everything.
Most of it exists, and that which doesn't, you write. You end up with more reliable code. Simply the fact that microcontroller-based applications fail less frequently than CE-based applications is pretty clear evidence of that. Also, those of us working at the assembly level on microcontrollers tend to be a little more careful than Windows programmers--or so it would seem.
A lot more third party software is available for larger OSs such as WinCE and Linux, and these OSs also provide a lot more native functionality that you don't have to code or buy extra, such as a GUI, networking, memory and storage management etc.
Agreed, but how much third-party software is available to control the climate in a BMW? To spit out keys in some situation? How much memory and storage and networking is required in a car? "Think outside the OS."
Again, an OS is best for a system that has to run many different things and those things can't be known ahead of time. A nice, small, embedded system is best for applications where you know what the thing is going to do. Even if a single chip has to control cruise control, air conditioning, EFI, an GPS positioning, that can all be done easily by a microcontroller. You don't need an OS for a microcontroller to attend many tasks at the "same time."
For many, a highly specialized hardware and software platform might still be the best choice, while for others a more open OS is preferable
Agreed. I'd just argue that a car is a perfect example where highly specialized hardware and software would be the way to go.
How old is your current car? If it's been made in the last, oh, 15-20 years, you've probably already turned over control of many of the parts of your car to a computer. They call it an ECM and it's really a microprocessor, but it's still a "computer."
That's what it would cost you, after dealer mark-up. A "computer" in a car is normally a "microcontroller," a single chip. So what they're really telling you is that it would cost $10k for 6 chips. And I can assure you that the unit cost of those 6 chips is under a dollar a piece.
If you can cut down the number of computers needed, you can lower the price of your car or increase the profit margin. Or both.
Increase profit margin, if that's possible. Are you really serious when you say they'd charge you $10k to replace the "6 computers" in your car???
The down side to that is that if the single computer fails, all those functions go away.
The problem is when you use OS's like CE it is entirely possible that the single computer will fail. When you develop it all on a microcontroller and get rid of all the fancy BS, you can get everything into a single chip and be stable.
You know, I really think it comes down to keeping Microsoft as far away from anything of any importance. And I say that in all honesty, not just to score points with the anti-MS crowd here.
I've developed under Windows CE, Windows, Palm, Unix, and 8052 microcontrollers. For reliability I would choose those "platforms" in reverse order. And, yes, development tools, memory optimization, and watchdogs are available for all of them.
OS's are generally for when a single piece of hardware is going to have to do many different tasks. Maybe one user will use it to listen to music, another to burn CDs, another to develop software, another to surf the Internet, etc. Parts inside washing machines and cars, however, are not going to see such variable usage. A washing machine is always going to wash utensils. A car is always going to drive down the road. These are not applications that really require an OS. Some good firmware is all you need.
Using microcontrollers in cars is not new. They've been doing it for over a decade. Only now, when you start contaminating things with OS's such as CE, do you really see a problem.
True, and obviously a degree from Harvard carries much more weight than a degree of Devry (if you're looking to be a lawyer, anyway). But Regardless of the school, as you say, what you get out of it depends largely on what you put into it. Since "what you put into it" isn't shown on your degree and is pretty impossible to quantify, what good is a degree to "measure" that?
On the other hand, if the work experience of the individual in question is impressive and looks to be what I'm looking for, THAT'S what I'm looking for. At least if the work experience stated is true, that tells me the person can do the job. A degree doesn't tell me anything.
I didn't get my degree becasue someone might want to "see it", but becasue I wanted to learn.
Cool. I got my degree because someone might want to see it. When there's something I want to learn about, I surf the net or read a book and learn it. But it's something that I was interested in or had a reason to learn. There were a bunch of classes I had to take that had nothing to do with what I'd be doing in life, haven't used since, and have--for the most part--forgotten. I didn't take those classes because I was interested in sociology or accounting but because I had to take them to get the piece of paper.
I would have enjoyed learning something in the few courses that I got to take that were actually relevant to my field, but unfortunately in every case I knew more than the instructor--or at least knew more than the level that was to be taught in the class. In fact, I was actually able to skip two classes entirely based on "work experience."
This isn't necessarily the best thing to base a hiring decision on, but it's really hard to have interviews with all of the 5000 people applying for each spot...
Oh, I agree. But I'd certainly narrow down my field of contestants based on work experience first. Then, if two or more contestants had relatively equal work experience, sure, what the heck, go with the college grad. But first and foremost is what the work experience shows he/she can do--and that is more clear from their work experience than from whether or not they have a college degree.
IMHO. :)
According to IMDB, only 63 movies had worldwide box office totals of $360 million or more. If you look at just U.S. box office earnings, only 5 have ever made more than $360 million. Yes, there are movies that make $360 million, but that is far from the average. In fact, I believe industry executives celebrate if a "normal" movie exceeds $100 million.
It also doesn't matter what the economics of CDs are DVDs are. I'll be the first to admit that the business model of the movies/DVD industry is much better than the recording industry. But in the end, both music and movies are "entertainment" for the customer. Most of us have a certain amount that we can spend on "entertainment" each month and, as a result, we have to make a decision on what we are going to spend our money. As a customer I don't care how or why DVDs cost what they do, I just know I feel like I'm getting a lot more for my money when I buy a DVD.
Fact is, the music industry DOES have to have their CDs compete with DVDs. That's the reality. Actually, the reality is music is now free and the "recording" industry probably has another 5 years of life, maybe 10 if they buy appropriate legislation.
I got my first job in the industry in 1989 when I was 1-year into my degree and had absolutely no "real" experience, but I was hired as a programmer. That was the first and last time my resume really got me in the door. Ever since then, my jobs have been based on knowing someone or someone knowing my work.
That said, I would truly be hesitant to work at a company that has a policy of tossing any resume that doens't have a B.Sc. Some of the best people I've worked with didn't (and still don't!) have degrees.
What does a degree show? That you can put up with 4 years of BS instead of a few months in the case of a certification. It's not like I learned anything at my degree--I just spent 4 years and thousands of dollars to get a piece of paper that no-one's ever asked to see anyway. A degree means you were protected from the real world for 4 more years while you spent weekends partying and making out with girls. I'm not saying that's a bad way to spend 4 years, but is it any real factor on which to base a hiring decision?
BTW--The analogy of a certification being jumping a 4" bar and a degree being a 12' bar is incorrect. More than anything, a degree just means you were able to jump the 4" bar for 4 years. You don't actually jump any higher.
Likewise, let's be honest... if the avionics of a commercial jet are so vulnerable to random or even organized interference, that's a bad thing. Even if it just makes the plane go off course a little, that's unacceptable. Don't tell passengers to turn off their electronics, fix the dang avionics system to work. Not because we NEED to listen to CD-Players on takeoff and landing, but because anything susceptible enough to be affected by CD-Players is susceptible to many other influences, both random and organized.
I'd agree that laptops shouldn't be used on takeoff or landing for the same reason that tray tables and seatbacks should be in their full upright position--in case of a crash. But a CD-Player? Who cares... In the U.S. they're talking about anti-missile systems on commercial jets, and yet we're to believe that the same commercial jet can't handle a CD-Player being turned on??