> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Michael Rigby-Jones > wrote: > = > >> http://blogs.msdn.com/mikehall/ > >> > > http://blogs.msdn.com/mikehall/archive/2009/04/23/ce-6-0-hard-real-time- > >> embedded-o-s-here-s-the-proof.aspx > >> > >> I always thought otherwise. But I know Beckhoff is using it > >> in the ARM based PLC along with bigger PC baed PLC. > > > > Are we supposed to be impressed with the inverted pendulum control > > running on a 1GHz desktop CPU? =A0I'll bet that could be done by a > > mid-high end PIC. =A0Or are they suggesting that CWE 6.0 has a very lar= ge > > overhead... > > > That is just a demo. > = > All the bigger OS/RTOS have large overhead. Windows CE has, > so does Vxworks, Linux may have even more overhead. > = > Beckhoff has quite some PLCs based on Windows and > Windows CE and they seem to do quite well in this space. > Many industrial panels use Windows CE actually. > = The point here is that a real time operative system has a guaranteed (short= ) = response time between I/O (interrrupts) and your code. This is easy on a PI= C = but not so in a multitasking environment like Windows. /Ruben =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Ruben J=F6nsson AB Liros Electronic Box 9124, 200 39 Malm=F6, Sweden TEL INT +46 40142078 FAX INT +46 40947388 ruben@pp.sbbs.se =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -- = http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist