lefko@vaxwaller.UUCP (Marty Lefkowitz) (04/26/91)
In article <2nsgwa=@rpi.edu>, barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes: > >Real-time data-acquisition systems are 'REAL TIME SYSTEMS', and real time > >systems generally _are_not_suited_to_ multi-tasking. If you want real That statement is almost true except for the generally part. In fact out of all the systems I've delt with (even including unix, some flavors of) they were real time systems. Actually the big drawback is/would be a non-preemptive message based system. I know in windows this is the case, probably with os2 also. The other important matter is memory mapping for the micro systems or the ability to add boards that do this kind of a thing.
rdthomps@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Robert D. Thompson) (05/03/91)
In article <4896@vaxwaller.UUCP> lefko@vaxwaller.UUCP (Marty Lefkowitz) writes: >In article <2nsgwa=@rpi.edu>, barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes: >That statement is almost true except for the generally part. In fact >out of all the systems I've delt with (even including unix, some >flavors of) they were real time systems. Actually the big drawback >is/would be a non-preemptive message based system. I know in windows >this is the case, probably with os2 also. Probably not - OS/2 is pre-emptive. Regards |(8> --- Robert