On 03/08/2012 07:17 AM, charles green wrote: > the overcapacity problem is a problem of going to unnecessary lengths to > accomplish a defined task, a problem of applying the most extreme measures in > straigtforward cases. > Who said anything about going to unnecessary lengths? The capacity available on the computers we're currently using far outstrips the needs of the CNC control software, and leaving that excess capacity unused is a waste of resources. > if you had a pocket calculator, would you trade it in for a smart phone that > included a pocket calculator app, streaming web video, and a fish pond widget > for your cat to play with? the long term cost increase would only be a > factor of ten thousand or more, and who isnt getting all kinds of additional > income these days? > Who's trading anything in? We're talking about using something that we already have. Any computer that's capable of running LinuxCNC, is certainly capable of multi-tasking. > the disposal liabilty pcs of a decade vintage have plenty of capacity to > function as machine controllers, so why not repurpose them to that task > rather than a dumpsite? if you had one computer that could do everything > except more or less dedicate its resources to being a machine controller, and > for free, have another computer perform that function, would you toss that > second comp and somehow reconfigure the first comp for an extended capability? > My machine computers are all used computers, retasked from something else or bought used. Why should I go out and buy another computer when I have a computer standing by that I can use? Why have two computers, both using resources when I can use just one to accomplish the same thing? Unless you want the exercise of running back and forth between the computers to fix something, transfer code, run programs that work with the CNC software and so forth. > another angle: one of the advantages of an os like win98 or dos is that they > are not ever going to require updates, or run into backwards compatibilty > problems. fixed forms, like a basic bipolar junction transistors, may be not > suitable devices for every application, but they are useful, well defined, > and behave in predictable and consistant ways. tools that have such traits > are desireable. continuous retooling is a drag. > Pretty soon even the used computers out there will not support win98 or DOS. In fact most of them do not, due to the devices attached to the machine. Computers are designed to multi-task. Especially with operating systems like Unix and Linux. Multi-tasking operating systems have been around for a long time, and become more and more robust every year. If you prefer to stick yourself back to something that can only do one thing at a time, you're more than welcome to do that. Doesn't make it any better or more preferable.
I'm sure you can build an embedded system running LinuxCNC that does only machine control and nothing else. But you are talking a higher expense to make it that way. I've been around high performance computing for a good many years, and the computers and operating systems available today, even on the used market, far outstrip machines that were designed to run Win98 and DOS. But hey, if you want to limit yourself to technology and procedures that are 20 - 30 years old, by all means, be all you can be. Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
