[extropy-chat] Re: SPACE: where are we?

[Mike Lorrey]

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >
> > Yes, this is a point. It also seems that this computer system is
> > common to quite a number of NASA probes.
> 
> I'm not sure of the extent to which Rik and Mike are
> agreeing with me or disagreeing with me.
> 
> But if you are disagreeing it ain't gonna cut the mustard.
> 
> In the first place to the best of my ability to determine thus
> far the NASA probes (as well as many others) are running a
> RAD hardened version of IBM processors that were common in the
> early-to-mid '90s.  One would assume you can pick these up
> (in the non-RAD hardened form) on eBay for pennies on the dollar.

I've got one in my office here. That is, I have a PC using a Power PC
200mhz chip sitting here, with a hosed hard drive.

I have no idea what particular board the Rover is using. I'm certain I
don't have it here. I certainly don't have any flash capacity here. 

That isn't the problem, though. VXware is a ruggedized OS that is built
to continuously self diagnose (note how it decided to send its own
diagnostics data back to NASA). It is not a desktop operating system,
it is an operating system for running stuff remotely and if needed,
autonomously. Lots of I/O capabilities.

Now, I don't doubt that one could use the linux kernel to develop a
similar operating system that would be open source, but you can't
convince me that you can pull SuSE off the shelf and use it to reliably
run a space probe. A Probux OS would require its own user community.

Rik's point here holds, the old IBM quote applies "There is a current
worldwide demand for 5 computers". There are what? a dozen probes in
space at the current time, run by 2-4 space agencies. That is some
market.

The Open Source method works well because you have thousands upon
thousands of developers and debuggers who do so because they use this
OS on their own equipment every day for every day purposes.

Now, unless you could make a screen saver emulator debugging and
testing an emulated version of the OS on desktop systems across the
country, you are not going to take advantage of the power of numbers
like you want to for Probux.

> 
> Except in the actual application (and Hello -- you have to be
> in space where the RAD capability is a strong consideration) the
> hardware doesn't friggen matter to the software.  If I don't have
> the hardware I can simulate it.

Sure you can. Gotta build your simulator inside a microwave oven,
though... ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html