|
At the company I work for, we have been using MS for our industrial control system for just about as long as MS has been around. DOS in the early days, then 2000, XP, and finally 7. my issue is coming from exactly where Microsoft is going, it seems like they are pushing developers and the whole ecosystem into the cloud for processing and storage while the APIs are getting more removed from the bare metal of the OS.
Our original DOS system used C and when .NET was first released it was redesigned to work on Windows. Over time the system has gotten quite large; employing communications from serial, raw sockets and remoting/WCF to communicate with various hardware and other specialized computers.
Microsoft's future effectively kills my product; 90% of my customer base has no internet connectivity and even if they could get some sort of internet out there, most of them are too scared to do so; thinking they will get hacked somehow and damage all their equipment or something.
MS put out Embedded/Compact 7/8 but you still got to find equipment running this OS or try and make your own image to put on hardware (I got no time for the later, as I'm the only developer working with 3 other techs). These Embedded systems are still geared for always connected, but may work for the short time.
I started looking at Linux, QNX, Windriver, even Raspberry Pi (with OS). But there are so many flavors and options, I'm not even sure where to start. And then there is the machine the OS runs on; standard PC, PC104, Com Express.....
Any one else doing some industrial control out there not using MS as a base? if so where to start?
I feel like I have oatmeal for a brain today.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm in the same boat brother.
I write industrial control systems, Windows 8 can be bent to work in this situation, but its not easy and really makes it seem like I'm destabilizing it.
I'm looking at possibly moving a lot of my code-base over to Mono and running on some flavor of Linux.
|
|
|
|
|
My system will run on 8 with a few tweaks to the OS, but the techs refuse to learn it/support it, so I'm still building 7 boxes.
Is there a particular flavor of Linux that has caught your eye? I've only started playing with Ubuntu and Debian in a VM. I'm looking for something that an average person comfortable with MS (my customer base) not to get too freaked out when they first see it.
Nice to know I'm not the only one with a headache.
|
|
|
|
|
I think I maybe in that boat soon, some RF controllers on PC104 cards running XPe. Nothing from the customer (8+ years...that good right) as soon as support is pulled whats the betting "oh we have to upgrade now its not supported". I have been trying to get my head around what is Windows Embedded platform CE5, CE6, CE6.5, Windows Embedded, Windows Mobile, Windows for serial killers? There does seem be one now what gives. 
|
|
|
|
|
Debian can be a pain in a ass for hardware support since they roll out updates A LOT slower than anyone else. Debian however, does have long term stability, so if you want something that's going to work reliably for years, if you can get Debian installed and working on the machines you're using, then that's a good option. On the other hand, if there's any new hardware you're using, odds are the drivers in Debian aren't going to support it.
Ubuntu LTS is usually a decent OS and is easy to work with. Their stuff is a lot more up-to-date than Debian but you do pay a price in stability. I've definitely downloaded some updates that broke some stuff in Ubuntu. The LTS version is however decently stable (they put out too many updates if you ask me). Mint is an Ubuntu derivative that throttles the updates in order to provide for a better stability experience. They're also not following path with the Ubuntu Unity interface, which is pretty but slow.
The other option out there that I'd recommend is RedHat Enterprise, it's no longer a free distribution (you have to pay for installation disks or you can get the source code free and compile it yourself). Since you're paying, you do get some support in case you get stuck. RedHat does seem to be very stable but also has the latest drivers usually. Since a lot of people are using RedHat, there's also a lot of forums for help as well (CentOS is the free version of RedHat, compiled by someone else... I have had some performance issues with it however).
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the info, that will help me get started. just put a few Linux books in my Amazon cart as I will admit I am a complete nube to the OS, I've spent too many years just trying to keep up with Microsoft.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, let me know if you have other questions down the line... I've gone through this headache before. I use several Linux distros along with several Windows versions.
|
|
|
|
|
I know that some companies don't like using obviously-windows based industrial controllers. One customer of ours, the morning shift came in to find half the machines not working because the night shift had pinched the ram and processors.
PC104 is ok because they are generally not easily dismantlable, but an "industrial PC" is fair game it seems...
|
|
|
|
|
In general our stuff is based on embedded controllers which can't be repurposed with ease, Windows controllers we generally look at as Windows has a tendency to get interrupted and wander off to do something while you are trying capture data...
|
|
|
|
|
for the most part, our current system is not real time on most things. but the president of my company is making some new promises.
If I may ask, what is your embedded controller/OS?
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on the project and customer most get a Microchip based controller so the it's just a straight Intel .hex file up/down loaded to the controller others use MSP430 family and the Texas Instruments O/S...Atmel (here lies madness), XLINX / Spartan and on
|
|
|
|
|
I built a few 'one off' projects using a Tern 286 "ET" board with touch screen. decent company to work with, horrible documentation, they used the Paradigm compiler/ide; not bad to work around.
Currently got a side project using an Arduino with some expansion boards via Ada fruit. the project is on stall until the current workload lightens up a bit.
These are great for specific purpose machines, but the majority of our work is different per each job.
The stuff you do, I wish I had more time to work in, it's generally more interesting to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: The stuff you do, I wish I had more time to work in, it's generally more interesting to me.
it used to be to me, come the weekend playing with what you work with ain't so much fun 
|
|
|
|
|
A company I worked for in the 90s was using QNX (on custom PCs) for that sort of thing; so that gets my vote.
And have you looked into something like a Fit-PC running Linux or similar?
|
|
|
|
|
One thing Linux does not give you the ability to point fingers (& lawyers) if something goes wrong! 
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it does... you just have to have the right versions. RedHat makes a ton of money on their support side, they actually have a huge building close to where I work.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I suppose it makes sense, mind you if RedHat are supporting it, do they a process the software must be certified on? Or else I can think of a couple of things that they could solve... 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure if you pay them enough money they'll certify whatever you want...
|
|
|
|
|
A friend of mine says RHEL is also really bad about be trapped with old versions of things. Obsolete versions of Python and GCC are his biggest complaints. The former for lacking newer language features, that latter for a bunch of usability (debugging???) related improvements that after years of GCC devs saying they're impossible or are too low priority to ever be implemented suddenly found themselves being implemented after they were launched in Clang/LLVM.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
They sure don't provide the latest and greatest that's for sure... but I think they have a good middle ground of stability and newer stuff. Latest and greatest has it's own headaches, like my Ubuntu machine that wants to do updates every day, half of which require a reboot (something that Ubuntu has become bad about).
|
|
|
|
|
Linux is also not a true real time operating system, where QNX has been optimized for that degree of control and predictability from the start. It's also a micro kernel architecture, perfect for embedded systems.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I have only really started looking at QNX look like it might be of use [bookmark!!]
|
|
|
|
|
Fit-PC, interesting little box, I will look into a little more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My first job in '89 was C / QNX, and QNX was also my first OS love affair (my PC at home was running DOS 3.1 at the time, there's simply no comparison).
As much as I love QNX, it got bought out by RIM / Blackberry a year or two back. Given that they're currently in meltdown, I'd be nervous about the implications for QNX. Pity.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
