![]() |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
Either way, Linux can be shrunken down to being as minimalist as the hardware is. Why exactly a phone needs to support modules, for example, is beyond me. Compile in the things you want and the Linux kernel can become extremely small / adaptable to anything. Hell, I bet you could run damn small Linux on something with 16mb of ram. In fact; http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/486.html slaapliedje |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
a) WP7 is not CE
b) Scaling up in the immediate future is fine. It already supports new stuff. c) Scaling up in the long run is moot, since in a couple of years W8 will be out and it will run on x86 and ARM, so that's that. It scales up to a powerful desktop. And down to minimum WP7 reqs. Personally, I'm going to guess that an OS rewritten in 2010, breaking compatibility is less of a fish out of water than an OS designed for desktop and scaled down. Not that most of what is being run today is just a scale or a straight recompile. Maemo is way faster that EasyDebian Debian. |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
I think the main limitations are in footprint for tiny embedded systems (same as windows whatever), and limited time functions (same as windows whatever). And, of course, certification for safety critical systems. Realtime capabilities have no direct influence on energy consumption and minimal hardware specs. Or, well, they do. Realtime sysems need high quality, stable clock sources. |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
I heard that Microsoft was gonna help Nokia maintain this site. In fact, there's an update expected today. I sure hope they don't fuc
|
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
|
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
It is true that, at its heart, Linux is a fairly simplistic concept. Back at the very beginning, Linus Torvalds just wanted to create an operating system for himself to use on his own PC. He had no vision of running a graphical interface, or supporting a particular important application, or even of making money. It was, plain and simple, just a system for controlling the hardware of a PC. Windows XP was not designed with quite the same goal. The core of XP is the Windows NT kernel, which is certainly powerful and flexible; however, the effort made to support legacy Windows software, the effort to integrate browser technology into Windows, and the effort to improve the look and feel of Windows have all complicated the core task of the operating system, to the extent that a given machine running XP will use more CPU and RAM when running a particular application than the same machine would under Linux. (Even more so under Vista or 7.) This isn't necessarily a bad thing! Users interested in running legacy software, or enjoying a lavish GUI, appreciate the choices Microsoft has made. But this is why Microsoft created an entirely different OS for embedded hardware. Windows CE is a real-time operating system designed specifically for small devices. As such, it does make more efficient use of CPU and RAM than Linux does (even those versions of Linux optimized for embedded use and supporting real-time operations). The cost for this, however, is that CE doesn't support the same functionality that NT does. You can't just drop an NT-kernel application into a CE device and watch it run; you'll actually have to spend some time and effort porting it over. Linux, to a very great extent, provides the same feature set everywhere it runs. So, the same Open Office that runs on a PC version of Linux also runs on the N900; no modification needed. Certainly, you don't get the kind of efficiency and real-time support you'll find on CE, nor all the bells and whistles crammed into XP, but applications written for Linux will work on Linux, pretty much wherever Linux works. Linux has made the compromises necessary to allow it to run well in multiple environments; the kernel does not provide nearly the level of functionality you'll find in something like Windows XP. Microsoft could put in the time and effort to truly generalize the CE feature set for use with higher-end hardware, but I just don't see it; that would ultimately make it a competitor to the XP/Vista/7 world, which would be bad for their bottom line... |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
|
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
|
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
http://www.watson.ibm.com/index.shtml btw. http://felipec.wordpress.com/2011/02...-linux-scales/ .edit Probably Google also disagrees with you :) How about Tivo Actually most DVR are running linux. Ohhh scary. Little company TomTom has devices that run on top of linux Or Garmin |
Re: The future of your Nokia Windows phone
Quote:
In any case, mobile devices are quickly reaching the computing power of desktop PCs. An operating system that can't actually perform everything that a desktop PC OS does will certainly suffer in that environment. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:15. |
vBulletin® Version 3.8.8