Android vs Qt vs C/C++

Thats very insightful..And you are?

know

grounds

me

vehicle

using

area

designs

to

Android

the

a

is

can

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
Zarakava
Loading thread data ...

e.

Do your engineers have internet? Why can't they ask questions here?

Can you beat a

Reply to
linnix

Linnix i dont understand the basis of your arrogance. Why my engineers do not ask questions here should not be your concern. I am asking questions here to learn and understand. If providing help towards that without posting your not so very witty comments is too much to ask, please ignore the post as there are better people providing valuable responses. please dont cloud that.

As far as the specs go, you are not inline with my requirements. yet. thanks

slat=

platform

who

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
Zarakava

On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 08:33:08 -0600, Zarakava wrote: (Top posting fixed)

VxWorks is as bad as Linux. I'm pointing to something much lighter than that. As I said, one could probably do this job without an OS at all, just run bare metal with a task loop.

I'm a bit concerned for you, because this is one of those "if you have to ask, you can't do the job" sorts of things -- you need to get yourself one or two good books on embedded systems programming, and read them fast.

Yes, you could do this on machine running Linux or VxWorks -- but your total machine load (both memory and processor usage) would be something like this:

.----------------------------------------------.--------. | | | | LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX | appli- | | LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX | cation | | | | '----------------------------------------------'--------'

You _could_ do this, but unless your production volumes were really low it's not going to pay back very fast.

I'd do this with one of the many itty-bitty single-thread multitaskers out there, like Micro-C/OS-2, or FreeRTOS, (or maybe ucLinux, but I don't know enough about ucLinux to say). Or, like I said, I'd just do it in a task loop.

1: This depends on your volume, but unless it is huge use one of the many ARM Cortex parts out there. NXP, TI, and nearly everyone else on the planet has them. The Atmel and Microchip 32-bit parts are candidates, too. 3: See above.

2: To do this right would require some careful assessment of what your client wants, and what's available on the market. It's not something I'd do for free. For free, I'll point out that Analog Devices seems to be the biggest name in inertial sensors, at least for low and moderate volume production. There are others, but the names slip my mind. Google is your friend.

There is a very strong correlation between the quality of output from an inertial sensor and the amount of money you pay for it -- once you've zeroed in on one or two that'll do the job for you, you can almost find equivalents just by looking at price tags. So you really need to know just how good of a sensor you really need before you go shopping for the "world's best bargain" (which may be useless to you in the end), or the "world's best sensor" (which is currently in orbit, having proved an element of the theory of relativity, and has a cost approaching a billion dollars).

Yes, sort of. I suggest that rather than looking to the DIY market first, you start by looking at manufacturer's processor evaluation boards. The DIY market tends to get stuck on older processors that are easy to get in qty 1; these aren't always the most cost effective (or capable) processors out there, and they sometimes aren't even easy to get reliably in large quantity (Atmel has a spotty delivery record, for instance).

Manufacturer's eval boards not only work right off the bat, but you usually get better tools with them, and they're for processors that the manufacturer thinks (or wants) to sell going forward, not for processors that happen to be fashionable with hobbyists.

But if the processor you want happens to be available on a DIY board that happens to have the features you want -- jump on it.

--
My liberal friends think I'm a conservative kook.
My conservative friends think I'm a liberal kook.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Wescott

am

Oh, OK. I was going to show you a 70g impact sensor for drop/crash detection. But i better hold my peace then.

Reply to
linnix

for

popular

a

fast.

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
Zarakava

ucLinux is like Linux, except that it doesn't use an MMU. So all processes are in the same address space, and you can't do a traditional fork (you can do a vfork). However, you would still get the same picture as with "normal" Linux.

Before considering Micro-C/OS-2, read the fine print of the license - it's quite expensive. I'm not suggesting it is /too/ expensive - it's up to the buyer to decide if it's worth the money. But people often think of it as a small low-cost system, because it is very low cost to try out, and get surprised by the final bill.

Reply to
David Brown

Thnak you David. I shall get back once i have educated myself on all the latest information provided here.

don't

a

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
Zarakava

The last time I specified Micro-C/OS-II, it was a $1500, one time fee per board design (this was 10 years ago). The nearest competing "royalty free" license was $30000 for roughly the same thing. I called it "quite inexpensive".

I forgot eCOS -- but then, I don't know how eCOS is fairing these days.

--
My liberal friends think I'm a conservative kook.
My conservative friends think I'm a liberal kook.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Wescott

Looks fairly healthy:

formatting link

-- Les Cargill

Reply to
Les Cargill

I understood that Micro-C/OS-II required a fee per project, not per board design, and I believe the fee is quite a bit higher now. For a single project, that model will work well - and I'm sure that compared to other commercial RTOS's it is quite reasonably priced. But you'll quickly become concerned about the price if you have a lot of projects (but maybe there are site developer licenses, or something similar, also available).

My point is not that it's a particularly expensive OS - just that people often think it is very cheap, free, or "free with the book".

Reply to
David Brown

There's also RTEMS at

formatting link
which is also open source.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Reply to
Simon Clubley

=2E

FSL MQX RTOS could be an (free an lightweight ) alternative :=20

formatting link
=3DSWnT

Emmanuel

Reply to
bricolMan

Thanks a lot guys for the suggestions.. Looking into it

days=

--------------------------------------- Posted through

formatting link

Reply to
Zarakava

For most embedded needs Linux is a little too heavy.

I recommend folks to take a look at Nuttx:

formatting link

This is POSIX and BSD licensed. May not support your chipset yet but the developer may help you port it.

Reply to
Marco

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.