Why do you still use Windows XP?

B

BillW50

In
Lostgallifreyan said:
I decided to risk this one:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ASUS-Eee-PC-904HD-8-9-0-9-GHz-Laptop-PC-/120874428274
I have no idea yet if this will cause elation or regret, but it will
at least get me some much needed mobility.

I hope I can get some cheaper than that, so I can get backups if I
decide on them long term.

Maybe I will, if the world swoons and falls into the arms of ARM
CPU's.

I didn't recall the 904HD model of having a Celeron processor. I would
have guessed an Atom processor. And I think they listed 1GB max was
wrong. As I would think it can handle 2GB of RAM (should only have one
RAM slot though).

The price sounds good to me. No problem there. Worse comes to worse you
can always get your money back out of it. So I don't think you will
regret it at all. ;-)
 
B

BillW50

In
Lostgallifreyan said:
It's possibly my Kingstons were fakes. Not all that likely, but
bought from a small local shop. If they had been, the shop wouldn't
have known either. I've seen a couple of real fakes since though,
they're usually more obvious, rough-looking in some details, or with
half claimed capacity, slow access, or worse.

I find that cheap SD cards are a bad bet, but cheap CF cards often
score high. Best for top nothc in both is Transcend, at least, last
time I bought. Sandisk on eBay is impossible, fakes that make a
minefield more mine than field. Hopefully Transcend won't suffer the
same fate. Maybe not though, I think they were more open about their
detailed documentation, so fakers can't so easily rely on buyer's
ignorance of details. (I wish ALL parts were so openly spec'd as
those things were!) Anyway, Transcend were the only CF cards I ever
found that reliably gave me performance like UDMA mode 5. And at a
modest price that made Sandisk look very disappointing, even greedy.

All wonderful information! Many thanks! I bought a fake off of eBay
once. An 8GB SD card which turned out to be really a 2GB SD card. I
tried looking for ways to fix it so everything would see it as a real
2GB once again.

I never found a good way to do this. So I cheated and used a
partitioning utility and created a partition of 2GB. Now an OS won't
touch the unreal 6GB part.

This fake 8GB is really slow at writing. Of course I don't trust it with
original files or anything. But it has been doing very well otherwise.
 
Z

Zaphod Beeblebrox

In

Okay, I thought there were recent discussions about it.

There might be, just not in the newsgroup (which never had a lot of
traffic even when XP Embedded was the current version).
Well I never tried it, but I see nothing stopping Embedded from running
from a DVD read only, a ROM, or almost anything else as read only.

True, though most embedded products tend to steer away from spinning
disks toward solid state media - both for reliability and space
concerns.
See this is what I am talking about. They have other partitions/drives
that are not under the write protection with the EWF enabled (generally
it is only the system partition). And in these cases, all bets are off
as those other drives are still being written too.

The post that the link points to says nothing about multiple
partitions, though I'll admit the OP does. It wasn't my intent to do
your homework for you, but rather to show that there are recorded
instances out there in the group. There are enough posts in the
archive discussing failures on single partition media that it is
accepted in embedded product engineering circles as real problem. It is
one of the reasons MS just isn't taken seriously in the embedded world.
It was kind of weird - MS had a big presence at ESC Boston 2010 and was
practically laughed out of the conference, and didn't even bother
showing up at ESC Boston 2011. It's pretty clear they "just don't get
it" as far as embedded systems go.
 
B

BillW50

In
Zaphod said:
There might be, just not in the newsgroup (which never had a lot of
traffic even when XP Embedded was the current version).

I wish I had known that newsgroup existed back then. As I would have
been asking a lot of questions way back then. ;-)

[...]
The post that the link points to says nothing about multiple
partitions, though I'll admit the OP does. It wasn't my intent to do
your homework for you, but rather to show that there are recorded
instances out there in the group. There are enough posts in the
archive discussing failures on single partition media that it is
accepted in embedded product engineering circles as real problem.

Thanks Zaphod! I plan on spending the next few weeks reading through the
archives to see what I can find. And you might have missed this post by
Lostgallifreyan, who explained to me how corruption could happen. See
below.

In BillW50 wrote on Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:47:27 -0500:
In

Okay now that makes sense and I can see that happening. And one could
avoid this problem electronically by disabling the write enable line.

I also mentioned to Lostgallifreyan that one could physically disable
the write enable to the drive. And regardless what else is happening,
that should prevent any shenanigans of any accidental writing to the
protected drive.

It is odd, I have routinely killed the power to my embedded devices and
I never had a problem. I suppose how the power fades throughout the
system determines how risky this practice would be on a given machine.
It is one of the reasons MS just isn't taken seriously in the embedded
world. It was kind of weird - MS had a big presence at ESC Boston 2010
and was practically laughed out of the conference, and didn't even
bother showing up at ESC Boston 2011. It's pretty clear they "just
don't get it" as far as embedded systems go.

I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?
 
B

BillW50

In Lostgallifreyan wrote on Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:13:46 -0500:
That reminds me of something... I made a small GPS logger based on a
Logomatic v2 board. One of the things that board has is an SD card
socket, and a warning that we are supposed to manually request the
data to be flushed to the card before removing power, to avoid this
corruption problem. I needed a reliable system that I could turn off
power from entirely, using a magnet and reed switch, so I had to
figure out a way to stop the device safely. I did it with an LED, an
aerogel capacitor, and not a lot else. The idea is that the Li-ion
cell keeps the cap charged, and when power is removed the (carefully
chosen) LED arranged for a voltage drop that immediately put a logic
line below thrshold, to logic 0, forcing data flush. It had just
enough time to do this before that cap discharged. :) So it was always
safe after that. I came up with a basic rul that for any system
needing that method, the capacitance should be rated at one farad per
amp drawn by the load. (And the cap rated for the voltage used too). I
documeted the doing on Sparkfun Electronics forum using the same name
I do here.

The point of that is, that some systems might use a similar method.
Power fading can be managed so a reservoir persists long enough to
finish a cache flush to disk or card before critical power loss
occurs. The question is, is this actually done? I like my method
because it doesn't depend on an order given. It physically makes sure
there IS always enough power to do the deed. This is true nio matter
how the main source fails. Basically, like a UPS writ very very
small...

The main problem with this idea is that it may not be easy to apply
in many situations. You'd need a way to send a 'logic low' signal to
force a card driver to flush the cache and finnish writing,
immediately on receipt of signal, and I've no idea if that's a
standard thing. Even if it were, it might need a few parts changed or
moved, using SMT soldering in most cases. At least the Logomatic
makers thought about this, but even there I had to do some work of my
own.

That is one amazing story Lostgallifreyan. I love it! That reminds me of
all of the mods I have done in the past. ;-)

My first experience with RAMDisk was an external RAM module for the
Commodore 8-bit machines. Well the first RAMDisk experience was really
on an Epson CP/M laptop. But that had battery power 24/7 and didn't
count for loss of power glitches, since it never had any.

Anyway being new to RAMDisks, I was done with coding and powered off the
computer without thinking to save my work to a floppy. Instantly I
thought oh crap! Powered back on in less than a second and checked the
RAMDisk and everything was still there fully intact. ;-)

So I started testing how long the power could be gone before corruption
would occur. And it would still hold data for up to 4 to 7 seconds
later. 5 to 7 seconds was a toss up and it could go either way. I wished
I investigated further to learn how long those RAM chips could retain
data without a refresh. As I would guess a second or so there could have
been enough power floating around to keep the refresh going for a bit.
But even that doesn't explain up to 7 seconds later and everything could
still be intact.
 
Z

Zaphod Beeblebrox

I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?


Windows Embedded isn't intended for those types of devices - in fact,
the licensing agreement specifically prohibits using Windows Embedded
in a "general computing device". And given the cost (last time I
checked it was $80 per license, probably more now) there isn't much
incentive to use Windows Embedded over an OEM license anyway. Yet more
evidence Microsoft doesn't get it with respect to embedded platforms.

--
Zaphod

Adventurer, ex-hippie, good-timer (crook? quite possibly),
manic self-publicist, terrible bad at personal relationships,
often thought to be completely out to lunch.
 
C

Char Jackson

In message <[email protected]>, BillW50 <[email protected]>
writes:
[]
I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?
Oh, I think systems that were (more or less) instant on, could not be
corrupted, and looked like normal Windows, would have a not-small
market.

On the other hand, they'd be quickly exploited.
 
Z

Zaphod Beeblebrox

In message <[email protected]>, BillW50 <[email protected]>
writes:
[]
I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?
Oh, I think systems that were (more or less) instant on, could not be
corrupted, and looked like normal Windows, would have a not-small
market.

On the other hand, they'd be quickly exploited.

What do you mean?
 
C

Char Jackson

In message <[email protected]>, BillW50 <[email protected]>
writes:
[]
I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?

Oh, I think systems that were (more or less) instant on, could not be
corrupted, and looked like normal Windows, would have a not-small
market.

On the other hand, they'd be quickly exploited.

What do you mean?

I mean in the usual sense.
 
Z

Zaphod Beeblebrox

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:36:46 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"

In message <[email protected]>, BillW50 <[email protected]>
writes:
[]
I am not sure if there is enough demand for Windows Embedded anyway?
Since the appearance of netbooks, tablets, and such... it seems to make
more sense just running the stock Windows anyway, don't you think?

Oh, I think systems that were (more or less) instant on, could not be
corrupted, and looked like normal Windows, would have a not-small
market.

On the other hand, they'd be quickly exploited.

What do you mean?

I mean in the usual sense.

I still don't understand what you mean. Why would they be quickly
exploited, and in what way?
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top