NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/comp/realtime/1501

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-05 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!ccvqc
Newsgroups: comp.realtime
Subject: Re: What's wrong with DOS in real-time?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Christopher Vickery <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, 5 Jan 1993 12:19:35 EST
References: <[e-mail]><[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Lines: 23

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Sheppard) says:
>
>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher Vickery)
>writes:
>
>>There are real time kernels and real time operating systems available for the
>>8086, but if if you want to do real-time on a DOS machine, you have to use
>>iRMX for Windows.  That's a full-blown real-time OS that runs only on an 80386
>>or above, undoubtedly too big for a small embedded app.
>
>There are Real-Time Operating Systems available for 'DOS' machines
>(80386/80486 PC's) which are scalable, and thus suitable for many embedded
>applications.  OS-9000 (a product I sell) would be one example of such an OS.
>
Right.  My comment meant to indicate that the only real-time OS that runs
with DOS is iRMX for Windows.  Then I found out that QNX runs with DOS/
Windows too.  iRMX for Windows "ecapsulates" DOS as an iRMX task using
VM86 mode to make it so DOS and Windows don't know that anything has
changed.  I'm not sure how QNX does it, since they use the phrase "emulate
DOS" to describe what they do.
-------
Christopher Vickery, Computer Science Department, Queens College (CUNY)
Flushing, NY 11367-0904  [e-mail] [phone]