I'm not a big fan of SCO anymore, and I haven't had to work with the SCO UNIX
for about 10 years, but I used to be the SA for the SCO box that ran the plant
that produces all the chemicals used by a major chip maker. I had that system
so tweaked that when I quit they didn't bother to replace me and the system
kept running fine until it was replaced about five years later. They only
called me in "on contract" once in that whole period and that was for a
hardware problem.

Dave Reinhart


Greg Copeland wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:16:44 +0000, leslie wrote:

Kevin Darling ) wrote:
:
: However, Microsoft themselves point out that Windows is not a hard
: realtime OS, and should not be used in more demanding applications
: such as fly-by-wire.
:
http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/july13/cov2.htm
Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water |
GCN July 13, 1998


That's actually an application bug and not an OS bug. One interesting
note is that they also highlight that Unix would be a much more reliable
option, which would be true, excluding SCO, and including Linux.

It's also worth noting, that traditionally, all MS OS's have somehow
managed to sidestep the DoD qualification phases. Some cash and palms are
usually suspected to be the reasons. In fact, while I don't have a link
off hand, there is a fairly well known quote, by a DoD (IIRC) guy, which
can be paraphrase as, "If Windows had been forced to go through the same
channels as every other OS, it would of never qualified."

Cheers!