Software application development
This blog is intended to provoke discussion and exchange between like minded software application developers, engineers, architects, project managers - and keen hobbyists too.
Wednesday 18 June 2008, 3:09 PM
Fighter pilots, periscopes and device software optimisation
So why do we need it? We already have version control and change management software to help re-engineer desktop software to ‘devices’ in various forms – and if the software is being developed for a device from its first iteration then why should it need optimising in some special kind of way?
The BlackBerry gang at Research in Motion and Palm have been telling us for years about the various challenges of developing for ‘devices’ – you know the kind of thing: smaller screen, user input restrictions, limited battery life, slower processing power etc. Developing for these and other devices is different, so why do vendors like Wind River keep pushing the whole optimisation programme?
'Image courtesy of: Research in Motion
DSO has now, according to Wind River, encompassed multi-core software development and virtualisation techniques. The argument being that the ability to virtualise hardware allows multiple operating environments to share underlying processing cores, memory and other hardware resources. The company says that virtualisation presents the opportunity for device manufacturers to reduce hardware costs and power consumption as they add new capabilities to existing devices.
I think the problem here is what we mean by the term ‘devices’. It’s not just mobile phones, PDAs and other handhelds. The kind of device Wind River’s toolset would be used for could be a heads-up-display in a fighter pilot’s helmet or some kind of monitor inside a submarine periscope. Basically, this is the stuff of mission-critical aerospace and defense applications.
Maybe it’s just the way the term is structured that makes it feel uncomfortable. Wouldn’t DSO be better as Optimisation Software for Devices? It’s too late now I guess.
PreviousComments on this post
Hi Adrian.....new here and would consider myself as a rookie.
It seems to me though, that common sense should be the most critical factor when dealing with fighter jets, submarines, and suchlike.
More than ever I believe that these systems need a good old fasioned manual override.
how would such a system work on the heavily computerised typhoon euro fighter, which relies on instability for manouverability, a great engineering challenge, maybe an independent moteor could keep twanging the high tension wires that are constantly adjusted to keep the thing in the air.
regards roger
Thanks for your comment Roger,
Manual override - oh, yes - that's a good one. I like it. Now just how far could that be taken I wonder?
Dear Mr Gates - I would like to request a manual override function to help me avoid my Blue Screen of Death troubles and - while I'm at it, Dear Mr Jobs, I really don't feel like I need to update iTunes and QuickTime every 10 days so could you please observe my manual override and leave me alone?
I think it's a subject all in itself and is great - you should blog on it even.
I'm no fighter plane expert but I did see the Blue Angels (that sounds so soppy compared to the Red Arrows doesn't it) at Andrew's Airforce Base in Washington DC last month. They kept them all in the air this time as opposed to the show in South Carolina (or somewhere) where the pilot failed to "tense" properly before a pull up and ended up carving a new runway into the forest.
Anyway, I still like the manual software override theme :-)
Adrian
Hi Adrian....
That made me laugh......what i was really getting at; was that there should me the option of a direct interface between pilot and the raw hydraulic controls of the mechanical machine, that way people could at least get home and not drop out of the sky!!
As for the windows manual override.....well, would that condemn us to the post office, drawing charts and graphics by hand etc?
maybe one day, some kind of ultrasonic device could sit there in a corner and baby sit the windows (or whatever) OS and transmit a higher form of error correction when windows has a hiccup or worse.
About the quick time time thing...
I seem to remember apples software behaving very badly on my machine, almost like a virus! So i got rid of it
(It went kicking and screaming).
I replaced it with alshow an the k lite codec pack....no negative issues to report so far ....
rog
