Re: Re: Black Box

At 07:08 14/10/00 +0000, Ballendo wrote:

>P.S. Since I've run steppers successfully(for years) with 8254 timing
>using programs from IndexerLPT to AhHa! to CncPRO to EMC(which is
>servicing a GUI) I'm not sure why all this "it CAN'T be done!" It IS
>being done! Daily!
>
>What am I missing, here?
>
>Is it just that I'm willing to accept the computer spitting the bits
>as a "machine controller"? And not expect CNC to run as a "background
>task" while I check my email?!?
>
>Is it that my steps/sec. needs aren't in the >20k/sec. range?
>
>I really think that people ARE willing to have the box "tied up,at
>least somewhat" while they are machining. They just want to be able
>to use the familiar windows interface. Without a re-boot.
>
>Now editing/importing the next program while one is cutting is nice,
>and could be called important; but a "sluggish GUI rate" here is not
>likely. Point being, this is a "coasting job" for any modern
>processor anyway.
>
>Really, WHAT part of this am I not understanding??

While the modern processors are up to it, the "modern" operating systems
aren't. This is why the EMC guys have to coerce Linux into behaving like a
real-time OS before they can make any headway. The reality is that none of
the commercial PC O/S available today offer the level of sophistication (in
terms of real-time features) that I used to expect to be able to use when I
was doing process control on DEC PDP-8 and PDP-11 processors in the early '70s.

Just a though though - with Win NT/2000, it is possible to use
multi-processor PC configurations, and have the O/S multi-task among the
processors available. Has anyone considered the possibility of using
NT/2000 in a 2 processor PC, using one processor to handle the GUI-based
apps and the other to handle the CNC?

Regards,
Tony