Re: [time-nuts] Basic question regarding comparing two frequencies
jimlux@earthlink.net said:
But over the next few years, I suspect you'll see more and more of it
coming onto the surplus market. My fond hope is that my daughter will be
able to capitalize on it.
A friend had a fancy scope with an Etherenet. It got infected with the
virus-de-jour.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray wrote:
jimlux@earthlink.net said:
But over the next few years, I suspect you'll see more and more of it
coming onto the surplus market. My fond hope is that my daughter will be
able to capitalize on it.
A friend had a fancy scope with an Etherenet. It got infected with the
virus-de-jour.
Yes.. I was at a meeting at work last week where we discussed this.
Seems it works like this: The equipment mfrs have about 6 month
turnaround on patch cycles, so your instrument is almost always
vulnerable. But, if you don't connect it to anything or use it as a
browser, you're ok. Then, someone plugs a USB stick in (that is
infected from some other PC).. and that infects the instrument. SInce
the instrument isn't running anti virus (they're of limited value
anyway, and usually have a performance impact that's unacceptable in
embedded systems), the virus lurks there. Then, when you DO connect to
the network, it leaps into action, or, it infects the USB stick of the
next poor schlub to use it.
That seems to indicate these devices are running a version of embedded
Windows for them to get infected by a virus and I wonder why they need
such a sledgehammer internally.
Steve
PS. sorry for top-posting but that's the only way I can reply at the
moment (basic HTML Gmail).
On 26/07/2010, jimlux jimlux@earthlink.net wrote:
Hal Murray wrote:
jimlux@earthlink.net said:
But over the next few years, I suspect you'll see more and more of it
coming onto the surplus market. My fond hope is that my daughter will
be
able to capitalize on it.
A friend had a fancy scope with an Etherenet. It got infected with the
virus-de-jour.
Yes.. I was at a meeting at work last week where we discussed this.
Seems it works like this: The equipment mfrs have about 6 month
turnaround on patch cycles, so your instrument is almost always
vulnerable. But, if you don't connect it to anything or use it as a
browser, you're ok. Then, someone plugs a USB stick in (that is
infected from some other PC).. and that infects the instrument. SInce
the instrument isn't running anti virus (they're of limited value
anyway, and usually have a performance impact that's unacceptable in
embedded systems), the virus lurks there. Then, when you DO connect to
the network, it leaps into action, or, it infects the USB stick of the
next poor schlub to use it.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
Steve Rooke wrote:
That seems to indicate these devices are running a version of embedded
Windows for them to get infected by a virus and I wonder why they need
such a sledgehammer internally.
Steve
PS. sorry for top-posting but that's the only way I can reply at the
moment (basic HTML Gmail).
Yes.. most are running some flavor of Windows Embedded (formerly known
as WinCE) or WinXP. It's a cost driven thing.. small form factor
motherboards are readily available, windows gives you a familiar (to
most users) interface for doing things like setup of the network
interface, file system, etc. I'd say it's probably cheaper (in a
capital investment sense) to put a small PC into the instrument than to
design your own custom controller board, write embedded software for it,
etc.)
Especially if you want commonality across your whole line, where the
higher end instruments have fairly sophisticated add-on software (all
those slick applications that analyze signals, set things up), choosing
some sort of popular OS platform makes sense.
MS makes it pretty easy to do the development.. The Visual Studio
products are inexpensive, well integrated, etc. They've got decent
documentation for generating stripped down installs suitable for
instruments. They also have update management, etc.
Some flavor of Linux is really the alternative, and the learning curve
to get started with embedded applications is a bit steeper, especially
if you want more than what can be done by a command line interface.
Which GUI toolkit do you use? Where do you get it? etc. With Windows,
that whole list of choices has been made for you.
ROFLMAO!
-John
==============
jimlux@earthlink.net said:
But over the next few years, I suspect you'll see more and more of it
coming onto the surplus market. My fond hope is that my daughter will
be
able to capitalize on it.
A friend had a fancy scope with an Etherenet. It got infected with the
virus-de-jour.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
On 26/07/2010, jimlux jimlux@earthlink.net wrote:
Some flavor of Linux is really the alternative, and the learning curve
to get started with embedded applications is a bit steeper, especially
if you want more than what can be done by a command line interface.
Which GUI toolkit do you use? Where do you get it? etc. With Windows,
that whole list of choices has been made for you.
This is really an old excuse now as Linux has been around a long time
and there are already a lot of embedded systems running it. As for a
GUI toolkit, you have choices with Linux, ie. QT and GTK, to name but
two, and Windows only gives you a single choice. As for development
environments, the World is your oyster with Linux and it all comes
without expensive licensing issues.
Steve
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein