[Coco] Microware OS-9 for x86

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 16 June 2010, Michael Kerpan wrote:
>I think that ARM would be LESS safe, given that OS-9 is market as an
>embedded OS and ARM is just about the most popular architecture for
>embedded purposes. Nitros-9 for x86 would probably be seen as a
>harmless nostalgia trip by the folks at Radsys, whereas a Nitros-9 for
>ARM would set off alarm bells in an instant.
>
>Mike

As usual, I opened keyboard and inserted both feet.  You are of course 
right.  I was only considering the plethora of one board arm stuff I see in 
Circuit Cellar ads.  There is quite a selection, and most are quite low 
power drain compared to the x86 stuff.  Can't touch the 63C09's low power, 
but the slowest one at 1/4 watt is pretty close.

>On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett at gmail.com> 
wrote:
>> One could probably liquidate the lot of us & not be able to make a
>> payment. So this would be a project for the DE1, but looking over the
>> fence to x86 code just doesn't sound like a good idea to me.   Arm or
>> PPC makes far more sense, and is no doubt a lot safer.  But the arm
>> boards start at about $229.
>
>--
>Coco mailing list
>Coco at maltedmedia.com
>http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>


-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
A billion here, a billion there -- pretty soon it adds up to real money.
		-- Sen. Everett Dirksen, on the U.S. defense budget