4 ms·

In our factory, is at least still one OS/2 PC running. I'm not proud for this.

avs733 8y ago
last time I was in a 300mm fab I definitely saw OS/2, command lines being used by technicians, and a LOT of windows embedded 3.1. The main defense is a computer at the entrance where technicians are supposed to scan their USB drives. It's a devils choice really...do you put the tools on an externally accessible network? If not how do engineers get data off of tools? how does the factory talk to itself and schedule things? I don't envy FAB IT. Utterly thankless.
dylan604 8y ago
It's not necessarily something to not be proud of, though. NASA's space shuttles ran on something like a 386 CPU. That's what was available when the system was designed. Probably one of the best "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" examples. Swapping out to newer components would have meant replacing so much of the system, that it wasn't worth it. Especially if it was doing everything that needed to be done. Same thing with your OS/2 system. As long as it's working, there's really no need to change it. The fun begins when it no longer works and needs to be replaced. How much of the factory will then need to be replaced/updated just because the controlling computer can no longer operate the older equipment? That's the type of scenarios that give managers nightmares.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  Well, I think the problem arises out of the fact that most systems that size are "broke", and some other systems (a small QNX or OpenBSD [or maybe these days, some form of L4]) might have fewer flaws that can cause issues, the likes from which TSMC has apparently suffered.
squarefoot 8y ago
OS/2 was very stable, and certainly immune to viruses designed for Windows. The only problem back in the day could arise from its infamous single input queue which could freeze the entire system if a single program didn't respond in time to GUI events. The problem however was corrected in the latter versions.

last time I was in a 300mm fab I definitely saw OS/2, command lines being used by technicians, and a LOT of windows embedded 3.1. The main defense is a computer at the entrance where technicians are supposed to scan their USB drives. It's a devils choice really...do you put the tools on an externally accessible network? If not how do engineers get data off of tools? how does the factory talk to itself and schedule things? I don't envy FAB IT. Utterly thankless.

dylan604 8y ago

It's not necessarily something to not be proud of, though. NASA's space shuttles ran on something like a 386 CPU. That's what was available when the system was designed. Probably one of the best "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" examples. Swapping out to newer components would have meant replacing so much of the system, that it wasn't worth it. Especially if it was doing everything that needed to be done. Same thing with your OS/2 system. As long as it's working, there's really no need to change it. The fun begins when it no longer works and needs to be replaced. How much of the factory will then need to be replaced/updated just because the controlling computer can no longer operate the older equipment? That's the type of scenarios that give managers nightmares.

microcolonel 8y ago
Well, I think the problem arises out of the fact that most systems that size are "broke", and some other systems (a small QNX or OpenBSD [or maybe these days, some form of L4]) might have fewer flaws that can cause issues, the likes from which TSMC has apparently suffered.

squarefoot 8y ago

OS/2 was very stable, and certainly immune to viruses designed for Windows. The only problem back in the day could arise from its infamous single input queue which could freeze the entire system if a single program didn't respond in time to GUI events. The problem however was corrected in the latter versions.