3 ms·

Just as a casual reader of this comment, a few tips: - The rhetoric about the world grinding to a halt isn't really pertinent and makes you look unreliable. Al

Just as a casual reader of this comment, a few tips: - The rhetoric about the world grinding to a halt isn't really pertinent and makes you look unreliable. Also, no, not "literally." I think what you're getting at is that it's chosen for high-reliability systems, with the implication being that it's chosen for its superior reliability(?) - But I say this because it sounds like you have some knowledge as to how this obscure microkernal is used and sharing that is valuable to the community. It's just a shame if the message gets lost in the delivery.

jacquesm 8y ago
The world really would literally grind to a halt, you are severely under-estimating how common this particular OS is. It has been the embedded system of choice for a very large variety of applications, it is anything but obscure it is just obscure to those who spend their time working on web stuff but in industry you would come across it (and RTOS: https://rtos.com/ https://rtos.com/) very often. Neither of those names will ring a bell for people who spend their days with your usual web toolsets.
- nickpsecurity 8y ago
  It really wouldnt. They'd keep using the OS and tools to sustain their systems until they got a replacement vendor supporting QNX or replaced the systems with non-QNX software. They might also sue original supplier. So, rather grind to a halt, it would all continue running in legacy mode, users would spend more money, and it gets supported or replaced. Lots of precedents for that sort of thing. Between acquisition price and QNX's revenues, it's unlikely support will be terminated any time soon. We wont get to see the hypothetical tested unless RIM bankrupts with nobody acquiring and supporting their assets. That a losing company acquired QNX did worry me a bit, though.

3 ms·

Just as a casual reader of this comment, a few tips: - The rhetoric about the world grinding to a halt isn't really pertinent and makes you look unreliable. Al

by alexandercrohde 8y ago

jacquesm 8y ago
The world really would literally grind to a halt, you are severely under-estimating how common this particular OS is. It has been the embedded system of choice for a very large variety of applications, it is anything but obscure it is just obscure to those who spend their time working on web stuff but in industry you would come across it (and RTOS: https://rtos.com/ https://rtos.com/) very often. Neither of those names will ring a bell for people who spend their days with your usual web toolsets.
- nickpsecurity 8y ago
  It really wouldnt. They'd keep using the OS and tools to sustain their systems until they got a replacement vendor supporting QNX or replaced the systems with non-QNX software. They might also sue original supplier. So, rather grind to a halt, it would all continue running in legacy mode, users would spend more money, and it gets supported or replaced. Lots of precedents for that sort of thing. Between acquisition price and QNX's revenues, it's unlikely support will be terminated any time soon. We wont get to see the hypothetical tested unless RIM bankrupts with nobody acquiring and supporting their assets. That a losing company acquired QNX did worry me a bit, though.