🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <130.166.uupcb@ssr.com> dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin)  writes:
>  > .>Agreed, but I'd class it as real-time.  Task switching time is quite
>  > .>predictable.  Task prioritization is easy and precise.  What OS would
>  > .>you consider more suited for real-time?
>
>GO> .  mm! Heard about iRMX from INTEL?
>
>Yes, and also RT-11 from DEC.  (And there have been a couple of
>weak tries at adding RT extensions to *ix systems...)  Both good OS' for
>real-time. But what makes them more suited for real-time?

I am not sure what you mean by "weak tries at adding RT extensions to *ix
systems", but my employer sells a real-time, Unix-like operating system.
We even have some competition (whose names I won't mention so I don't
advertize them ;-).  It is not a "weak try".

And, since this is comp.sys.unisys, I will mention that I can run it on
my Unisys PW2 850.

-- 
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
Alan F. Perry                      | "e-mail is wrecking my life"
esprit@netcom.com        (home)    |            - some random person 
allan@hakkinen.lynx.com  (work)    |              standing in San Francisco