What is Digg?80 Comments
- nickycakes, on 11/26/2008, -4/+35linux can finally power 100 year old technology like the common traffic light. TAKE THAT MICRO$OFT LOL
- MAGZine, on 11/26/2008, -3/+31I can just see the nerd with the Laptop in his car; root access to the trafficlight internals.
- jggube, on 11/25/2008, -10/+38Why not, Linux is the most junk-free (and therefore stable) OS, so it's a great idea. I'm questioning Java as the front end though...
- sprash, on 11/26/2008, -1/+24Greatest myth ever. Even if you include VM startup Java beats not only every scripting language (like perl, php, ruby or python) but also some compiled languages (like pascal).
- johnstar, on 11/26/2008, -0/+9year of the Linux traffic light?
- zoydberg, on 11/26/2008, -0/+8my favorite quote fta:
Lock added. “By choosing Linux, we are prepared for the future. It’s a flexible and scalable system.” - haentz, on 11/26/2008, -1/+8It's Realtime, stupid.
- 0akley, on 11/26/2008, -5/+11digg needs a traffic light section!
- clichecow, on 11/26/2008, -0/+6Just because the operating system is open source does not mean the lights are.
- diggopolous, on 11/26/2008, -1/+7Just when I thought I had already read the most gratutious Linux articles ever, this one is posted.
- KibibyteBrain, on 11/26/2008, -0/+5@ethana Just because you only know about PC OSes doesn't mean that is all that is out there. There are hundreds of embedded OSes that have a smaller footprint and more real time/interrupt driven features than Linux.
The only benefit of Linux for embedded systems is that its very well supported for general development tools compared to the competition because so many people [relatively] develop for it. In some ironic sense, Linux is sort of bloatware in a field where sometimes designers don't use an OS at all and instead just the interrupt features of their microcontroller when they develop applications. - inactive, on 11/26/2008, -2/+7>Linux is the most junk-free (and therefore stable) OS
hmmm where should i start - newbr33d, on 11/26/2008, -1/+6Linux user here, but that was actually quite funny. :)
- TheWindBlows, on 11/27/2008, -0/+3Who -- puts traffic lights on windows, you better be expecting crashes.
- loquax, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3I've programmed quite a bit in C++, C#, VB (Both .NET and the older variety), and JAVA. The myths of JAVA really do need a reality check. Here is my take
C++ --Super fast, hybridized OO/Procedural language extremely unportable if done with Microsoft products. You have more opportunities to really screw things up and write bad, bad code with C++. Don't even think about developing in this language unless you have quite a few really, really talented geeks. If they produce methods that are over 20 lines of code and have a conditional complexity greater than 5-10 and do not write the code/methods to be testable, fire them immediately or you will be stuck with them until they are well into their 80s.
VB (Both varieties) --really clunky, really verbose. It was intended to be a prototyping language and nothing more and should have remained as such. While .NET makes some serious improvements. And yes, java now has had foreach structures like VB for the past two versions.
C#--awesome language syntactically takes the best of Java and really makes it even more usable. However, it is starting to run the risk of being over- bloated with features that sacrifice clarity for coding ease. C# is a viable language for desktop applications AND web services creation. However, while it is said to run under the Mono project, I've never seen it operate under it and have my suspicions that it is a good version or two behind in features. Additionally, the open source offerings for C# are just now starting to ramp up.
Java--extremely portable, lots of mature, easy to use open source libraries for all sorts of things. It is a tad slow when using Swing libraries. SWT does a heck of a lot to speed up the front end. On the back end it is as fast as you could want it to be without all the dangers of C++ memory leaks. You have to know how to tweak the VM settings for ultimate performance, but once it is up and running, nothing is more stable.
Bottom line--Use C# or Java. The portability of C# is a little less than what one could want (and that will change). C# also has fewer open source offerings currently (but that will also change). Java is a little more mature and has a few more people familiar with it. I will say that the Visual Studio 2008 IDE is much, much more responsive than the Netbeans IDE. Eclipse comes close if you get some of the commercial plug-ins available. - freezermeat, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3The "best" aspects of Visual Basic? Erm, dude... In any case, this whole thing about Java being slow: it's not. I've seen Java run as fast as C, even doing stuff like 3D in OpenGL, which you would normally think is a non-starter.
- Projektorboy, on 11/26/2008, -3/+6If there were Microsoft-run traffic light systems would they crash to solid blue lights once a month?
- charlietuna, on 11/26/2008, -1/+4Why create a 16KB executable when 16MB would do as well? Ahh yes, Java marketing at its best.
- wedderburn, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3in cities and large towns they may have, sequences for busy times and quiet times on the streets.
- black27696, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3They will be closed loop, I hope.
- DavsTaylor, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3how long til it's hacked? longer than windows, give it that!
- freezermeat, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3I don't think this is true. Pascal has been around for nearly 40 years, and I doubt that bytecode interpreters were part of its implementation on the earliest hardware. I've programmed Pascal on OpenVMS, for example, and there was no bytecode involved, as few as I know! Obviously any language can be compile to bytecode if you want to write such a compiler, but it's not inherent in the language. You could, for example, build some hardware that executes Java bytecode directly... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_processor
- leakus, on 11/26/2008, -0/+3I am not sure if I am supposed to take this as an offense or a compliment?
- spectecjr, on 11/26/2008, -1/+3Uh, Sprash? Pascal isn't a compiled language. It's interpreted. Specifically, it's compiled to bytecode (P-code), which is the origin of Java's bytecode.
- slapded, on 11/26/2008, -0/+2hack the planet!
- pHr34kY, on 11/27/2008, -0/+2Ballmer: Now what do you think Windows is worth?
- inactive, on 11/26/2008, -11/+13In other news: Germany gets the longest and slowest stoplights in the world
- Kingoftherings, on 11/27/2008, -0/+2Linux isn't complicated, the average user just isn't good enough to use it.
- richlw, on 11/26/2008, -0/+2it's a space station
- Myztry, on 11/26/2008, -1/+3I was thinking it was overkill. Programmable logic controllers weren't exactly fast and managed quite fine.
- Kingoftherings, on 11/27/2008, -0/+2I still don't see any traffic lights running Windows.
- berfarah, on 07/08/2009, -3/+5Well, I would hope so. I mean, I assumed that traffic lights and other systems that need a robust operating system would run Linux. The only place where I oppose Linux is on the PC, because it's too damned complicated for the average user.
- tmatyt95, on 11/26/2008, -0/+2It is good to see that more companies are giving Linux the green light.
- foxontherock, on 11/26/2008, -0/+2What's that story? There is a lot of linux, php, java, asp, perl, ... any application in the world. Do we have to list every application written in java running on linux? Is this system the only one in the world running with java/linux ? I know a lot of them in my city where friends work and they are not on digg for that!
- spectecjr, on 11/26/2008, -3/+5Hopefully this will work better than Virgin America/Airbus's in-flight Linux powered entertainment system. If it works about the same, expect lots of literal crashes.
- opticwind, on 11/26/2008, -1/+3"Powered by"? Linux outputs energy now? What, is there like a big-ass penguin on a generator?
- black27696, on 11/26/2008, -1/+3Linux user here, actually wearing a tux shirt atm. Rekkon, you're correct to a point. In a huge number of ways, Linux is far more user friendly that Windows **. The problem is that in the highest visibility operations, like installing new software, it can be extremely complicated. Apt-Get and its front-ends are amazing but when they don't have what you need or you don't know what you're looking at and install multiple versions of the same thing or try to compile on your own your world can come crashing down around you. I don't have that problem, but any "average" user is going to. There's still a long road to go, I believe Linux will eventually no longer be a share of the market, it will BE the market, but that's a ways off yet. The foundation, however, has been laid.
- stoanhart, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1Maybe because:
a) It IS deterministic, since they are using Real-Time Java, not standard Java as you would use for desktop software.
b) Developing in Java is easier and faster, and therefore cheaper. - DickBreath, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1The UCSD p-System was popular in the late 70's early 80's. It compiled Pascal down to bytecodes. This worked great on systems with only 64 K of memory.
There were also Pascal compilers that compiled to native code. For example, the Corvus Concept had a native Pascal to 68000 compiler. Lisa Pascal (Apple) had an extended language to 68000 compiler. Lisa Pascal became MPW Pascal. There was also Turbo Pascal on DOS which I believe was compiled to native code.
On the early (1984) Mac, Microsoft had their own unique development tools that compiled Pascal to p-Code and interpreted it. - alarion, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1http://java.sun.com/javase/technologies/realtime/f ...
- DickBreath, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1Why? Because it might be easier to do. (eg, cheaper) A SoC with 16 MB is dirt cheap. Why bother with a 16 K one?
I've personally written cell phone games in Java that compiled down to 21 KB and run on four billion devices, regardless of the underlying processor in the phone. And no, the game action does not stop to GC. - TheMandibleClaw, on 11/27/2008, -0/+1I would have gone for QNX for the OS. Don't get me wrong, I love linux. But QNX is a real-time OS, also unix based. Just not free ...
Nice choice of java though! - inactive, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1I really appreciate this story because in school my major involves embedded systems that use linux. One of my current projects is to build an autonomous little rover that runs off linux.
If you want some more information on the technology:
http://www.signalbau-huber.de/files/file/Prospekt_ ...
http://www.signalbau-huber.de/files/file/128_DB-Ac ... - solarwind24, on 11/26/2008, -1/+2No YOU'RE slow...
- Weebs43, on 11/27/2008, -0/+1I wonder what happens when traffic lights running Windows get the BSOD
- charlietuna, on 11/28/2008, -0/+1to be fair you should add the Java runtime to that and compare it to embedded C or assembler. I understand that there are reasons for this, but they might have less to do with reliability and more to do with maintainability and low cost.
- browntiger, on 11/26/2008, -1/+2I bet they were using embedded OS, like BSD in the past. Hooray for giving linux a chance. I can not agree on choice for java. It will work - but not to my taste. Most java applications are slow and not reliable.
It is cheaper to develop in java. I use it for my rapid prototypes. - Zippo, on 11/26/2008, -1/+2Alright, German hackers, start hacking lights.
- Myztry, on 11/26/2008, -0/+1They are all variables. The number of lanes. The permitted turns. Delays. Priorities. Crossing existence.
Write the code once, and configure the settings for each intersection. Pre-configs would cover all but the rarest situations.
The only time it should be necessary to change the code is if the law changes in a manner not accounted for. -
Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is