Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Feb 2011 11:35 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 462206
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-08-26
That's a good point.
Going with the mini Linux distro approach has caused a lot more problems for companies than the modified kernel as a base for a new OS approach.
The problem is definitely not the Linux kernel. It's well established that even unmodified it can be relied upon for embedded use.
Linux is very portable but it seems that a lot of what goes into a distro is not. The mini Linux distro approach has been a tar baby for companies like Nokia. They think they are saving time but run into unforeseen interdependencies.