Great News! The Canon EOS-1DS Mk III uses Embedded Win32!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ray, Mar 22, 2007.

  1. ray

    ray Guest

    Excuse me?? Sane people are supposed to jump ship from a perfectly good
    camera to go with one which BSODs 16 times per day at random?? I'd be much
    more impressed if it was embedded Linux.
     
    ray, Mar 22, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. For maximum efficiency in running the dual Digic III processor engine Canon
    has elected to use Embedded Win32. This is really exciting and
    groundbreaking news that will surely have even more Nikon users jump ship
    and come over to the Canon camp. This is going to be one sweet camera!






    Rita
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Mar 22, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ray

    ASAAR Guest

    If you can deal with the time from power up to first shutter
    release of about 3 1/2 minutes. Canon promises that the popup ads
    appearing in the LCD display will all be tastefully done and will
    never cover more than 8% of the display at any given time.
     
    ASAAR, Mar 22, 2007
    #3
  4. ray

    AZ Nomad Guest

    Make sure you get the version with 2G of ram so you'll have enough room for
    a copy of norton internet security, spysweeper, aim and weatherbug.
     
    AZ Nomad, Mar 22, 2007
    #4
  5. ray

    Skip Guest

    That's probably why they've gone to a larger 3" LCD screen. The ads were
    too small on the older 2.5" screen.
     
    Skip, Mar 22, 2007
    #5
  6. ray

    Mike Russell Guest

    [re Win CE running on Canon Mark III]
    Don't forget Photoshop! LOL.
     
    Mike Russell, Mar 22, 2007
    #6
  7. ray

    AZ Nomad Guest

    the trick is trying to use it on 2" lcd display.
     
    AZ Nomad, Mar 23, 2007
    #7
  8. ray

    Mardon Guest

    Technically you should say, "Win x86" not x32. That said, you've also got
    the wrong OS. The mark III has 14 bit per channel colour depth, totally 42
    bits per pixel. Surely you can see that 32 bits is not enough for 42 bit
    colour. Perhaps they'll recall all those x86 cameras and install Vista
    x64; or maybe that will be the first reason to flash the PROM. ;)
     
    Mardon, Mar 23, 2007
    #8
  9. ray

    Just D Guest

    :) ...and don't forget to carry some kind of mobile hard drive with all
    required drivers, Acronis to make a complete copy of the whole device just
    in case of crash to have a way to restore it each time when it blows up,
    etc., etc.

    As a professional software developer I can say that usually my versions of
    Windows regardless of the generation can survive for maximum/only 6-8
    months, then I have to reinstall the whole OS from scratch. I started using
    recently the complete hard drive backup that I've done when installed
    Windows, all service packs and fixes, development IDEs, drivers, customized
    system/user settings, all required tweaks, etc. This hard disk copy helps me
    to retore the whole machine in an hour or two. To reinstall everyting from
    scratch even using DVD hard drive images which is much faster than DVD disks
    usually takes at least 3 days before I can start working. Keeping in mind
    that my machines were and are always very fast... that's not very bad.

    P.S. Just wondering who is this super smart one who decided to use Win32 as
    a basic platform....)

    To the initial person who posted this info - thanks for warning me and all
    us! :)

    Just D.


     
    Just D, Mar 23, 2007
    #9
  10. ray

    Just D Guest

    "Mardon"
    If with all restrictions related to the digital content existing in Vista,
    they will have to use a much more powerful processor...))))) Also regularly
    update all certificates because some day the camera will recognize that you
    decided to make a picture of... and will refuse to do that. Also you will
    not be able to download your own images to some non-certified computer just
    because..., or because the user has a wrong name, not the name entered by
    you as the comments to the images adding by camera. Cool! Too smart to live!
    If I had an enemy I'd buy this camera for him. :)

    Just D.
     
    Just D, Mar 23, 2007
    #10
  11. Linux would suck too. These kinds of things use commercial lightweight
    operating system kits that can be customized for different kinds of
    hardware. In many cases, algorithms that don't scale well for larger
    systems can run extremely efficiently on tiny systems.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Mar 23, 2007
    #11
  12. ray

    Matt Ion Guest

    I'm looking forward to seeing a Blue Screen of Death on my camera's display...
     
    Matt Ion, Mar 23, 2007
    #12
  13. BS!
    There is no need of Win32 in a Camera.
    Rita, are you a TROLL?
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rn?= Dahl-Stamnes, Mar 23, 2007
    #13
  14. Actually, there is the need of an _EMBEDDED_ operating system in a camera,
    and it is not inconceivable that MS has developed an embedded version of
    Win32, since there's some money to be made in that market.

    However, a quick google indicates that there's no such thing as "embedded
    Win32".

    There is this, however: http://www.on-time.com/

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Mar 23, 2007
    #14
  15. ray

    Lionel Guest

    Yes, that's a pet peeve of mine. One of the biggest weaknesses common
    to both Windows & Linux is the fact that very few of the people
    writing the I/O code (eg; device drivers) actually understand how (or
    even why!) to write re-entrant, interruptible code that doesn't block
    interrupts for a hundred, or even a thousand times as long as should
    be required to service a given I/O request ("A ISR stub? - What's
    that?). It's simply not possible to build a real-time system around an
    OS that will routinely block *all* pending events for tens of
    milliseconds or more.
    Qnix or RTOS would be reasonable choices to run a camera. Me, I've
    always done all my own embedded programming in assembler, FORTH, & (if
    I can't avoid it), C. But I'm kind of showing my age there, because
    modern devices have to support so many complex data formats &
    interface protocols that they really do need some sort of minimal OS
    if the programmers are to achieve any kind of productivity
    Mind you, at least some of the Canon DSLRs run an embedded
    [MS|DR|Free?]-DOS, which sounds awful from a programming POV, but
    actually makes a lot of sense after you think about it for a while.
     
    Lionel, Mar 23, 2007
    #15
  16. Why does it matter what is running in the image processor?
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Mar 23, 2007
    #16
  17. The Canon my catch a cold from the internet ... I hope there is no wifi on
    these things ;-)
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Mar 23, 2007
    #17
  18. They very likely use a 14-bit processor. Hearing aids and other embedded
    hardware routinely use the non-byte aligned processors.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Mar 23, 2007
    #18
  19. ray

    ASAAR Guest

    It's not what is actually running that matters. What is *said* to
    be running is more important, in that it will draw in more energetic
    responses. The OP is, after all, lovely Rita, rpd's own meter maid.
    :)
     
    ASAAR, Mar 23, 2007
    #19
  20. Sometimes I am slow to pick up on the fact that I have been trolled. Trolls
    deserve the USENET equivalent of the death penalty ... dirty bastards ;-)
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Mar 23, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.