On 7/8/14, 5:40 PM, Piotr Sybilski wrote:
>> Since EPICS is not sold commercially its market share is by
>> definition zero
>
> Ok, I agree. I should use the term: "how widely is the technology
> used" (but it is still ambiguous, we can talk about number of
> developers, number of projects using it, cost of the projects based on
> it and so on, my market share question was a general term in which I
> wanted to know in which fields and how widely is OPC/DDS/EPICS used, I
> couldn't find many industrial projects based on EPICS, thus my market
> share rating was low).
Hi, Piotr.
With something like "market share" or "how widely is the technology
used," you should know why you're interested in that. The answer is
probably that you're wanting to use it as a proxy for measuring some
other things. From an extreme point of view, who cares what the market
share is if EPICS works well for you? But obviously, that's ignoring
other factors that might be important to you that market share might be
a proxy for, such as:
* Will I be able to find companies offering EPICS software development
services?
* Will I be able to find software engineers to hire with EPICS
experience (not that that's required)?
* Will I be able to get support from EPICS experts?
* Will EPICS be around for a long time?
* Will software developers be actively developing and improving EPICS?
* Will software developers be writing new modules and drivers for EPICS
to support new capabilities and hardware?
* Are there a lot of existing EPICS modules and drivers?
* Will companies provide EPICS drivers for hardware they sell?
* Will I have any bargaining power with companies when asking them to
provide an EPICS driver for their hardware?
* Will my new proposed standards be rejected by the astronomical
observatories because my standards use EPICS but almost all
astronomical observatories use the NOT_EPICS control system framework?
* Can I conclude that EPICS is likely a viable control system framework
since so many people and organizations have chosen to use it?
>> What will be the on-going costs of supporting the other technologies,
>> and how long will you be able to get support for them?
>
> DDS standard is maintained by Object Management Group (25 years of
> promotion and standardization, CORBA for example). And here comes
> probably the main difference, as DDS can be used as a real time
> system, as I understand EPICS is soft-real time.
EPICS can run on VxWorks and RTEMS. Given this, you can still do many
things with real-time requirements. Another model, though, is to do
real-time stuff on dedicated hardware, and just use EPICS to control
it and get data from it. In this model, EPICS doesn't need to be
real-time.
Lewis
- References:
- New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Piotr Sybilski
- RE: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Dalesio, Leo
- RE: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Piotr Sybilski
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Pete Jemian
- Next:
RE: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Dalesio, Leo
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
<2014>
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
RE: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Dalesio, Leo
- Next:
RE: New standards for small and medium sized astronomical observatories Hill, Jeff
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
<2014>
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|