VxWorks is just too good [LWN.net]

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 7:36 UTC (Fri) by larryr (guest, #4030)
In reply to: VxWorks is just too good by RMetz
Parent article: LinkSys courts Linux hackers with WRT54GL (LinuxDevices)

Yeah, but I think that is baloney; for the amount of effort it takes to write software for VxWorks vs Linux they could get the memory footprint down under Linux; 2MiB flash and 8MiB RAM is more than enough to run ucLinux and the application software for a home router/firewall.

I wonder if the main reason some embedded vendors are moving away from Linux is they are afraid of the whole GPL thing.

Larry

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 9:49 UTC (Fri) by rmstar (guest, #3672) [Link]

2MiB flash and 8MiB RAM is more than enough to run ucLinux and the application software for a home router/firewall.

It would be interesting to see what happens if someone actually puts together such a software package and offers it to them free of charge :-)

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 12:46 UTC (Fri) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link]

Help me understand why hardware vendors care fig #1 about a software license like the GPL.
The rumor that hard drive and video card vendors fear exposure of patent violations certainly has some possibility.
Cartel-ish behavior emanating from certain corners of the continental US is also a possibility.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 15:22 UTC (Fri) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link]

for the amount of effort it takes to write software for VxWorks vs Linux

Actually, it's probably mostly a branding effort. VxWorks ships a Platform for Network Equipment that has like 95% of what you need to do a box like the Linksys. Just setup the web pages to do what you want, with your branding, and you're pretty much there.

And since they are selling 100's of 1000's of these a month, the development and licensing costs are in the noise at that level, especially as the more you sell, the cheaper the development is.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 15:25 UTC (Fri) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] (2 responses)

Bzzt, try again.

Ultimately the only reason any Taiwanese company uses Linux in a mass-produced product is because it is cheaper per-unit than the alternatives. Don't delude yourself into thinking any otherwise.

Also, don't delude yourself into thinking Linux is the end-all be-all for everyone. It keeps getting better, yes. So do the alternatives. In the end we all win.

Besides, Linksys (with rare exceptions) doesn't actually write any of the code that goes into their prodcuts. Aside from the UI tweaks and branding, it's all done by the ODMs and chipset manufacturers.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 18:17 UTC (Fri) by mf (guest, #34286) [Link] (1 responses)

You're very close. Cisco recently bought Linksys, and it's time to start paying off the purchase price. Cisco is all about manufacturing and margins. Linksys is probably under heavy pressure right now to get their margins up, and one way to do it is by cutting BOM costs. VxWorks is already in a lot of Cisco products (I've worked on a few in the past). They're probably not giving it away, but you can be sure the incremental adder for VxWorks is less than the savings in BOM costs.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 19:15 UTC (Fri) by larryr (guest, #4030) [Link]

but you can be sure the incremental adder for VxWorks is less than the savings in BOM costs.

The "incremental adder" for Linux is 0. I think the "savings in BOM costs" is a red herring, since the implication that the new hardware configuration precludes using Linux is a non sequitur.

Larry

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 19:12 UTC (Fri) by brouhaha (guest, #1698) [Link] (2 responses)

Sure, but Linksys doesn't have to do the rewriting of the software, so their cost to switch is almost nothing. The software is provided by the ODM that makes the box for Linksys, or (more likely) by the vendor of the wireless chipset/SOC. For instance, their original Linux-based router software was provided by Broadcom. If they're still using Broadcom chips in the new WRT54G, the VxWorks software is probably also provided by Broadcom.

Disclaimer: I work for a company that develops chips and software for competing wireless router products, though my comments here are my own opinions and do not necesssarily reflect the position of my employer.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 19:23 UTC (Fri) by larryr (guest, #4030) [Link]

Linksys doesn't have to do the rewriting of the software, so their cost to switch is almost nothing. The software is provided by the ODM that makes the box for Linksys, or (more likely) by the vendor of the wireless chipset/SOC.

So with Linux or VxWorks the amortized development/NRE cost is roughly the same (negligible).

Larry

So Broadcom

Posted Dec 5, 2005 21:17 UTC (Mon) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link]

wasn't capable of building a software load that would fit in the smaller footprint?

Or wasn't given the chance?

Clearly, C/L is still paying them, so they're not entirely on the outs...

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 19:16 UTC (Fri) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] (1 responses)

If that were true, OpenWRT would work on the series 5 devices, and they wouldn't have had to make the "L" to keep people happy (or they wouldn't relate it to Linux, but rather to having a complex routing system). It should be possible to make it work, but it's not trivial (in fact, the OpenWRT developers have no plans to do it, even though lots of people seem to have the things and want to use OpenWRT), and a company can just hire VxWorks programmers.

VxWorks is just too good

Posted Dec 2, 2005 19:48 UTC (Fri) by larryr (guest, #4030) [Link]

for the amount of effort it takes to write software for VxWorks vs Linux they could get the memory footprint down under Linux;
If that were true, OpenWRT would work on the series 5 devices

This seems to suggest that implementing OpenWRT in a way which offers a compelling value proposition for its prospective users is comparable to implementing the minimum core functionality necessary for the box to be a profitable consumer product. I do not think they are comparable.

Larry