Highway POS System
Why Linux? Because it works. Because it does the job. Because, let's face it, it's free.
In late 1993, we started doing preliminary design work on a new retail petroleum point of sale (POS) unit. Basically, it's an electronic cash register (ECR) which also handles credit cards and controls fuel dispenser systems. We wanted to design a PC-based system to leverage the ease of availability and low prices associated with PC hardware.
Our sister division in the Netherlands had already began designing a new POS system for the European market. Since they had provided major components of our current successful products, we waited in heady anticipation for their design documents. Unfortunately, their design was based on MU-DOS, a multitasking DOS by Digital Research. We weren't very happy, and started researching alternative operating systems.
We had the following requirements:
Soft real time: While we didn't need a true real time system, we did need an operating system which would be able to handle over a dozen serial ports. These ports weren't always active, but we'd have bursts of communications from 9600 baud and higher, and we needed to be responsive in processing the incoming data. We also had to handle an experienced ECR cashier who would be entering keystrokes at a high rate and expecting a quick system response.
Multitasking: Preferably preemptive. What we really wanted was protected memory segments, so that one task wouldn't be able to corrupt another's data space. Being able to use multiple programs would allow us to change out specific programs without affecting the rest of the system.
Non-proprietary: We wanted an OS and development system that was supported by an outside agency using industry standard tools and utilities. We wanted to make our own workload as small as possible.
Inexpensive: The price point we were aiming at for the product didn't allow too much choice in the way of software.
In fairly short order, we had examined a number of candidates and decided to use SCO Unix w/Chorus Micro-kernel. Linux hadn't become an option—yet. We had heard of it, but didn't feel it was mature enough or commercially acceptable enough to warrant serious investigation.
Windows 3.1 still seemed too buggy, Windows NT was too expensive and too much of a resource hog.
QNX suffered from a lack of virtual memory. While we didn't have a real need for virtual memory, we wanted the ability to use it if the application needed it for some short but highly memory intensive operation.
OS/2 was originally high on our list, as our sister division was also looking at migrating to OS/2 for their product. Unfortunately, we consistently had problems with installation and found support extremely difficult to get.
SCO's only real problem seemed to be pricing. They wanted much too much, much too soon. While we started negotiating, we needed to start developing. We didn't want to purchase any SCO development systems, so we decided to start our development on Linux. Linux was fairly POSIX compliant, so we were confident we would be able to port our code without difficulty to another platform, particularly another Unix platform.
Differences in usability showed up almost immediately. I was working on the one SCO system we did have (an evaluation unit) and found the utility commands to be almost primitive compared to Linux. Things as simple as the recursive (-R) flag were missing from the chmod and chown commands. I found myself locating and acquiring more and more GNU tools. I was unable to get good or timely support for the SCO C compiler and the C++ front end. (They didn't have a native C++ compiler at the time.) I had difficulty in getting quality technical support. I had plenty of their time, but kept talking to support personnel who were not close enough to the module for which I needed information. I continually had to bother my SCO sales representative to renew my support contract (which was free due to the on-going negotiations).
On the Linux side of the partition, life was much smoother. The utilities were very advanced, the documentation reasonably good and the Linux newsgroups were a wealth of information and solutions. We tried using the SCO newsgroups, but found that, unless someone had experienced the exact same problem, little help was forthcoming. Linux newsgroups allowed us to contact the actual authors and maintainers of specific areas of code to better understand and troubleshoot problems. They were also fast. Within a matter of a day or two (sometimes less) we had fixes, workarounds and suggestions to try. It was almost like having a bunch of Linux experts on our payroll.
While upper management continued negotiating with SCO, engineering started quietly hoping that we could stay with Linux. However, we still had that commercial issue. We were afraid our customers wouldn't accept a free “hackers” OS. Luckily, Linux just kept gaining momentum. Linux 1.0 came out during this time, and suddenly companies like Caldera were making this wonderful OS a commercial product.
Suddenly, using Linux wasn't quite the issue it had been the previous year. Our customers still weren't sure, but their technical people started giving grudging acknowledgement that Linux just might be okay in a product. We decided to stay with Linux and drop SCO, who still wanted too much, too soon—we've never looked back.
Fast/Flexible Linux OS Recovery
On Demand Now
In this live one-hour webinar, learn how to enhance your existing backup strategies for complete disaster recovery preparedness using Storix System Backup Administrator (SBAdmin), a highly flexible full-system recovery solution for UNIX and Linux systems.
Join Linux Journal's Shawn Powers and David Huffman, President/CEO, Storix, Inc.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
|CentOS 6.8 Released||May 27, 2016|
|Secure Desktops with Qubes: Introduction||May 27, 2016|
|Chris Birchall's Re-Engineering Legacy Software (Manning Publications)||May 26, 2016|
|ServersCheck's Thermal Imaging Camera Sensor||May 25, 2016|
|Petros Koutoupis' RapidDisk||May 24, 2016|
|The Italian Army Switches to LibreOffice||May 23, 2016|
- Download "Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI"
- Secure Desktops with Qubes: Introduction
- Chris Birchall's Re-Engineering Legacy Software (Manning Publications)
- The Italian Army Switches to LibreOffice
- Linux Mint 18
- Petros Koutoupis' RapidDisk
- ServersCheck's Thermal Imaging Camera Sensor
- Oracle vs. Google: Round 2
- The FBI and the Mozilla Foundation Lock Horns over Known Security Hole
Until recently, IBM’s Power Platform was looked upon as being the system that hosted IBM’s flavor of UNIX and proprietary operating system called IBM i. These servers often are found in medium-size businesses running ERP, CRM and financials for on-premise customers. By enabling the Power platform to run the Linux OS, IBM now has positioned Power to be the platform of choice for those already running Linux that are facing scalability issues, especially customers looking at analytics, big data or cloud computing.
￼Running Linux on IBM’s Power hardware offers some obvious benefits, including improved processing speed and memory bandwidth, inherent security, and simpler deployment and management. But if you look beyond the impressive architecture, you’ll also find an open ecosystem that has given rise to a strong, innovative community, as well as an inventory of system and network management applications that really help leverage the benefits offered by running Linux on Power.Get the Guide