Distribute your QNX RTP application on Tucows!

If you’re writing or porting an application for the QNX
realtime platform (RTP), here’s your chance to distribute it
to the worldwide community of RTP users.

Starting immediately, Tucows – the largest distributor of
software on the Internet – is taking submissions for their
new library of QNX RTP software.

Once the library is up and running, all RTP applications
accepted by Tucows will be distributed across the Tucows
network, which totals over 4000 service providers worldwide.

Just imagine… once your software is accepted, it will
be immediately accessible to every RTP user and developer.
There’s no better way to target the fast-growing QNX RTP
community – over 350,000 downloads at last count!

What kind of software can you submit?

You can submit freeware, shareware, adware, demoware,
and so on. Tucows can also provide an e-commerce solution
if you’d like to distribute a commercial version of your
software.

Submitting is easy

To submit your application, visit the Tucows submit
center at http://submit.tucows.com, click on QNX, and fill
in the information requested.

Within days, Tucows will review your submission and
inform you whether it has been accepted.


Get in on the ground floor

The fact that Tucows is already building a QNX library –
just weeks after the RTP launch – is a testament to how
quickly the QNX realtime platform is gaining momentum. Now’s
the time to establish your application as a standard among
RTP users. So submit as soon as possible!

The best of luck with your submission and thanks again
for choosing the QNX realtime platform.

I think that the current QSSL’s OS naming convention seems to be very
confusing for anyone having the first contact with different QNX OS
flavours. Now, it is just “QNX” on Tucows…
Unless, it is deliberately done so: “QNX” is here to stay purely from the
historical reasons, and it will (hopefully) successfully represent future
QSSL releases…

Zeljko

“Debbie Kane” <debbie@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:8t4p3q$ao$1@nntp.qnx.com

If you’re writing or porting an application for the QNX
realtime platform (RTP), here’s your chance to distribute it
to the worldwide community of RTP users.

Starting immediately, Tucows – the largest distributor of
software on the Internet – is taking submissions for their
new library of QNX RTP software.

Once the library is up and running, all RTP applications
accepted by Tucows will be distributed across the Tucows
network, which totals over 4000 service providers worldwide.

Just imagine… once your software is accepted, it will
be immediately accessible to every RTP user and developer.
There’s no better way to target the fast-growing QNX RTP
community – over 350,000 downloads at last count!

What kind of software can you submit?

You can submit freeware, shareware, adware, demoware,
and so on. Tucows can also provide an e-commerce solution
if you’d like to distribute a commercial version of your
software.

Submitting is easy

To submit your application, visit the Tucows submit
center at > http://submit.tucows.com> , click on QNX, and fill
in the information requested.

Within days, Tucows will review your submission and
inform you whether it has been accepted.


Get in on the ground floor

The fact that Tucows is already building a QNX library –
just weeks after the RTP launch – is a testament to how
quickly the QNX realtime platform is gaining momentum. Now’s
the time to establish your application as a standard among
RTP users. So submit as soon as possible!

The best of luck with your submission and thanks again
for choosing the QNX realtime platform.

Look also at http://www.be.com - they posted an article comparing
feature sets of different internet applicances, using different OSes
(including iOpener, based on QNX4) with BeIA solution. They of course
call QNX4 just ‘QNX’ and since most people think that QNX RTP is ‘QNX’
it might really damage perception of system. ‘Oh, it does not support
Macromedia, Java, RealPlayer, any streaming media, what a poor
system…’

I think QSSL should let Be know that they should not use name ‘QNX’ in
such indiscriminate manner. They do discriminate between versions of
WinCE after all. They could include Audrey into comparision too, or QSSL
could make their own comparision and publish it :slight_smile:

And QSSL should try to deliver the message to public that QNXRTP is ‘New
QNX’. That is very tough task in practice and perhaps a better approach
would be to have a distinctive name. Now, ‘Realtime Platform’ in NOT a
name, it is ‘distribution type’ at best. And ‘QNXRTP’ in not a name
either because people don’t like names consisting of 6 consonants
(remember, PCMCIA = People Can’t Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms).
I’ve told that already, but will repeat - ‘QNX Neutrino’ is a much
better name and we still can have ‘QNX Neutrino OEM’ and ‘QNX Neutrino
RTP’, which would clear most of confusion. This naming scheme should be
applied consistently and pervasively.

  • Igor

Zeljko Fucek wrote:

I think that the current QSSL’s OS naming convention seems to be very
confusing for anyone having the first contact with different QNX OS
flavours. Now, it is just “QNX” on Tucows…
Unless, it is deliberately done so: “QNX” is here to stay purely from the
historical reasons, and it will (hopefully) successfully represent future
QSSL releases…

Zeljko

“Debbie Kane” <> debbie@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:8t4p3q$ao$> 1@nntp.qnx.com> …
If you’re writing or porting an application for the QNX
realtime platform (RTP), here’s your chance to distribute it
to the worldwide community of RTP users.

Starting immediately, Tucows – the largest distributor of
software on the Internet – is taking submissions for their
new library of QNX RTP software.

Once the library is up and running, all RTP applications
accepted by Tucows will be distributed across the Tucows
network, which totals over 4000 service providers worldwide.

Just imagine… once your software is accepted, it will
be immediately accessible to every RTP user and developer.
There’s no better way to target the fast-growing QNX RTP
community – over 350,000 downloads at last count!

What kind of software can you submit?

You can submit freeware, shareware, adware, demoware,
and so on. Tucows can also provide an e-commerce solution
if you’d like to distribute a commercial version of your
software.

Submitting is easy

To submit your application, visit the Tucows submit
center at > http://submit.tucows.com> , click on QNX, and fill
in the information requested.

Within days, Tucows will review your submission and
inform you whether it has been accepted.


Get in on the ground floor

The fact that Tucows is already building a QNX library –
just weeks after the RTP launch – is a testament to how
quickly the QNX realtime platform is gaining momentum. Now’s
the time to establish your application as a standard among
RTP users. So submit as soon as possible!

The best of luck with your submission and thanks again
for choosing the QNX realtime platform.

Igor Kovalenko <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote:

Look also at > http://www.be.com > - they posted an article comparing
feature sets of different internet applicances, using different OSes
(including iOpener, based on QNX4) with BeIA solution. They of course
call QNX4 just ‘QNX’ and since most people think that QNX RTP is ‘QNX’
it might really damage perception of system. ‘Oh, it does not support
Macromedia, Java, RealPlayer, any streaming media, what a poor
system…’

Actually this is incorrect, the i-Opener supports MP3 and Macrodedia Flash,
which is misinformation…

Chris

I think QSSL should let Be know that they should not use name ‘QNX’ in
such indiscriminate manner. They do discriminate between versions of
WinCE after all. They could include Audrey into comparision too, or QSSL
could make their own comparision and publish it > :slight_smile:

And QSSL should try to deliver the message to public that QNXRTP is ‘New
QNX’. That is very tough task in practice and perhaps a better approach
would be to have a distinctive name. Now, ‘Realtime Platform’ in NOT a
name, it is ‘distribution type’ at best. And ‘QNXRTP’ in not a name
either because people don’t like names consisting of 6 consonants
(remember, PCMCIA = People Can’t Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms).
I’ve told that already, but will repeat - ‘QNX Neutrino’ is a much
better name and we still can have ‘QNX Neutrino OEM’ and ‘QNX Neutrino
RTP’, which would clear most of confusion. This naming scheme should be
applied consistently and pervasively.

  • Igor

Zeljko Fucek wrote:

I think that the current QSSL’s OS naming convention seems to be very
confusing for anyone having the first contact with different QNX OS
flavours. Now, it is just “QNX” on Tucows…
Unless, it is deliberately done so: “QNX” is here to stay purely from the
historical reasons, and it will (hopefully) successfully represent future
QSSL releases…

Zeljko

“Debbie Kane” <> debbie@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:8t4p3q$ao$> 1@nntp.qnx.com> …
If you’re writing or porting an application for the QNX
realtime platform (RTP), here’s your chance to distribute it
to the worldwide community of RTP users.

Starting immediately, Tucows – the largest distributor of
software on the Internet – is taking submissions for their
new library of QNX RTP software.

Once the library is up and running, all RTP applications
accepted by Tucows will be distributed across the Tucows
network, which totals over 4000 service providers worldwide.

Just imagine… once your software is accepted, it will
be immediately accessible to every RTP user and developer.
There’s no better way to target the fast-growing QNX RTP
community – over 350,000 downloads at last count!

What kind of software can you submit?

You can submit freeware, shareware, adware, demoware,
and so on. Tucows can also provide an e-commerce solution
if you’d like to distribute a commercial version of your
software.

Submitting is easy

To submit your application, visit the Tucows submit
center at > http://submit.tucows.com> , click on QNX, and fill
in the information requested.

Within days, Tucows will review your submission and
inform you whether it has been accepted.


Get in on the ground floor

The fact that Tucows is already building a QNX library –
just weeks after the RTP launch – is a testament to how
quickly the QNX realtime platform is gaining momentum. Now’s
the time to establish your application as a standard among
RTP users. So submit as soon as possible!

The best of luck with your submission and thanks again
for choosing the QNX realtime platform.

In article <39F867A3.B15ED64B@motorola.com>,
Igor Kovalenko <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote:

Look also at > http://www.be.com > - they posted an article comparing
feature sets of different internet applicances, using different OSes
(including iOpener, based on QNX4) with BeIA solution. They of course
call QNX4 just ‘QNX’ and since most people think that QNX RTP is ‘QNX’
it might really damage perception of system. ‘Oh, it does not support
Macromedia, Java, RealPlayer, any streaming media, what a poor
system…’

I agree that they should have specified QNX 4 in their results.
It’s quite the jump to suppose that the speed or functionality
of the appliance reflects limitations in speed or functionality
of OS used. It seems clear that’s what they are attempting
to imply. Slimy.

Anyone else notice that unless ZD gave them license to use the
benchmark sw that was different from the standard click-through
currently on the ZD site, it appears that Be did not even bother
to comply with the terms of the iBench™ license? :slight_smile:


Eric Johnson
QA Mgr, QNX Software Systems Ltd.

Eric Johnson wrote:

In article <> 39F867A3.B15ED64B@motorola.com> >,
Igor Kovalenko <> Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> > wrote:
Look also at > http://www.be.com > - they posted an article comparing
feature sets of different internet applicances, using different OSes
(including iOpener, based on QNX4) with BeIA solution. They of course
call QNX4 just ‘QNX’ and since most people think that QNX RTP is ‘QNX’
it might really damage perception of system. ‘Oh, it does not support
Macromedia, Java, RealPlayer, any streaming media, what a poor
system…’

I agree that they should have specified QNX 4 in their results.
It’s quite the jump to suppose that the speed or functionality
of the appliance reflects limitations in speed or functionality
of OS used. It seems clear that’s what they are attempting
to imply. Slimy.

Look at the previous article (need for speed). They appear to make
conclusion about ‘platform performance’ judging by speed of loading of
cached pages. Which most likely is influenced mainly by type of cache
media used and cache size, rather than by OS type. Cheap cheaters I’d
say…

Anyone else notice that unless ZD gave them license to use the
benchmark sw that was different from the standard click-through
currently on the ZD site, it appears that Be did not even bother
to comply with the terms of the iBench™ license? > :slight_smile:

That’s little too much to expect I guess :wink:

  • igor

… This naming scheme should be
applied consistently and pervasively.

  • Igor

That’s true 100%.

Zeljko

Igor Kovalenko <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> wrote:

Eric Johnson wrote:

In article <> 39F867A3.B15ED64B@motorola.com> >,
Igor Kovalenko <> Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> > wrote:
Look also at > http://www.be.com > - they posted an article comparing
feature sets of different internet applicances, using different OSes
(including iOpener, based on QNX4) with BeIA solution. They of course
call QNX4 just ‘QNX’ and since most people think that QNX RTP is ‘QNX’
it might really damage perception of system. ‘Oh, it does not support
Macromedia, Java, RealPlayer, any streaming media, what a poor
system…’

I agree that they should have specified QNX 4 in their results.
It’s quite the jump to suppose that the speed or functionality
of the appliance reflects limitations in speed or functionality
of OS used. It seems clear that’s what they are attempting
to imply. Slimy.


Look at the previous article (need for speed). They appear to make
conclusion about ‘platform performance’ judging by speed of loading of
cached pages. Which most likely is influenced mainly by type of cache
media used and cache size, rather than by OS type. Cheap cheaters I’d
say…

Guess they must be scared of something…just a personal impression…