hi,
has anyone experience with the Matrox Genesis Framegrabber using QNX? I would
be specially interested in the speed compared with NT4, if it isn’t slower
we would change to QNX.
robert
–
mfG
Ladstaetter Robert mailto:ladi@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at
I don’t know the speed comparison, but I think you would have to be trying
very hard to make performance under QNX worse than NT.
But you should talk to Matrox rep. Not all software available from Matrox
for NT4 is available for QNX. Depending on your application, you might not
be able to do it, regardless the speed.
You may also want to scan this newsgroup archives for some of the other
discussions on this board.
=Dave
Robert Josef Ladstaetter <ladi@pluto.tu-graz.ac.at> wrote in message
news:8mn4d3$3og$1@fstgss02.tu-graz.ac.at…
hi,
has anyone experience with the Matrox Genesis Framegrabber using QNX? I
would
be specially interested in the speed compared with NT4, if it isn’t slower
we would change to QNX.robert
–
mfG
Ladstaetter Robert mailto:> ladi@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at
On 7 Aug 2000 19:58:27 GMT, Robert Josef Ladstaetter
<ladi@pluto.tu-graz.ac.at> wrote:
We had terrible experience with the QNX software for this board. To be
fair at the time the software was very new, however we ended up
returning the board after struggling for months.
We then went with a BitFlow RoadRunner and wrote our own QNX SDK for
it, and it works like a dream - we capture 955 frames/second at
256x256 8 bit greyscale deterministically and use it as input to a
direct visual servo control for mobile robots and also for robotic
arms.
Were Bitflow helpfull when you wrote the QNX SDK?
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com