Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I have an
Pentium?
//Danne
Daniel Engberg wrote:
Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I have
an Pentium?
//Danne
I think it works. Check the supported CPU’s on http://qdn.qnx.com
Luke.
“Daniel Engberg” <daniel.engberg@telia.com> wrote in message
news:97ti2d$cau$1@inn.qnx.com…
Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I have
an
Pentium?
file://Danne
qnx4 works ok for us on intel 486 DX4 ~100Mhz 8Mb ram.
no pentium is required.
// wbr
Ian Zagorskih
Novosoft CyBearNet Department
Custom software development and web design since 1992
E-mail: ianzag@novosoft.ru
Phone: +7 (3832) 39-72-60, 39-72-61
Fax: +7 (3832) 39-63-58
For more visit www.novosoft-us.com
“James Boucher” <jaboucher@home.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:WTwo6.20566$c7.5831042@news3.rdc1.on.home.com…
There was a post a while back that said you needed a Pentium.
I know the spec says Media GX 2xx minimum which is Pentium.
Anyone every tried a 486?
“Daniel Engberg” <> daniel.engberg@telia.com> > wrote in message
news:97ti2d$cau$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I have
an
Pentium?
file://Danne
I tried it on a 486dx-6&mhz laptop. The OS installed fine but never boots.
It loads about 5 secs in, then reboots and continues this process forever.
-John
Previously, Ian M. Zagorskih wrote in comp.os.qnx:
Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I have
an
Pentium?
file://Danneqnx4 works ok for us on intel 486 DX4 ~100Mhz 8Mb ram.
no pentium is required.
But I wouldn’t want to try to run a development machine.
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com
“Mitchell Schoenbrun” <maschoen@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:Voyager.010306112253.13315A@schoenbrun.com…
Previously, Ian M. Zagorskih wrote in comp.os.qnx:
Hi,
I’m just wondering if I could run the newest QNX on a 486 or must I
have
an
Pentium?
file://Danneqnx4 works ok for us on intel 486 DX4 ~100Mhz 8Mb ram.
no pentium is required.But I wouldn’t want to try to run a development machine.
well, i had a chance due to field conditions to use listed above machine
as a development station for some large project to do the final debugs.
if frankly i’m embrrassed to give a definite mark of my feelings but can
tell
only one: a person working in team with me on ip200 32Mb under
winnt 4.0 with delphi 3.0/paradox had a much more hardships and negative
emotions 
having tested a lot enough of different pc configuratins from my point
of
view my current celeron 366Mhz 128Mb seems to be a perfect workstation
for qnx4 development actually for any project with seems like any
complexity.
well, about any
// wbr
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com
Ian Zagorskih
Novosoft CyBearNet Department
Custom software development and web design since 1992
E-mail: ianzag@novosoft.ru
Phone: +7 (3832) 39-72-60, 39-72-61
Fax: +7 (3832) 39-63-58
For more visit www.novosoft-us.com
Previously, Ian M. Zagorskih wrote in comp.os.qnx:
well, i had a chance due to field conditions to use listed above machine
as a development station for some large project to do the final debugs.
if frankly i’m embrrassed to give a definite mark of my feelings but can
tell
only one: a person working in team with me on ip200 32Mb under
winnt 4.0 with delphi 3.0/paradox had a much more hardships and negative
emotions >
Let me get this straight. You are comparing using QNX on a
486 vs NT on a 200Mhz P1 and you think that this is a fair
comparison…for NT? .
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com
“Mitchell Schoenbrun” <maschoen@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:Voyager.010309171258.18165A@schoenbrun.com…
Previously, Ian M. Zagorskih wrote in comp.os.qnx:
well, i had a chance due to field conditions to use listed above
machine
as a development station for some large project to do the final debugs.
if frankly i’m embrrassed to give a definite mark of my feelings but can
tell
only one: a person working in team with me on ip200 32Mb under
winnt 4.0 with delphi 3.0/paradox had a much more hardships and negative
emotions >Let me get this straight. You are comparing using QNX on a
486 vs NT on a 200Mhz P1 and you think that this is a fair
comparison…for NT? >
this was a stone in m$ garden 
actually i realized that if trying
to compare the end result, both development systems supplie
about the same conditions for a developer. i.e. both they worked
SLOW. very slow. but watcom 10.6 wcc386+wlink for qnx4 worked
quite slow on 486dx4 100Mz/8Mb and delphi3 for nt4 also worked
incredibly slow on ip200Mz/32Mb.
well, should be mentioned that qnx4 system was [as usually in qnx4
world] distributed between about hundred little modules and at same time
nt part with almost same functionality was [as usually in m$ world]
solid as a rock. so every time my colleague made some even marginal
changes he had to re-link the whole 5Mb+ in size executable and at this
moment of truth observing his sorrows i felt the great mission of qnx4
architecture ! amin
ps: this dosn’t mean that nt4 is a bad product. this is a very good
thing if using it a wize & proper way, i know. this means only that very
often i can see that gentlemens designing systems working under windows
in our case dosn’t understand the trem “modularity”. and sometimes
[if project hasn’t died after its birth] there might be tendentions for
growth.
sure you know how is it to try to extend or reengine a “solid as a rock”
project…
// wbr
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com