To change the topic slightly, I often get the impression that QSSL views
customers as a nuisance that get in the way of them doing the cool stuff
they do. Since we’re only a small customer, I suppose we are just a
nuisance . But it would be nice for QSSL to come out
It’s a very strange situation - tech people are generally very helpful and
friendly and ready to answer questions about almost anything. But getting
non-technical info is like pulling teeth. As an example - I check the QNX
website regularly, look at some of the newsgroups (eg qdn.public.news), get
the email update, and yet the first I know of the existance of 6.2 is via
Is it too much to ask that QSSL keep its customers updated with what’s
coming down the pipeline? Yes, I know there is probably some information
somewhere on the website or in a newsgroup somewhere, or available to those
with inside contacts, but it’s certainly not obviously apparent. I suppose
we could also sign up for some beta program, and find out that way, but we
have our own jobs to do… Why can’t QSSL trust its own customers with the
same info they distribute to the general public? Even the Evil Empire tells
people years in advance what the next version of the OS will be released,
what it will have in it, what will be fixed, what won’t. So what if everyone
laughs at them for not meeting their deadlines, changing the feature set
etc - at least you have an idea of what to expect. And at least they go out
of their way to help developers. How does QSSL expect us to plan for the
future in this kind of environment?
While I’m ranting, here’s some more. When we started our new development, we
weren’t sure whether we should switch from QNX4 to QNX 6 (this was in 2000).
We tried to get some advice from QSSL on the best approach to follow. We
wanted to know things like - how long would QNX4 be around, how stable was
RTP, when did they think it would ship, what features would the shipping
version have, could it do the things we wanted it to do, etc? I don’t think
these are unreasonable questions to ask of your vendor. The answer we got
was, decide for yourselves. And not delivered in a particular helpful way,
In contrast, when we spoke to WindRiver, they sent 3 sales heavies the next
week to speak to us. Despite us telling them we weren’t likely to buy
because of tool price, history with QNX4 etc. While we still think QNX6 is
technically superior, and we’re not sorry with our decision to use it in our
new product, we’re feeling really nervous that QSSL sees us as some
Finally, I’m glad someone mentioned the issue of development tools… I
don’t think my blood pressure could cope if I got onto that topic…
Phew. That feels better. Now, back to meeting those impossible deadlines…
Speaking for myself only, of course.
“Ian Cannon” <email@example.com> wrote in message
I’m in total agreement.
Previously, Mario Charest wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
“Igor Kovalenko” <> firstname.lastname@example.org> > wrote in message
news:a2pjkg$27o$> email@example.com> …
Okay, I held up for long enough, here it goes.
I’ve heard X86 is actually at the end of list of supported platforms
in terms of revenues generated.
Given the track record of QNX to ditch a product line in favor of a new
it wouldn’t surprise me if they would drop x86 support…
(I mean it in a sarcastic way, but some part of me sees some truth in
Harris, you might wanna think how to improve this situation. There
someone authorized to say something like ‘yes we know of a problem and
is what we’re doing about it’. Of course, when it is being the case.
really comes down to the strategy QNX as a company uses to move
far it is always has been strategy of hiding in the dark to make a
when opportunity comes. It is workable strategy for a small underdog
got you this far, but if you ever want to become something more than
public eyes, you’ve got to do some open moves. Defining some market
tendencies, instead of following ones. Some roadmaps would not hurt.
am daydreaming >
That strikes a nerve. From where I sit, QNX has always work in
“fire extinquisher mode”. They seems to be going from reorganisation to
running in circle, shutdown private distributor channels, setup their
then shutdown some of them down. While they keep on reorganising
product development crawl.
They tell their sales peoplep to target industrial automation, then
their mind and they target internet appliance, then they change their
target automotive then again a change for Telecom, etc. Each time,
they were able to attract, hanging. Today if I was to build a product
sort of continuity, i’d think twice about using QNX6.
Product wise, things are going VERY VERY VERY slowly. 16 months after
the initial public release I still can’t get a list of installed IRQ
The development tool story is a huge mess; CodeWarrior flop, then
you got all these unpolish kit all over the place Windows, Solaris,
All not having quite the same feature set or version. Then there is now
in the pipe. When is something going to get finish with a professional
and for all. I just can get it into my head that in 2002. QNX is still
trying to define
their development tool.
Then their is the QNX4 situation, people having to switch ( supposely to
thus face decrease performance.
I’ll use another thread to talk about the good things >
Mario “blowing off steam” Charest