Curiosity Rover -- A Technology Powerhouse

I would be remiss if I failed to mention the biggest technology achievement of this year, the perfect landing and immediate operation of NASA's Mars rover Curiosity. In this stunning achievement of application of modern technologies, I want to point out this fine example of an embedded system.

Spaceflight Now has an excellent article on how the computer system was selected and built to work in the harsh Martian environment. Engineers at BAE Systems chose redundant and radiation-hardened PowerPC electronics to survive the thin Martian atmosphere. With 20% the CPU power of a modern smartphone, this device needs to be able to autonomously roam the surface for extended periods and be capable of sophisticated scientific experimentation.

It is interesting to note that there was not enough memory to store the landing software and the navigation software in the computer's memory. For the trip from Earth to Mars it had one mission, a perfect landing. Once the rover successfully landed and performed basic diagnostics the program memory was wiped and is currently being updated with navigation-oriented software. The new software needs to work flawlessly for a 2-year mission. There will undoubtedly be more updates but not a complete change of function.

For those interested in following its journey, visit NASA's official Curiosity website.

-Gary

GPUs: The Unsung Hero of Embedded Displays

GPUs, also known as Graphics Processing Units, are the unsung hero of smartphones, tablets, and embedded displays.

The incredible throughput rates of GPUs allows for computation that standard multi-core Central Processing Units cannot provide. 

Companies are also beginning to add application processing to the GPU, known as GPGPU (General-Purpose Graphics Processing Unit). This is not a hardware device as such but is software and hardware working in concert on a GPU.

Since GPUs are not oriented to traditional application programming, various software platforms have evolved. OpenCL is supported by an industry consortium, KhronosGroup.org to promote platform independence.

The competing standard is CUDA which was created and is promoted by NVIDA, a leader in the GPU market.  Some say NVIDIA's  GeForce256 was the first GPU. (At least it was marketed that way.)

Anyway, I'm interested to hear what GPUs my readers are currently using, and if they have any comments on their usefulness or shortcomings. Let me know.

 

-Gary

Testing Real Time Embedded Systems

 

Gary Felberbaum, the Principal of Advanced Decisions, talks about testing real time embedded systems.

How early should someone consider testing?

The earlier that someone gets involved in setting up the strategy and setting up the architecture to enable testing is really important. You should to start thinking about how you will test an embedded system as soon as you are conceiving a project or an embedded system.

What is needed to get started?

The same steps are needed when starting to test or develop an embedded system. The starting process refers back to the simplest thing which is requirements: sitting down, defining what it is that you want to build, and then thinking about how to test the system (adding special electronics, special software, etc.).

Why is embedded system testing different from other software application testing?

It is different because you are interacting with a lot more real-world, physical processes. You’re measuring things that you may not have control over, while in application testing you can set up a test database and test against the test database. In the real world, for applications you have to think about how you’re going to simulate processes that you can’t control and that may take designing certain types of computer model and simulations that you need to do to make embedding system testing actually work.

Can the iPad help to usher in a new age in medical record keeping?

Now that the dust is settling and millions of words have spewed forth over the eventual “success” of the yet to be sold iPad, I would like to weigh in. Most of what I have read about the product and its potential has to do with the consumer. I am confident that Apple’s marketing clout will make the iPad a hit among consumers even considering the relatively high initial price. I feel I am in good company here, since many analysts are predicting millions of units sold in 2010 alone!

However I am more interested in the use of the iPad as a business application device. This is the first hand-held “tablet” which in my opinion could really facilitate the transition from a paper based medical community to a digital one. There are many reasons why I think this product may be a game changer.

PC based tablets have been around for a number of years. They are typically small notebook computers with a touch screen that can be inverted and lay closed over the keyboard. A typical weight is about 3+ pounds. Kind of heavy to carry throughout the day up and down the halls of a typical hospital while making rounds. They are typically pen or keyboard based. A bit clumsy to use when on the go.

On the other hand the iPad addresses several of the negatives preventing widespread adoption of the PC tablet. Here are some of the major ones. It is a relatively light-weight (1.6 lbs) device with an amazing display. User interaction leverages the multi-touch iPhone/iTouch gestures that are familiar to millions of users. When needed a virtual keyboard facilitates data entry. The 9.7 inch screen with 132 pixels per inch resolution screen (1024 by 768 pixels) is sufficient for viewing medium resolution medical images along with patient information. WiFi and 3G connectivity allow access to medical data from anywhere.

With the creation of novel medical software applications, the iPad may just accelerate the change over to the digital age replacing the medical profession’s clipboard and paper based systems

Can the iPhone/iTouch platform be a next generation enterprise communication platform?

Now that Apple has released the iPhone SDK will there be a rush to adoption by business? Apple is trying very hard not to repeat the past mistakes of creating a closed Mac platform. The addition of a $100M VC fund for application development will certainly help. But is it enough?

According to the announcement this week, Apple will still control the conduit. All applications must be downloaded via iTunes. No software will be permitted to allow the iPhone to work with phone carriers that are not approved by Apple. In the US, we have one phone carrier to choose from … AT&T.

It seems to me that Apple has taken a first step, but a baby step.  If Apple is serious about adoption of the iPhone as a ubiquitous handheld business communication device I believe much more needs to be done. Here are a few suggestions.

First and foremost Apple needs to open the connectivity choices to any wireless carrier. Address security issues such as data encryption and secure access. The iPhone software needs to allow managed updates via company IT department. And finally very tight, seamless integration with Enterprise systems such as Exchange is required.

Although this is not an exhaustive list, in my opinion it would propel the iPhone to becoming the device of choice for the Enterprise.

Interoperability, sometimes it just works!

I just took ownership of my first “green” car … Toyota Camry Hybrid. It is quite an impressive vehicle with excellent gas mileage for a midsized car. My research has shown it would be a very sophisticated, technological savvy vehicle. The computer control system enables real-time monitoring and control of energy consumption. Switching back and forth as needed between electric battery and gasoline engine within a fraction of a second. I was very happy with my purchase considering just energy savings, comfort and safety.

What I didn’t realize is the degree of sophistication with Voice Activation, NAV, Bluetooth and cell phone connectivity. Multiple vendors and industries are involved with the above technologies. Yet Toyota was able to interface them seamlessly? The ease of connecting my Blackberry Pearl with the car’s Bluetooth was a thing of beauty. But the most amazing part was that I was able to transfer my Blackberry address book contacts to the auto’s address book wirelessly via Bluetooth. It is one thing to have basic connectivity, another to agree on a data transport via Bluetooth to capture the phone’s information. I wonder if a contact's address can go right into the NAV system to set the destination point?  Maybe next model year.

The DVD war is over, Toshiba surrenders!

The long awaited resolution of which technology will be the High Definition DVD choice of the future is here and the winner is ... Blu-Ray.  The slow adoption of high definition DVD has been blamed on the competitive war between the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD camps. Some think that without a clear standard, consumers have stayed out of the market. Others expected a dual system that supports both technologies. Some dual-format devices have already been produced.

I think another reason exists for the slow adoption. Better choices. Why rent or buy a DVD when you can easily stream it via your cable, satellite or an on-line supplier. The cost is about the same, don’t need to leave your couch and you can get at least 5.1 surround sound. What is missing, the out-takes, extras, and alternative endings. For the vast majority of movies you want to watch how important are these features?

I am not planning on buying a Blu-Ray DVD anytime soon.

Did Apple Set The Standard Again?

Macworld 2008 is now in the books. Some stunning new products were announced. For a company that is no longer a "computer" company it does a pretty good job of disguising itself. Perhaps Microsoft/Dell should take notice.

For me, the new MacBook Air is a beautiful product.  It is a true portable that embraces wireless. Finally having the option of a full sized keyboard and reasonably sized screen in a remarkably thin and lightweight package will set a high bar for portable notebooks. A docking station is no longer needed; I only see the need for two cables in the office. One cable is for power and the second for an external monitor. WiFi and Bluetooth wireless connections for the network and mouse/keyboard eliminate the need for additional cables.

But for me the most significant product announcement is the new Airport/NAS or Time Capsule. The combination of software (Leopard’s built-in Time Machine) and wireless hardware make automated backup a reality.  There is simply no reason for us not to have our digital life stowed away safely and inexpensively. But best of all, instantly retrievable.

I am confident that the PC community will catch-up, but non-Apple users will have to wait until Windows 2009 . . . is released.

Mandatory Tools for Telecommuting

Winter is still with us and as I work from home I keep wondering do I have everything I need. Well probably not. What do I need? I have my trusty Powerbook, my Treo, and internet connectivity. Is that enough?

The most important secondary tools are the various power supply adapters. Without those you will have a very short workday. Unfortunately no notebook I am aware of has a battery capable of supplying an 8-hour charge. I have found that by turning off BlueTooth and WIFI (except when needed) does help. But you will still need that power adapter for a full days work. Most modern notebooks that are 3 years old or less have built in WIFI and LAN support. The days of carrying a bunch of PCMCIA cards are behind us.  I do recommend a Flash memory drive for backup. The easiest way to back up files today is to a FLASH drive.

The remaining key item is a secure software infrastructure. On my notebook I have a VPN client. This is a crucial part of the telecommuting working experience. With a VPN server setup in the office I am able to SECURELY access the files that I forgot to transfer to my flash drive the night before. You want to work on your local hard drive but sometimes you just need that  remote access because there is always one more file to read.

Don’t abandon the PALM OS!

As an avowed Palm PDA addict since the early generation Palm Pilots to the modern Treo I am very concerned about the future of the Palm OS. The path to Window’s based Treo’s will eliminate a worthy competitor. The Palm OS has always been easy to use, easy to learn alternative to the Microsoft Window’s Mobile OS.

The main argument I hear for the change to the mobile Windows OS platform is to integrate better with Exchange Server for enterprise users. But the Palm OS based products have integrated with Windows and Palm platforms for many years. The Palm OS current version integrates seamlessly with Window’s Exchange server for email, calendar and of course can read/write Microsoft Office documents with third party software. How much more integration do we need or want? I certainly don’t want or need easy access to viruses, worms and spyware!

I regularly use use my Palm/OS Treo 650 to connect to the company Exchange Server for email and calendar; synchronize with my MAC OS/X Powerbook for contacts and Microsoft Word/Excel documents. Through a wealth of third party software applications virtually any conceivable task is readily available.

On behalf of Palm OS users everywhere please don’t give up the fight.

Is source code control for everyone?

Sometimes I encounter clients who do not have source code control. Actually they say they do because ALL of the source code is on the programmer’s computer. It is all in one place, we can agree on that!

Most developers would agree that when a team of programmers is working on a project you need to have managed source control. But why not even for a single programmer project? It is true you don’t have to worry about merging changes from multiple programmers, but you do need to know exactly what code was included in each release. It is also helpful to be able to roll-back to earlier versions for the solo programmer when looking for the impact of changes that may have introduced bugs.

Today there are many source controls tools to choose from, including open source versions. There really is no software development project too small that would not benefit from source control.