Re: Disk is cheap?

From: Ralf Baechle (
Date: Sat Feb 24 2001 - 08:59:35 EST

On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 02:29:54PM +0100, Robert Kaiser wrote:

> Perhaps a more convincing argument may be that in embedded devices,
> disk as well as memory and CPU power are _not_ cheap.
> The more resources Linux requires, the less are it's chances of being
> accepted as a viable alternative in embedded systems.
> > I'm still stuck with a P-133, 56 MB RAM (60-70 ns, some EDO,
> > some FPM) and not only Linux but also W2K on a 2.1 and a 0.8 GB
> > HDD.
> That would be _a_ _lot_ for an embedded system!

Oh this common missconception that embedded system equals small systems.
There are embedded systems that outrun supercomputers without sweating,
have gigs of RAM and sometimes if you look at them closly even have the
names of well known big iron companies on their boards. The whole
embedded term is just so weakly defined and everybody seem to have his
personal definition.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 28 2001 - 21:00:07 EST