I say at the mercy of Microsoft, but we were willing co-conspirators. I loved Windows 3.1. I was blown away by Windows NT 3.51 (I used to try and crash it by writing to memory I had no business fooling with). I was a beta tester for Windows 95 and NT 4.0. I upgraded to Windows 98 and 2000. I have developed skills in writing code for Microsoft systems far beyond my abilities on any other platform. Yet with all the background I have in products from Redmond, Im becoming a little disillusioned with its strategy to control everything from the desktop to the back office. And Microsofts 18-month cycle for operating system upgrades is making me weary.

Then there is the incredible complexity of Microsofts new ideas about licensing software. I dont know about you, but were taking a long, hard look at upgrading our standard desktop systems. And this seems to be the norm; most companies are still two releases behind the latest version of Windows; there are a lot more businesses running Window 98 (not even Second Edition) than anything newer.

But amidst all the versions of Windows, the licensing nonsense, and the plethora of bug fixes and updates, a version of Windows XP has slipped by without a lot of fanfare or coverage. And that prompted me to take a brief look at the latest and greatest from Bill Gates and the boys: Windows XP Embedded.

Inner Space

An embedded operating system is an integral part of the machine it runs on. Embedded systems have been in widespread use in manufacturing processes for years. A device is built for a particular purposeadding a part to a car engine, for exampleand an operating system and software are created to control that particular machine or device. Your automobile probably has many devices with embedded systems that make that machine operate effectively. A typical PC, on the other hand, is tabla rasa on which (theoretically) any operating system and application software can be installed. (Never mind the fact that PCs are based on Intels ancient X86 architecturean architecture that was developed in the days when Bill Gates thought 640 KB of memory was more than anyone would ever need.)

Windows XP Embedded (XPE) is a component-based operating system based on the full-featured code base of Windows XP. A developer can select from 10,000 components and assemble a custom OS that does only what is required of it and no more. On the surface, this makes a lot of senseWindows operating systems have become so bloated by including every possible feature, that they have become unwieldy. My fast PIII laptop with a ton of RAM takes more time to load Windows 2000 than my old 486 with 24 MB takes to load Windows 3.1. If I could create my own operating system that includes only those features that I absolutely need, I could theoretically make an incredibly efficient system.

Some of Them Want to Use It, Some of Them Want to Abuse It

Some insurance companies with which I have worked are real sticklers for control. They have pre-configured desktop and laptop systems from which no deviation is permitted. They closely control everything from browser plug-ins to application software. Many use the desktop as a thin client machine, with all application software and data residing on corporate servers.

The reasons for such tight control are many and varied. Strict compliance requirements often dictate that individual employees have limited and controlled access to illustration and policy software. Potential security breaches are another legitimate reason for tightly locked-down systems. The reasons for ultra strict control may be something as simple as worry about too many (or any) employees browsing the Web during work hours.

And imagine the Big Brother possibilities. A Machiavellian CIO could custom build machines that do only what he wants them to doand which could report their daily activity back to IT. Scary? You bet.

That little scenario was both impractical and silly. Impractical because off-the-shelf computers and operating systems are so inexpensive that it make no sense to custom build systems for common business use. Silly because insurance companies arent really that paranoid. (Are they?)

I can envision some useful custom devices that may appeal to readers of this magazine. Two types of devices that XPE supports are point of sale (POS) systems and thin clients. Would it be reasonable to create an agents POS devicesomething that could be dedicated to a particular carriers products and sales tools? You bet. It would allow for keyboard as well as touch screen input. It would have limited functionality and would only need a small catalog of operating system features. Using a USB or wireless connection, it could perform a daily download for that days appointments. Client information could be updated on the device throughout the day. Purchases and updates would be uploaded on demand or during scheduled daily connections.

The possibilities are endless and I wont bother to elaborate. The point is that there could be a use for such an animal. One version would be a fully functional devicea handheld, palmtop, or even desktop for independent agents that would only sell one carriers products and upload only to that carriers system. A captive agents device would add some more features to make the device more attractive to use. An agents POS device could also be built that would be a plug-in to an agency systemessentially a black box that would provide product and policy uploads and downloads from carrier to agency and vice versa. A handheld device using Windows XP Embedded could be used for field work and transfer data to the black box POS on demand.

A Full Featured Operating System

Developing XPE devices should prove easier than developing proprietary embedded systems or using existing Linux or other systems for a number of reasons.

Windows XP is a full featured, robust operating system. The fact that is over-featureda nice way of saying bloatedis a plus if it means you have more to choose from when you go to pick the OS features you want.

It is built on the NT kernel, which has now been around for enough years to be considered a mature operating system.

It contains a comprehensive suite of networking tools and protocol support.

It utilizes industry standard security (Kerberos).

It is a true 32-bit operating system with a protected memory model.

XPE systems can be developed using the Windows Embedded Studio, a version of the Microsoft Visual Studio that is familiar to most Windows developers.

What are the major disadvantages of Windows XP Embedded?

It requires an X86-based processor.

It is not a real time operating system.

The jury on XP is still out. Most of us will wait and see how the licensing thing shakes out before devoting major corporate resources to Windows XP. The possibility of using the same operating system for enterprise solutions as well as company or industry specific devices is intriguing. If I were in a position where my business model justified semi-proprietary devices, I wouldnt hesitate to investigate using Windows XP Embedded to build those devices.

Real-Time Operating Systems

What is a real-time operating system? The easiest way to explain it is to imagine two systemsone thats real-time, and one thats on the opposite end of the real-time spectrum.

Think of a system that controls the flow of blood through an artificial heart. It requires correct and positive action now. More exertion? More bloodnow. Time is of the essence for the system to operate properly; the processor cannot waste time swapping out some virtual memory when it needs to make a decision regarding pump speed and pressure.

On the other hand, a batch system for computing monthly payroll can run just about anytime and take as long as it wants, providing it meets some basic deadline.

Thus the basic criteria for a real-time operating system is that timeliness is an inherent propertyotherwise it isnt a real real-time system.

Heres An Idea

Operating systems are tied to specific processor architectures. It might make sense for future computer architecture to abstract an interface layer that sits above machine language and below assembly language. Thus software and operating system manufacturers could write code to a universal machine interface and chipmakers could make processors that would operate using that interface. A particular processor or system could use only those parts of the abstracted instruction set that are required. This could eliminate the incredible inefficiencies we have in most modern desktop systems, which are continually forced to be backward compatible to the lowest common denominator.

More on XP Embedded

www.microsoft.com/Windows/embedded/xp