M
Original-From: Anthony Kerstens <[email protected]>
>With TCP/IP and Java, Linux has already looked after connection
>to Microsoft Windows apps. A great many web servers are run
>off Linux boxes.
You're correct, and I'm not as knowledgable about this as a lot of the posters, but what about ActiveX? I read Moore-S' response and Curt's response to Mr. Moore but there's the rub. Curt even goes so far as to recent and say, at this mature stage in the discussion, that he'd be happy for Windows to be the platform of choice, were that it could fulfil an aspired goal of true openness.
While all this discussion of what platform to use is useful, we're also trying to figure out the best way to implement control in the plant (I'm from the process side of the industry) and not just process control, but equipment lifecycle control, also. In the batch arena, you've got the SP 88 standard for process control which seems to have been gotten nailed down with (relative) ease. But on the continuous, exothermic, process side you've got fieldbus and something called PI STEP. Does anybody have a better knowledge, than me, of PISTEP? Web site says: " [PISTEP] aims to increase the competiveness of UK companies in the process industries by improving engineering information management throughout the lifecycle and the supply chain. "
The part that really interests me (since I'm in sales and marketing) is this program item:
" International standards for representing information -- both the data and its meaning -- as a basis for exchange and sharing. "
This sounds real similar to what's happening in the CALS initiative, but mainly in the U.S. Now, furthermore, parts and systems procurement improvement would, logically, relate intimately with engineering execution improvement, because for the automation of either, requires a set of standard terminology that comprises referents of things, and those referents are unique for the entire system, and all participants use the identical referents.
E-commerce needs the same foundation, to get into motion. In discrete automation sectors, I think, automotive companies are backing standardization. It is also likely that, that situation, will
mature faster than its equal in the process side.
Hope this isn't too far off-topic, to get a response. Moderator, you may need to give this post a new title. Your choice.
<OK, this is the start of a new thread, see subject line. --Jennifer Powell>
Regards,
Matthew, Yamatake
>With TCP/IP and Java, Linux has already looked after connection
>to Microsoft Windows apps. A great many web servers are run
>off Linux boxes.
You're correct, and I'm not as knowledgable about this as a lot of the posters, but what about ActiveX? I read Moore-S' response and Curt's response to Mr. Moore but there's the rub. Curt even goes so far as to recent and say, at this mature stage in the discussion, that he'd be happy for Windows to be the platform of choice, were that it could fulfil an aspired goal of true openness.
While all this discussion of what platform to use is useful, we're also trying to figure out the best way to implement control in the plant (I'm from the process side of the industry) and not just process control, but equipment lifecycle control, also. In the batch arena, you've got the SP 88 standard for process control which seems to have been gotten nailed down with (relative) ease. But on the continuous, exothermic, process side you've got fieldbus and something called PI STEP. Does anybody have a better knowledge, than me, of PISTEP? Web site says: " [PISTEP] aims to increase the competiveness of UK companies in the process industries by improving engineering information management throughout the lifecycle and the supply chain. "
The part that really interests me (since I'm in sales and marketing) is this program item:
" International standards for representing information -- both the data and its meaning -- as a basis for exchange and sharing. "
This sounds real similar to what's happening in the CALS initiative, but mainly in the U.S. Now, furthermore, parts and systems procurement improvement would, logically, relate intimately with engineering execution improvement, because for the automation of either, requires a set of standard terminology that comprises referents of things, and those referents are unique for the entire system, and all participants use the identical referents.
E-commerce needs the same foundation, to get into motion. In discrete automation sectors, I think, automotive companies are backing standardization. It is also likely that, that situation, will
mature faster than its equal in the process side.
Hope this isn't too far off-topic, to get a response. Moderator, you may need to give this post a new title. Your choice.
<OK, this is the start of a new thread, see subject line. --Jennifer Powell>
Regards,
Matthew, Yamatake