Thread

1. Felger · 1790377305 · focus · HN ↗

   Not DOS, but I sold a '99 HP computer running win98 last month, to replace an identical failed system. It was used to control a 50 meters long custom industrial paint booth line for special equipments (like 57" rims). Luckily, their HDD was OK. Urged them to make a few sector-to-sector copies of it on a few spare HDD. This $100 sell surely has prevented this business from massive bills or even going bankrupt in the meantime from production loss.

   1. fluorinerocket · 1790450510 · focus · HN ↗

      Insane to me that someone would use a windows machine to run a piece of equipment when PLCs exist and are supported for decades by companies like Rockwell, Siemens, Allen Bradley

      1. Felger · 1790453665 · focus · HN ↗

         There are lot of windows based solutions since more than 20 years ago for two main reasons : recipe management system, and logging. A basic SCADA of sort. PLCs systems of that era could either not manage it (TSX, S5,S7-100/200), or it would be additionnal very expensive, complex and typically OPC-based solutions (I'm shivering).

         Some of theses solutions are built upon common PLCs but some are built as standalone solutions when I/O are simple enough (modbus mainly, RS232/422/485, ethernet/IP, controlnet, ...). Seen lot of them in breeding nutrition management systems, in-house developped processes, ...

         1. Felger · 1790629995 · focus · HN ↗

            Oh, and I forgot another great issue that made a lot of companies developping their own PC/windows-based solutions : PANELS. The panel solutions provided by the main players were quite horrific : proprietary, slow, buggy, limited, very expensive, bad at commissioning (speed, firmware/software compatibility issues). Siemens Simatic HMI from the '2000 decade was especially lagging and a few generation behind those from, for example, Allen-Bradley with the PanelView +/CE range, based on... Windows CE.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.