??? 12/01/05 14:23 Read: times |
#104493 - Oh dear Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
Calm down
I will when you do so. I'm perfectly calm. You just seem to be SHOUTING rather a lot, I worry about your blood pressure. Good, at least you've you've learned something. When I previously explained to you 'real time' means 'deterministic' you replied: I totally, absolutely disagree Yes, and I still do. That contradicts your position in your last post. You said: We have no disagreement as to what a DTOS (please note the "new" name Deterministic ... which I hope offend you less) does You invented another of your nicknames for an RTOS and stated that it is deterministic. That is not an absolute and only meaning of the phrase, so I stated 'real time' can mean 'deterministic'. That someone has decided on a meaning of a phrase does not mean it is the only one, or even that it is the right one. WHY do you keep insisting that it is the only meaning. Well, IEEE and the two other definitions of the term 'real time' posted in this thread give it the same meaning. Seems clear where the concensus lies. So, Erik, can you post your definition of 'real time'? It is time YOU "learned something". In this particular case I would have to disagree. If you do not dispute that fact, why do you keep pushing that the name makes sense. I've made no comment on whether the name makes sense or not. As it happens, I think the name is ridiculous but it exists, and it has an accepted definition. The names I use will not lead to the fact you have "never disputed" Unfortunately you are the only one in possesion of a copy of 'Erik's alternative dictionary'. The rest of the world will carry on using the accepted names for things. I have ABSOLUTELY NO MISUNDERSTANDING of what the idiot that named it so mean. That doesn't seem to be the case, unfortunately. That does not mean that I think it is right to use a name that many misinterpret. [/quote As opposed to one nobody else has ever heard of? |