As I said before, in my opinion the expression 'real time' is a poor choice for what it describes, but this does not take away from the fact that it does exist and, no matter how hard you battle against it, it does have a definition.

"it does have a definition"
yes, so does "the cannonball express" which was proudly re-introduced in a press release that stated it went as fast as 60 MPH. Does that mean that I have from then on to consider a train that goes 60MPH as very fast?. The fact that a faulty definition exist does that mean that I have to accept it?

as I stated:
"Why do I use URTOS/DTOS or whatever? to stress that these thing have nothing to do with the webster definition of "real time".

Again, as it is a "a poor choice for what it describes" what is wrong with stating that?

just see here:

if you google for "dictionary "real time"" the first that commes up is
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/R/real_time.html

which start
"Occurring immediately. The term is used to describe a number of different computer features.... "

so, not only I, but a dictionary entry is "wrong"

even Webster is "wrong" stating "real time (as it comes in)" which does not match with the "accepted" definition of RTOS.

The issue is that the definition of RTOS and RT is not the same.

Once more:
The reason I keep using URTOS etc is to make darn totally absolutely sure that the point that a URTOS is NOT "real time" comes across.

Erik