Re: [foxboro] Installing Foxboro IADay0 Ethernet / problem with Dell P4

        I have to agree with the overall sentiment on the list today about
Windoze vs. UNIX, but have to disagree with the statement:

"Of course Windoze seems to be the "cheaper" way to go from a capital
expenditure point of view..".

        Through the use of 10 dual headed WP-51D's, and 20 dual headed PC's
running Exceed, coupled with the remote DM capability, we were able to
provide 30 dual headed workstations for use in our central control room.  By
calling up remote DM's from the WP's, the PC's are dual use as control
system workstations and enterprise Windows based access points for
production related applications such as PI, email, SAP, and other pertinent
intranet/web based information required by our operating technicians.
        Had we bought 30 Windows NT workstations instead, our software
license costs would have been excessive, coordinationg our software
installation efforts to work with the hardware installed would have been a
nightmare, the opportunity for the blue screen of death would be
ever-present, and loading the NT boxes with enterprise applications such as
PI would have been ill-advised.  Had we proceeded in that path we would now
have 30 NTWP's that were out of date as soon as the XPWP's were introduced.
In order to upgrade to the XP stations we would have to pay again for the
licensing and go through the headache of loading the software again.  If
somebody thinks that would be cheaper they are going to have to explain it
to me.

        Because of Foxboro's decision to migrate all new apps such as IACC,
future Wonderware replacement of DM and Foxview, IO_Gates capability and
support, etc, I felt like we would be forced into the Microsoft world if we
were going to continue using Fox IA.  The future for UNIX on Fox IA
continues to look a bit bleak but experienced customers voicing their
concerns is the only hope we have of making it change.  Recently it was
released that Foxboro would support the Solaris 8 machines on the nodebus
instead of only on the high speed ethernet solution.  That is a small
indication that they may be seeing the light about problems associated with
Windoze.  However, I think they are too far down the MS path and it seems
unlikely they could reverse the decision.  Most of the ideas sounded good on
paper but bringing it to reality in an MS environment is much more
difficult.
        We purchased and installed two XP-AW's on my recommendation in order
to experiment on a small scale with IACC as well as using the IOGate
functionality for Modbus/TCP and OPC data links to IA.  I was amazed at the
loss of some basic functionalities when we installed these boxes.  We have
been so used to pulling a remote DM from any WP51 or AW51 on our carrierband
and remotely entering the ICC on any CP hosted by any AW.  That isn't
possible on the XPAW.  You must do it from the boot host.  I can't even copy
a block from an AW51 hosted CP to an AWXP hosted CP. The XP boxes are only
single user capable.  If I wanted to use a remote desktop client to access
Foxview on the AWXP at the same time someone else wants to use it on the
local screen, it can't be done.  We are doing it everyday of the year on the
Solaris boxes using X-windows.
        When I tried to load the IOGate software we had purchased, I found
out that I would have to contact a dedicated person and provide specific
information about what AW CSA ran on what AW the IOGate would run on and
then wait for them to give me information to put into a license text file on
the AW host before I could run the application.  If I want to move CSA or
move the IOGate to a different host I guess I have to reapply for license
info to manually type in the file to make it work.  After I got my
modbus/tcp IOGate working I started trying to get the OPC gate working.
Again I went through the license routine.  I thought I'd learned a lot
trying to get the Modbus gate working but I still was unable to get the OPC
gate going.  It was only by chance that the I found out that the XP box
could only run one gate at a time.  The NT boxes could do both.  It just
demonstrates what most people already know, and that is, even though they
are all MS Windows OS, there are a ton of potential pitfalls in assuming
that they will all be able to run the same applications.
        That is my two cents worth on this Friday afternoon.  Have a good
weekend everyone.

Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY USA


-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Corbett, Rod
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 7:46 AM
To: 'foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Installing Foxboro IADay0 Ethernet / problem with
Dell P4


It is my sincere hope that Foxboro have enough sense to keep Unix going in
the long term....IA is a control system so performance/reliability/security
have to be the central issues....connectivity to the outside world is at
best a side issue.....unfortunately, the outside world connections seem to
be driving all DCS suppliers so we get one IT solution after another fixing
problems which should not even exist.

Many of the so-called "needs" for information are just "wants" from people
who do not have any long term concern about the process control system...but
they seem to be getting the "air-time". Of course Windoze seems to be the
"cheaper" way to go from a capital expenditure point of view...but you
really have to wonder in the long run????

What we have done on site is to allow only a Modbus connection to the
outside world...a serial link.....information is supplied on measurement and
control at a once per minute frequency in spite of protestations from the
casual users of the information. In fact, because the process is under
control and is actually fairly slow, the information is more than enough to
meet everyone's "needs". The information goes to PI and then on to many
other applications but the window to IA is one-way.  In fact, when "blaster"
and "slammer" showed up, the only system that was not "pinged" was the IA
system....there was trouble with every other computer system on site.

Rod Corbett
Process Control
SEPH

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Ruth [mailto:Stan_Ruth@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 8:19 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Installing Foxboro IADay0 Ethernet / problem with
Dell P4





I agree - both QNX and Linux should have been pursued before the Windoze
marketing ploy.  Now Foxboro has the problem of melding two dissimilar
operating systems in one control network, as well as providing technical
support for both.  In the long run, which operating system do you think
will get the most support from Foxboro?


Stan Ruth
Process Control Engineer
Huntsman


 

                      "Corey R Clingo"

                      <clingoc@basf-cor        To:
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

                      p.com>                   cc:

                      Sent by:                 Subject:  Re: [foxboro]
Installing Foxboro IADay0 Ethernet /  problem with        Dell  
                      foxboro-bounce@fr         P4

                      eelists.org

 

 

                      03/25/2004 04:03

                      PM

                      Please respond to

                      foxboro

 

 





Oh, they definitely had better options (IMHO) than Windoze -- maybe even
better than Solaris.  For an example, go check out QNX -- used in
everything ftom ATMs to cars to hospital life-support equipment.  And it
was real-time on an 8088, back in the day...
Corey Clingo
BASF Corp.






"Schouten, Frits JF" <Frits.Schouten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
03/25/2004 02:19 PM
Please respond to foxboro

              To:  "'foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'"
              cc:
         Subject:       Re: [foxboro] Installing Foxboro IADay0 Ethernet /
problem with Dell P4






Hello list.
Might this explain why people that have established Foxboro systems are
somewhat reluctant to include a (cheap?) Microsoft based OS in their
control
environment? In the end you get what you pay for.

I believe that Foxboro, in an attempt not get a share of the bottom end of
the market, went in bed with Microsoft.
Reading the list messages, that was not such a good idea.

They would have been better off porting Foxboro I/A to Linux.
Imagine a ROM(flash memory) based Linux box that you turn on and goes.
Well
there's an idea.

Cheers,
Frits.











_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html

foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave




 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
 
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
 
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts: