Chrysler Adopts Linux For Vehicle Simulations

eMilkshake writes "According to this ComputerWorld article, Chrysler is adopting Linux for vehicle crash testing. According to the article, 'the new system is expected to improve simulation performance by 20%, while saving about 40% in costs....'" Insert knee-jerk reaction joke about computers and crashing here.

Software?

[The Bungi]

The article doesn't mention the software used for the simulations themselves... anyone else curious as to what it is and who is writing it or providing it?

I don't get it

[vlad_petric]

The price tag for the deal isn't being released. Cost savings were a major motivator for the project, which was first considered about a year ago.

And how precisely are they going to save money ? And save money relative to what ? The old system ? (I kind of doubt it) The same hardware system with a proprietay OS ? Maintenance costs ?

This article has all the characteristics of a "negative" FUD.

The Raven.

How much of that savings is about Linux?

[jasonditz]

It says the Linux solution saves 40% over the prior Unix solution, but it doesn't say what the prior solution is. Are the savings here really coming from using Linux, or just from using cheap commodity hardware clustered together?

Re:If people bought cars like computers...

[El Pollo Loco]

Funny, I was just thinking about this. A reletive just lost a whole bunch of data, due to a in a software program. While cars require a bit of basic knowledge, and licensing, there is liability there. If ford builds Taurauses with defective ignition controle modules(true), and my cars stalls and gets hit in the middle of an accident, I can sue them. When my relative lost his data due to something that was not his fault, who's liable. No one.

Re:If Operating Systems Were Cars...

[forevermore]

MAC SYSTEM 8: You get in the car to go to the store and the car drives you to church.

I never quiet understood this reference. Wouldn't this behavior be more indicative of Windows XP? (like how the first time I tried to manually enter an IP, it too me 25 minutes to convince it that I really didn't want to sign up for MSN or have it auto-configure my cable/dsl connection for me)

Re:This is one application -- You don't understand

[afidel]

For a cheap "compute farm" cluster, you can't beat Red Hat Advanced Server with Xenon's.

Sure you can, how about redhat iso's running on Athlon MP's (or soon Opterons). Free software on better price/performance hardware.

Re:This is one application -- You don't understand

[Proudrooster]

Ok, you win.. that beats it :)

However, I try to throw some cash Red Hat's way every now and then so they keep making distros.

Assume your cluster costs $50,000 to build (including the Giga-bit ethernet gear), you are only going to pay $l000 or less for the O/S.

That's a great deal and a half. Also, that paultry $1,000 investment keeps you in patches plus, gets your a year of email install/configuration tech support.

But, your solution is definately cheaper !