I hope that’s like a personal laptop or something. I’d hate to think we shot people into space on something that’s running windows for a critical system.
I have not worked on human rated launch vehicles, but I’ve been adjacent to them, saw what went into them, and a few close personal friends have worked it.
Anything that can jeapordize the safety of the crew must go through a rigorous independent validation and verification process that takes years, software included. No shot a Microsoft product was even in consideration for those systems.
Being in industry I find it crazy that so many people are freaked out by this. Astronauts have email, they have tasks and schedules and reports to make. Why would NASA reinvent the wheel on a task/schedule manager when the ground operators and astronauts are already used to using Outlook.
I think they’re saying they’re not using Windows to operate Artemis II but the astronauts are probably used to using Microsoft products. So when it comes to simple logging and data entry they probably are using Windows. But these are their own computers and not used to run Artemis II. I may be wrong but that’s how I understood it.
Yup, sometimes it’s too easy for me to just slip into work mode when talking about this kind of stuff and I don’t elaborate enough. Thanks for stepping in.
Based on industry rumors I believe the Orion capsule control computers are running VxWorks (I’ve heard that maybe a few boxes are using RTEMS?) All of that source code would have been reviewed, audited, and tested to hell and back.
The day-in-the-life stuff for the astronauts is entirely believable to be Windows. The risk of it failing is so low (medium probability, low impact), it’s what they’d be familiar with, and it’s part of daily life at NASA anyways. Linux is no better when it comes to safety critical components and the astronauts almost certainly wouldn’t want to be dealing with Gnome’s… uniqueness…
I hope that’s like a personal laptop or something. I’d hate to think we shot people into space on something that’s running windows for a critical system.
I have not worked on human rated launch vehicles, but I’ve been adjacent to them, saw what went into them, and a few close personal friends have worked it.
Anything that can jeapordize the safety of the crew must go through a rigorous independent validation and verification process that takes years, software included. No shot a Microsoft product was even in consideration for those systems.
Being in industry I find it crazy that so many people are freaked out by this. Astronauts have email, they have tasks and schedules and reports to make. Why would NASA reinvent the wheel on a task/schedule manager when the ground operators and astronauts are already used to using Outlook.
Wait are you saying they do or don’t have Microsoft products?
I think they’re saying they’re not using Windows to operate Artemis II but the astronauts are probably used to using Microsoft products. So when it comes to simple logging and data entry they probably are using Windows. But these are their own computers and not used to run Artemis II. I may be wrong but that’s how I understood it.
Yup, sometimes it’s too easy for me to just slip into work mode when talking about this kind of stuff and I don’t elaborate enough. Thanks for stepping in.
Based on industry rumors I believe the Orion capsule control computers are running VxWorks (I’ve heard that maybe a few boxes are using RTEMS?) All of that source code would have been reviewed, audited, and tested to hell and back.
The day-in-the-life stuff for the astronauts is entirely believable to be Windows. The risk of it failing is so low (medium probability, low impact), it’s what they’d be familiar with, and it’s part of daily life at NASA anyways. Linux is no better when it comes to safety critical components and the astronauts almost certainly wouldn’t want to be dealing with Gnome’s… uniqueness…