Software is ‘soft’ that means it can be easily and readily changed and may be more prone to ‘bugs’ because the changes are done more often. Firmware is NOT software
This is complete nonsense.
Peter wrote:
This is complete nonsense.
Against all forum rules: +1
And if I may elaborate: firmware is indeed a subcategory of software, it is executable code, usually produced by a compiler and/or assembler. The difference is that firmware is permanently visible to the cpu, normally to be executed at boot time, whereas “normal” executables (such as your favourite spreadsheet, web browser, music/video player, &c) are loaded from disk to RAM to be there executed.
Sorry USFlyer, I respectfully disagree. Our business makes control units for the auto industry, and these days the firmware can be updated quite easily, sometimes we have a dedicated port on the device, but more often it’s done over the CAN network on the car. Tesla update firmware over the air whilst the car is sat in the garage, and the owner need not know anything about it.
In general there is a bootloader that cannot be so easily re-flashed.
Firmware for a particular device is readily testable, but the bigger the system and the more different systems talk to each other the more difficult it gets. Software should be structured such that a database update cannot sabotage it, but these things are of course still possible.
One would have hoped that avionics has significant software testing; the testing in the automotive industry, particularly for safety critical parts, is substantial.
However, notwithstanding the above, I am a believer in “glass” instrumentation. As has been mentioned before the probability of software failure is substantially lower than vacuum pump failure for example.
Firmware is a special form (subset) of software. Therefore it is software.
But like a lot of IT terminology, what does and does not count as firmware is not clearly or universally defined. Is a bunch of C++ code written for a PIC or AVR “software” or “firmware”? If the later then does the same code become “software” when compiled for Windows? It’s largely a meaningless distinction.
But in any case, it’s a lot clearer what “firmware” is than what “the cloud” or “big data” is. Another two meaningless phrases invented by marketing people in IT companies.
I thought “big data” was the one on the black thingamajig…
USFlyer, the world is nowhere near as simplistic as you make out.
It is completely standard these days to include firmware updates for submodules as part of an overall software update on the parent unit. You don’t necessarily need special hardware to update firmware in a module such as an AHRS unit.
I would be astonished if Garmin cannot (and do not) update the firmware in their embedded modules as part of a normal run-of-the-mill update.
edit missed the other posts saying the same thing!
I would be astonished if Garmin cannot (and do not) update the firmware in their embedded modules as part of a normal run-of-the-mill update.
The Garmin firmware is updated across all modules during the regular updates.
