I ran screaming from Symbian OS and pledged to never buy another Nokia product about 6 years ago because of this specific topic. I worked with Nokia on a few development projects.
Symbian's scheduler (back then) was a strict priority queue. Instead if proper threads and processes, it was simulated through an "Active Object Queue" which was very simplistic and barely functional. The idea was, you had a list of cooperative threads (windows 3.1 style) and the first item in the list flagged as needing attention was the next item run. So, if you were to release control from a high priority object and want it back after, it would get control immediately and starve all other threads.
Later, they added a "kernel scheduler" which was "real-time" but was little more than an interrupt handler with a limited scheduler. The overall goal of the OS design was "it doesn't matter how back the OS sucks, we can run on a lower end CPU than windows CE." So while Windows CE was a full, preemptive multitasking real-time kernel. Symbian was basically something closer to a kernel with a real-time process and a non-real-time process.
The round-robin scheduling algorithm allocates CPU time to processes by sequentially assigning the CPU to processes of equal priority that are in the state of being able to use the CPU. (Not blocked) This works by appearing to evenly distribute the CPU amongst CPU ready processes. Processes that are waiting on something, such as an I/O event, particularly waiting on the user to press Enter, are not considered for allocation. Often, there is a priority assigned to the process, which factors in the allocation strategy. Processes that are mostly I/O intensive tend to have higher priority, giving them good response time. Processes that are mostly CPU intensive tend to have lower priority, so they don't interfere with overall system responsiveness.
Windows operating systems primarily use a scheduling algorithm called the "Multilevel Feedback Queue" (MLFQ). This algorithm allows processes to be dynamically moved between different priority queues based on their behavior and requirements, which helps optimize CPU utilization and responsiveness. It employs various time slices for different priority levels, ensuring that both high-priority and lower-priority tasks receive appropriate processing time. Additionally, Windows also utilizes a round-robin approach within each priority level to fairly allocate CPU time among processes.
what is algorithm and its use there and analyze an algorithm
In the past (and perhaps currently as well) it has used round-robin, at one time 1 second but since updated to .1 seconds. It may also have other features such as preemptive abilities. Priority fair scheduling.
Encryption
same as linux use.
The round-robin scheduling algorithm allocates CPU time to processes by sequentially assigning the CPU to processes of equal priority that are in the state of being able to use the CPU. (Not blocked) This works by appearing to evenly distribute the CPU amongst CPU ready processes. Processes that are waiting on something, such as an I/O event, particularly waiting on the user to press Enter, are not considered for allocation. Often, there is a priority assigned to the process, which factors in the allocation strategy. Processes that are mostly I/O intensive tend to have higher priority, giving them good response time. Processes that are mostly CPU intensive tend to have lower priority, so they don't interfere with overall system responsiveness.
Windows operating systems primarily use a scheduling algorithm called the "Multilevel Feedback Queue" (MLFQ). This algorithm allows processes to be dynamically moved between different priority queues based on their behavior and requirements, which helps optimize CPU utilization and responsiveness. It employs various time slices for different priority levels, ensuring that both high-priority and lower-priority tasks receive appropriate processing time. Additionally, Windows also utilizes a round-robin approach within each priority level to fairly allocate CPU time among processes.
Linux has a number of schedulers available in its kernel, plus at least one scheduler available as a patch. But the default schedler is the Completely Fair Scheduler. Like most modern schedulers, it is pre-emptive, meaning that instead of the process deciding when to give up the CPU, the kernel decides for it when to give up the CPU. This keeps even the most uncooperative process from starving the other processes on the computer of CPU time. From what I understand of how CFS works: It keeps an eye on how much of an assigned quantum (length of time.) is actually spent on the CPU by a process and how much of the quantum is spent blocking (Keeping off the CPU to wait for I/O requests to complete, a process can't usually proceed and keep going without requested data. During the time a process is waiting for the hardware, other processes make use of the CPU.) The less time a process actually uses the CPU on its given quantum, the higher a priority it gets so that when the data from an I/O operation is complete the process can quickly execute to the next I/O request and block again. This keeps the CPU busy, but the system responsive to just about any event.I don't know what sort of process scheduling is used on Windows. Windows, unlike Linux, is given a pretty heavy black box treatment when it comes to its users and a great deal about its kernel is not common knowledge. Presumably it is a pre-emptive, priority-based scheduler. Doubtful it's as efficient as CFS.
Shortest Job First (SJF) scheduling and priority scheduling are both CPU scheduling algorithms used in operating systems to manage process execution. SJF selects processes based on the shortest estimated execution time, while priority scheduling selects processes based on their assigned priority levels. In some cases, SJF can be viewed as a specific type of priority scheduling where the priority is inversely related to the job length—the shorter the job, the higher its priority. Thus, both approaches aim to optimize CPU utilization but differ in the criteria they use for process selection.
Android and symbian is different System, so if you want to play android game on it, you must use android emulator on your symbian.
samsung
If you mean Android OS, then no. Nokia C7 use Symbian Anna (previously Symbian^3 and Symbian Belle some time later) as it's OS.
Online scheduling is the useage of competitive analysis (or online algorithms) on scheduling problems. Online algorithms is characterized by making decision "online", which means a point in the time axe. In this point of time, we can not see the future jobs or tasks, whereas we only know the jobs or tasks before or at this point of time. In contrast, in offline scheduling problems, there is no the conception of "point of time". We are lords of the world. We stay outside the real world and can see the past and future (jobs or tasks). TThis aspect is called "offline". Since we can see the past and the future, we know the total knowledge of the problem before we make decision (not depending the time). Even use the simpliest method, such as enumeration, then we can obtain the optimal solution. Nontheless, by not knowing the future knowledge of problem, we must make decision. Then we use a critierion to meaure the performance of online algorithm, called competitive ratio. This is a conception like approximation ratio, compering the objective value obtained by online algorithm and that of offline (optimal) algorithm. Offline scheduling is concerned of the classical scheduling problems. Not introducing the conception of "online". Offline scheduling problem is scheduling problem.
A CPU scheduler maximizes CPU utilization. It can do the scheduling based on two types, which is either a preemptive or a non-preemptive scheduling.
The best search algorithm to use for a sorted array is the binary search algorithm.
symbian S60-based smartphone