93 pretty sure NASA is using a custom Linux environment (for obvious reasons)92. I do think if they ever go back to Luna or to Mars, that they will write a sturdy, custom operating system, because no-one wants blue screen of death or spinning beach ball of doom whilst travelling in a fragile metal can, enroute to or from a celestial body.
93 I've heard that for each line developers change they need to write documentation on why they changed it. Making NASA probably both the best place to work as a developer and the worst92 Yeah, when you're dealing with something like a rocket, you want something that you can control and make sure doesn't change without you explicitly making said changes.
93 that makes sense. I mean, don't fix it if it isn't broken. Especially when you are dealing with something that is in outer space and failures may cost lives (and a whole lot of money)92 I vaguely remember them asking the public for some certain type of ancient Intel processor, as they were what was used to initially build the Space Shuttle, and were starting to fail, but they were unwilling to change anything about it, including changing the processor type.
edit: 88, damn you always typing at the same time as me .91. I'm still a little torn on the whole going to Mars/back to the Moon thing. While on the one hand it seems like an expensive endeavour, at the same time its pretty exciting to think that I could watch a landing in my own lifetime. I don't think any landings at this point would convince those who believe it was faked before though. While they didn't really have the capacity to fake it that convincingly back then, they do now.