Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Mar 2013 22:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Windows "Microsoft today announced via its website the general availability of the Windows Embedded 8 family of operating systems. Extending Windows 8 technologies to a spectrum of edge devices, Windows Embedded 8 helps enterprises capitalize on the Internet of Things with the platform to capture, analyze and act on valuable data across IT infrastructures." So, this is NT-based, and not CE-based, right? Even though I'm currently researching and writing about Psion and Symbian, I'm dreading the day I have to sort through the mess that is Microsoft's mobile and embedded systems. Just check the page for Windows Embedded 8, and look at those names. The heck?
Order by: Score:
thom, it could be worse
by smashIt on Wed 20th Mar 2013 22:41 UTC
smashIt
Member since:
2005-07-06
You are what you 8.
by tomz on Wed 20th Mar 2013 22:53 UTC in reply to "thom, it could be worse"
tomz Member since:
2010-05-06

ROFLMAO!!!

For Con-cretins.

Windows already 8 my data, now it wants to eat my device.

So is it going to require a Metro interface and UEFI or other per-device DRM?

Reply Score: 1

Disappointed
by robojerk on Wed 20th Mar 2013 22:56 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I am actually disappointed of the lack of an ARM based version of Windows Embedded 8.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Disappointed
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 20th Mar 2013 23:08 UTC in reply to "Disappointed"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, what - the - heck? Is that Microsoft's way of saying " Just use something else and leave us alone"?

Or is it just a protection from a third party taking windows 8 embedded for arm and creating a decent full windows 8 tablet that includes a fully functional desktop interface? There used to be cheap-o arm based laptops that ran windows CE skinned to look like windows xp. Maybe this is there way of preventing more confusion than there already is?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Disappointed
by robojerk on Wed 20th Mar 2013 23:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Disappointed"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

I don't think how there could be confusion for "embedded" customers. How often do you see embedded PC's at Best Buy, Frys, etc. None. embedded customers are usually IT people. I think if a customer expecting a full blown version of Windows bought an embedded version, they'd probably figure out they messed up pretty quick, I can't even install Adobe Reader XI on a Windows 7 Embedded OS without it complaining.

We're going to be deploying more thin clients here at my work. If they were going to release an ARM based version of embedded so I could run Vmware View, RDP, Citrix, or just browse the web I would definitely be interested (as long as the client I needed supported ARM).. Cheaper hardware, less energy, less heat.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Disappointed
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 21st Mar 2013 14:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Disappointed"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

How often do you see embedded PC's at Best Buy, Frys, etc.



Rarely. But I have seen them. Usually they're more often found at place like menards or farm and fleet or other places that no one sane person would buy computers from.

Its true that a savy person would figure out quickly that it wasn't the genuine article, but most people aren't that savy. There is already enough confusion between windows RT and windows 8. Microsoft definitely wouldn't want more.

Embedded users would want arm, Microsoft has a windows 8 version that works on arm. So why wouldn't they do it? Its a bit of a mystery to me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Disappointed
by TechGeek on Thu 21st Mar 2013 03:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Disappointed"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Microsoft doesn't want to compete in the cheap space. And really, there is no amount they can charge that will beat free, so why bother? I have no idea why anyone would use this over Linux. Chances are its artificially crippled so as not to displace any other products, much like their starter or home editions. Just a waste of time.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Disappointed
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 21st Mar 2013 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Disappointed"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The reason to use Windows embedded, is that you don't need as highly skilled developers for simple "embedded" projects. You end up using a Visual Studio for development, and you have all the drivers already written for you. So if you are doing low volume high margin devices, windows embedded can make a lot of sense. At least, that was my focus when evaluating it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Disappointed
by robojerk on Wed 20th Mar 2013 23:25 UTC in reply to "Disappointed"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

We can do some amazing things with devices like RaspberryPi. I think we're now reaching the point in computing where making specific,little computers that serve the need of a single person can be done by a laymen with a little bit of education (trip to book store/amazon).

Sometimes I wonder if Microsoft will ever make free, or really really cheap ($5-$10/license?) but completely torn down version of Windows (similar to PE) for enthusiasts/modding/education to compete with Linux in that area. It looks like a "no" in this iteration. I think if Microsoft made an embedded version of Windows like that it would at least be another option for people that like tinker, or have a specific need not being filled, and if someone's hobby ever went into mass production it could lead to license sales for them.

Oh well, Linux/FreeBSD, etc still works, is free, and completely customizable.

Edited 2013-03-20 23:28 UTC

Reply Score: 7

Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Thu 21st Mar 2013 00:34 UTC
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

Windows Embedded 8, based on Windows 7.

Unless you use Windows Embedded 8 Pro, in which case it's based on XP, Vista, 7, or 8, depending on your choice.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 21st Mar 2013 14:20 UTC in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

That is a terrible website, and its very confusing with the different versions, but I don't think that's accurate.


http://www.microsoft.com/windowsembedded/en-us/evaluate/windows-emb...

From that it seems like all windows Embedded 8 versions are based on windows 8.

If you go through the OS chooser menu, you get a very confusing page that makes it seem like windows 8 embedded pro could be based on xp, vista, 7 or 8. But I think that's just showing the different versions of embedded pro.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Thu 21st Mar 2013 20:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

It seems to me the per-device recommendations have changed since I last looked. Maybe they errors?

I don't know. I was kinda confused by the indications that the lesser versions of Win Embedded 8 were based on 7, but it actually made some sense since it isn't available for ARM, which the Win8 kernel does run on.

Also, if you click "Windows Embedded 8 Standard" it takes you to the Windows Embedded 7 page...

And as for Win Embedded 8 Pro looking like it can be based on XP, Vista, 7 and 8, I have a feeling that the Pro license allows you you pick-and-choose.

Edited 2013-03-21 20:18 UTC

Reply Score: 2

..uhm...
by justanothersysadmin on Thu 21st Mar 2013 04:45 UTC
justanothersysadmin
Member since:
2011-06-09
Wasn't it always..?
by henderson101 on Thu 21st Mar 2013 09:39 UTC
henderson101
Member since:
2006-05-30

Fairly sure Windows Embedded was borne out of the pre-installation environment for XP/2000/NT4/etc. Fairly sure it was always NT based - though looking at Wikipedia, it seems like it depended on your target. Certainly, the only version I ever encountered was the NT based one.

Reply Score: 3

robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

The Verge has an article <a=http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/21/4004540/intel-vs-microsoft-how-at... vs. Microsoft: how Atom processors could kill Windows RT.

I wonder if Microsoft did have an ARM based embedded OS, but since the comparison of Surface vs Surface RT showed how badly Windows performs on ARM if Microsoft is rethinking their entire ARM strategy and are withholding releasing anything else for the platform.

Perhaps this shows how married their software is to Intel, and until they spend more time on development for their mistress ARM they cant even get a divorce.

Reply Score: 2