Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 19:19 UTC
Windows The rumours about Windows possibly being ported to ARM has left a lot of people bewildered; why would you port Windows NT when Windows CE 6.0 is a perfectly capable operating system? Putting all the pieces together, it's actually quite clear why you would want Windows NT on ARM: servers.
Permalink for comment 454770
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

The irony here (and keep in mind, I'm a big FOSS dude) is that if I understand it right, NT is more portable than ReactOS.

Reactos might be more portable than MS NT due to a lower amount of asm used. Please note Reactos is a NT design OS just built in the Open Source world from documents got on NT design.

FOSS != "designed with portability in mind".
FOSS == "the code is there to be made portable by anyone who wants to port it".

Linux wasn't designed to be portable, originally. Read the original announcement email. It originally had a ton of 386 asm and depended on 386-specific instructions.

FOSS isn't necessarily 'portable' code, it's 'able to be ported' code.
Semantics, but yeah.

Older the project in the FOSS world the more portable it becomes. Its a nature of the FOSS world as the backgrounds of the coders become more diverse so does the project supported platforms.

Yes a lot of FOSS projects started out platform locked one way or another.

Now closed source normally goes the other way. Portable and becomes less portable. NT use to support stack loads of different platforms but 2008 and Windows 7 support a small number due to cost cutting.

People forget that Internet explorer use to run native on Unix OS's.

Reply Parent Score: 2