Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Dec 2010 22:56 UTC, submitted by fran
Windows Very light on details, but this is interesting nonetheless - very interesting, and potentially one of the biggest things to have hit the operating systems business this decade. Bloomberg is reporting that Microsoft plans to announce Windows for ARM processors at CES in January 2011.
Thread beginning with comment 454374
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: what's the point?
by 0brad0 on Wed 22nd Dec 2010 00:10 UTC in reply to "RE: what's the point?"
0brad0
Member since:
2007-05-05

Desperate move? Would you say the same if support for a new architecture was added to Linux or *BSD? Probably not, right?
As has been demonstrated by both iOS and Android, new platforms can gain acceptance and applications fairly quickly, if they provide something people want.


Of course not because *BSD/Linux already run on almost every CPU architecture out there. Desktop incarnations of Windows runs on exactly one. That is a desperation move and Microsoft has a lot of work cut out for them to be even remotely competitive. From a performance perspective they'll also face similar issues as they do with netbooks but even more so.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: what's the point?
by perlid on Wed 22nd Dec 2010 00:30 in reply to "RE[2]: what's the point?"
perlid Member since:
2010-12-21

Of course not because *BSD/Linux already run on almost every CPU architecture out there.


Your argument makes no sense. Did you also think is was a desperate move when, back in the days, Linux went from x86-only to also support its second architecture? I didn't think so. My point here is that the reason why people like yourself want to call this a desperate move, is simply because you don't like Microsoft and their products (btw, me neither), but that has nothing to do with them being desperate, but more about people spreading FUD because they think Microsoft is "evil" and desperately want them to fail.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: what's the point?
by 0brad0 on Wed 22nd Dec 2010 00:39 in reply to "RE[3]: what's the point?"
0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05


Your argument makes no sense. Did you also think is was a desperate move when, back in the days, Linux went from x86-only to also support its second architecture? I didn't think so. My point here is that the reason why people like yourself want to call this a desperate move, is simply because you don't like Microsoft and their products (btw, me neither), but that has nothing to do with them being desperate, but more about people spreading FUD because they think Microsoft is "evil" and desperately want them to fail.


It makes perfect sense. Back then Linux had zero market share to hold on to. Microsoft has everything to lose. Mobile devices are the future and Microsoft's attempts at this so far have been extremely poor.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: what's the point?
by bnolsen on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 15:14 in reply to "RE[3]: what's the point?"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

microsoft is evil. They were convicted of abusing their monopoly position in the market to the damage of the market.

Under the table oem deals, behind the scenes threats against manufacturers to lock out potential competition, strong armed treatment of technology partners, thats an incomplete list but reason enough why they should become a minor player in the market.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: what's the point?
by BallmerKnowsBest on Fri 24th Dec 2010 16:11 in reply to "RE[3]: what's the point?"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

people spreading FUD because they think Microsoft is "evil" and desperately want them to fail.


Truer words have never been posted here. If anyone's desperate here, it's the Anything-But-Microsoft zombies and their bitterness over Microsoft's success. Sadly, they're all too witless to realize that that bandwagon left them behind ages. For mindless wannabe-hipsters, Google's the company that's now cool to hate.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: what's the point?
by lucas_maximus on Wed 22nd Dec 2010 14:00 in reply to "RE[2]: what's the point?"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Of course not because *BSD/Linux already run on almost every CPU architecture out there. Desktop incarnations of Windows runs on exactly one. That is a desperation move and Microsoft has a lot of work cut out for them to be even remotely competitive. From a performance perspective they'll also face similar issues as they do with netbooks but even more so.


Windows NT kernel is built to be portable (there is a version of Windows XP for Itanium and Windows Server 2008 for Itanium also). The diagram below is the Windows 2000 architecture, I have seen similar diagrams for Windows VISTA & 7, but I couldn't find it with a 2 second google. However it illustrates the point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_2000_architecture.svg

Notice at the bottom there is a Hardware Abstraction Layer. This is where I would imagine (I am a web developer not systems developer so I can't say for certain) most of the main development will be in porting Windows to ARM (if it does indeed happen).

Secondly, Windows 7 & Windows 2008 R2 are highly modular e.g. We have Windows 2008 R2 servers which boot up without the windows shell, i.e. DOS prompt and not much else, you pretty much need to know powershell to interact with it. I don't doubt they will customise the build to include what is necessary.

Thirdly Windows 7 already support multitouch, and they already have a touch based UI with Windows Phone 7.

I agree with the other poster I doubt this is a desperate move, I think it is a pro-active one.

Edited 2010-12-22 14:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4