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.
Thread beginning with comment 454622
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Makes sense
by sukru on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 20:13 UTC
Member since:

Currently servers is the only place Microsoft can comfortably try new things. Most of their stuff is based on .Net, which is portable anyways, and the NT kernel has always been multi-platfrom capable.

And, if they succeed, I believe, like others mentioned above, this will pave roads for a future Chrome OS competitor in smaller devices. If they can make sure that Windows runs OK on ARM, then they can have a small shell/IE/Silverlight/RDP services for their lightweight clients.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Makes sense
by freebsd on Fri 24th Dec 2010 07:43 in reply to "Makes sense"
freebsd Member since:

Most of their stuff is based on .Net

I assume you were not thinking about Office, IE, Active Directory and other similar behemoths. They are most likely in C/C++ with some portion specific to processors(Assembly!), porting them is little more than just compilation.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Makes sense
by moondevil on Fri 24th Dec 2010 21:33 in reply to "RE: Makes sense"
moondevil Member since:

Most of their tools are nowadays developed in .Net.

Even the C/C++ build chain now make use of msbuild (Microsoft's Ant) instead of nmake.

The only C/C++ software are operating system low level stuff and APIs, games and applications that Microsoft has before .Net.

Still, C and C++ can be made quite portable, and lets not forget that the NT line used to run in several platforms.

Reply Parent Score: 2