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 454639
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

What do you mean by "Without any problems"? You haven't benchmarked any of the ARM servers for your load, because they don't exist.

I was talking from a provisioning & operational standpoint. Whether a particular server can handle the load you intend for it applies to any CPU, no matter if it's ARM or x86-64.

If it helps, the majority of my x86-64 servers are virtual machines with very low CPU usage profiles: I have some physical hosts running multiple KVM instances where the Munin graph for CPU usage is basically non-existent.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

Ok, that makes more sense. But within the same processor architecture, its pretty easy to just guess that this years x86 processor is probably going to handle the load that last years did. Changing architectures means you have a lot less in common and requires much more intensive resource planing.

Virtualization, in my opinion is a good argument why ARM will never take off in the data center. If you have a lot of underused servers, virtualization is awesome. A much better solution for high availability, backup, and energy conservation than ARM.

Reply Parent Score: 2