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 454676
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, I assume thats peak. I wanted to overestimate the cost difference for affect. Even at 35 watts the cost savings per year for a single device isn't much.

Reply Parent Score: 2

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

Yeah, I assume thats peak. I wanted to overestimate the cost difference for affect. Even at 35 watts the cost savings per year for a single device isn't much.


It more than what you think if its in a server farm.

You are forgotten. Its not just the cost of the server. Its the cost of the power supply to support it in case of power outtage and the size power feeds racks require. Each 1 watt in a server farm very quickly totals up to a huge number.

And a server farms have to work on the presume that peak will be required while in power outage.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yes a server farm, obviously thats huge. No doubt. I think there are other reasons why it wont take off there as well, which I've explained in other threads in this discussion. This particular thread was about a single device in a small or home office. It makes no sense for MS to port to arm just for a small office server this thread was describing.

Reply Parent Score: 2