Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th May 2011 21:50 UTC, submitted by fran
Windows The ARM version of Windows 8 might have just become the most desired version of Windows in our hearts and minds. After us talking about legacy code and backwards compatibility in Windows for years now, an Intel senior vice president, Renee James, has just stated that Windows 8 on ARM will not have any form of compatibility for legacy applications whatsoever. Update: Microsoft has responded to Intel's claims. "Intel's statements during yesterday's Intel Investor Meeting about Microsoft's plans for the next version of Windows were factually inaccurate and unfortunately misleading," the company said, "From the first demonstrations of Windows on SoC, we have been clear about our goals and have emphasized that we are at the technology demonstration stage. As such, we have no further details or information at this time."
Thread beginning with comment 473768
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Intel could probably block it...
by TemporalBeing on Thu 19th May 2011 18:33 UTC
Member since:
2007-08-22 least native support in Windows could probably get blocked by Intel as MS probably doesn't have the right licensing to x86 technology to make the virtual machines.

That said, even Win7 is not-backwards compatible all with WinXP applications; and the older the version of Windows required the less likely it will be compatible. That's why the introduced the XP-mode virtual machine in Win7 - it runs WinXP under a special virtual machine instance (complete with desktop) to run those legacy applications in.

However, to put it on ARM Microsoft would have to get licenses to the x86 instruction set - licenses they likely don't have. Further, they would need licenses not just from Intel, but also AMD and likely a few other smaller players too (e.g. Transmeta) if they want to do certain things - like support AMD64 (which utilizes Transmeta technology)

So yeah, they may try - but they'll likely be irrelevant any how. Just one more thing to break the elephant's back. Didn't expect them to topple a tree onto themselves though..

Reply Score: 2