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 473941
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by orestes
by viton on Fri 20th May 2011 11:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by orestes"
viton
Member since:
2005-08-09

It's not about running them, it's about PERFORMANCE. It makes a huge difference if you just use (highly portable) C code for A/V codecs and JIT compilers or assembly.

I understand it perfectly. I work with multiplaform high performance code. But at some point these apps was not optimized.
There is a big difference between slow app and non working app. So get'em running is 80% of deal.
x86 assembly code can be machine-transcoded to ARM without a much problems and NEON ISA is actually more flexible than SSEx.

Ever compared the JS performance of IE 32 bits vs. 64 bits?

Do you mean MS didn't optimized 64bit version?

Trust me, I'm running Linux on loads of plattforms: x86, x86_64, m68k, SPARC and PPC, I know what can easily be ported and what not =).


Linux @ x86_64, ARM, CELL(in past)

Edited 2011-05-20 11:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2