Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Jun 2011 00:39 UTC
Windows It's 2am here (edit: I'm done writing, it's 2:38am now), and I really ought to be sleeping right about now, but for some stupid arbitrary reason, the D9 conference is held at honestly irresponsible hours for us Europeans (and we rock, damnit). So, here I am, MacBook Air on my lap, camomile tea (the Empress of Teas) in my cup, because Microsoft just had to show Windows 8's new interface for the first time at this ungodly hour. Oh, and they unveiled some more interesting stuff about Windows 8. Update: The videos from D9 are up. Mossberg talking to Steve Sinofsky, and the Windows 8 demonstration by Larson-Green.
Thread beginning with comment 475814
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Underwhelming
by christian on Thu 2nd Jun 2011 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Underwhelming"
christian
Member since:
2005-07-06

"If Microsoft makes a .net runtime for ARM there is no reason why .NET apps won't just work unless of course they call some native Win32 code that might not exist on the ARM version of Windows.

It might help if we appraised ourself of what .Net actually is. It is a wrapper around the Win32/64 API. That's it. That's very x86 specific, and let's be honest, it was what kept developers on Windows on a specific platform.
"

Eh? Win32 was written for MIPS/x86/Alpha/PowerPC (in that order I think). Very little x86 specific.

You simply aren't going to get a complete .Net runtime for the Arm platform because you'll have to port the Win API. Not going to happen.


It will be at least as complete as anything Mono can accomplish. Plus, it will have access to the Windows API, it's Windows!

"Same story with Silverlight. I swear people don't know how a virtual machine or anything works anymore.

They're not virtualising anything and this has nothing to do with virtualisation.
"

CLR is a Virtual Machine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Language_Runtime

It's not machine virtualization in the sense of virtualizing hardware, but a virtual machine in the same manner as the Java virtual machine. All very detached from x86 and portable to ARM.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Underwhelming
by segedunum on Fri 3rd Jun 2011 01:12 in reply to "RE[3]: Underwhelming"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Eh? Win32 was written for MIPS/x86/Alpha/PowerPC (in that order I think). Very little x86 specific.

It's not that it could never be done but there is a heck of a lot that is specific to the x86 architecture because it simply has to know a lot about the processor. It's why Wine hasn't managed it, and they'd then need an emulator to be effective. It's been made clear there will be no emulation in the Arm version of Windows. It's also a monumental effort to support on a different architecture for the benefit of third party programmers - compiler, tool support etc. etc.

As it was, Microsoft just simply couldn't support a complete version of Windows on multiple architectures and it's doubtful that the Arm version of Windows will be.

It will be at least as complete as anything Mono can accomplish. Plus, it will have access to the Windows API, it's Windows!

As complete as Mono isn't anywhere near good enough, and I very much doubt developers will have access to the Windows API in whatever form it is in. Microsoft will have to re-implement the underlying framework - and make sure it works exactly in the same way as other versions of .Net on x86.

CLR is a Virtual Machine

When that depends on a lot of native code implementations you'd be hard pushed to call it that.

Reply Parent Score: 2