Index
> Non-x86 architectures > Windows 8 stable on ARM, say MS |
| Author |
|
|
revolution 28 Jan 2012, 17:09
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57367694-64/windows-8-stable-on-arm-going-to-developers-soon-say-sources/
Quote: "The bigger implication is, with [Intel-based] ultrabooks you're popularizing the idea that you have this thinner design that turns on faster, that lasts longer [battery life]--but then you have Windows 8 on ARM that's built at a price point that's much lower. And does all of those things too. |
|||
28 Jan 2012, 17:09 |
|
|
Enko 28 Jan 2012, 17:27
I'm not surprised, as win8 of what I could see on screenshots is almost designed for tablets. I guess microsoft got tired of androids everywhere.
|
|||
|
28 Jan 2012, 17:27 |
|
|
cvtss2sd 28 Jan 2012, 18:21
I suspect that we're going to see WIndows 8 x edition (where x is the standard groups) and Windows 8 Mobile (basically, an updated windows CE) edition.
|
|||
|
28 Jan 2012, 18:21 |
|
|
cvtss2sd 28 Jan 2012, 21:43
Dex4u wrote: Most people can not see the wood for the trees, M$ have only one way in there minds as to how to dev for windows and thats html5 and java. The only problem i have with your train of thought is that HTML5 and JAVA are not MS' IPs. |
|||
|
28 Jan 2012, 21:43 |
|
|
rugxulo 16 Feb 2012, 21:31
I'm no Windows fanboy and barely use it and don't really like it much (esp. since no more decent DOS support, boo). But I think that's a bit of a drastic guess.
From what little I thought I had heard, the UI was partially going to be written in HTML 5 and Javascript (not Java). Yes, MS is heavily backing that now, somewhat, although neither has been finalized in any new standards lately. They are still supporting native apps and C++ but C# managed stuff too. There will be WinRT and Win32 for backwards compatibility. It's true that I think it's a weird transition, and I'm not sure I agree with it, but whatever, it's their money / life / etc. |
|||
|
16 Feb 2012, 21:31 |
|
|
Coty 17 Feb 2012, 02:38
Dex4u wrote:
Most likely BSD like Apple did, (they call it darwin, it's just a modified BSD). And when that day comes, windows might actually be worth something. |
|||
|
17 Feb 2012, 02:38 |
|
|
Dex4u 17 Feb 2012, 02:51
@rugxulo, Your right i ment to say Javascript.
@Coty, yes with its BSD license, it makes more sense. |
|||
|
17 Feb 2012, 02:51 |
|
|
f0dder 29 Feb 2012, 17:16
Why on earth would Microsoft want to move Windows towards a BSD base?
The NT kernel is actually pretty decent, and there's been a lot of work on optimizing it from Vista through Win7 and Win8 - check some of the channel9 interviews with the kernel devs. It's the Windows userland (especially the crufty Win32 API) that kinda sucks, and guess what - userland would have to be reinvented if they moved to a BSD core. The stuff available for BSD and Linux is mediocre at best, and one of the big reasons those platforms have so little market share... Apple have their own userland, but they've spend a loooooot of time polishing that. Throwing away the good parts of Windows and getting pretty much nothing in return for it? Insanity  |
|||
|
29 Feb 2012, 17:16 |
|
|
Dex4u 29 Feb 2012, 23:23
f0dder wrote: Throwing away the good parts of Windows and getting pretty much nothing in return for it? Insanity This says to me, that in time you will not be tied to the OS, so m$ will use a bsd kernel and save them selfs billions  .
It simple, all open source will end up doing is saving big Co billions and devaluing coders.  |
|||
|
29 Feb 2012, 23:23 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|