Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

blogs.windows.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–418 of 418 posts

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#411

Post by folmar »

slashdev wrote: post #298
px43 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google has been steadily moving things into play services though, which is not open. This is a good thing, they've been de-googling the base OS and making it as stripped down and bare-bones as possible. This is a huge win for security, privacy, and freedom in general, and exactly what they should be doing. Android should be a small, secure Linux based operating system with an API that makes it easy to build service…

Fair enough, but android without play services is also barely usable and most apps will not run. It's also an effective way of building the walls around the garden.

Android with google services replacement MicroG GmsCore runs most apps without hassles.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#412

Post by folmar »

px43 wrote: post #278
slashdev wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I boot Linux on an iPhone? Install android instead? I don't think we ended up in a place much better off from a freedom perspective. Android is a little better because parts of it are open. Google has been steadily moving things into play services though, which is not open. There is now an open source replacement for play services - I don't think it's very compatible yet though.

> Google has been steadily moving things into play services though, which is not open. This is a good thing, they've been de-googling the base OS and making it as stripped down and bare-bones as possible. This is a huge win for security, privacy, and freedom in general, and exactly what they should be doing. Android should be a small, secure Linux based operating system with an API that makes it easy to build service…

My experience is quite the opposite: they are hardcoding more things to be hard to replace - you can only have /system apps not affected by forced battery saving limits, the new file-based encryption is moot on unlocked bootloader etc.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#413

Post by deaddodo »

pjmlp wrote: post #391
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But will it run modern web pages and youtube?

To be fair, YouTube doesn't run on Linux anyway, it crawls, unless you happen the have the magical combination of proper drivers.

YouTube plays fine on my 2020 laptop running Linux. The only feature I miss out on (that the hardware provides) is HDR, but it's a small loss for me to have my preferred development environment.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#414

Post by deaddodo »

simias wrote: post #219
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Modern PC EUFI bootloaders are bigger and more bloated than any uboot build in existence, and things like device tree support in linux means that you can support various boards with the same kernel (including boards that don't exist yet). Sure you'll probably still need custom bootloaders for most boards, but it's not like you can swap your motherboard BIOS/UEFI chips and expect them to work either. This feels like…

I feel like we're kind of mixing up a bunch of things here, or maybe I am. The reason you don't need to mess with GRUB or you BIOS when you change your hardware is that modern hardware interfaces have built-in discovery and resource allocation features. Before that you had to deal with pesky low level details like IRQ allocations and the like (which was a thing on PC not that long ago). That's not really a feature of…

> You can write a simplistic boot sector loader for PC in a few hundred ASM opcodes, that would be a lot more difficult for the average ARM bootloader because there's a lot more to do before you can just call into Linux. In general you won't even have RAM or caches available when u-boot begins executing.

This is exactly the point OP's getting at though, and the exact "discovery" features you handwave away. If I write an OS (or bootloader) on x86 w/ BIOS/uEFI, I can easily query available memory and start using it. Meanwhile u-boot has to be told via an external resource how much RAM is available before it begins initializing. This is fine for embedded/bespoke development (since you'll know the hardware you're developing for and can make assumptions), but a pain for general OS development where you have to inform the bootloader/OS of every devices capabilities.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#415

Post by mycall »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #343
px43 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you really arguing the that Windows CE platform was more open than Android? Back in 2005, an open source Linux based phone was a hippie pipe dream, and carriers were FIRMLY against allowing anything open source on their networks. Android blew all of that wide open, and now the most popular phone OS in the world is an open source Linux based OS. This is what we were all dreaming about back then. I feel like this i…

Except the Android of today has not much in common with the Android from ten years ago. Android might be open sourced but is by no means like the linux that you'd run on your PC and is being increasingly built to wall you into Google's services while Samsung and the rest try to remove Google as much as possible from the equation and sway you to their services. Basically you're the cashcow they try to heave around. Wh…

There are many bluetooth call recorders out there. They are better than nothing.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#416

Post by pjmlp »

deaddodo wrote: post #413
pjmlp wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, YouTube doesn't run on Linux anyway, it crawls, unless you happen the have the magical combination of proper drivers.

YouTube plays fine on my 2020 laptop running Linux. The only feature I miss out on (that the hardware provides) is HDR, but it's a small loss for me to have my preferred development environment.

Lucky you for having the right set of drivers.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#417

Post by spoopyskelly »

saagarjha wrote: post #348
oaiey wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly the point. When a 16 year old non-male teenager is accepting it, than you won. See iPhone, facebook, whatsapp, tiktok or whatever they are doing nowadays. I owned two of these devices as a personal information manager (contacts calendar ...). They were not comfortable and the data plans then were so prohibitive expensive that modern usage was far away.

There's no need to stereotype.

You should go work at, then get fired from, the Google AI ethics team. They have the same prejudice against reality as you do.

Re: A preview of x64 emulation on Windows for ARM

#418

Post by nvrspyx »

icedchai wrote: post #377
nvrspyx wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there was a time when only IBM was capable of making PCs They may have been the only one's that could use the term "Personal Computer" for a short time, but they were not the only ones making PCs. You had Commodore, Amiga, HP, Wang, Apple, etc. Even still, IBM's PCs were not locked down and were, for the most part, based on an open architecture allowing you to freely upgrade parts. Later down the line (specifically…

In the 80's, "PC" meant IBM or compatible. Nobody ever called their Apple, Amiga, Commodore 64, etc. a "PC." There were even some products, like the "Apple II PC Transporter" that made your Apple II compatible with a PC. That meant an IBM PC.

Right. My point was that "PC" was used exclusively for IBM as a marketing term, but it was not the only "personal computer" available. PC became a generalized term much later, although Apple still held on to PC being a term for any computer that was Windows-based (or simply any computer that wasn't a Mac).
Post reply on HN