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

Introducing Copilot+ PCs

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 614 posts

Re: Introducing Copilot+ PCs

#133

Post by bitwize »

andyp-kw wrote: post #46
RedShift1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesn't, just like Teams and Teams are the same thing.

Teams, Teams and Skype.

Don't forget .NET, which simultaneously referred to an abstract machine runtime, an SOA strategy involving SOAP and XML, rebranded versions of Microsoft services intended to align with this strategy, and even Microsoft's centralized authentication service (called .NET Passport at first). It wasn't until later years that Microsoft associated the brand more or less strictly with the runtime.

Not to pick too much on Microsoft, Sun had previously done the same thing with Java, sticking Java stickers on anything and everything they could get away with. Arguably, it worked: Java was the buzz of the industry in the late nineties and table stakes for greenfield enterprise development in the early 2000s -- unless you were using .NET.

Re: Introducing Copilot+ PCs

#137

Post by nerdjon »

chucke1992 wrote: post #104
nerdjon wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is my question though, comparing how this works on Mac. Will Windows have the opposite? ARM running on x86? I continue to wonder how Microsoft expects to work long term. Are they expecting that every developer is just going to keep x86 and ARM based app perpetually or users be stuck always using that emulation layer if they are running ARM? Microsoft won't be able to 100% transition to ARM like Mac did. At some…

I think the idea is to all apps and developers gradually transition and develop with ARM support - after all even the mobile devices will be running on ARM sooner or later so future apps, games will be developed with ARM in mind anyway. x86 apps will be supported - with some paid support for example. But it all depends on the market share of ARM at one point. But you can run DOS apps still so with emulation layer - a…

> But it all depends on the market share of ARM at one point.

Right thats kinda my point, unless I have missed it I have yet to see any real talk about ARM on custom built machines and I doubt gamers are going to give that up anytime soon.

Apple was able to force the transition to happen. I highly doubt Microsoft is going to risk actually dropping x86 from Windows on any reasonable timescale and there has to be something for ARM to x86.

Unlike when Apple announced that all of Mac was transitioning, there isn't a reason for a developer to think that anytime soon they can drop x86, so why complicate what they have now by adding ARM?

Re: Introducing Copilot+ PCs

#138

Post by Dalewyn »

jamesdepp wrote: post #109
sylens wrote: post #91

Looking at the landing page for the new Surface devices ( https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface ) the top third of the page looks really amateurish in terms of web design. Clicking one of the "Meet the new" buttons really drives it home.

Looks like they're relying on system fonts instead of serving them over the web. It uses Segoe UI (a Windows font) by default. I tried accessing the page via Fedora and iOS and neither load the font correctly.

>Looks like they're relying on system fonts instead of serving them over the web.

This is a good thing. Using system fonts means less bandwidth consumed, more privacy (presumably), faster rendering, and better consistency with the rest of the user's environment.

The only failure could be not serving a web font as a failsafe, but I'm not going to count that against them because I hate the idea of web fonts.

Edit: Actually, nevermind all that. Microsoft is serving Segoe UI as a web font in addition to referring to the system copy.[1] If that's not rendering properly, either Microsoft got the URL wrong or something is fubar on the browsers concerned.

[1]: https://blogs.microsoft.com/wp-content/themes/ms-blogs/style...

Re: Introducing Copilot+ PCs

#139

Post by adastra22 »

andyp-kw wrote: post #61

I can't remember seeing Qualcomm CPU's before. The name makes me think of WiFi cards. With Intel stock taking a dive recently, I can't help but feel that the processor landscape is changing.

Qualcomm makes the CPUs in most android devices, as well as VR/AR (e.g. Meta's Quest line). Qualcomm probably makes more CPUs (and GPUs) than any other vendor.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel/qualcomm-snapdragon-x-elite-b...

Post reply on HN