ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes • Hacker News Board

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#91

Post by WorldMaker » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 3:52 PM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #87

felixrieseberg wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can now publish win32 binaries to the Windows Store, which run in a virtualized environment. They get the same rights as normal win32 exes because they _are_ exes.

I'm still confused. Why are they run in a virtualized environment then? Can a Windows Store win32 app change system display gamma settings? Monitor all network traffic?

From what I've seen, most of the virtualization that remains is filesystem/registry virtualization, primarily with the goal to insure clean install/uninstall. Security is handled in most of the usual Win32 manners (user token privileges, UAC, et al).

From your examples, I believe gamma settings would be accessible, but every tool I've seen that reliably monitors all network traffic uses a kernel-level driver and I don't think you can install kernel-level drivers from the Store right now.

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#92

Post by WorldMaker » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:05 PM UTC

colemickens wrote: post #55

mtgx wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they're going to let people build/distribute native ARM binaries for Windows 10 Hasn't that been possible since Windows RT?

Sort of. Windows RT only ran Microsoft-signed ARM binaries. Hence why I assumed it would've been an explicit announcement if they were allowing devs to distribute native ARM executables.

Windows RT supported C/C++ "native" compiles for ARM, so long as you published it to the Store and used the WinRT runtime/lifecycle. It just didn't support Win32 binaries compiled to ARM outside of the exceptions for Microsoft's own applications.

I don't think we have details if the new plans include allow developers to cross-compile Win32 apps to ARM, in addition to the x86 emulation.

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#93

Post by WorldMaker » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:19 PM UTC

quink wrote: post #11

mark-r wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It generally takes Microsoft 3 tries to get something right. Unfortunately their next ARM device will only be #2.

I'd say Windows CE on ARM devices was attempt #1. Lumia and Surface 1 and 2 were #2.

1. Windows CE on ARM

2. Xbox 360

3. Windows Phone 7 (on leftover chunks of Windows CE) on ARM

4. Windows Phone 8/Windows RT

5. Windows 10 on ARM

So, by my count, this might be iteration 6? (Though maybe more like 5 Part 2.)

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#94

Post by subspaceman » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:34 PM UTC

dcw303 wrote: post #57

cm2187 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4

Thanks. I'm thinking of replacing my MBP for a Surface Pro 4. I'd heard the battery life wasn't great but didn't know about it taking a long time to wake up.

This is exactly what I just did and it's been great so far. The battery life isn't spectacular for todays standards, but it lasts longer than my 2012 rMBP 15" does now. Quick, light (way lighter than the MBP) and has been fun to draw on. Getting use to windows again takes a bit of time, but with the new Bash integration, my workflow is just about the same.

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#95

Post by mrpippy » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:43 PM UTC

witty_username wrote: post #90

rossy wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like an application/website problem rather than an operating system problem. You don't need to distribute both an EXE and an MSI installer. That's like distributing both a .pkg installer and a .dmg/.zip for your Mac program. Just pick one technology. Most programs don't need both. You don't need to use Microsoft's installer technology either. Installers are simple programs. You can roll your own or use th…

You don't even need to bother with 32-bit x86. Nobody has 32-bit x86.

The ARM emulator only runs 32-bit x86 binaries.

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#96

Post by mrpippy » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:51 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #78

m_mueller wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, you get a corporate drama, a human drama and a tech drama all wrapped up in one series of presentations: Jobs' return (as a consultant) 1997, promoting technologies from NeXT. Watch basically everyone asleep at the wheel except Jobs, the man with a plan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QrX047-v-s WWDC Q&A - 'the art of saying no' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iACK-LNnzM Jobs' hostile takeover in July b…

I find it interesting to hear how important developers were in the 1997 video. I feel like the first Intel Macs were indeed machines build for developers. But since, like, Snow Leopard, the developer experience has either stagnated or regressed. The command line tools are ancient, managing packages has been left for Homebrew and the like, etc. Macs more and more become pure Facebook consumption machines.

Note that in the 1997 video, everyone in that room was Mac application/hardware developers, and the Mac ecosystem at the time didn't intersect much with the Unix/Linux world at all.

It wasn't until OS X that Unix/Linux developers started coming to the Mac. (see this 2002 Mac magazine ad: "Sends other UNIX boxes to /dev/null." http://xaharts.org/funny/Apple_Mac_OS_X_Unix_ad.html)

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#97

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:51 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #78

m_mueller wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, you get a corporate drama, a human drama and a tech drama all wrapped up in one series of presentations: Jobs' return (as a consultant) 1997, promoting technologies from NeXT. Watch basically everyone asleep at the wheel except Jobs, the man with a plan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QrX047-v-s WWDC Q&A - 'the art of saying no' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iACK-LNnzM Jobs' hostile takeover in July b…

I find it interesting to hear how important developers were in the 1997 video. I feel like the first Intel Macs were indeed machines build for developers. But since, like, Snow Leopard, the developer experience has either stagnated or regressed. The command line tools are ancient, managing packages has been left for Homebrew and the like, etc. Macs more and more become pure Facebook consumption machines.

[deleted]

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#98

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 4:51 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #78

m_mueller wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, you get a corporate drama, a human drama and a tech drama all wrapped up in one series of presentations: Jobs' return (as a consultant) 1997, promoting technologies from NeXT. Watch basically everyone asleep at the wheel except Jobs, the man with a plan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QrX047-v-s WWDC Q&A - 'the art of saying no' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iACK-LNnzM Jobs' hostile takeover in July b…

I find it interesting to hear how important developers were in the 1997 video. I feel like the first Intel Macs were indeed machines build for developers. But since, like, Snow Leopard, the developer experience has either stagnated or regressed. The command line tools are ancient, managing packages has been left for Homebrew and the like, etc. Macs more and more become pure Facebook consumption machines.

[deleted]

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#99

Post by scholia » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 6:00 PM UTC

RandomOpinion wrote: post #10

Interesting. I must say that I'm surprised that MS didn't give up on Continuum after Intel hosed them by cancelling their Broxton smartphone x86 chip. MS might just be throwing good money after bad. The two keys will be performance and compatibility for the x86 emulation. If they can get it to the point where it's effectively as fast as Intel's low power Atoms while still keeping broad Win32 app compatibility, then M…

> I must say that I'm surprised that MS didn't give up on Continuum after Intel hosed them by cancelling their Broxton smartphone x86 chip. MS might just be throwing good money after bad.

Intel didn't hose Microsoft, it hosed Intel.

Microsoft was already developing for ARM so nothing changed for Microsoft. Intel stopped developing for smartphones and tablets so something changed for Intel.

Windows 10 is free on small screen devices so Microsoft didn't even lose any revenue....

Re: ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes

#100

Post by scholia » Thu, Dec 08, 2016, 6:10 PM UTC

eikenberry wrote: post #70

kalleboo wrote: post #48

People have been speculating for the past year if Apple could switch their Macs to ARM, and keep compatibility with a emulation layer like they did during the PowerPC->Intel transition. I guess Microsoft beat them to the point... Will be interesting to see how well it performs in real life.

I think Linux beat them both to the point... many years ago.

> I think Linux beat them both to the point... many years ago.

Nope. Windows NT was written to be cross-platform. It wasn't even developed on an x86 processor.

And NT development started at the end of the 1980s, before Linus even thought of writing his x86-specific operating system. (Because he only had x86.)