Sat, Feb 28, 2015, 2:26 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Intel Corporation Message Board

  • wallisweaver wallisweaver Nov 30, 2011 2:01 PM Flag

    Microsoft Doesn't Like ARM

    It's seems pretty clear now that Microsoft isn't very fond of ARM.

    Remember back when the first devices were supposed to come out with Windows 8? Everyone was wondering if we going to see both ARM and Intel devices at the show or just ARM. And then it turned out that there was only the Intel device.

    And now right after we hear how excited Otellini is about Windows 8 for later this year in combination with Ivy Bridge, we find out that ARM Windows 8 devices won't be out for years.

    So, it seems that Microsoft is speeding along the Intel version and the ARM version - not so much.

    It just looks like Microsoft doesn't like ARM. Or maybe the Microsoft developers don't like ARM.

    Given that, it's difficult to see a successful result for a product that will be at best:

    1.) Late to market.
    2.) Challenged in performance and
    3.) Missing applications, drivers and compatibility.

    Pity the fools that have to work on the ARM Windows 8 project...

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Well, take a look at how many sources posted it up:

      http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=microsoft+windows+8+arm#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=microsoft+windows+8+arm+mid-2013&pbx=1&oq=microsoft+windows+8+arm+mid-2013&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=30935l37581l0l38957l9l9l0l0l0l0l164l1103l3.6l9l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=c7c5405aadf16337&biw=1280&bih=598

      Not that the number necessarily means reliability but it indicates that a number of people in the industry thought it was credible.

      It will be interesting to see how it plays out...

    • Blue,

      Been doing some web searching on this, and it appears that Microsoft wanted greater access to the details underneath the hood...

      Only gonna help Win8 on ARM...

    • Sorry but I'm gonna be from Missouri on this one. Show me the beef...
      -----

      Fair enough. There is press and there is press. I noticed that you used a rather dubious source for your WARM conclusions as the header of this thread...

      Regardless, there are easier (and more valid) arguments in the pending failure of ARM on Windows than "Microsoft doesn't like ARM".

    • Microsoft doesn't make chips for the Xbox. As far as I know Microsoft farms out all of its hardware. But there is nothing to suggest they are contemplating chip design or building.

      As far as the computer press goes, these are the guys who still think Intel is going out of business because PC sales are declining. They are also the ones who are keeping ARMs stock price artificially inflated. And you want me to infer something based on their tone in discussing the ARM architectural license. Talk about a reach.

      Sorry but I'm gonna be from Missouri on this one. Show me the beef...

    • [Again you are asking everyone to take a leap of faith based on facts not in evidence. You assume that Microsoft is going to leap from mice and keyboards to chips. Quite a stretch...]
      -----

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinect

      -----
      [No, there is no evidence that they do. You are not just speculating. You are wildly speculating without any supporting documentation. Your license argument goes no where without something to back it up...]
      -----

      You know, I just don't know how to respond to that:)

      The fact that the licence exists says a lot even if you don't understand it. Do a google and you'll see what the computer press thinks.

    • ":) You are right, a licence doesn't have to be used. However, most people/firms don't take out an expensive licence unless they have a plan to use it...

      [You can't go by what most people do. You have to actually check. And so far we have no indication that Microsoft is planning to either design or build chips. It's highly unlikely...]

      "As for Microsoft...yes, they have a hardware business...You honestly didn't know?"

      [Again you are asking everyone to take a leap of faith based on facts not in evidence. You assume that Microsoft is going to leap from mice and keyboards to chips. Quite a stretch...]

      "My point in bringing up this licence was to highlight that MS has got more eggs in the ARM basket than you would think."

      [No, there is no evidence that they do. You are not just speculating. You are wildly speculating without any supporting documentation. Your license argument goes no where without something to back it up...]

    • The license doesn't HAVE to be used for anything. Once again, it's a right not a requirement. The license isn't used for designing or building anything. The license merely provides the right. The legal gap in your education is as large as the financial/accounting gap.

      Microsoft is writing software. They aren't designing or building chips or having anyone else build them. If this is incorrect please post up some information on it. If you had anything you wouldn't be trying to build your argument on the foundation of just a license...
      -----

      :) You are right, a licence doesn't have to be used. However, most people/firms don't take out an expensive licence unless they have a plan to use it...

      As for Microsoft...yes, they have a hardware business...You honestly didn't know?

      My point in bringing up this licence was to highlight that MS has got more eggs in the ARM basket than you would think.

    • ":) You really don't understand the IP business. That licence is *only* used for designing/building your own CPU (to the ARM ISA).

      You are quite correct, MS will farm out their CPU (and the SoC that is built around it) to one of the foundries. Assuming that it ever gets finished that is..."

      ***

      The license doesn't HAVE to be used for anything. Once again, it's a right not a requirement. The license isn't used for designing or building anything. The license merely provides the right. The legal gap in your education is as large as the financial/accounting gap.

      Microsoft is writing software. They aren't designing or building chips or having anyone else build them. If this is incorrect please post up some information on it. If you had anything you wouldn't be trying to build your argument on the foundation of just a license...

    • It doesn't mean anything of the sort. A license is a right not an obligation or a requirement. Having a license tells us absolutely nothing about what the plan is. The plan could be to take a look and examine the possibilities. It could be merely intellectual property for the purpose of software development. Or it could mean their intention is to design chips to be built by someone else.
      -----

      :) You really don't understand the IP business. That licence is *only* used for designing/building your own CPU (to the ARM ISA).

      You are quite correct, MS will farm out their CPU (and the SoC that is built around it) to one of the foundries. Assuming that it ever gets finished that is...

    • What makes you think armh chips will have the horsepower to run windows? I hear all the yapping but I don't believe it. MSFT has earned their Platinium Bogware Awards.
      -----

      Because they do:) Seriously, there are a few places online that you can see benchmarks and the Cortex A9 has enough grunt to match the current crop of Atoms. Against mainline Intel CPU's, the A9's get blown out of the water.

    • View More Messages
 
INTC
33.25-0.400(-1.19%)Feb 27 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.