Microsoft Details Windows 8 for ARM

MrSeb writes "In an 8,000-word treatise, Steven Sinofksy himself has taken up pen and paper to describe Windows 8 on ARM (WOA) in great detail. There's a lot of good stuff in there, but one point is particularly troubling. Quoting Sinofsky: 'WOA does not support running, emulating, or porting existing x86/64 desktop apps. Code that uses only system or OS services from WinRT can be used within an app and distributed through the Windows Store for both WOA and x86/64. Consumers obtain all [WOA] software, including device drivers, through the Windows Store and Microsoft Update or Windows Update.' It's hard to under-emphasize just how huge a change that is. It's one thing to say that ARM CPUs won't support x86 emulation; something else entirely to split software delivery and installation. Up until now, one of the biggest differences between desktop and mobile operating systems has been the ability to install software. It's true that Microsoft's decision to wall off unapproved software installation is similar to the approach of Android and iOS — but iOS isn't the same thing as OS X. Combining both of these decisions under the 'Windows' brand could be disastrous, not because Microsoft is evil, but because it creates two entirely different user experiences on the basis of which ISA your CPU supports."

Comments

Please,

[SuricouRaven]

May we have the old Borg icon back for this story?

Re:Please,

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, the Borg only operates on x86/64 machines

Re:Please,

[Sponge Bath]

...this is laziness. No borg icon warrented.

Maybe a slacker borg with an arm replaced by a bong: "Dude, where's my cube?"

Re:Please,

[Anonymous Coward]

May we have the old Borg icon back for this story?

No, the old borg icon had the Bill Gates face, a guy that since then has saved millons of lives. He deserve a better icon.

Re:Please,

[poetmatt]

Technically, all of the world runs on linux and not sun - why the misleading? This actually hasn't changed very much - linux was always on the backend, and now it's simply surging for the end users too.

Suns' engineers have confirmed that android is not java - yet android and not ios is heading towards the largest marketshare in the world (see india custom tablet for example). Windows has been on a gigantic decline but has pushed hard to not have studies that mix mobile and desktop OS marketshare as windows is heading towards irrelevant whereas ios will remain relevant.

Re:Please,

[Anonymous Coward]

Talking about Linux on desktop again, are we.

Re:Please,

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Why? So far t his is just the ARM version. It sounds more like they just are going the cheap route, and not fulling integrating the ARM version with their Intel version.

Basically to my thinking: A) Other Win8 versions have these features, then this is laziness. No borg icon warrented. B) All Win8 versions lack these features (then why the big deal about the ARM version?), then this is a closing of the walls intentionally for a purpose. Borg icon deserved.

There is another possibility: Microsoft has massive legacy commitments. Practically all the world's boring corporate stuff that isn't old, specialized, or hip, enough to be running on some sort of intimidating big iron or linux/web/cloud/thingamawhatsit. Most of that software is absolute dreck, and rather boring, but much of it is also quite critical to a variety of high value operations and impossible or uneconomic to port or even modify very much. For this reason, Microsoft's walled-garden options on x86/64 are pretty minimal. Architecturally they could roll it out tomorrow(Software Restriction Policies are basically that, but under the control of your domain admin); but the customers that matter would scream like nobody's business.

However, since there isn't any legacy Windows software or legacy Windows device drivers, on ARM, since it has never run on ARM before, there is no legacy market to worry about. Microsoft has a free hand, more or less. As with the xbox, the other recent situation where MS started clean, without legacy impediments, they apparently see a walled garden as their best option.

It remains to be seen how long the momentum of more-or-less-open x86 IBM compatibles will carry them into the future; but so long as the legacy/in-house/custom demand is there, they'll be hard to kill entirely. However, I'd say that it is "outlook not so good" for open platforms any time somebody starts a new one from scratch...

Re:Please,

[DickBreath]

The problem with Microsoft's new walled garden is that they have an already entrenched walled garden competitor: iOS.

They also have an entrenched open competitor: Android.

Windows on ARM is just Microsoft's PS/2 like attempt to recreate its monopoly on the new platform where all the excitement and momentum already is. It's not that Microsoft's existing Windows platform doesn't also have momentum, but that is already in a very long slow decline and Microsoft knows it. (I hope they know it, since the decline of PC sales and thus Windows sales was in their quarterly report.)

Re:Please,

[hairyfeet]

Actually I have a better choice, one that fits their boneheaded moves of late. Picture this, Steve Ballmer with his tongue out wearing an "I Heart Apple!" beanie, since every damned thing that monkey has done has been a "me too! oh oh me too!" for at least the past five years. lets look at this shall we? Hmmm...locked down OS, App store, making everything go through corporate....where have I see this before? Could it be...I don't know....iPad?

For all those zealots that think I'm some sort of "M$ Ninja" being paid to sell MSFT crap let me blow their perception bubbles apart...Windows 8 is gonna be the biggest flop since Bob, not even Vista failed as badly as Win 8 is gonna fail, its a touchscreen desktop when less than 0.2% of the world's desktop and laptops are actually being sold with touchscreens, and when a 17 inch touchscreen is $300 and a 25 inch widescreen monitor is $150 that isn't gonna change between now and release in Oct, and NOBODY is gonna want a Windows 8 ARM device that looks like Windows but doesn't actually run Windows programs! All this is is the exact opposite of what they have tried and failed with for a decade. remember how they made WinMo look like XP, right down to the start button? remember how it flopped? Well now they are just gonna take the WinPhone UI and slap it on the desktop! How fricking stupid can you get, did Apple slap iOS onto the Mac? NO of course not. Why? Because the devices have completely different inputs therefor requiring completely different UIs! this is OS 101 stuff people!

So fear not FOSS lovers, this isn't the 90s and a year after Win 8 launch you'll be able to find this crap in the bargain bin right next to the Zune and kin and Vista boxes in the "shit nobody wants even when its cheap" section. I sell to normal people, the 99% of the population that aren't geeks or power users, just average folks. So far i've shown Win 8 to nearly 200 people and do you know how many positives I've gotten? ZERO. The closest i got to a positive was this exchange: Why that looks like a nice cell phone, is that Android? i heard its really nice...what do you mean its Windows? Windows what? Why that is just stupid! Why would I want a cell phone on my computer?" and out of the mouth of Ms Pipkin comes wisdom. Everyone who sees it thinks its a cell phone and everyone who tries it quickly becomes frustrated because without a touchscreen its about as fun as trying to control your phone using nothing but a keyboard.

so no SuricouRaven we don't need the Borg back, the Borg were actually scary. what we need is an icon showing Ballmer for what he is, a biog fricking clown of a CO with an Apple fetish. Ironic that every time i put Ballmer spellcheck wants to correct it to ballgirl, as that pretty much is what he is, someone chasing after the balls Apple hits.

Re:Please,

[Anthony Mouse]

It remains to be seen how long the momentum of more-or-less-open x86 IBM compatibles will carry them into the future; but so long as the legacy/in-house/custom demand is there, they'll be hard to kill entirely. However, I'd say that it is "outlook not so good" for open platforms any time somebody starts a new one from scratch...

I don't think the in-house and custom software is going to save anything, because the large majority of new business applications have the application itself running in the data center and the users access it through a web interface. And legacy software is replaced by new stuff the more time passes.

But I don't think the future is as bleak as all that, for different reasons. The largest impetus for closed platforms comes from the wireless carriers who want to make sure you aren't doing anything as unscrupulous as making a VOIP phone call over WiFi without paying them for minutes, and who subsidize your phone and in so doing become the "customer" of the device who gets to decide how open it is.

Here's the thing: I expect that inside of five years, flip phones are going to be almost completely dead. Tomorrow's top end Android handsets will still be ~$500, but today's will be $50. Some handset maker who still has a tooled factory churning out "obsolete" phones will realize that with nothing more than a software patch, they can sell them retail as WiFi-only devices that still make phone calls and browse the 'net as long as you're at work, at home, at school or anywhere else that has WiFi. The poorest customers will quickly realize that $50 or $100 once is much less expensive than $50/month indefinitely, even if it means they can't make calls in their cars, and many will do that. The carriers will then realize they're getting $0/month from these customers and that if they offered a cheap bring-your-own-device plan, they could be making $20 or $30/month from customers who by and large don't actually tax the cellular network because they use WiFi 90% of the time, and a big chunk of those people will pay that so their phones will work in their cars etc. And so will a big chunk of the people who had been buying subsidized phones, who realize that $500 once + $30/month is a lot cheaper than $200 once + $100/month. (The savings for everyone comes from the fact that you're taking a massive load off of the cell towers and putting it on DSL and cable lines where adding bandwidth doesn't require outbidding everyone else for finite wireless spectrum.)

With any luck that will be the end of carrier device subsidies and with it the end of locked boot loaders etc. Even the carriers seem to be looking for a way out of subsidizing premium devices for most of their customers. But do that and you open the door back up for innovation: Once people no longer need carrier approval to sell Android and other Linux-based devices that work away from home, you have the possibility of things like the Spark tablet or whatever Canonical feels like producing start to take hold, which can easily be made to run both Android apps and Linux native apps, and you can see the possibility of an open platform gaining a sigificant foothold. Not to mention whatever products come out of Google buying Motorola Mobility.

If that happens then Microsoft will have to decide whether to go the Apple route and try to keep their ARM platform closed, or stick with their traditional forte and open it up. And I kind of feel like there isn't any room in the market for more than one Apple.

Re:Please,

[s73v3r]

While that may be true, he still got that money in incredibly shady ways.

His new efforts should be praised, but they don't necessarily erase what he's done in the past.

there are other ARM options..

[apodyopsis]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/01/new-kde-tablet-to-liberate-linux-enthusiasts-from-walled-garden.ars

Suddenly one of these is looking tempting for my tablet needs.

I did have an ASUS transformer for a few months but I sold it to a friend as I was unhappy with the way Android does things. I have an iPhone and whilst I think iOS is very clever I'm not convinced I would want it in a larger form factor. I want to be able to write code, play with software and be the master of my own system to a level that Android and iOS does not seem to happy with. I was wondering is an ARM Win8 tablet was the way forward - but this seems to rule of that option :(

I admit some Linux bias as I only use it at home and coding on it (armel linux) forms a large part of my job as well.

Re:there are other ARM options..

[JoeMerchant]

So, Spark ships with Plasma Active pre-installed, which is nice.

Can't Plasma Active be installed on any number of tablets? I'm thinking of the RockBox / DD-WRT experience for tablets instead of Music players / Routers.

As for Win8 Arm gaining the walled garden "feature" of iOS... good luck with that. I'll write code for Win8 on Arm when I can do it using the Qt API.

Re:there are other ARM options..

[rdnetto]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/01/new-kde-tablet-to-liberate-linux-enthusiasts-from-walled-garden.ars

Suddenly one of these is looking tempting for my tablet needs.

I did have an ASUS transformer for a few months but I sold it to a friend as I was unhappy with the way Android does things.

As the owner of an Asus Transformer currently running Kubuntu, I find this somewhat ironic.

Re:Why is this relevant?

[SuricouRaven]

Depends how good their marketing department is. Remember, they can afford to lose a few hundred million dollars a year in that department for however long it takes to turn it into something profitable, and they have a history of using their successful products as tools to drive users to their unsuccessful products.

Obvious problem is the drivers

[laffer1]

It's scary that you have to get drivers through the windows store. That means you could never get some new arm hardware running with windows as a hobbyist or try some third party driver when the default crashes. It also means that it might be harder to upgrade windows on some devices as microsoft could block you from getting drivers for the current windows release.

The ARM port is truly a hardware lock-in. I hope it fails.

Fracturing

[Sarten-X]

Y'know, for all I hear about Linux being so fractured, I'd expect to see more coherence from Microsoft and Apple.

The vast majority of distros differ in small ways, but they all work with mostly the same paradigms. To install software, you usually install a package from a repository. To add something not in the repositories, it's usually "./configure; make; make install".

Looking at the Windows world, there's worse fracturing, but because it's all under one brand, it's somehow okay. Inter-process communication is done with DDE - no, wait - OLE. I mean sockets. Really .NET has its own IPC and you should use that now. On one system, you install with an executable file obtained from the vendor. On another system, you install through a storefront.

At least Linux accepts that it's fractured, and each distro often learns from the others.

Re:Fracturing

[tepples]

Inter-process communication is done with DDE - no, wait - OLE. I mean sockets. Really .NET has its own IPC and you should use that now.

So should a UNIX program use pipes, X11 Inter-Client Exchange (basis for DCOP), Bonobo, or DBUS?

Chicken and Egg problem

[DickBreath]

The value of Windows is the huge legacy software collection that it runs.

A "windows" platform that cannot run that software base is basically a new platform. Starting from scratch. Sort of like a new version of Linux, or Hurd, or something new.

Microsoft may port their own apps. Great. But what about third parties?

There is .NET, of course. But apps written in .NET would be fairly new apps. What about apps written in older languages? Some apps may be trivially recompiled. Or recompiled after significant effort. But some apps may be slightly or even deeply wedded to the x86 and maybe x64 architectures.

Other apps may be wedded to legacy languages that may not get ported. Will Microsoft be porting Visual Basic 6? Visual FoxPro? What about Delphi? Etc.

Even if a developer can fairly trivially build their app for WOA, why would they if there is not a large user base on that platform ready to fork over money? The developer has to expend effort (eg cost) today on a platform where customer demand may not materialize. If WOA doesn't run an end user's favorite legacy applications, then why would the user want to migrate to WOA? It's cheap and easy to buy a desktop or laptop running legacy Windows that is familiar and runs your legacy apps.

WOA has a chicken and egg problem. Which came first? The large number of third party apps / developers supporting WOA? Or the large end user base running WOA?

Furthermore, a developer who expends effort to port their product to WOA, even if "porting" is little more than a trivial recompile and repackaging, and tracking new SKU's, that developer will want to be compensated for that additional effort. You can bet that developer will want top dollar (eg price gouging) for that new WOA edition of their product. Do you really think you'll see a $99 Photoshop on WOA? Also don't expect a free upgrade to the WOA edition of your current application.

WOA may be Microsoft's counterpart of the PS/2 moment. The market may "just say no" (as they say in the '80's). The problem with PS/2 was that it was nothing more than an attempt to recapture IBM's monopoly using a new platform. That is what WOA is. Microsoft wants their legacy monopoly on these new mobile ARM platforms, just as IBM wanted their legacy mainframe monopoly in the PC market.

Another problem is that these new platforms are fundamentally different. They bring things that legacy PC's don't have deeply baked into the system and applications. Android for example can support both the legacy keyboard / mouse setup as well as touchscreen and voice commands. Those pesky new PC's offered a lot more than a mainframe terminal had, such as mouse and GUI. Oh, and cheap software, just as the new platform app stores offer pretty cheap apps.

Want to see WOA go exactly nowhere? There's an app for that!

Re:Chicken and Egg problem

[DickBreath]

To add to my argument (parent post), I would like to add . . .

Both iOS and Android are already entrenched. WOA is starting out with zilch third party software. Android has 200 million installed base and 700,000 activations per day (or 8.1 per second). WOA isn't even reality yet.

As others point out, what about drivers? How are you going to get third party device drivers for WOA? (Of course, in fairness, this question could be asked for Android and iOS as well. But I think expectations of an iOS / Android device are different than something branded "Windows".)

I mentioned languages like VB6, VFP, Delphi, etc. Some scoff at that. I'm not saying they are sexy, I'm just saying that a lot of software that makes the world go around is written in those non sexy tools.

Re:Chicken and Egg problem

[Missing.Matter]

If Microsoft is making developers have to re-think their app, their UI, and perhaps their development tools

The app and UI can be completely the same. WOA supports the Windows Explorer and thus the Desktop, so it's not always metro. You can application can look exactly as it does on x86. In terms of developer tools, I don't know. Many .Net developers might just be able to select the ARM compiler flag and go. There are a lot of apps that would instantly be available for WOA if this is the case.

and how they even get their product marketed and delivered to the consumer

They can market their product same as always. Distribution has to be through the Windows Store so that would be the only big change. But given that the software would have to go through an app store for all the other platforms it doesn't seem to be a deal breaker in this case.

but more importantly, a huge third party developer base. Developers who have already significantly re-thought their apps for the new type of platform. The new UI style. The fact that touchscreen, gestures and multi-touch and voice commands are a given -- in addition to working with a keyboard, and pointing device(s). Most traditional Windows developers have not yet or only just begun to think about these concepts.

You seem to be making this assumption that there are only iOS, Android, or Windows developers... and not that most companies these days are developing for all platforms at once. This isn't a matter of stealing developers from another platform or attracting first time devs. This is an issue of a company that develops for iOS, Android, and Windows deciding if they want to support a new platform. Obviously that choice is easier to make if the install base is large (which of course is at 0 now) so it all hinges on how easily Microsoft makes it to develop for WOA.

Don't see the big deal

[ArchieBunker]

You don't like these new terms? Well then don't fucking buy it then. I fail to see the outrage here... Sounds exactly like the Apple walled garden approach.

Let it begin...

[neokushan]

Whenever the first tidbits of the UEFI secure boot cropped up that many people immediately cried foul over, I was one of the people who stood up and said "Not so fast, everyone - it's mandated that it be enabled by default, but there's nothing to say you can't customise it or disable it". Many people were quick to jump on MS, stating that it's just to stop Linux adoption and such and still I persisted in saying that MS wasn't the bad guy, if you didn't have an option to disable UEFI secure boot, it was the OEM or motherboard manufacturer at fault, not MS. I got into many heated debates about this point.

However, that was regarding Windows 8 x86/64.

Windows on ARM will demand that UEFI secure boot be enabled and that there is no way to disable it. Any Windows ARM tablets or PCs that come out will not be capable of running anything other than Windows - not Linux, not Android, nothing. Since Windows ARM won't be sold directly, it means there will be absolutely no way to buy a Windows ARM machine that runs other OS's - not even if you built one yourself.

It is with this that I retract any previous objections to people crying foul over the UEFI Secure boot malarkey. Even though Windows 8 x86/64 is still "fine", the issue of the ARM version is too great to ignore. So by all means, commence flaming.

Re:Let it begin...

[Errol backfiring]

How do I vote with my cash? By not being able to buy the computer I want because there is an operating system forced down my throat?

Re:Let it begin...

[archen]

I was one of the people who stood up and said "Not so fast, everyone - it's mandated that it be enabled by default, but there's nothing to say you can't customise it or disable it"

I think that was one of the points to the people where crying foul. Sure you can customize it or disable it... FOR NOW. Down the road this might not be true once they have their foot in the door. We're down the road now, and lo and behold devices appear where EUFI can't be disabled. Another example for us to keep in mind when we label people/organizations like the EFF as "too paranoid".

Re:Let it begin...

[neokushan]

The problem, which is what separates the ARM and x86/64 side of things, is that Microsoft allows the x86/64 vendors to do whatever they want as long as certain defaults are met, i.e. UEFI secure boot is enabled by default, but they don't say anything about disabling it or giving the user the option to. In that instance, you very much get a full working PC and if the OEM is nice enough, you'll be able to do whatever you like to the UEFI system - including disabling Secure Boot and inserting your own keys.

However, when it comes to ARM Microsoft is very specific in that they make sure manufacturers do not allow any way to disable Secure Boot. This presumably also includes the ability to insert your own keys and such. The reason this will stay enforced is because the OEM has absolutely no way of servicing their tablet other than via Microsoft's own Windows Update. Even driver updates come through here now, so if an OEM decides to give customers the key to the UEFI lock, Microsoft will disable all support options for that OEM. It's an entirely closed ecosystem with Microsoft completely in control.

Simple solution for X86 apps

[slim]

Install Windows/ARM on a RiscPC.

Acorn's machine had a 486 or 586 as a co-processor, so that RiscOS could host DOS apps running on their native processor.

Re:More!

[DrgnDancer]

He wasn't saying that Microsoft isn't evil, only that their evilness or lack thereof is irrelevant to the point he is currently trying to make.

Like NT/RISC before it...

[unixisc]

Windows 8 on ARM will be an even greater disaster than NT 4.0 on any of the RISC platforms - Alpha, MIPS or PPC - ever were. NT/AXP at least had some presence in the workstation place and at least made an attempt to run Wintel apps via FX!32, but this platform won't even try running Wintel apps, which is what everybody understands Windows apps to be. I'll predict that Windows 8 on ARM will simply kill Windows, since there will be no way for Joe Q Public (i.e. NOT your average /. reader) to tell which box will run their accumulated Windows apps, and which ones won't. Microsoft won't even be able to go BACK to Wintel 7 after that.

Re:Like NT/RISC before it...

[21mhz]

I'll predict that Windows 8 on ARM will simply kill Windows, since there will be no way for Joe Q Public (i.e. NOT your average /. reader) to tell which box will run their accumulated Windows apps, and which ones won't.

Why, it's easy: here's a desktop box, it can run all your crufty Win32 stuff written in 1998 like it ever did (but we gently encourage you to switch to the new apps which are oh so much more shiny). Here's a sleek tablet, now this runs Windows 8 "Tablet Edition" or whatever they'll call it, and you only install apps from the walled garden.

As to getting enough apps in the garden, it's hard to tell. There is already a growing marketplace of applications for Windows Phone, and that's reportedly going to converge with WinRT by Win8/WP8, becoming effectively a subset of the APIs available for the "big" Windows. I got a Nokia Lumia 800, and I was astonished to find high-quality apps provided by my bank, the local newspaper I read, and my IPTV provider. This being in Finland, perhaps they consider Nokia's large presence on the home market inevitable. But it shows that given enough confidence in the new platform, getting useful applications written for it is no big deal really.

Re:Like NT/RISC before it...

[xigxag]

Why are uninformed FUD comments like this getting modded up? The blogpost clearly states that WOA devices will be unequivocally labelled to strongly distinguish them from traditional x86/64 devices.

WOA is not an attempt to replace Windows with a gimped version of itself. It's meant to be another member of the Windows family, like Windows Server, Windows Phone, etc., that extends the basic Windows paradigm to devices where it does not have significant market share. It is basically a rearchitected Windows CE that takes into account the rise of iOS.

iOS is derived from OSX, but you wouldn't expect to run an OSX application on iOS. So Joe Q Public is already primed to the idea that top-tier desktop applications won't run on WOA, and from reading the article, it seems that the marketing of the tablet devices will make that abundantly clear. Windows 8 Desktop is the successor to Windows 7 and WOA is something different, a competitor to iOS that has a Windows-esque look and feel.

Where WOA claims to have an advantage over iOS is, first, that it will allow users interact with the device with a traditional desktop paradigm, if they choose. Secondly, WOA apps, unlike iOS apps, will be also able to be run on your traditional desktop/laptop, making for a much more integrated total experience. And thirdly and most importantly, MS Office.

However, if the concept of being able to "up-run" your tablet apps on your desktop proves fruitful, there's no engineering reason why Apple couldn't do the same thing. And of course, once Apple did do it, suddenly up-running your apps would be the most awesomeish thing ever.

Re:Well

[WrongSizeGlass]

It's possible that this is the first step toward leaving 'Windows legacy applications' behind. They are going to have to do it sometime, and ARM isn't similar to x86 like Atom is, so this may be a logical starting point.

At some point (Windows 9? Windows 10??) Microsoft is going to need to leave older applications behind to fully transition to the 'Metro' platform/paradigm. This probably will include the desktop .Net frameworks and other MS technologies, libraries, etc. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is going to be a significant change and a lot of work for software companies.

Before you jump on them about the UX

[MikeRT]

Consider the fact that there are no mass market ARM-based desktop PCs. It's not like Dell is offering a low-end dual CPU ARM offering and Microsoft is doing their best Montgomery Burns impression at the suggestion that it be given a full desktop. Personally, I am not sure I'd want a Windows 7-like UI on a tablet (not sure I'd want Metro either, but that's beside the point).

This is micsoroft iOS.

[Alkonaut]

So it has little in common with "Windows". This won't be what you use to run "Windows" on your new arm ultraportable. This is what you use when you run some metro-esque OS on a tablet.

The difference between Win8-ARM on a device/appliance is to Windows on a laptop/desktop what iOS on an iPad is to MacOS on a macintosh laptop. All this talk about walled gardens aside, I can see the point of having a very protected environment for computers that are appliances more related to my toaster than they are to my old desktop computer. I don't want to care about device drivers when Win8 runs in my TV, phone or tablet. It must just work, even if it means I can't install my old applications. If I want a computer where I can do anything I want, I get a computer. In this case that happens to mean my computer has to be x86 and my appliances have to be ARM. So be it. It almost certainly was going to be that way for the foreseeable future anyway.

I can't really blame microsoft for making this decision. They don't want to wall in windows users, they want to win over some iOS users with iPad. Maybe on Win9 or Win10 we'll do all our computing in the walled garden. But lets cross that bridge when we get ther.

Ah,

[ledow]

So it's Windows CE then?

Thanks for the clarification but I'd suspected that all along. Windows is only "Windows" on your PC. No change at all, to anything, then.

Re:Why is this relevant?

[sed quid in infernos]

A hybrid device, like an Asus Transformer, that allows me to run a full version of Office that works well with a mouse and keyboard on a portable device that has the media consumption abilities I use a tablet for (video, music, books, comics) and has battery sufficient for 8 to 12 hours use? Yes, please.

It remains to be seen if MS and the hardware providers can deliver that, but there are significant professional use cases for such a device, in addition to the obvious consumer ones. Especially if document folders sync transparently.

Sure, I'd prefer it if the device could have a real intel chip, so I could run all my software. But that seems at least one chip generation away.

Re:Obvious *benefit* is the drivers

[sunderland56]

Drivers are the largest problem with x86 Windows - well over 50% of the stability problems and blue screens come from badly written drivers. Microsoft has a process to submit a driver to their labs for testing and approval today - but (a) they make it insanely difficult and expensive, and (b) the market doesn't care whether a driver is approved or not.

Drivers are also the largest security hole there is - a kernel module has full and complete access to your system. People claim to be concerned about security, but then install third party drivers without a second thought.

Overall, it looks like Microsoft is doing exactly what people have been asking for - a more secure Windows environment. Locking down software to approved sources only, and getting rid of creakingly old APIs that date back to Windows 3.1, will make it faster, more stable, and more secure - but now people are complaining.

Note that for the hardware/software developers - hobbyist or professional - there will be a developer switch, to turn off security and allow you to load unsigned/unapproved programs and drivers.

Windows 8 & Unity

[assertation]

I could be wrong, but the preview shot I saw of Windows 8 with the missing "start" button makes it look like Microsoft is trying to do the same thing as Canonical.

I'm guessing neither org wants to look like it has the same old frumpy desktop.

If that doesn't work, Canonical is only 1 6 month release away from going back to something more PC and keyboard friendly. Microsoft on the other hand will have a much harder mess to clean up from.

Re:Well

[DickBreath]

You are probably right.

That is why I believe WOA will fail.

Leaving the legacy applications behind means WOA is a new platform. Starting basically from scratch. Competing with already entrenched players (iOS and Android). It starts off with little third party software where iOS and Android already have a huge base of developers.

Point of no return

[unixisc]

There may not be a Windows 9 if Microsoft blows this one, since it will permanently throw a question-mark on the Windows brand on whether a particular Windows from Microsoft runs Windows applications or not. The same problem that Linux has - where certain applications can't be installed on certain combinations of the Linux kernel & libraries based on certain dependencies - but only worse: w/ the Linux case, one can at least get all the versions of every library that may be needed, but there will be no way of making Wintel apps run on ARM.

Re:Well

[Half-pint HAL]

It's possible that this is the first step toward leaving 'Windows legacy applications' behind. They are going to have to do it sometime, and ARM isn't similar to x86 like Atom is, so this may be a logical starting point.

Exactly. It's legacy software that's tied mainstream computing to the x86 architecture for two decades. Tthe x86 is a power-hungry architecture best suited for desktop and rack computing, but recent trends are towards mobile computing. Laptops started to outsell desktops. Netbooks hit the market. Smartphones reached a level where they could be used as complete computers. And the Tablet PC concept, which had been bubbling under for over a decade, finally found it's niche as a "maxi-smartphone". x86 is dead, and MS need to encourage people to produce standardised, architecture-neutral code if they're going to migrate to another architecture.

If they don't migrate to another architecture, what happens? Smartphones with HDMI out (and a built-in focus-free laset picoprojector) and Bluetooth or USB for keyboards and mice displace the traditional computer. If Windows is still split between phone and desktop, Windows dies.

So why the separation between desktop and phone OS? Why WOA an not just maintain their ARM version as Windows Phone? Because right now, phone apps are phone apps, and desktop apps are desktop apps. An OS lives and dies on its third party software, and this move is calculated to ensure that there is a back catalogue of desktop software available when the two paradigms merge.

It's a smart move, and shows a lot of foresight. Google should take note, and start working on standardised compatibility layers that encourage Linux app developers to produce software that can be easily migrated to Android.

Re:Why is this relevant?

[DickBreath]

> That's gotta be a deal breaker for some of us.

Don't know if you're being sarcastic. It is a deal breaker for some. While VB6, VFP etc may not be sexy, a lot of legacy software are written in those.

The War on General Purpose Computing

[volts]

This is part of an emerging pattern in which consumers are sold restricted systems with enforced toll collection. Cory Doctorow refers to this as "the coming war on general-purpose computing". His analysis is thought provoking. It is disheartening to consider how may technologies with security benefits can also be used to restrict the rights of customers.

Re:Well

[0123456]

Exactly. It's legacy software that's tied mainstream computing to the x86 architecture for two decades.

It's legacy software that's tied people to Windows for two decades. Break the compatibility and no-one needs Windows any more.

I DO see the problem here

[DickBreath]

http://www.asymco.com/2012/01/17/the-rise-and-fall-of-personal-computing/

I'm not holding funeral services for the PC just yet.

Eventually the traditional PC will be gone. Not that we won't have comfortable workstations with big screens, keyboard and a mouse. It's just that the platform, and especially its OS will be different. And that screen will be a touchscreen. And it will also have voice recognition.

In particular, look at those graphs in the article. They tell quite a story. Consider that first and last graph especially. Consider that those are logarithmic scales. That means that the iOS / Android devices have rocketed to large numbers faster than anything in history. It is easy to see that by vast numbers alone they will soon eclipse traditional PC's. Just last week I was reading how Microsoft's sales of Windows are down, and they blame it on declining sales of PC's.

I don't know iOS numbers, but I do know that Android devices exceed 250 Million with over 700,000 new activations per day (or over 8 per second).

The entire computing landscape has changed before and it will change again. Not overnight. There is not a bright line you can point to and say that is the day it changed. It's just gradual continuous change. A blur. A gradient.

Also, Steve Jobs was right and was able to avoid the innovator's dilemma. Ignore the Android line. Look at the iPad / iPhone lines compared to Mac. He was right to recognize, acknowledge and not be in denial about it -- the innovator's dilemma. ("we can't build the new platform because it will cannibalize the existing profitable platform.")

Something else to notice about those graphs: PC's are getting very flat. Mac still have a significant upward trajectory.

Basically: things are changing. I think WOA signals that Microsoft recognizes this, and is floundering around trying to do something about it, and will ultimately fail. This should not be a surprise. Microsoft has passed its middle age and is moving into its golden years. :-)

Maybe I'm reading it wrong...

[HerculesMO]

But if you develop your apps in WinRT, the same code will be able to compile into ARM or x86. I don't see a big deal, honestly. It's not like it will take developers extra work, since .NET and the JIT compiler should handle that workload. In fact, it makes Windows a more appealing development environment because you're hitting multiple platforms, form factors, etc... all with a single set of code.

But correct me if I misread.

Re:Maybe I'm reading it wrong...

[HerculesMO]

And all distros of Windows (Phone/Server/Desktop/ARM) as well.

That was my point though -- I think this is actually a benefit to the Windows ecosystem, and since the new version of .NET should allow people to take their projects, import them, and recompile for the next version... it will be easy to get started. Granted, non .NET apps will have to migrate if they want to use ARM, but if they move over "as-is" they will still work as good as they do now.

There's really no downside.

Re:Why is this relevant?

[sed quid in infernos]

No to AutoCAD and Maya, probably no to full versions of ACS (but maybe a lighter suite). If this works for Microsoft, I think it will work like this: some people who want to travel light but want full Office productivity will buy WOA devices. This popularity will spur app development, including some enterprise integration. Developers will start releasing more apps for Win8 (which, remember, will also work on new Intel/AMD Win8 machines, so there will quickly be a large installed base).

Android and iOs have had years to get a decent office app out; they haven't done it yet. And a big part of this is good mouse/keyboard interface - drag and drop, mouse-click-popup menus, consistent highlighting/copy/paste, etc. So if MS gets a 12 month lead on real Office software, it might overcome the iOs/Android head start for a certain class of users.

Note the "If" at the start of my speculation. I don't know if this will happen, but it seems more than just possible.

.NET Framework and .NET Passport

[tepples]

Microsoft has never had a clue about branding. Look at .NET, they stuck that meaningless label on everything from IDEs to websites to chat clients.

Really there were only two things that were ever called .NET: the .NET Framework and .NET Passport authentication. The ".NET" IDEs were IDEs supporting the CLR languages that work with the .NET Framework. The ".NET" web sites and chat client supported Passport and have since been renamed to "Windows Live".

Re:User-mode drivers

[Chokolad]

> At least under Linux, device classes with user-mode drivers include printers (CUPS), scanners (SANE), video (X), and even installable file systems (FUSE).

Imagine that, most of this is also running in user-mode in Windows.

Why Go ARM when there is Medfield?

[guidryp]

I am failing to see why anyone would get an WOA tablet.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/intels-medfield-atom-z2460-arrive-for-smartphones
Summary Medfield is running in similar power envelope to an ARM SoC, but with faster benchmarks.

ARM might get you marginally more battery life, but Medfield gives you full backward compatibility.

WOA is the Windows "Kindle Fire" consumption tab

[Glasswire]

Anyone who's been paying attention realizes that MSFT was engaging it's traditional Apple-envy by trying to create a MSFT iOS tablet experience (we create, you consume and buy) with WOA. Despite (at least on boot) laying Metro on both, REAL Windows (x86) is very different and can be used to do creative tasks.

MSFT wants what Apple has:
APPLE: OS/X on x86 (general purpose computers) to create apps for ARM iOS (device OS) phones and tabs
MSFT: Win on x86 to (general purpose computers) create apps for ARM Win8 (device OS) tabs (phones later)
The money is in the consumption devices, so you focus on making sure the general purpose devices (computers running a real OS) have the tools to rapidly build app product for the devices.

Imagining the ARM ver of Windows be a thriving creative equal of x86 is typical Slashdot wishful thinking. A new, CHEAP fast, open platform that doesn't drive additional revenue isn't in any major player's interest and isn't going to happen.

You've got amazingly cheap and powerful x86 architecture that acquired a gigantic open ecosystem in spite of what the big players have wanted. Appreciate and protect this anomaly while you can.

Re:Zune.

[Missing.Matter]

Zune : Windows Media Player :: iTunes : Quick Time

Re:Well

[0123456]

It's API compatible minus features not physically available on a tablet. A quick recompile and voila, instant port.

You're not a software developer, are you? Because I wouldn't want to work with someone who thinks that they can just do a 'quick recompile' and ship a product out the door.

And, in any case, that wouldn't help the bazillions of old, unsupported Windows programs that keep people tied to Windows.

Re:This is nothing that wasn't unexpected...

[UnknowingFool]

This is not much different than what Apple is doing.

Technically no, but Apple is making a clear distinctions: iOS is not OS X. The two share the same parent code base but are intended for different platforms with different APIs. With MS, everything must be "Windows" regardless of differences. This is likely to create mass consumer confusion. "But I bought this application for my PC, why doesn't it work on my Windows tablet? It says compatible with Windows 8."

Re:Why is this relevant?

[DickBreath]

As you say, ARM is a nice platform. And the successful systems built on it (Android and iOS) are also nice -- and more importantly already successful and established. Windows on ARM is not reality yet.

Re:Well

[unixisc]

Point is all Debian apps - everything in the Debian collection - is FOSS, or in other words, the source code is already there. So of course, it'll be an identical experience. Let's say you use Debian on your ARM PC, and you happen to get hold of a SunBlade 150 workstation. Guess what - you can install the Sparc version of Debian, then all the apps you were running on your PC to the unixstation, and you're off to the races. Since all the source code is w/ you.

Not the case w/ Windows, as WrongSizeGlass points out. There, you just have x86 binaries, so if, somehow, you happened to get an Alphastation in front of you, guess what? You're out of luck here, since all those Windows apps you have won't run on NT on your Alphastation, and only slowly if you happen to have FX!32

Re:Well

[DeathFromSomewhere]

It would be horrendously slow and eat battery like mad. It's helpful to keep in mind that WOA is an iPad competitor (read: touch screen UI). Running these old keyboard and mouse interfaces on a touchscreen would make for a terrible user experience, ask anyone that has used a XP or win 7 tablet. Now add in the amount of extra effort that would be required to write not just an x86 emulator but ensuring 100% compatibility with the existing APIs and it becomes clear why Win32 is a non-starter on ARM.

For the people that absolutely cannot live without legacy Win32 code, there will be x86 devices in similar form factors as the ARM devices. There was a whole pile of them unveiled at CES this year.

Re:Please wait...

[hairyfeet]

i'm sorry but you are incorrect. I ran Vista on what was a pretty nice machine at the time, an Intel Pentium D 2.66Ghz, 2Gb of RAM, and a Geforce 7600GS and the thing was a dog, it would have "senior moments" and forget the network shares and not see them before being rebooted, would drag down the entire system when doing simple multitasking like watching a movie while doing a file transfer, and this was seen all the way through SP1 which is when i finally gave up on the POS. Now that exact same machine is running Win 7 Home and has been since Oct 09, and its fast, it runs great on the network, nothing about the hardware has been changed, still the same Pentium D, still the same GPU, same everything but when I use that machine its like night and day. The performance of Vista was so bad it got to be a running joke at the shop, when someone would come in with Vista we'd say "I'm sorry" and make a little tisk tisk noise. Take any of those machines and slap Win 7 on them (which I have done quite often) and all I get from customers is "Wow, this is like a new machine, thanks!". so calling Win 7 no better than Vista is simply incorrect, its like saying WinXP is no better than WinME, there really is no comparison.

As for win 8, anybody smell that? that stench of fail that is practically leaking from the thing like a silent but deadly fart? I've been running the dev preview on an Athlon X2 i have sitting in the corner of the shop, now this baby has 3gb of RAM, fast 200gb SATA, its not a bad machine at all, but everyone who has tried it, more than 200 so far, has HATED IT with a capital H! this is the same stupidity we saw with winMo only in reverse, instead of tying the desktop metaphor to mobile we are seeing the mobile metaphor tied to desktop and its still a failwhale. Honestly after spending 3 days with it as my primary OS I couldn't stand it anymore, without a touchscreen its just painful to use.

And what person is gonna want a Win 8 ARM that doesn't run Windows programs? THIS, this right here, is the reason we need to call Captain Obvious to save the day. MSFT simply refuses to believe that the ONLY reason people use Windows is WINDOWS PROGRAMS which as we see in TFA simply won't run on ARM. Here we see MSFT vainly believe if they Ape the Apple philosophy they can get Apple iMoney, but its so full of fail its unreal. Without the lock on x86 people simply won't buy windows, and why should they? apple has nicer designs, android is cheaper, they have NO selling point for Win 8. Mark my words its gonna make Vista look like 95, its gonna go down so hard it'll finally kill those WinME and Bob jokes. in the future people will say "Its a Win 8 level of fail!" to describe projects that have no chance. maybe we'll get lucky and this turkey will get Ballmer finally fired and they can bring Allchin or Ozzie back to right the ship, because this is just a disaster and even the shills like the Yahoo product girl, whose answer to every product is "Buy it! Buy it now!" said of Win 8" Uhhh...wait until you get something with a touchscreen before getting it" which for her was the equivalent of "My eyes! The goggles they do nothing!"

Re:Please wait...

[nightfell]

Here we see MSFT vainly believe if they Ape the Apple philosophy they can get Apple iMoney, but its so full of fail its unreal.

If MS were to really ape Apple, they'd drop the Windows UI from the tablet version of Windows, and not put the whole tablet UI into the desktop version of Windows. MS is too insecure about leaving behind their highly successful Windows product when it comes to devices for which Windows itself makes no damned sense.

They are afraid that if they leave behind traditional Windows, they won't be able to compete against Apple and Google. They're probably right, but we'll never know. They are heading down the path to irrelevancy.

A parallel in the Open Source world is Ubuntu. They receive a lot of flak from traditionalists for trying new things, but how else are they supposed to gain market share and promote innovation? By doing what all the other distros have been doing, which is just making their desktop a little shinier and rearranging the buttons? That hasn't worked for the past 20 years, why expect it to work now?

If the iPad was just a tablet Mac, like many Slashdotters wished it had been, it would not be as successful as it is. *That's* the lesson MS should take from this, but they are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They want to start with something new, designed for the form factor and usage patterns (which is the correct thing to do), but also trying to leverage Windows, where absolutely none of the strengths of Windows brings anything of value!