yeah, why have multi-threading when you can just use different processors to keep applications responsive. Sounds like a cop out due to poor implementations to me. And lets stop running more than one application at a time since we can run our OS and app in virtual machines while we're at it.
what I read a few years ago led me to believe there wasn't complete mixing but instead a definite stratifying going on. IIRC the paper talked about measurements across layers and measuring increases in the fresher water layer(s). I wasn't try to say it would cause increased melting of the caps although it could. Only that it would/could change the currents and therefore change the weather patterns.
I read that too but I think it'll be a big game changer if the water circulation pump in the Atlantic gets messed up. I'd already read that lots of fresh water were are already detected further south than ever before. Lots of fresh water further south changes the current layering of water due to different densities of fresh vs salty water and that's what could screw things up.
a change in those currents means a change in water temps and that means a change in weather patterns.
It sure does seem like lots of stuff is melting all over the place and faster than "expected".
RIM had and still have a good size install base and it's firmly in the corporate environment. Given that and the history of how Microsoft uses it's profits to purchase market share this seems like another opportunity to pull a Nokia or better. The "better" being a direct purchase.
not a mixed message really because when you take something as simple as the Arduino and decide to make it into a "wearable" platform, you're going to come up with things similar to someone else with a similar goal. And having followed Lady Ada for a while, I would trust her to do her best to think about the solution without lots of influence from previous products. ie the solution based on the goal and not just ways to extend someone elses product.
None of that stuff is really technical and just marketing fluff so if someone gets bent out of shape over it, I doubt they are going to be a customer of either platform.
You obviously didn't RTFM or blog because she mentioned that LilyPad preceded her Flora design. FYI, the Flora design is different than the LilyPad so who cares if LilyPad came first if Flora has the features you'd want?
don't forget that the radioactive rocks also allowed them to work 2nd and 3rd shifts during the power outages too. Love that green glow on a moonless night. lol
but the guy can make lots of money getting clicks from ads posted on Facebook. And if he could get Colbert to talk about it then he'd have a line at his door of Conservatives wanting to purchase it. Maybe it'll be the next Pet Rock.
their solution is to move developers to a cross Windows platform software model. Apps which work on the Windows Phone phones will run on the Windows 8 on what ever hardware it is on. There is no way they can do an x86 emulator because their current phone OS( Windows CE ) under the Windows Phone UI is not able to use multi-core hardware not access RAM over 512MB. This is being downplayed and hidden from users in hopes they can market the Windows Phone look over the hardware. Do a search on existing Windows Phone phones and you'll find it near impossible to find out what SoC/CPU it's running and how much RAM it has. Their plan is to get Windows 8 for ARM debloated enough to put on phones in 2013. So during that time they'll spend millions and even billions paying vendors to migrate their x86 software to this WinRT cross-Windows device runtime.
they have lots and lots of marketing to do in the next 1-2 years and it's going to cost them many billions to fool so many.
that's why I say we start calling Windows Phone 7,8,etc devices Windows Phone phones. The name, Windows Phone, is a dumb play on the iPhone name and this technique goes back decades. For instance, IBM had a web browser on OS/2 in the 90s called IBM Web Explorer and later Microsoft licensed Spyglasses Mosaic and labels it Microsoft Internet Explorer.
They probably wanted to call it the new UI over Windows CE the WinPhone but no doubt it was more important to try and specifically tie it to MS Windows and they'd already used Windows Mobile for a name. Windows Phone phone
you doubt they subsidize the device? Doubt no more since it's well known that while Microsoft will charge licensing fees for their software, they also sign _marketing_ agreements which funnel money back to the vendor. Getting netbooks away from Linux when they first appeared cost Microsoft lots of money as they pulled Windows XP from retirement, licensed it very cheaply( down in the range of what they license Windows CE for ~$15 ) and then turned around and provided lots of money back via the marketing programs. When Windows 7 was release, Steve Ballmer even told guests at their shareholders meeting that they would not be licensing Windows 7 as they did Windows XP and would not name that mistake again. or to that effect.
There are also bits of evidence that when companies, big ones, start looking into migrating to Linux software there is a fund Microsoft sales people can pull from to greatly reduce or even eliminate the cost of the Microsoft software to keep them on Windows, etc. There were some European stories where this kind of back funding was exposed. There was a cheap laptop program in Europe which was getting Linux preloaded as requested by the orgs CTO but Microsoft went over his head and got Windows preloaded which forced the CTO to redirect the delivery to a 3rd party to reimage the device with Linux. There was also the cheap Laptop program for Thaiwan which had Dell or HP preloading Linux and the devices were selling so fast the company ran out of inventory and the other (HP or Dell) was asked to come in and supply devices. In popped Microsoft and surprise surprise all of a sudden there was a switch to Windows and even including MS Office all for $15 but we didn't hear about the backroom marketing or "services" funding they used to make the switch a money making proposal for the vendor and an expense for Microsoft. All to keep Linux off devices.
So, they have been doing this kind of thing for decades. Any time you hear someone say Microsoft is friendly to Linux or open source it is 100% bull and 100% marketing drivel. The Windows OS is what they making all of their income from and protecting that is a standard business practice. Spending millions protecting that is nothing relative to the billions per quarter in profits they make from it.
it is their monopoly on the PC which they are leveraging to force vendors to do these kinds of things. A few years ago, the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturers Association said something very telling during a conference when asked about Linux on netbooks and PCs. He said something to the effect of this, the manufacturers were afraid of Microsoft and so Linux would not be part of PC like devices(PC, laptops) but on devices not currently licensed for Windows they were fine with(phones, routers,etc).
As we've seen with their IP licensing scams, all those vendors with previous or existing Microsoft licensing contracts signed on the dotted line for "protection" covering Android. So even though they don't have a monopoly on phones nor tablets they wield power from their existing monopoly in the PC segment and can be seen to be using it in demanding features which exclude other OS's from being installed on the hardware. Especially when they are not consistent with that on the PC segment. And it's very public that some businesses and organizations put Linux on devices instead of Windows specifically for better security. Example, the recent DoD migration from Windows to Linux for drone controller systems.
This will require investigating by the DOJ and not just asking if Microsoft threatens anyone. They'll have to look at lots of email and other statements to build the picture of how Microsoft coerces companies into doing their bidding. I doubt they'll put in the effort though.
Microsoft will have to imply the GUI won't be there or else developers will just continue and tell the admins to install the GUI system and effectively eliminating any benefits of keeping the GUI out of the server.
What is this, something like 15 years after they put the GUI into the NT kernel in NT 4.0? That fantastic Window 95 desktop wasn't even close to the OS/2 WPS yet still was a performance sucking pig so they had to pull the GUI into the kernel to keep an acceptable performing GUI experience.
I wonder what's causing them to do back to pulling the GUI out of the kernel and even telling server software vendors to code to this configuration? It's SOP for *nix systems so what's going on? From what I've seen running Windows in VM's, you can fit way more Linux servers in VM's than you can Windows and it has everything to do with the performance requirements(CPUs and memory) of the environments. Where's the leaked memo about this anyways?
Linux and *nix and most all other OS's do not distinguish between server or client except for what software you install. Unlike Microsoft who uses this as a profit generator. Does anyone remember when Netscape was making a killing selling their Netscape web server for running on Windows 2000 instead of the server and Microsoft only allowed their web server( IIS ) with a Windows Server license? Microsoft's response was to change the EULA for the client stating you could not have more than 4 or 5 users connected to the computer over the network at any one time. This forced companies to spend the extra money on Windows Server and btw, it came with IIS so why purchase Netscape's server was the general consensus after that.
FYI, the Windows GUI subsystem is part of the kernel so til this new release you already had a reliability problem. Running desktop apps on your server isn't a good idea if you like keeping your users happy with your admin services and not going to help reliability neither. No doubt Microsoft is finally doing this because it's a pathetic kludge with so much of the GUI subsystem tied into the kernel and they are getting beat in the pants with much more efficient Linix/*nix configurations in the server room.
Besides, they won't be eliminating the GUI and therefore your little LANs can still have a server which is also used as desktop and all that brings.
I think it was Windows NT 3.51 which was the last NT/Server configuration which had the GUI outside of the kernel. Compared to the other OS's of the day, NT was a bloated slug and with the GUI outside of the kernel it was a super slug. People would learn about the reliability issues later after they'd invested in the software and migration so 2nd redundant systems were required to keep the users happy. It kept Microsoft happy too as they sold another Windows Server license and helped sell more PC hardware. Good for the Windows support system and costly for businesses who found their single yet expensive UNIX server was replaced with not one cheap PC but 6, 8, 10 etc cheap PC servers and more admins. ouch.
so why do they take it and spend it on their own budgets instead of doing something to benefit the passengers at the airports?
Isn't this a form of theft? If you find a wallet and give it to the Police, efforts are made to return it to the owner and only after a period of time and attempts made does the finder get to keep the money. He/she probably has to claim it as income too.
How about free wifi for x number of days at all airports or something beneficial to the air travelers?
that was _level_ of education, not form or specialty of education. and on the Mac or Linux users being mad about not being able to run native apps goes, Linux users are far and above more technically inclined since they have to install their OS and the iPhone/iPad are completely different use cases and look and act nothing like a Mac so why would they expect that? This is about the PC form factor and why we won't see ARM based PC devices.
There's also a big difference between moving to online apps and actually being there enough to not need any native apps. Besides,.Net is not pervasive enough either.
look at all the stories on the what Microsoft has done with Barnes & Noble regarding patent IP and Android. This is the trickery they use and the big issue BN is having is the price they want for a small element of the over OS. ie they want as much or more than they charge for licensing their entire Windows CE OS.
Also notice that those who have signed all have some form of other licensing arrangement with Microsoft and therefore they can strong arm them with threats of denying those other licenses or something like that. Barnes & Noble does not license any Microsoft software nor does Motorola Mobility that I know of. Do you notice Motorola Mobility is not doing Windows Phone 7.x and even claimed they would no longer be doing Windows Phone phones well before the Google purchase.
and the Overview, Highlights, and yikes "Get The Facts" sections never even mention ARM. I guess people who purchase or run servers don't want to know this little fact.
It reminds me of how Dell had to sell Linux and even had to change pages Microsoft disagreed with.
It may be "here" as in at HP's beta site but it isn't here as in the real world.
the problem with ARM PC's for Microsoft is that people will think they can install x86 apps on them and they can't. Apple, by virtue of their costs tend to be used by more educated people and because of the smaller market share had/have fewer head aches dealing with migrations. Making the iPad enabled to run iPhone apps was very smart on Apple and Microsoft can't really do that with the market share Windows Phone phones have.
I doubt very much we'll see anything running ARM SoCs which look like a PC(desktop or laptop) and runs Windows 8 for ARM. Metro is the UI and API they need to get cross CPU and cross device applications and without widespread use of that a Windows for ARM PC will just drive the public nuts as they find out there existing software will not work and there's nothing like it available. Maybe in 5 years but looking at Android and Apple's iOS you have to wonder if they can even get to 20% market share in the phone segment in that time.
Had Linux on desktops done better we might see some ARM PCs but you know how the years of the Linux desktop has gone.
but you forget that the current laptop PC manufacturers will not touch anything which does not run Windows. Sure Windows will eventually run on ARM and could run on an ARM laptop but you do know that Microsoft controls what Windows gets installed on don't you? They aren't going to allow laptops with just the ARM chip to boot Windows on that even if it's only running Metro and the hardware manufacturers are not going to cross Microsoft.
Apple can pull it off because people know Apple controls everything from the music store, application store, OS and hardware. If Android picks up with a more feature rich application base it might work but again, you won't see standard hardware vendors who work with Microsoft making Linux or Android based hardware and cross Microsoft's path.
We might see ARM on servers but it would have to be specialty hardware to keep it from getting anywhere near what's considered a PC.
Intel has nothing to worry about in the PC market except for a diminishing roll of the PC(desktop and laptop) due to tablet use. Intel has to be in the tablet and phone market to even keep its market share stable. Going with PowerVR was a smart move but they have to keep up with power usage and Nvidia's Tegra 3 just changed the game with the 5th CPU under clocked.
sure and then why did Paul Jacobs say that Snapdragon would allow PC makers to produce “the lightest, thinnest PCs,” at his CES keynote and specifically mention Windows 8?
I would not doubt the ignorant press pundits are putting all the Windows 8 spin on things but if you've been around the tech sector for a while you also know that corporations are also run by ignorant people. ie you've seen them do things like license Java to Microsoft and think Microsoft is going to abide by it. Or sign licensing deals for Linux with Microsoft and think it's about interoperability and not a patent protection racket. Just to name a couple of obvious ones.
What these pundits and corporations are missing is the fact that PC manufacturers are beholden and afraid of Microsoft and will not so anything to upset them. It was made painfully public a few years ago when the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturers Association specifically stated the members were afraid of Microsoft and that the PC was off the table for them regarding anything but Windows(ie Linux). He stated that non-PC devices were ok(phones, tablets, embedded).
Besides, Microsoft will not want laptop or even netbooks running Windows 8 on ARM until they know their MS app store is fully loaded and people know what Metro is and that Windows applications will not install on a Windows for ARM PC. They would be foolish to let the public get that confused and no doubt the press would be even more confused. Windows 8 for ARM will most likely be all about tablets and phones for the short term.
I would not doubt Mr Jacobs has already heard from Microsoft regarding his error.
Windows on ARM PC and we can't forget the year of Linux on the desktop. Yeah, right.
Qualcomm folks must be smoke'n something good to think Windows on ARM is going to be worth a hill of beans. It'll probably be just as good as Windows on the OLPC XO was, at best.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, why have multi-threading when you can just use different processors to keep applications responsive. Sounds like a cop out due to poor implementations to me. And lets stop running more than one application at a time since we can run our OS and app in virtual machines while we're at it.
LoB
what I read a few years ago led me to believe there wasn't complete mixing but instead a definite stratifying going on. IIRC the paper talked about measurements across layers and measuring increases in the fresher water layer(s). I wasn't try to say it would cause increased melting of the caps although it could. Only that it would/could change the currents and therefore change the weather patterns.
LoB
sorry, no MOD points but what you said is the key. I just posted above too.
LoB
I read that too but I think it'll be a big game changer if the water circulation pump in the Atlantic gets messed up. I'd already read that lots of fresh water were are already detected further south than ever before. Lots of fresh water further south changes the current layering of water due to different densities of fresh vs salty water and that's what could screw things up.
a change in those currents means a change in water temps and that means a change in weather patterns.
It sure does seem like lots of stuff is melting all over the place and faster than "expected".
LoB
RIM had and still have a good size install base and it's firmly in the corporate environment. Given that and the history of how Microsoft uses it's profits to purchase market share this seems like another opportunity to pull a Nokia or better. The "better" being a direct purchase.
LoB
not a mixed message really because when you take something as simple as the Arduino and decide to make it into a "wearable" platform, you're going to come up with things similar to someone else with a similar goal. And having followed Lady Ada for a while, I would trust her to do her best to think about the solution without lots of influence from previous products. ie the solution based on the goal and not just ways to extend someone elses product.
None of that stuff is really technical and just marketing fluff so if someone gets bent out of shape over it, I doubt they are going to be a customer of either platform.
LoB
You obviously didn't RTFM or blog because she mentioned that LilyPad preceded her Flora design. FYI, the Flora design is different than the LilyPad so who cares if LilyPad came first if Flora has the features you'd want?
LoB
good point, do they have patents on NTFS which are about to expire? hmm, no patents on NTFS... BINGO, we have a winner.
what, mod'ded "Funny" and not "Informative". Duuuuuudes?
LoB
don't forget that the radioactive rocks also allowed them to work 2nd and 3rd shifts during the power outages too. Love that green glow on a moonless night. lol
Scooby Doo, look what you've done!
LoB
but the guy can make lots of money getting clicks from ads posted on Facebook. And if he could get Colbert to talk about it then he'd have a line at his door of Conservatives wanting to purchase it. Maybe it'll be the next Pet Rock.
LoB
their solution is to move developers to a cross Windows platform software model. Apps which work on the Windows Phone phones will run on the Windows 8 on what ever hardware it is on. There is no way they can do an x86 emulator because their current phone OS( Windows CE ) under the Windows Phone UI is not able to use multi-core hardware not access RAM over 512MB. This is being downplayed and hidden from users in hopes they can market the Windows Phone look over the hardware. Do a search on existing Windows Phone phones and you'll find it near impossible to find out what SoC/CPU it's running and how much RAM it has. Their plan is to get Windows 8 for ARM debloated enough to put on phones in 2013. So during that time they'll spend millions and even billions paying vendors to migrate their x86 software to this WinRT cross-Windows device runtime.
they have lots and lots of marketing to do in the next 1-2 years and it's going to cost them many billions to fool so many.
LoB
that's why I say we start calling Windows Phone 7,8,etc devices Windows Phone phones. The name, Windows Phone, is a dumb play on the iPhone name and this technique goes back decades. For instance, IBM had a web browser on OS/2 in the 90s called IBM Web Explorer and later Microsoft licensed Spyglasses Mosaic and labels it Microsoft Internet Explorer.
They probably wanted to call it the new UI over Windows CE the WinPhone but no doubt it was more important to try and specifically tie it to MS Windows and they'd already used Windows Mobile for a name. Windows Phone phone
LoB
you doubt they subsidize the device? Doubt no more since it's well known that while Microsoft will charge licensing fees for their software, they also sign _marketing_ agreements which funnel money back to the vendor. Getting netbooks away from Linux when they first appeared cost Microsoft lots of money as they pulled Windows XP from retirement, licensed it very cheaply( down in the range of what they license Windows CE for ~$15 ) and then turned around and provided lots of money back via the marketing programs. When Windows 7 was release, Steve Ballmer even told guests at their shareholders meeting that they would not be licensing Windows 7 as they did Windows XP and would not name that mistake again. or to that effect.
There are also bits of evidence that when companies, big ones, start looking into migrating to Linux software there is a fund Microsoft sales people can pull from to greatly reduce or even eliminate the cost of the Microsoft software to keep them on Windows, etc. There were some European stories where this kind of back funding was exposed. There was a cheap laptop program in Europe which was getting Linux preloaded as requested by the orgs CTO but Microsoft went over his head and got Windows preloaded which forced the CTO to redirect the delivery to a 3rd party to reimage the device with Linux. There was also the cheap Laptop program for Thaiwan which had Dell or HP preloading Linux and the devices were selling so fast the company ran out of inventory and the other (HP or Dell) was asked to come in and supply devices. In popped Microsoft and surprise surprise all of a sudden there was a switch to Windows and even including MS Office all for $15 but we didn't hear about the backroom marketing or "services" funding they used to make the switch a money making proposal for the vendor and an expense for Microsoft. All to keep Linux off devices.
So, they have been doing this kind of thing for decades. Any time you hear someone say Microsoft is friendly to Linux or open source it is 100% bull and 100% marketing drivel. The Windows OS is what they making all of their income from and protecting that is a standard business practice. Spending millions protecting that is nothing relative to the billions per quarter in profits they make from it.
LoB
it is their monopoly on the PC which they are leveraging to force vendors to do these kinds of things. A few years ago, the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturers Association said something very telling during a conference when asked about Linux on netbooks and PCs. He said something to the effect of this, the manufacturers were afraid of Microsoft and so Linux would not be part of PC like devices(PC, laptops) but on devices not currently licensed for Windows they were fine with(phones, routers,etc).
As we've seen with their IP licensing scams, all those vendors with previous or existing Microsoft licensing contracts signed on the dotted line for "protection" covering Android. So even though they don't have a monopoly on phones nor tablets they wield power from their existing monopoly in the PC segment and can be seen to be using it in demanding features which exclude other OS's from being installed on the hardware. Especially when they are not consistent with that on the PC segment. And it's very public that some businesses and organizations put Linux on devices instead of Windows specifically for better security. Example, the recent DoD migration from Windows to Linux for drone controller systems.
This will require investigating by the DOJ and not just asking if Microsoft threatens anyone. They'll have to look at lots of email and other statements to build the picture of how Microsoft coerces companies into doing their bidding. I doubt they'll put in the effort though.
LoB
Microsoft will have to imply the GUI won't be there or else developers will just continue and tell the admins to install the GUI system and effectively eliminating any benefits of keeping the GUI out of the server.
What is this, something like 15 years after they put the GUI into the NT kernel in NT 4.0? That fantastic Window 95 desktop wasn't even close to the OS/2 WPS yet still was a performance sucking pig so they had to pull the GUI into the kernel to keep an acceptable performing GUI experience.
I wonder what's causing them to do back to pulling the GUI out of the kernel and even telling server software vendors to code to this configuration? It's SOP for *nix systems so what's going on? From what I've seen running Windows in VM's, you can fit way more Linux servers in VM's than you can Windows and it has everything to do with the performance requirements(CPUs and memory) of the environments. Where's the leaked memo about this anyways?
LoB
"Even Linux severs can have a GUI",
Linux and *nix and most all other OS's do not distinguish between server or client except for what software you install. Unlike Microsoft who uses this as a profit generator. Does anyone remember when Netscape was making a killing selling their Netscape web server for running on Windows 2000 instead of the server and Microsoft only allowed their web server( IIS ) with a Windows Server license? Microsoft's response was to change the EULA for the client stating you could not have more than 4 or 5 users connected to the computer over the network at any one time. This forced companies to spend the extra money on Windows Server and btw, it came with IIS so why purchase Netscape's server was the general consensus after that.
FYI, the Windows GUI subsystem is part of the kernel so til this new release you already had a reliability problem. Running desktop apps on your server isn't a good idea if you like keeping your users happy with your admin services and not going to help reliability neither. No doubt Microsoft is finally doing this because it's a pathetic kludge with so much of the GUI subsystem tied into the kernel and they are getting beat in the pants with much more efficient Linix/*nix configurations in the server room.
Besides, they won't be eliminating the GUI and therefore your little LANs can still have a server which is also used as desktop and all that brings.
I think it was Windows NT 3.51 which was the last NT/Server configuration which had the GUI outside of the kernel. Compared to the other OS's of the day, NT was a bloated slug and with the GUI outside of the kernel it was a super slug. People would learn about the reliability issues later after they'd invested in the software and migration so 2nd redundant systems were required to keep the users happy. It kept Microsoft happy too as they sold another Windows Server license and helped sell more PC hardware. Good for the Windows support system and costly for businesses who found their single yet expensive UNIX server was replaced with not one cheap PC but 6, 8, 10 etc cheap PC servers and more admins. ouch.
Welcome back to the 90s Microsoft.
LoB
I agree and it should go back to the air travelers in general IMO.
LoB
so why do they take it and spend it on their own budgets instead of doing something to benefit the passengers at the airports?
Isn't this a form of theft? If you find a wallet and give it to the Police, efforts are made to return it to the owner and only after a period of time and attempts made does the finder get to keep the money. He/she probably has to claim it as income too.
How about free wifi for x number of days at all airports or something beneficial to the air travelers?
LoB
that was _level_ of education, not form or specialty of education. and on the Mac or Linux users being mad about not being able to run native apps goes, Linux users are far and above more technically inclined since they have to install their OS and the iPhone/iPad are completely different use cases and look and act nothing like a Mac so why would they expect that? This is about the PC form factor and why we won't see ARM based PC devices.
.Net is not pervasive enough either.
There's also a big difference between moving to online apps and actually being there enough to not need any native apps. Besides,
LoB
look at all the stories on the what Microsoft has done with Barnes & Noble regarding patent IP and Android. This is the trickery they use and the big issue BN is having is the price they want for a small element of the over OS. ie they want as much or more than they charge for licensing their entire Windows CE OS.
Also notice that those who have signed all have some form of other licensing arrangement with Microsoft and therefore they can strong arm them with threats of denying those other licenses or something like that. Barnes & Noble does not license any Microsoft software nor does Motorola Mobility that I know of. Do you notice Motorola Mobility is not doing Windows Phone 7.x and even claimed they would no longer be doing Windows Phone phones well before the Google purchase.
LoB
and the Overview, Highlights, and yikes "Get The Facts" sections never even mention ARM. I guess people who purchase or run servers don't want to know this little fact.
It reminds me of how Dell had to sell Linux and even had to change pages Microsoft disagreed with.
It may be "here" as in at HP's beta site but it isn't here as in the real world.
LoB
the problem with ARM PC's for Microsoft is that people will think they can install x86 apps on them and they can't. Apple, by virtue of their costs tend to be used by more educated people and because of the smaller market share had/have fewer head aches dealing with migrations. Making the iPad enabled to run iPhone apps was very smart on Apple and Microsoft can't really do that with the market share Windows Phone phones have.
I doubt very much we'll see anything running ARM SoCs which look like a PC(desktop or laptop) and runs Windows 8 for ARM. Metro is the UI and API they need to get cross CPU and cross device applications and without widespread use of that a Windows for ARM PC will just drive the public nuts as they find out there existing software will not work and there's nothing like it available. Maybe in 5 years but looking at Android and Apple's iOS you have to wonder if they can even get to 20% market share in the phone segment in that time.
Had Linux on desktops done better we might see some ARM PCs but you know how the years of the Linux desktop has gone.
LoB
but you forget that the current laptop PC manufacturers will not touch anything which does not run Windows. Sure Windows will eventually run on ARM and could run on an ARM laptop but you do know that Microsoft controls what Windows gets installed on don't you? They aren't going to allow laptops with just the ARM chip to boot Windows on that even if it's only running Metro and the hardware manufacturers are not going to cross Microsoft.
Apple can pull it off because people know Apple controls everything from the music store, application store, OS and hardware. If Android picks up with a more feature rich application base it might work but again, you won't see standard hardware vendors who work with Microsoft making Linux or Android based hardware and cross Microsoft's path.
We might see ARM on servers but it would have to be specialty hardware to keep it from getting anywhere near what's considered a PC.
Intel has nothing to worry about in the PC market except for a diminishing roll of the PC(desktop and laptop) due to tablet use. Intel has to be in the tablet and phone market to even keep its market share stable. Going with PowerVR was a smart move but they have to keep up with power usage and Nvidia's Tegra 3 just changed the game with the 5th CPU under clocked.
LoB
sure and then why did Paul Jacobs say that Snapdragon would allow PC makers to produce “the lightest, thinnest PCs,” at his CES keynote and specifically mention Windows 8?
I would not doubt the ignorant press pundits are putting all the Windows 8 spin on things but if you've been around the tech sector for a while you also know that corporations are also run by ignorant people. ie you've seen them do things like license Java to Microsoft and think Microsoft is going to abide by it. Or sign licensing deals for Linux with Microsoft and think it's about interoperability and not a patent protection racket. Just to name a couple of obvious ones.
What these pundits and corporations are missing is the fact that PC manufacturers are beholden and afraid of Microsoft and will not so anything to upset them. It was made painfully public a few years ago when the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturers Association specifically stated the members were afraid of Microsoft and that the PC was off the table for them regarding anything but Windows(ie Linux). He stated that non-PC devices were ok(phones, tablets, embedded).
Besides, Microsoft will not want laptop or even netbooks running Windows 8 on ARM until they know their MS app store is fully loaded and people know what Metro is and that Windows applications will not install on a Windows for ARM PC. They would be foolish to let the public get that confused and no doubt the press would be even more confused. Windows 8 for ARM will most likely be all about tablets and phones for the short term.
I would not doubt Mr Jacobs has already heard from Microsoft regarding his error.
LoB
Windows on ARM PC and we can't forget the year of Linux on the desktop. Yeah, right.
Qualcomm folks must be smoke'n something good to think Windows on ARM is going to be worth a hill of beans. It'll probably be just as good as Windows on the OLPC XO was, at best.
LoB