4 ms·

> The majority of new APIs are UWP only Microsoft APIs? Or APIs in general (which I doubt). Microsoft will try everything to push UWP into our PCs but I've bee

by PoL0 9y ago

> The majority of new APIs are UWP only Microsoft APIs? Or APIs in general (which I doubt). Microsoft will try everything to push UWP into our PCs but I've been using Win10 for a couple years now and the only UWP application I (barely) use is Sticky Notes. The rest of my application ecosystem hasn't changed much.

pjmlp 9y ago
Windows 10 APIs of course. Well, Win32 is still there, but not on Windows 10 S and on ARM Windows 10 Always Connected PCs it gets JITed while UWP runs natively.
- vetinari 9y ago
  Microsoft tried that with Windows RT. It's riskier to that specific Windows edition than to the Win32.
  - bitwize 9y ago
    And they're going to keep trying until it finally sticks. It's like Palladium or the Scientology Fair Game policy: just because people don't like it doesn't make it not critical to the organization. They just have to backpedal publicly to re-establish good PR, then sneak it in quietly while people's guard is down.
    - IntelMiner 9y ago
      Microsoft isn't Apple. Their entire business relies on retaining as much backwards compatibility as possible Every time they make any sort of major, sweeping change. They get raked over coals until they're charred to a god damn crisp When Windows went from the old DOS-ish 95/98/ME to the much more stable NT based 2000 and XP, lots of things broke. XP only survived the Microsoft EOL chopping block because of the rise of Netbooks. And even then, companies pay millions to keep that afloat due to how entrenched it is (Something likely to be repeated with Windows 7) Vista brought a ton of (arguably much needed) changes. But its hardware requirements were pretty high for the time. Along with buggy drivers from Nvidia, that sank the entire operating system. Both in public perception and market share Windows 7 (on release) was arguably a UI-tweaked Vista. Hardware had caught up by then, and a lot of people agreed that this was the "good" upgrade from XP Windows 8 came out and tried to shoehorn that whole "Metro" interface and converge everything around it. And it flopped almost as hard as Vista did Windows 10 Microsoft played a much stronger hand and dragged everyone they could (willing or otherwise, if you believed some accounts) over with a "free" upgrade for most. But it also pruned back Metro pretty hard. Instead trying to chase after the "App Store" model
      - bitwize 9y ago
        > Microsoft isn't Apple. And that's just the problem, innit. The App Store is making Windows irrelevant. Apple also has a FAR better security story, and part of it is because they whitelist everything that runs on their flagship devices. Microsoft tried to do the same thing with Windows RT and Windows Phone. Didn't work. They were forced to backpedal, but they're not about to give up on making Windows Store the centerpiece of the Windows experience, and sideline, marginalize, and limit the capabilities of Win32 on the Microsoft platform -- "for security purposes" of course. Eventually, Win32 stuff will still run, but heavily sandboxed and unable to take advantage of cutting edge features of the Windows OS (HoloLens? Cortana? The database file system they've put off implementing for so long?). It could be that Windows 11 uses HyperV to run a Windows 7 instance for legacy apps while new stuff -- including support for newer graphics cards/GPUs -- must be compiled against UWP in order to run on the main kernel instance.
- Const-me 9y ago
  AFAIK it’ll work the same way for desktop win32, and store UWP apps. Both will be JIT-ed if there’s no ARM binaries available, both can be compiled to native ARM64 binaries: https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-apps/ https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-ap...
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Currently the JIT only works for x86-32, not x86-64.
    - Const-me 9y ago
      That’s true, but quite a lot of modern desktop software still comes with 32-bit binaries. Even Microsoft’s own software: visual studio and skype are still 32 bit, office has both versions…
      - fyfy18 9y ago
        There is still a 32bit version of Windows 10: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Explains-Why-Windows-10-32-Bit-Is-Still-Needed-469563.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Explains-Why-Window... I wonder why they didn’t push fat binaries like Apple did?
        vetinari 9y ago
        Because 64-bit Windows doesn't run 16-bit binaries, 32-bit one does. Fat binaries aren't going to change that.

by PoL0 9y ago

pjmlp 9y ago

Windows 10 APIs of course. Well, Win32 is still there, but not on Windows 10 S and on ARM Windows 10 Always Connected PCs it gets JITed while UWP runs natively.

vetinari 9y ago
Microsoft tried that with Windows RT. It's riskier to that specific Windows edition than to the Win32.
- bitwize 9y ago
  And they're going to keep trying until it finally sticks. It's like Palladium or the Scientology Fair Game policy: just because people don't like it doesn't make it not critical to the organization. They just have to backpedal publicly to re-establish good PR, then sneak it in quietly while people's guard is down.
  - IntelMiner 9y ago
    Microsoft isn't Apple. Their entire business relies on retaining as much backwards compatibility as possible Every time they make any sort of major, sweeping change. They get raked over coals until they're charred to a god damn crisp When Windows went from the old DOS-ish 95/98/ME to the much more stable NT based 2000 and XP, lots of things broke. XP only survived the Microsoft EOL chopping block because of the rise of Netbooks. And even then, companies pay millions to keep that afloat due to how entrenched it is (Something likely to be repeated with Windows 7) Vista brought a ton of (arguably much needed) changes. But its hardware requirements were pretty high for the time. Along with buggy drivers from Nvidia, that sank the entire operating system. Both in public perception and market share Windows 7 (on release) was arguably a UI-tweaked Vista. Hardware had caught up by then, and a lot of people agreed that this was the "good" upgrade from XP Windows 8 came out and tried to shoehorn that whole "Metro" interface and converge everything around it. And it flopped almost as hard as Vista did Windows 10 Microsoft played a much stronger hand and dragged everyone they could (willing or otherwise, if you believed some accounts) over with a "free" upgrade for most. But it also pruned back Metro pretty hard. Instead trying to chase after the "App Store" model
    - bitwize 9y ago
      > Microsoft isn't Apple. And that's just the problem, innit. The App Store is making Windows irrelevant. Apple also has a FAR better security story, and part of it is because they whitelist everything that runs on their flagship devices. Microsoft tried to do the same thing with Windows RT and Windows Phone. Didn't work. They were forced to backpedal, but they're not about to give up on making Windows Store the centerpiece of the Windows experience, and sideline, marginalize, and limit the capabilities of Win32 on the Microsoft platform -- "for security purposes" of course. Eventually, Win32 stuff will still run, but heavily sandboxed and unable to take advantage of cutting edge features of the Windows OS (HoloLens? Cortana? The database file system they've put off implementing for so long?). It could be that Windows 11 uses HyperV to run a Windows 7 instance for legacy apps while new stuff -- including support for newer graphics cards/GPUs -- must be compiled against UWP in order to run on the main kernel instance.
Const-me 9y ago
AFAIK it’ll work the same way for desktop win32, and store UWP apps. Both will be JIT-ed if there’s no ARM binaries available, both can be compiled to native ARM64 binaries: https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-apps/ https://mspoweruser.com/windows-arm64-gets-first-compiled-ap...
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Currently the JIT only works for x86-32, not x86-64.
  - Const-me 9y ago
    That’s true, but quite a lot of modern desktop software still comes with 32-bit binaries. Even Microsoft’s own software: visual studio and skype are still 32 bit, office has both versions…
    - fyfy18 9y ago
      There is still a 32bit version of Windows 10: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Explains-Why-Windows-10-32-Bit-Is-Still-Needed-469563.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Explains-Why-Window... I wonder why they didn’t push fat binaries like Apple did?
      - vetinari 9y ago
        Because 64-bit Windows doesn't run 16-bit binaries, 32-bit one does. Fat binaries aren't going to change that.