8 ms·

I tested Qualcomm’s first Windows on Arm computer (a HP Envy 2) in June 2018: it was very underwhelming but seemed promising. Yet here we are 4 years later… Qua

I tested Qualcomm’s first Windows on Arm computer (a HP Envy 2) in June 2018: it was very underwhelming but seemed promising. Yet here we are 4 years later… Qualcomm and Microsoft have been working on this at least as long as Apple, I would say. The difference in outcomes is insane, and I think it speaks broadly not about how bad Qualcomm and Microsoft are at this (they’re not) but rather how insanely good Apple’s Silicon team is. And of course it speaks volumes about the power of hardware-software integration under the same roof. I also came to the conclusion that Qualcomm, Microsoft, and all their OEM partners have broadly underestimated what Apple would be capable of off the bat with its first and second gen silicon.

yakak 5y ago
I think a lot of it is about commitment. Apple has a lot to lose whenever it changes the CPU architecture for Mac, especially if it gets stuck with two for longer than expected. For Qualcomm and similar, a foray in Notebooks is just something interesting. For Microsoft such a foray is always limited by its x86 ecosystem losses.
- karmakaze 5y ago
  Microsoft has been known to do things half-heartily on both h/w and s/w: phone OS, Windows RT, UWP, app store, etc. Even the Internet Explorer to Edge transition was long overdue, but not too late. The way MS works is very much like Google where they have their cash cows and everything else seems like a diversion until they miss the boat on a new thing and it's too late. Remember that Windows NT originally supported x86, MIPS, Alpha but haven't taken it further. They also make entire toolchains that could make building for multi-targets as seamless as they choose save final validation.