4 ms·

> This is a market failure more than an Apple failure Arguably it's a Microsoft failure more than anything. If they had delivered a version of Windows for ARM

> This is a market failure more than an Apple failure Arguably it's a Microsoft failure more than anything. If they had delivered a version of Windows for ARM capable of seamlessly emulating x86 code with no compromises and released it a decade ago the world would likely be different.

voidfunc 2y ago
Why would Microsoft build something almost no customers were asking for? Even now ARM is niche.
- everettp 2y ago
  What? Per Wikipedia: "With over 230 billion ARM chips produced, as of 2022, ARM is the most widely used family of instruction set architectures."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family
  - PetitPrince 2y ago
    Niche in the laptop and desktop caategory I assume?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- teknologist 2y ago
  To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. That was the Mac experience that customers weren't asking for yet "wowed" them when it came.
  - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
    > To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. x86 already was on its way towards such a goal.
    - threeseed 2y ago
      Years later. And it took the threat of the PC industry moving to ARM to light a fire under Intel.
    - teknologist 2y ago
      x86 is an overcomplicated behemoth never intended for low power computing. It’s lipstick on a pig for mobile x86 at this point
  - antifa 2y ago
    > customers weren't asking for they definitely were asking for longer battery life and cooling systems less noisy than a fighter jet, but the supply side of the market was a desert filled with minefields and duds until the M1.
- franga2000 2y ago
  ARM tends to have better performance per watt, leading to improved battery life and thinner/lighter devices at the same performance and price point. Are you sure nobody is asking for it?
  - jocaal 2y ago
    Correction, ARM chips tend to be designed for better performance per watt. The instruction set has nothing to do with it. For a long time intel and amd neglected the mobile markets. That is about to change.
- h0l0cube 2y ago
  I'll assume you mean niche in the desktop space. So there's a catch 22 here. ARM was niche on desktop because no-one made the first move. That is, until Apple launched the M1, which is exactly the failure of imagination of Microsoft that GP is talking about. Though a quick google shows they did indeed investigate this avenue in 2016 for Windows 10, though they obviously didn't commit to it: > On December 7, 2016, Microsoft announced that, as part of a partnership with Qualcomm, it planned to introduce support for running Win32 software on ARM architecture with a 32-bit x86 processor emulator, in 2017. Terry Myerson stated that this move would enable the production of Qualcomm Snapdragon-based Windows devices with cellular connectivity and improved power efficiency over Intel-compatible devices, and still capable of running the majority of existing Windows software (unlike the previous Windows RT, which was restricted to Windows Store apps). Microsoft is initially targeting this project towards laptops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#Features_in_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#Features_in_develop...
roshankhan28 2y ago
i dont really agree with the microsoft failure part, could explain why do you have this point of view? would love to hear it :)
aleph_minus_one 2y ago
> If they had delivered a version of Windows for ARM capable of seamlessly emulating x86 code with no compromises This is hardly possible on most ARM chips because x86 has a much stronger memory model than ARM. Also concerning "with no compromises": common x86 implementations have a very fast implementation of the SIMD instruction sets (SSE..., AVX/AVX2, perhaps AVX-512) that is much slower to emulate on ARM because their SIMD instruction set is different. The only reason why people don't realize this is that a lot of common software makes no intense use of these SIMD instructions. Then there are the subtle parts that (as far as I am aware) the ARM FPU handles multiplication of denormalized floating-point numbers slightly different than x86 (both implementations are allowed by the standard) etc.
- rob74 2y ago
  Well, Apple seems to have achieved this (for all intents or purposes) on MacOS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)#Rosetta_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)#Rosetta_2 - "In some benchmarks, x86-64-only programs performed better under Rosetta 2 on a Mac with an Apple M1 SOC than natively on a Mac with an Intel x86-64 processor"), so there's no reason why Microsoft shouldn't be able to do the same for Windows? Of course, Apple designed the M series ARM CPUs specifically for their devices, but I'm not sure how much care went into optimizing x86 emulation?
  - happymellon 2y ago
    The M1 was significantly faster than other ARM chips. Why? My impression is that due to Apples permissive licence, they are able to make more changes. If we just look at the mess that ARM is making of Qualcomm situation, where we finally have a performing alternative chip. Arm hasn't granted anyone else the ability to make significantly modified chips for multiple platforms, so Nuvia were fine while it was all just research. > Arm's claim against Qualcomm and Nuvia is about protecting the Arm ecosystem and partners who rely on our IP and innovative designs, and therefore enforcing Qualcomm's contractual obligation to destroy and stop using the Nuvia designs that were derived from Arm technology Its rather telling that Qualcomm are allowed to make mobile chips, but not these ones because they want to "protect the ARM ecosystem". RISC V can't come soon enough.

voidfunc 2y ago

Why would Microsoft build something almost no customers were asking for? Even now ARM is niche.

everettp 2y ago
What? Per Wikipedia: "With over 230 billion ARM chips produced, as of 2022, ARM is the most widely used family of instruction set architectures."[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family
- PetitPrince 2y ago
  Niche in the laptop and desktop caategory I assume?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
teknologist 2y ago
To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. That was the Mac experience that customers weren't asking for yet "wowed" them when it came.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  > To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. x86 already was on its way towards such a goal.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    Years later. And it took the threat of the PC industry moving to ARM to light a fire under Intel.
  - teknologist 2y ago
    x86 is an overcomplicated behemoth never intended for low power computing. It’s lipstick on a pig for mobile x86 at this point
- antifa 2y ago
  > customers weren't asking for they definitely were asking for longer battery life and cooling systems less noisy than a fighter jet, but the supply side of the market was a desert filled with minefields and duds until the M1.
franga2000 2y ago
ARM tends to have better performance per watt, leading to improved battery life and thinner/lighter devices at the same performance and price point. Are you sure nobody is asking for it?
- jocaal 2y ago
  Correction, ARM chips tend to be designed for better performance per watt. The instruction set has nothing to do with it. For a long time intel and amd neglected the mobile markets. That is about to change.
h0l0cube 2y ago
I'll assume you mean niche in the desktop space. So there's a catch 22 here. ARM was niche on desktop because no-one made the first move. That is, until Apple launched the M1, which is exactly the failure of imagination of Microsoft that GP is talking about. Though a quick google shows they did indeed investigate this avenue in 2016 for Windows 10, though they obviously didn't commit to it: > On December 7, 2016, Microsoft announced that, as part of a partnership with Qualcomm, it planned to introduce support for running Win32 software on ARM architecture with a 32-bit x86 processor emulator, in 2017. Terry Myerson stated that this move would enable the production of Qualcomm Snapdragon-based Windows devices with cellular connectivity and improved power efficiency over Intel-compatible devices, and still capable of running the majority of existing Windows software (unlike the previous Windows RT, which was restricted to Windows Store apps). Microsoft is initially targeting this project towards laptops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#Features_in_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#Features_in_develop...

roshankhan28 2y ago

i dont really agree with the microsoft failure part, could explain why do you have this point of view? would love to hear it :)

aleph_minus_one 2y ago

> If they had delivered a version of Windows for ARM capable of seamlessly emulating x86 code with no compromises This is hardly possible on most ARM chips because x86 has a much stronger memory model than ARM. Also concerning "with no compromises": common x86 implementations have a very fast implementation of the SIMD instruction sets (SSE..., AVX/AVX2, perhaps AVX-512) that is much slower to emulate on ARM because their SIMD instruction set is different. The only reason why people don't realize this is that a lot of common software makes no intense use of these SIMD instructions. Then there are the subtle parts that (as far as I am aware) the ARM FPU handles multiplication of denormalized floating-point numbers slightly different than x86 (both implementations are allowed by the standard) etc.

rob74 2y ago
Well, Apple seems to have achieved this (for all intents or purposes) on MacOS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)#Rosetta_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)#Rosetta_2 - "In some benchmarks, x86-64-only programs performed better under Rosetta 2 on a Mac with an Apple M1 SOC than natively on a Mac with an Intel x86-64 processor"), so there's no reason why Microsoft shouldn't be able to do the same for Windows? Of course, Apple designed the M series ARM CPUs specifically for their devices, but I'm not sure how much care went into optimizing x86 emulation?
- happymellon 2y ago
  The M1 was significantly faster than other ARM chips. Why? My impression is that due to Apples permissive licence, they are able to make more changes. If we just look at the mess that ARM is making of Qualcomm situation, where we finally have a performing alternative chip. Arm hasn't granted anyone else the ability to make significantly modified chips for multiple platforms, so Nuvia were fine while it was all just research. > Arm's claim against Qualcomm and Nuvia is about protecting the Arm ecosystem and partners who rely on our IP and innovative designs, and therefore enforcing Qualcomm's contractual obligation to destroy and stop using the Nuvia designs that were derived from Arm technology Its rather telling that Qualcomm are allowed to make mobile chips, but not these ones because they want to "protect the ARM ecosystem". RISC V can't come soon enough.