7 ms·

Even if you do that, you still can't run your desktop apps on the ARM model. I really don't want to explain to luddite relatives why they can't run a game unles

Even if you do that, you still can't run your desktop apps on the ARM model. I really don't want to explain to luddite relatives why they can't run a game unless they buy the more expensive model. Either ban desktop apps on both models, or neither.

jfoutz 13y ago
Rosetta worked pretty well.
- koenigdavidmj 13y ago
  I agree with you that this is technically a solved problem. It's not difficult to develop a system that lets apps run on both architectures without users having to think about this. I'm talking about the management decision that only Metro apps can run on RT, which is such a stupid limitation that even Microsoft sees the need to bypass it to get Office on an RT tablet.
- twoodfin 13y ago
  Emulating an x86 on an ARM like the Tegra 4 would probably result in a pretty unsatisfying experience. Apple was doing the opposite: Emulating a processor with worse single threaded performance and (arguably) a simpler ISA. The alternative is a full port of Win32, which I imagine Microsoft considered and rejected. Even after they incurred all the time and development cost, ISVs would still have to at least recompile.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - bcoates 13y ago
    I think it has a nearly-full port of Win32, it's apparently not hard to disable the signing requirement and run cross-compiled Win32 ARM binaries and turn the Surface RT into a useful computer. Not much commercial software but the regular open-source windows stack works.
    - acqq 13y ago
      it's apparently not hard to disable the signing requirement and run cross-compiled Win32 ARM binaries Link please?
      - bcoates 13y ago
        This forum http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2130 http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2130 appears to be ground zero for that sort of thing. I don't have an RT handy to test it on.
  - moron4hire 13y ago
    I don't think it's a feasibility issue, because a fair bit of Win32 had already been ported to ARM from the Windows CE days. I had .NET apps that ran on Windows XP and Windows CE from the same binary. As long as you stuck to the .NET micro framework subset, it worked great and was actually quite performant.
rwallace 13y ago
While I agree with your overall sentiment, in fairness it's not hard to explain. "Well the cheap one is shite, it doesn't really work. The expensive one does work so you want to buy that if you're going to buy one at all."

jfoutz 13y ago

Rosetta worked pretty well.

koenigdavidmj 13y ago
I agree with you that this is technically a solved problem. It's not difficult to develop a system that lets apps run on both architectures without users having to think about this. I'm talking about the management decision that only Metro apps can run on RT, which is such a stupid limitation that even Microsoft sees the need to bypass it to get Office on an RT tablet.
twoodfin 13y ago
Emulating an x86 on an ARM like the Tegra 4 would probably result in a pretty unsatisfying experience. Apple was doing the opposite: Emulating a processor with worse single threaded performance and (arguably) a simpler ISA. The alternative is a full port of Win32, which I imagine Microsoft considered and rejected. Even after they incurred all the time and development cost, ISVs would still have to at least recompile.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- bcoates 13y ago
  I think it has a nearly-full port of Win32, it's apparently not hard to disable the signing requirement and run cross-compiled Win32 ARM binaries and turn the Surface RT into a useful computer. Not much commercial software but the regular open-source windows stack works.
  - acqq 13y ago
    it's apparently not hard to disable the signing requirement and run cross-compiled Win32 ARM binaries Link please?
    - bcoates 13y ago
      This forum http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2130 http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2130 appears to be ground zero for that sort of thing. I don't have an RT handy to test it on.
- moron4hire 13y ago
  I don't think it's a feasibility issue, because a fair bit of Win32 had already been ported to ARM from the Windows CE days. I had .NET apps that ran on Windows XP and Windows CE from the same binary. As long as you stuck to the .NET micro framework subset, it worked great and was actually quite performant.

rwallace 13y ago

While I agree with your overall sentiment, in fairness it's not hard to explain. "Well the cheap one is shite, it doesn't really work. The expensive one does work so you want to buy that if you're going to buy one at all."