Forget about Windows on Arm, wheres Windows on RISC-V? (www.xda-developers.com)
from Brkdncr@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 06:29
https://lemmy.world/post/16692841

#technology

threaded - newest

NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 06:39 next collapse

Forget about Windows

FTFY

essell@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 07:58 collapse

Where can you see lions… Only in Kenya!

Morphit@feddit.uk on 19 Jun 08:24 collapse

Kenya believe it‽

hohoho@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 09:35 collapse

Kenya only see lions through windows

Dremor@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 06:58 next collapse

It’s a RISC they are not willing to take.

RVGamer06@sh.itjust.works on 19 Jun 07:24 collapse

ba dum tsss

Treczoks@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 11:38 next collapse

Why would anyone do that? Even Windows on ARM is only a desperate move by Microsoft to make an appearence of keeping up with times, but RISC-V?

ramble81@lemm.ee on 19 Jun 12:04 next collapse

They tried Windows on Itanium and on Alpha. I think the biggest issue is even though the OS could be recompiled, most apps are not compiled at install in order to take advantage of the underlying platform. You saw a similar issue with the original Surface being ARM only. Sure the OS was there but people couldn’t run the Windows apps they were used to and Microsoft got held responsible rather than the developers.

Alternatively you’d have to put an x86 emulation layer which would slow apps down and people would again ask “why?”

nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br on 19 Jun 12:22 next collapse

One of the great advantages of software distributed with the source code is the flexibility to move to different platforms and architectures. I wonder if moving to a snap/flatpak model will change this flexibility in the future.

deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de on 19 Jun 12:36 collapse

They tried that, it’s called UWP. A lot of programs don’t want to be distributed through the microsoft store though, forcing them to use “old” .exe’s

BearOfaTime@lemm.ee on 20 Jun 05:56 collapse

God knows I don’t want that crap either. They’re always bastardized versions of full apps.

Brkdncr@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 12:38 next collapse

Hmm I wonder why MS has spent so much time converting office apps to run on webview2…

ramble81@lemm.ee on 19 Jun 14:35 collapse

Microsoft has always embraced their own migration. They converted their apps to UWP. They’re making them platform agnostic with webview2. If you want to run just their software on any architecture that’s fine, but Windows and x86 have been co-mingled and anyone who installs Windows expects their 3rd party software to just work.

Brkdncr@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 15:12 collapse

They’ve also been pushing PWA hard. A lot of apps run on webview2 even in specialized industries.

I won’t be surprised if we see a larger push to non-x86 and if it’s arm then it’s also possible to go risc-v if app support is there.

Veraxus@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 15:56 collapse

Emulation worked (and still works) great when Apple switched from x86 to ARM. It can be done.

erwan@lemmy.ml on 20 Jun 06:29 collapse

Also when Mac went from PPC to x86

pelya@lemmy.world on 19 Jun 19:57 collapse

RISC-V is not proprietary enough.

ReginaPhalange@lemmy.world on 20 Jun 13:59 collapse

as it’s seen as a threat to the tech that the US can influence or outright exert control over

Good