backtop


Print 33 comment(s) - last by MindParadox.. on May 14 at 12:15 PM

Missing legacy mode will hurt ARM Windows 8 according to Intel

Intel CEO Paul Otellini is certainly feeling a bit of heat as ARM processor architecture is set to come into Intel's traditional market of notebooks running Windows and compete head-to-head. Intel has been unable to compete directly against ARM in the mobile market for smartphones and tablets due to the higher power consumption of Intel chips. That is changing, however, with Intel "Medfield"-based smartphones coming to market.
 
Otellini was addressing a group of investors at Intel's investor day this week and took the time to throw stones at ARM platforms running Windows RT.

"There's been a lot of debate that [Windows 8] is going to be a real entree for the ARM camp into Windows for the first time," said Otellini. "While at face value, that's true...[but] I think they have a big uphill fight."

During the meeting, Intel showed off a new ultrabook with a touchscreen that was running Windows 8. The demonstration showed how the machine could be changed between the new touch centric Metro mode and a classic mode with the keyboard and mouse for control called legacy mode.
 
"With one button you can get to legacy mode...this is critically important for CIOs who want to preserve all of their investments in software," he said. "We have the advantage of the incumbency, advantage of the legacy support. Not just in terms of applications but devices."
 
Otellini also said that Windows 8 on ARM lacks corporate enterprise readiness which will further limit it's appeal. 

Source: CNET



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By Newspapercrane on 5/11/2012 9:52:39 AM , Rating: 2
Looks like Intel's already started slinging mud at ARM for this. Who know's what's going to happen with ARM in this generation of Windows, it could be very successful. I think it's more likely that ARM computers will be plagued with comparability issues. The standard Windows user doesn't understand processor architecture, it was hard enough to explain the move from 32 bit to 64 bit, many times I've resorted to explaining the main difference being the amount of RAM a computer can recognize.

I have a feeling that ARM Windows machines are going to get a bad reputation fairly quickly. Not because they will be bad machines, but because uninformed users will buy the smallest, shiniest gadget only to find that he can't run Hello Kitty Island Adventure on it. The sixteen year old at Best Buy who sold it to him won't know the difference, and end up going back to Windows 7 where he can go back to spending all of this time strutting around as a virtual cat, or whatever the deuce you can do in that game.

TL;DR: With uneducated Windows users, Windows 8 could become a worse marketing Fiasco than Windows Vista.




RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By WalksTheWalk on 5/11/2012 10:07:47 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly! The public will purchase a Windows 8 ARM tablet, see the desktop and be pissed they cannot install any of their existing Windows software on it, not understanding that Microsoft's branding of Windows 8 x86 and Windows 8 ARM is inherently flawed. Microsoft really needs to clear this up prior to launch and make a clear distinction between these two products.


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By kleinma on 5/11/2012 10:49:30 AM , Rating: 2
Well you could look at it from the standpoint that there are 2 types of software. physical media, and downloaded. I am sure no ARM units will have optical drives, so no person is going to get mad when they pop in some game CD and it won't install, because they can't get that far.

Most people (not all, but most) who download and install applications from the web, are generally at least a bit more tech savvy, and are more likely to know what they have is ARM or x86 based. You might get the occasional person who is trying to get iTunes on their ARM tablet, but you can't hold everyones hand. You claim the branding is flawed, yet not a single piece of hardware has hit the market yet, so I don't know how you can make that judgement so early. All the news so far about Windows 8 and ARM has been geared towards people who read tech news. There has been no real public marketing yet for any of this stuff.


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By WalksTheWalk on 5/11/2012 11:35:59 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, I just read that Microsoft WILL officially be differentiating the Windows 8 x86 and WinRT ARM products.

Windows 8 x86 = Windows 8
Windows 8 ARM = Windows RT

I don't know why they just didn't name it Windows Metro instead of Windows RT. Just silly.


By Aries1470 on 5/13/2012 5:17:57 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I don't know why they just didn't name it Windows Metro instead of Windows RT. Just silly.

Maybe because that is the new user interface's name? Just like "Aero" was for Vista & 7.

At least that is my understanding of it :-)


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By Reclaimer77 on 5/11/2012 12:44:33 PM , Rating: 4
They shouldn't have used the word "Windows" for the ARM OS. It sounds radical but think about it. Who says Microsoft MUST call every OS they make "Windows"?

This was an opportunity to make two distinctive product lines for multi-platform usage. Like you said, when people see "Windows" they are going to expect it to behave like Windows always has. They aren't going to understand x86 and ARM code incompatibilities.

That way us Desktop PC users could enjoy Windows 8 without the slap in the face that is Metro, and mobile device users could enjoy their dumbed down flavor of the month touch UI.

Windows 8 is a terribly flawed response to the iPad. There's a reason why the iPad runs iOS, not Mac OS X. Windows 8 is trying to have it all, and I don’t think that can be done. You can’t make something conceptually lightweight if it’s carrying 25 years of Windows baggage.


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By tayb on 5/11/2012 2:05:41 PM , Rating: 3
I think they should just call it what it really is, Windows Tablet 8 or Windows Mobile 8. Then they would have Windows Phone 8, Windows Tablet/Mobile 8, and Windows 8. I don't think it would be confusing at all. It is still Windows and it is still sharing a code base but it is a different version just like the Windows Phone and the naming should make that clear. Windows RT is just ridiculously confusing for average users.

I don't know if it is a flawed response just yet. Time will tell. The iPad sells well because it is fun to use and the entry price is $400. As an iPad owner, however, I can confidently tell you that it is nothing more than a toy and I would GLADLY pay double or more for an 11" version that was running OS X Mountain Lion. I would prefer a Windows tablet provided the experience was the same or better. Right now it is not, Windows 8 closes the gaps for tablet usage.

My concern on the matter is what they've sacrificed in order to make the UI tablet friendly. Metro takes some time to get used to and I'm not sure what percentage of people will take that time. To me it's very very similar to the ribbon UI overhaul on the office suite. People went ballistic at first and refused to give up their copies of Office 2003 but they've grown to enjoy it. It's a great UI for a tablet though.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/11/2012 7:11:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well "Windows Mobile" might conjure up memories of the last time they named something WinMobile heheeh. Not a good move there imo.

But yeah, the naming right now is pretty vague and not all that catchy. Like I said, I don't see why the mobile version HAS to be a "Windows" anything. Just call it Microsoft Metro or something.

quote:
My concern on the matter is what they've sacrificed in order to make the UI tablet friendly. Metro takes some time to get used to and I'm not sure what percentage of people will take that time. To me it's very very similar to the ribbon UI overhaul on the office suite. People went ballistic at first and refused to give up their copies of Office 2003 but they've grown to enjoy it. It's a great UI for a tablet though.


100% agree. I simply don't want, or even see the value in making my desktop OS look like and behave like a mobile device.


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By scrapsma54 on 5/11/12, Rating: 0
By StevoLincolnite on 5/11/2012 9:57:02 PM , Rating: 4
Where do you get the idea that Arm is around the speed of a Core 2 @ 2ghz?

If you think about it, Arm is competitive with Medfield. And Medfield is based on the Atom Architecture. And we all know how badly Atom performs against any decent desktop chip!

Heck my ancient Single-core Pentium M 1.6ghz laptop overclocked to 2ghz wipes the floor with my Atom 330 HTPC system in most situations that aren't heavily threaded.


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By dark matter on 5/11/2012 11:49:19 AM , Rating: 2
Can you run OSx applications on iOS?

Are people crying because they can't run Apple Mac Programs on their iPad?

If not...


RE: Thanks For Pointing that out Intel
By tayb on 5/11/2012 2:08:39 PM , Rating: 2
It's a little bit different because Windows RT will look and feel just like the other versions of Windows. It would be like if iOS was a complete clone of OS X... except that all your programs didn't work out of the box. It will just be confusing for people and Microsoft is doing a piss poor job managing that confusion and educating people.


By name99 on 5/11/2012 2:20:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can you run OSx applications on iOS?

Are people crying because they can't run Apple Mac Programs on their iPad?


Did Apple ever suggest, or even HINT that this would be possible? No.
THAT is the difference. Especially since there will exist x86 tablets that DO run x86 apps.


By someguy123 on 5/11/2012 4:16:13 PM , Rating: 2
I would've agreed with you a few years ago had we made a huge shift to RISC over x86 back when x86 bloat was still substantial. Nowadays I'd have to agree with Intel here after seeing the numbers on their atom phone. In a few cycles intel will have a product that'll be similar to ARM in performance and power while still retaining x86. It's still mudslinging but it's true nonetheless.


By Hector2 on 5/11/2012 6:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
have a feeling that ARM Windows machines are going to get a bad reputation fairly quickly. Not because they will be bad machines, but because uninformed users will buy the smallest, shiniest gadget only to find that he can't run Hello Kitty Island Adventure on it.

You mean like what happened to Atom & Netbooks. LOL. Medfield is Atom-based and is already competitive with today's low power, ARM-based smartphones. You can't expect ARM to outperform Intel-based chips in the tablet and netbook-like world running Windows.


By BigEdMan on 5/11/2012 10:08:26 AM , Rating: 2
Windows 8 on a ARM processor equipped tablet. Sure there's room for them in our infotainment ecosystem. But honestly who would want such a crippled product? But hey, it's still was to be better than an iPad. Personally I'll shell out a little more money and enjoy the full experience of Windows 8 on my phone, tablet, set-top box, laptop and PC.




By dark matter on 5/11/2012 11:54:35 AM , Rating: 1
Ha ha ha ha.

You're really telling us you're going to run a desktop operating system on your 4" phone....

Seriously dude... That's fucking idiocy.


By Aries1470 on 5/13/2012 5:59:46 AM , Rating: 2
Hey dark matter,
It has already been done... last year :-P so um, yeah.. I can not understand your point. :-)

To make it easier, here is a starting point, then you can google the phone's name:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2095989/f...

It only had 2 hours in Windows 7 mode but put it in phone mode and it lasts somewhat more. Keep in mind that it is using last years Atom in it ;-)


It's true, but Intel has only themselves to blame
By GatoRat on 5/11/2012 10:40:41 AM , Rating: 2
Intel knows better than any other company how to make chips run extremely fast where power isn't a concern. They are essentially clueless how to do the same where power is everything.

Microsoft would have stuck with x86 had Intel actually delivered a chip faster than ARM with as low power requirements and prices to match.




By someguy123 on 5/12/2012 12:46:01 AM , Rating: 2
They're essentially clueless yet delivered a chip nearly as fast an as efficient as a single core a15?

I think you're confusing cluelessness with being late to the party.


Drawbacks? With Windows? NO!
By jnemesh on 5/11/12, Rating: 0
RE: Drawbacks? With Windows? NO!
By Argon18 on 5/11/2012 11:45:09 AM , Rating: 2
Too true, W8 is going to end up just like Vista. Reviewers will unanimously declare it a turd, Nobody will buy it, and Microsoft will be backpedaling and hastily releasing Windows 9. The fact is people don't want a Windows PC that behaves like a tablet, and business doesn't like radical change. Look how long corporate IT has stuck with Windows XP. My desktop at work is still running XP and isn't slated for replacement until 2014.


The Future Looks Bright
By AntiM on 5/11/2012 11:19:20 AM , Rating: 2
The future looks bright for ARM, iOS, and Android. Not so bright for Windows and x86, at least for the mobile market.




windows 8 is gonna suck anyway!
By cyberserf on 5/11/2012 4:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
metro OS. what a joke. A PC is not an tablet or ghetto smartphone.




Desktop on tablet ?
By mei123 on 5/13/2012 3:41:11 AM , Rating: 2
What Intel fails to point out that running existing desktop GUI applications on a tablet has little value.
Indeed they can run, but these applications have not been build with a touch GUI, usability is that poor, that you would not want to run desktop apps, and even less pay for desktop apps to run on a tablet. Windows tablets, like from Wacom, have been around for a long time, they require pen based input to interact with desktop applications, which has never been popular.
X86 tablet running Win8 with full desktop, will not be a selling feature, people will quickly figure out to use these desktop applications you need a keyboard and will be better off with a laptop.




I'm just glad Intel has a competitor
By tayb on 5/11/2012 8:47:19 AM , Rating: 1
I'm glad Intel finally has a competitor that can punch it in the mouth in certain areas, namely battery life. I have no doubt in my mind that Medfield is a result of Intel being scared shitless of ARM coming to Windows in 2012. It's amazing what Intel can do when they are actually motivated to do it...




By Crazyeyeskillah on 5/11/2012 8:57:18 AM , Rating: 1
I love processors. Intel hasn't always been the best but they have taken a comfortable seat atop the food chain these days. If intel is going to be introducing medfield devices, I don't see how ARM making a splash on a low power, lower need windows 8 device will really hurt Intel, given the integrated graphics they can deliver now that they have beefed up processor graphics solutions. It seems like they may trade some market share, but i think it's clear that the growth segment is going to be in the power sipping low drain low to medium performance multimedia devices. That is the real battleground.




Windows RT Is to Windows As iOS is to Mac OSX
By Arsynic on 5/11/12, Rating: -1
By WalksTheWalk on 5/11/2012 10:02:54 AM , Rating: 3
The difference in your analogy is that Apple clearly brands them as different OSes for different products. Microsoft will be supporting both x86 and ARM tablets and branding them both exactly the same as Windows 8. This branding decision will go down as a huge blunder for Microsoft. I like their decision to provide a full Windows capability in a tablet, but there is MUCH confusion, even among tech people, regarding Windows 8 and its support of which appliations.


By Arsynic on 5/11/2012 12:37:38 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't "Windows RT" a different brand just like "Windows Phone"?

I don't see your point. That's why Microsoft named it differently.


RE: Windows RT Is to Windows As iOS is to Mac OSX
By cknobman on 5/11/2012 10:20:34 AM , Rating: 1
This is true for me on tablets/phones. I wont be buying a phone/tablet to run some legacy Windows apps on to begin with and I wont buy Intel(for these platforms) as I refuse to support a monopolistic type company invading a new market.

The only time I might show some concern is on a desktop/laptop but as of not this is a moot point anyways since ARM has not moved into that market yet.


By corduroygt on 5/12/2012 11:05:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is true for me on tablets/phones. I wont be buying a phone/tablet to run some legacy Windows apps on to begin

If one doesn't care about legacy apps, why would they even buy a Windows tablet? Why not get the other tablet that has hundreds of thousands of apps already?


By MindParadox on 5/14/2012 12:15:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If one doesn't care about legacy apps, why would they even buy a Windows tablet? Why not get the other tablet that has hundreds of thousands of apps already?


oh, ability to link up with your home computer/laptop and sync seamlessly?

ability to attach to say, your Xbox 360 or windows phone?

ease of use since more than likely everything will be similar in controls and appearance?

not everyone wants to run a completely different UI/set of instructions/look on every device they own

Mind you, not everyone wants everything to be seamlessly integrated across multiple platforms either, cause hey, that's their choice, but me personally, I like to have the option to do so :)

And someone should really go through those "hundreds of thousands" of apps and remove from that count all but one language version of each app, and all but one "heres a different color background for this app, but we'll count is as a different app anyway" type things. Might still be in the hundreds of thousands, but you'd cut that number significantly at least :P


"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki