10/31/2022 0 Comments People coding on mac computers
The caveat is that the developer has to tick a button/allow you to run it on there (UWP), unless you crack/hack that specific UWP. I'll tell you the differences between Continuum and WoA.Ĭontinuum runs on the phone, and these are Snapdragon 835 based processors. #PEOPLE CODING ON MAC COMPUTERS WINDOWS#Windows-on-ARM is now killed, and that is evolving into Windows 11S. Whatever you can run on Continuum you can run on WoA. #PEOPLE CODING ON MAC COMPUTERS WINDOWS 8#WindowsRT evolved into Windows 8 Common, and this evolved into Windows10 Mobile. moreThat's the thing you're not understanding. Mediatek sux, I got the ui part, but what about feature parity? Could the office apps on the phone work just. Sure, it pisses off some developers for a short period, but they adapt and they forget, but it really gets the ball moving forward. I do think MS should have been more heavy handed, and forced all future developers to HAVE to support it, kind of like how Apple operates. So if there is a poor experience for the user, that is mostly on the developer to blame. But if the developer needs to opt-in, or if they actively opt-out, you will get different experiences. I think the upcoming Windows 11S is doing the same thing. It is literally a checkbox in the SDK, and it's chosen by the developer. If there are ANY differences, it is because either the developer has a "mobile" version of that program, and they have nominated that to be run on WoA / Continuum instead of the full-Desktop version. #PEOPLE CODING ON MAC COMPUTERS PC#And the features that you get on a Desktop PC is the exact same that you see on WoA and Continuum. If something doesn't play on WoA, it won't play on Continuum. The problem with that, is it causes a lot of problems and makes Windows a worse experience which directly hurts MS. They went with "anything" and let the market decide. moreMS hasn't chosen Point 2, or Point 1. Mediatek sux, Sure any app will run, but it wont be offering the same features you'd get on the desktop. We had this partially done with the original 1st-gen Core-i processors and then later with 1st-gen Ryzen, but it was very partial. That means "new x86" chipsets that run newish-programs but they lack a lot of things for legacy support, and either have to do it through slow/software-emulation or by upgrading the hardware to ones which include specialised co-processors to handle those legacy code. The funny part is, whilst MS is neglecting to do this, and it is being hesitated by Intel/AMD, they will do it soon due to necessity. However, they still need to do some "shedding" in an interval, and I think every 12-years (double length of ARM) is appropriate for x86. So this means the x86-architecture cannot be upgraded as often. Now, it is true that desktops aren't upgraded often (6 years), whereas laptops are a little quicker (4 years), and phones are very rapidly renewed (2 years). So ARM is roughly on a 6-yearly cadence of changing and updating their architecture platform. Contrast that to ARM (RISC) which closed off individual architecture levels such as ARM11 (iPhone 3G/Google G1), ARMv7 (iPhone 5/Nexus 6), ARMv8 (iPhone 7/Pixel 2), ARMv8.2 (iPhone 11/Pixel 4), ARMv9 (iPhone 14/Pixel 7). Sure, x86 (aka CISC) has undergone changes since it's early days in the early 80s, mid 90s, and late 00s but they haven't shed most of these. And the ENERGY aspect comes from believe it or not the archaic system of Windows, and the built-up excess/junk within x86 instruction set. The performance also comes from over 6-years of neglect by Intel (and the inability for alternative x86 to compete). Whereas on ARM, the way SoftBank has unified the system and made their licenses enables cooperative innovation and competition. The cost issue comes from the monopoly set by Intel, with the market barely stabilising now with AMD. So why is it the case that ARM cores have the trifecta advantage in ENERGY, PERFORMANCE, COST ? Well, it is due to several reasons. Microsoft's poor approach has cost them dearly here, because they were stupid, stubborn, and didn't embrace the changing market. Apple Laptops, from 12in, 14in, 16in that are using the M1/Pro/Max are superior to their Windows counterpart when it comes to Single-core, Multi-thread, GPU, and Battery Life. The other reason is also mobile computing. In that market, it's entirely Linux wether a custom job or through Amazon Systems. And better than Ryzen are ARM-based servers. Now? AMD has the faster, more efficient, and cheaper platform compared to Intel. So previously Intel had a strong dominance there, with the majority running Linux System (usually Debian-based), but a lot of profits for MS/Windows. That's rapidly expanding thanks to going mainstream with ADSL/4G, and now very usable thanks to Fibre/5G. moreOne major reason would be for the Cloud Market. PC means operated by a computer OS LIKE WINDOW. Sohail shafayat, There no POST-PC era, nothing can replace a pc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |