Comments Locked

41 Comments

Back to Article

  • Penti - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Actually Windows Runtime apps for phones and for tablets are still two different things. So it's not like an compatible app is compiled anyway, they use slightly different runtimes! Though the runtime is essentially the same as with x86/64 Store apps. Universal apps are not WORA. Of course compiler work and so on will have to continue, which will take some resources if they want to move to ARMv8. I expect the current Phone-variant will just be extended and continue to be offered for anyone wishing to run on ARM, and be called "Windows 10" with a kernel update of some type. The phone-variant will still have to support and run non "universal apps"-projects as it will have to support older versions of it's runtimes even the old model from WP7.
  • Brett Howse - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    With Windows 10, the distinction you are making is going away though. The phone is no longer a different runtime.

    There used to be WinRT and WinPRT but now there's just Windows 10.
  • Flunk - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    They actually haven't announced Universal apps will compile on Windows 10 yet, it would be nice if all platforms shared a run time, but they haven't confirmed that. Universal Apps for Windows 8.1/Windows Phone 8.1 are a bit of a mess with multiple projects for UI and a shared core library.
  • Penti - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Universal apps also include when you have different apps on different runtimes but sell them as apps available on both phone and desktop store with one purchase, so in that sense it's similar to steamplay on Steam – but often even less related than that as some "universal" stuff shares no code at all.
  • Penti - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Actually they had a full featured Windows Runtime in Windows Phone 8.1 with the advent of universal apps projects in VS, and full C++/CX/XAML support. But it's still different! Plus Windows 10 for phones will still support Silverlight, Windows Phone Runtime (introduced in 8.0) and the Windows Runtime of WP8.1. The distinction will continue.
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    "With Windows 10, the distinction you are making is going away though."

    And since Windows 10 isn't coming to Windows RT, this is still in no way helpful to Surface RT devices.
  • nandnandnand - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    "There were advantages to Windows RT of course, with little chance of malware finding its way onto the system."

    Welcome to Windows RT. Population: 0.
  • TiGr1982 - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Well, not exactly 0, but, of course, pretty small :)
    Windows RT was initially called WOA (Windows On ARM). So, this means that this (failed) WOA project reaches its closure soon. woa... (but not a surprise here, actually).
  • HardwareDufus - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    actually, if WIndows10 is going to run on my Lumia1520.... than it is WIndows on ARM as my Lumia1520 uses the SnapDragon800 chipset which is ARM based.

    My Lumia2520 also uses the SnapDragon800 chipset...in fact, it's specs are nearly identical to the 1520, sans the higher res camera... shame my 6" phone will get WIndows10, but my 10" tablet won't.
  • serafimch - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link

    I bought a lumia 2520 at Christmas 2013-2014. I feel as a complete idiot, microsoft abandoned as with no reason.I will never go with microsoft again
  • Beany2013 - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    I wasn't expecting this, actually.

    I was looking at how Windows Server Core was moving along, and then looking at the interesting announcements RE ARM servers for use in hyperscale cloud stuff, and I was quite sure that the ARM code would live on in a Server Core variant.

    Apparently not.

    Ah well, I'm on Linux full time these days, it's of little relevance to me. Still interesting though.
  • DanNeely - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    It still could. Historically MS has maintained the ability to compile Windows to a number of CPU platforms that they never released the OS for as a way to make sure they don't inadvertently bake in a hard x86 dependency by accident. And since they need to maintain the ability to build the core of Windows on ARM for phones; I'd be surprised if they're not maintaining the rest as well.
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Indeed. Dropping support for a whole platform does not mean they aren't keeping it on the backburner. All of that portability work that went into WinRT and WinPhone will be alive and well, if only because they need it for WinPhone.
  • name99 - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    TECHNICALLY they will probably retain the ability to run Windows on ARM. But that technical ability has no BUSINESS value because no-one in their right mind (OEM or customer) will ever again trust a Windows targeting non-x86.

    MS has pulled this stunt how many times now? MIPS? PPC? Alpha? Itanium? Now ARM. The company obviously is not seriously interested in MAINTAINING a non-x86 presence; they pull this out every so often to get concessions from Intel, then, as soon as the concessions have been obtained, lose interest. You could have argued that RT was something different from those mid 90's experiments; but the company's behavior here shows that nothing has really changed.
    The third time MS tries this, they're just going to be laughed at...

    It's a shame because RT is actually a very sensible idea, IMHO. MS has a foot in Enterprise (where people want and need complexity and endless backward compatibility) and in Consumer (where simplicity and security, at the expense of backward compatibility) are more prized. Having RT as the Consumer-facing version of Windows makes a lot of sense (basically the equivalent of the iOS/OSX split). But MS was unwilling to actually provide the technical muscle to make this work, not to mention throwing in a third fscking OS, WinPhone, just to muddy the waters, rather than presenting WinPhone/RT as a single united entity.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, plenty of happy talk now about universal apps and how super-awesome Win 10 will be. But MS still has not SOLVED the fundamental problem --- this Consumer/Enterprise split that I mentioned. Talk about "no compromises" is BS. We heard this with Win8, and how well did denying reality work out there? A screwdriver is never going to be a good hammer, even if it's the greatest screwdriver in the world, and calling a screwdriver a "universal tool", designed with the needs of hammer-users in mind, doesn't change that fact.
  • ayejay_nz - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Kill RT, kill it dead.
  • Flunk - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    This is not that surprising, seeing as Microsoft already did this to Windows Phone 7 users (for significantly less reason). I feel for any WinRT users (if there are any), it's really annoying when your platform gets dumped.
  • meacupla - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Well, that was fast. I could never justify Surface or any device running WinRT for anyone, even with the reduced cost of it being bundled with office. It was just hard to explain how it was Windows, but couldn't run programs made for Windows.

    WinRT was very similar to having a car you could never drive on public roads, because it had square wheels.
  • Daniel Egger - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    The problem is not that it couldn't run "programs made for Windows" because in fact it can (after a jailbreak). The problem is that Microsoft thought they could create a completely closed environment where no one could use just any programs they desire (free or commercial doesn't matter) without creating a separate *special* version that could be uploaded to the Windows Store so that Microsoft could make a huge profit and fuel their shitty store with applications for all platforms.

    They knew they couldn't just lockdown the real windows so they had to use the new platforms Windows Phone and Windows RT. For WP it was less of a problem since applications had to be created from scratch anyway. For RT it really was a cheap ploy that most of the developers saw coming.
  • domboy - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    Exactly. I've run the jailbreak on my RT since day 1, and it's actually a really useful device. If Microsoft had actually released it as an open platform like x86 Windows the story might have been different... of course as Daniel mentioned, that's not what they wanted from it. So while I'm sad that Windows on ARM is going away for anything bigger than a small tablet, I'm glad that customers sent the message that they didn't want Windows to become a lock-down OS.
  • rxzlmn - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    I'm sorry, I don't know anything about how RT can run 'Windows' programs, but what exactly can it run? .NET only? Java? Anything? If the latter, how?
  • domboy - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    A "jailbroken" Windows RT device can run .NET programs that have been compiled to target "any cpu" (which is the default I understand), and win32 applications that have been recompiled for the ARM processor. A good example of a .NET application that runs unmodified is the KeePass2 portable executable version... download it and run it just like on x86 Windows.

    Obviously to recompile a win32 application you have to have the source code, so all the win32 applications that have been recompiled to run on Windows RT desktop are open source, things like Putty, 7-Zip, Dosbox, etc. Here's a list:

    http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2...

    This collection of ARM desktop apps have made my RT so much more functional than it was out of the box that I probably won't ever upgrade from RT 8.0 unless a new jailbreak is released for 8.1 and later (whatever version this new update will be called).
  • Cygni - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    Aw, i still remember when very dumb people vehemently defended Win RT to the death on this very websites comments...

    Good times, good times.
  • xrror - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    I just wish Microsoft would let users unlock their devices after official support is over. I'd be nice since my workplace bought a few when MS firesaled them for $120 a piece - we just got them to play with mostly, but it was interesting to have a device that also could join Active Directory and also be used for things like POS terminals and such.

    Oh well, maybe someone will have some success with getting breaking the firmware so we can install things after RT is dead.
  • domboy - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    I've had the same though. Throw RT users a bone and release a little app that allows the user to change the signing requirement so the open-source community could resume supporting the device with ARM compiled apps. And/or provide a way to unlock the UEFI so we could install Linux on them.
  • danbob999 - Thursday, January 22, 2015 - link

    And this is why people don't buy Microsoft non x86/AMD64 (PC) OSes.
    They left Windows Mobile users in the dark, Windows Phone 7 users in the dark, and now Windows RT users. Every time, they make a new start with big promises and tell people that their new OS is there to stay. But it doesn't. How do I know that the next Surface ARM windows 10 tablet will not be left in the dark too?
  • fel0niousmonk - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link

    Those early adopters are clearly not good enough evangelists for the platform.

    If Apple had those same early adopters, the world wouldn't be obsessed with iOS.

    There were & are so many early adopters who gave up trying, and in a lot of cases I think vindictively jumped ship and became supporters of the competition while feigning the MS support in the way of 'constructive' criticism. Windows users (or perhaps more accurately, users on Windows) are simply more cynical and jaded, and it's reflected in the strangely hypocritical market reactions to Windows products.

    Of course there is more at play here, but the reality of this can't be ignored.
  • fel0niousmonk - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link

    I'd wager a lot of the jaded early adopters of unsupported Windows products are the very type of people who laughed off the iPhone because it couldn't do anything special but be a reasonably capable touchscreen device that could make calls and play music, when buttons were the big mobile input.
  • mkozakewich - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    It shouldn't be too hard to turn Surfaces into Windows phones, right? They're running pretty much the same hardware.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    An interesting thought, though Windows Phone is way more limited than RT 8.1. I know they're calling Windows Phone 10 "Windows 10", but...presumably it's really Windows Phone 10? At any rate I'd take RT 8.1 over any version of Windows Phone, unless it's really a lot more Windows-y than I'm realizing.

    RT 8.1 works great as a desktop even, and while my primary phone is a Windows Phone, I'd still rather it somehow run real Windows on it :-D
  • zodiacfml - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    Inevitable. They weren't sure Intel will be able or will produce hardware that can come close to ARM thus the birth of RT. I feel bad for those who bought it.
  • Refuge - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    Wait people really thought Intel would have a hard time meeting the power/performance levels needed for mobile? Really? Ok... News to me then...
  • serafimch - Monday, February 16, 2015 - link

    you are right my friend, I myself bought it and feel betrayed not to say STUPID
  • damianrobertjones - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    "Windows RT will not get Windows 10 update" (Shouldn't there be an 'a' in there?)

    “we are working on an update for Surface (RT and Surface 2), which will have some of the functionality of Windows 10.”

    So... Which one is it?
  • Zizy - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    Eh, this will be the same as Lumia 1020 Denim update. As CPU cannot handle those fancy camera tricks it won't have them :)
    Similar thing will happen here. Forget "Hey Cortana!" on Surface 1 because CPU is too weak for that.

    MS will probably still call those versions W10, not 8.5 or so. Less complaining that way.
  • stefstef - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    what to make of the upgrade anyway ? i like windows 8.1. but years after the windos xp you can easily screw up windows just by installing some software. i have about 5 application programs + visura scanner. all fine. i have origin, battlenet, steam and ubisoft player. i installed about 20 games. result: 5 different versions of vc++ redist packages, each game tries to install the proper direct x version. result: the games app no longer working and recently i tried to install a normal software package. already the installer crashed. i had to do it in a fresh user account. so one day i will have to reinstall just i did a couple of install stuff. was the same on xp, now still the same on windows 8.1. well for that you cant blame microsoft. but why dont they try to start a second line which gets rid of this compatibility shite, makes a clean cut under the hood with a freshly started windows line instead of having this universal windows approach adding "features" like siri or the old start menu and a modern 3d glasses. i would prefer windows new or windows freshstart to the updates any day. for the real future i would be willing to sacrifice compatibility to some games and some apps easily.
  • ET - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    Pity. I had hoped that Microsoft would just make Windows for ARM, especially now that it has a single code base across all platforms.

    I think it would be good for Microsoft to have a full ARM platform, with the ability to run desktop apps (specially compiled or generic .NET apps), to widen the CPU base. Such an upgrade would have made RT tablets more useful, and made their users feel much better.
  • domboy - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    That's what I had been hoping for as well... that they ditch the silly locked-down OS thing and just release a Windows 10 for ARM that was identical to Windows 10 x86.
  • Wolfpup - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    "especially considering the Surface 2 was still for sale not very long ago."

    Actually it's still for sale.

    One thing this ignores is that while it's apparently not getting the new OS, Windows 8.1 will still be supported for years to come. I mean if you bought a Surface 1, it'll still be supported for years AFTER Apple dumps support for the iPad Air 3 or whatever (and Google any Nex...i?)

    I bought one for my mom, that she's using as a desktop, and for that use it's still great. It gives you a full/real web browser, flash, real office, a real file system, support for piles of accessories that iOS and Android can't use, etc. For her the fact that it's locked down is actually great, and it still does everything she needs, and it should be safe to use into the 2020s.

    For me, obviously I would have wanted an x86 emulator built in and for it to be unlocked like real Windows, but even still I like the thing.

    Obviously for the past year I've been thinking "why not just replace Tegra 4 with Atom 2?" The hardware and everything are great (even on the first gen version my mom uses)...but replace ARM with an Atom....
  • gumbedamit - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    I guess it's just my opinion, but RT was better than any tablet that I've used. The author talks about it's shortcomings, not being able to run x86 programs, does Android, does iPad run OSX. I'm so tired of that comparison. Sure there are a lack of native apps, but I guess having a fully functioning browser that allowed you to to the actual web site doesn't count. Didn't have to pay for Hulu Plus when I could just launch Hulu from my browser, then just WIRELESSLY stream it to my TV. True MULTITASKING split screen, three screens actually. Launching PowerShell, CMD Prompt and a bunch of other utilities. No lag, yes Android tablets and phones still lag. I have 3 Android tablets, the latest being the the Sony Z tablet. I can't fault too much with iPADs, I just don't believe the hype. My point is , My Surface RT and Lumia 2520 are the best tablets that I've used. I am deeply disappointed that MS has elected not to put them on an upgrade path. I am dubious about purchasing future products from MS. It's like getting into a new TV show with an exciting season ending cliffhanger, then finding out, the show was canceled... THAT SUX!!!!
  • Brett Howse - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    No, iOS and Android can't run x86 apps, but they have a much larger selection of apps in the store. I have a Surface RT. I know what it can and can't do.

    The issue with Windows RT is that it came out for ARM, and then shortly after Bay Trail came out and rendered it useless. Everything you say you can do on your RT device can also be done on a Windows tablet with an x86 processor, but they can also do a lot more. If the RT devices carried a discounted price they may have been more popular but they did not really come in any less expensive than an x86 tablet (Contra Revenue made sure of that).

    I have no issues at all with no more Windows RT devices being sold. Zero. I don't really like Microsoft leaving paying customers who bought into their ecosystem as recent as today http://www.microsoft.com/surface/en-ca/products/su... won't get the big update to Windows 10.

    So yes, these will continue to get security updates for years, but that's not the same thing as getting the OS update.
  • milleron - Monday, January 26, 2015 - link

    This might be the most customer-hostile action in the history of computers. That it comes from Microsoft is even more disappointing. To orphan an expensive piece of hardware before the first OS upgrade is inexcusable, perhaps even worthy of one of those hated class-action lawsuits.
    I was so disappointed in Windows 8 (I'm mainly a desktop user) and the utter, hideous failure of the Windows Store that, after running PCs with MS operating systems for 23 years, I switched my entire household to Apple products in every niche over the last two years.
    Still, I'm running Windows 10 Preview in a virtual machine and still following development. Before this despicable announcement by the villains in Redmond, there was a chance that I'd have returned to the MS fold should they ever produce another OS as great as XP or Windows 7.
    Not now. Never. What a bunch of creeps!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now