Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by smoldesu 975 days ago
Anticipation of what? Microsoft has "supported" ARM as far back as Windows RT, but developers and integrators don't care. The hardware didn't (and still doesn't) sell, and every usable core design is either from the stone age or completely proprietary. Somehow, x86 SOCs are easier to iterate on.

Dotnet supports Apple Silicon for the same reason it supports AArch64-Linux; it's a real user platform. Windows-on-ARM is really not, and it won't get the attention it needs until attractive hardware is ready to ship.
1 comments
WhereIsTheTruth 975 days ago
> Anticipation of what?

> it won't get the attention it needs until attractive hardware is ready to ship.

Dunno what to say!

Windows RT is the perfect example; software was not ready, and is still not

It's only been 11 months that Visual Studio can run on ARM

link
delfinom 975 days ago
>It's only been 11 months that Visual Studio can run on ARM

It's only been 3 years since Visual Studio runs in 64-bit on x86 ;)

I think the biggest holdback for VS with ARM was there were no good build boxes out there. With VS for ARM, Microsoft released their own ARM dev kit hardware loaded with 32gigs of ram and a snapdragon 8cx. Anyone else selling ARM hardware for Windows skimps with like 4g of ram.

VS could however crosscompile to ARM32 and later ARM64 for quite awhile.

link
smoldesu 975 days ago
Dotnet Core and Mono both supported AArch64 targets long before Apple Silicon existed, too. I think characterizing Microsoft as "lazy" in regards to RISC is wrong from a pragmatic point-of-view.
link
bhouston 975 days ago
I think unlike Apple, Microsoft doesn’t commit to Arm. And because it doesn’t commit it doesn’t truly invest like Apple in ensuring success.
link