Related
Hi folks
Recenty I got the Windows XP Embedded kit, and I was really satisfied and surprised with the performance of the directly built system on an old machine like a P1 @ 200 MHz with 64 MB of RAM, without a hard disk.
The main goal would be to run truly win32 apps on mobile devices, to give better functionality and compatibility.
Yet the builder supports x86 architecture only, but cannot be a big problem to port it to ARM pocessors.
What might be difficult are these things:
-Getting win32 drivers for built-in devices (ex. integrated SDIO/USB WLAN, BT adapter, touchscreen, and sound devices, and apps for them!)
-Saving user data on turning off (Ebmedded systems are designed for a workstation, like a cash register: prebuilt apps, and nothing more comfort ) like WM200x
If anybody has any suggestion are to get a warm welcome
bye
Yet the builder supports x86 architecture only, but cannot be a big problem to port it to ARM pocessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you kidding me?
This would mean reverse engineering and recompiling every binary in the OS.
Do you have any idea how many hours something like that would take?
yup, you're right, but in theory it's possibe. I've seen a running DOS on a Microchip micro-controller, or for example the Atmel STK 1000 is Linux based, also seen an mPlayer app operational on the demo board at the college.
as you see, i'm not an experienced programmer, but i'm not afraid to ask
Yeah, the basic low-level binaries must be recompiled, and once it's ok, it might be usable with regular win32 apps, until you run an old DOS app, wich directly access the hardware.
A few years ago i was able to port Z80 software to 8086, and it wasn't easy.
I don't really know these things, just want to see opinions, possibilities, and suggestions.
exe files are binarys which are instructions directly for the cpu
it's not parsed by the operating system
so compiling the os is not enough every application needs to be recompiled too
The programs you mentioned have source available in one way or another (since DOS is very old there are clones, like freeDOS).
If you have the full source for an app and the right compiler, porting it to another CPU is feasible.
But, this is not the case with embedded XP. Getting the full source is impossible which means most of the system will have to be rewritten from scratch.
Just look at the Wine project to see what it takes, and they "have it easy" - they are just trying to simulate the APIs not change processor architecture. (Lets make it clear - ARM instruction set is very different from x86).
And as Rudegar said it will not let you run any program that has not been specially compiled for ARM CPU.
I know it sounds like we are trying to kill you idea here but its nothing personal, unfortunately it just isn't feasible. We would all like to be able to run desktop apps on our devices, but simply having embedded XP on them would not accomplish that. Also while many old DOS apps can be run using various emulators like pocketDOS, almost all Win32 apps take more resources than our little gadgets can offer.
I am fairly sure though that in 5 -10 years that problem will be fixed.
<_< man hours or not, reveng'ing this will have a bigger impact than just winDOS Mobile devices. Desktops have a use for this, definitely (because the Vista-Only crap is starting to hit the market). Too bad they don't provide assembly in programming classes anymore, obviously because they don't want anyone else to reverse engineer anything and spoil their foisting fun. <_<
In any case, IIRC XP Embedded is missing the install/uninstall engine, so you can't customize it after it's flashed onto the board. This isn't quite a good start - XPLite or 98Lite are better for reverse engineering from scratch (but they're too powerful for mobile devices).
The other alternative is porting ReactOS, which is a reimplementation of W2K. Those guys are "having a lot of fun" getting things to work, tho. <_<
Maybye Windows CE6 yes, but Windows XP Embedded no, because they must run at 686-AT/X platform IMB. Sorry of my English
linux would be a path
with most linux programs you can compile them yourself
using good old
./configure
make
make install
of cause gui programs could have issues displaying correct
on such a small screen
You MIGHT be able to pull it off by installing a minimal (very!) WinMo firmware and then have it autorun Bochs, which is known to be able to run the PC version of XP.. A customised, thinned-down XPe image should run fine under Bochs.
--W5i2
As this is a developers forum - lets share here information on WoA (Windows on ARM) architecture.
What is known for now from different sources:
- WoA 8 would require UEFI to boot (instead of BIOS on x86), ACPI is required too. So no WoA to existing devices (they don't have UEFI/ACPI and I don't think that anyone would waste his time on emulating them).
- No native support for x86 apps on ARM, nor ARM apps on x86. Only .NET apps would work in both worlds.
But it is possible to create an emulator similar to DosBox that would run native x86 programs on WoA and, for example, I'm currently working in this direction.
- Though existing C++ apps can be recompiled for ARM from sources, it is not a 100% working solution. Current VS11 contains a rather limited set of ARM libraries - no DirectX libs earlier than 11, no import libraries for NtDll.Dll and similar DLLs.
I don't have access to any WoA builds, so I can't check whether these features are completely removed from ARM, or those LIBs are just not present in current VS11 build. But at least now we can compile test apps for ARM and analyze the code (though we don't have where to execute them yet).
- Native WoA programs use THUMB2 instruction set (ARMv7 and above). Though ARM instruction set would be supported too.
- According to "Microsoft Portable Executable and Common Object File Format Specification v8.2" WoA machine type in PE files would be 0x1c4, and some new relocations types are added (for example IMAGE_REL_BASED_ARM_MOV32T = 7). IDA understands such EXE files, though complains on relocs.
- SEH is implemented in a different way than on x86 (similar to x64, google for RtlAddFunctionTable to get the idea).
- WoA is more secure by default. For example TPM can be rarely found on x86, but it would be required on ARM.
- Most of existing drivers are source-code compatible with ARM (of cause if not using x86-specific stuff). But ARM would never allow to load unsigned drivers (unlike x86 Win7/8).
- As platform is completely new - all ARM drivers would be added to windows update site to simplify our life. Some obsolete hardware like 1394 is not implemented at all, so there would not be so many drivers for ARM llike for x86.
- All binaries would be the same for all SoC providers.
- No "native" ARM VisualStudio - developer tools are x86 only.
WoA requirements from different sources:
- 10.1” display with 1366x768 min resolution (though smaller screens may be supported with reduced functionality)
- Volume Control, Windows, Rotation, Lock power buttons
- Dual core CPU with hardware accelerated GPU
- at least 1 Gb RAM
- min 16 Gb fixed storage
- 100mW idle power in standby
- there are rumors that there would be standart "Phone call API" ("Apollo" UI)
Does anyone have access to ARM WDK? It would definitely contain a complete set of import libraries and would provide lots of info on WoA internals in headers/documentation. Seems that Windows 8 WDK on MSDN does not have ARM tools
so your bottom line says: no w8 on arm (ever)?
I'm not quite sure where you found that it requires ACPI. I didn't turn anything up.
The UEFI requirement is expected, and I doubt will be that much of a hurdle. UEFI is all open, and it should be pretty trivial to chainload a UEFI-compatible environment on top of the existing firmwares, provided that nvidia doesn't provide us with an implementation to start with, which I suspect they'll do.
For the emulator, I believe the best thing to do would be to provide something opposite of WINE, something that'd emulate the instructions, but pass API calls and translate between the two. A full Windows SDK will likely come out for ARM processors once it's finalized, if it's not already out. Have you checked in the Ultimate build of VS2011, or the express build?
Everything I could find relating to the TPM says that it's optional, but will be automatically utilized if available.
The rest is pretty inconsequental, at least to what I think most people here are interested in.
nvidia started a windows 8 development program for ARM (Clickey here), but I haven't seen anything else from it, has anyone else gotten anything?
mamaich said:
As this is a developers forum - lets share here information on WoA (Windows on ARM) architecture.
What is known for now from different sources:
- WoA 8 would require UEFI to boot (instead of BIOS on x86), ACPI is required too. So no WoA to existing devices (they don't have UEFI/ACPI and I don't think that anyone would waste his time on emulating them).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually they said it would continue to support BIOS for older devices.
See: Current machines dual-booting Windows 7 and Linux should be able to upgrade to Windows 8 without wiping out the Linux install. As Microsoft notes in the Building Windows 8 blog, “We will continue to support the legacy BIOS interface.” However, machines using UEFI instead of BIOS “will have significantly richer capabilities” including faster boot times and greater security. (from Arstechnica)
That's for x86. ARM was said to require UEFI. Besides, there is no real bios on Android tablets, at least not a common platform.
netham45 said:
I'm not quite sure where you found that it requires ACPI. I didn't turn anything up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got it in one of the "windows-on-arm" non-public documents dated the first half of this year. While UEFI,ACPI,TPM are an option for x86, they are required for ARM hosts.
So no custom WM8 bootloaders, drivers, patched kernel on ARM hosts (like "windows activators" do) until sign keys would be leaked or some backdoors would be found. Of cause this is good as this would make rootkit creation more difficult, and require device drivers signed by MS (so we'd get more stable OS) but I really don't think that this "protection" would last more than 1-2 months after WoA would be released.
For the emulator, I believe the best thing to do would be to provide something opposite of WINE, something that'd emulate the instructions, but pass API calls and translate between the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm already working on such tool. It emulates x86 instruction set with dosbox or bochs CPU emulation library (I'm using both of them for debugging purposes, while working on my own one that would be much more simple->faster), translates x86 WinAPI to "native" host WinAPI + emulates API that is not present or differently implemented on WoA. It is designed to be truly cross-platform, so just a recompilation + creating several thunks/stubs would be necessary when I'll get my hands to an ARM host running windows8.
Of cause programs that use heavy anti-debugging, self-modifying code, undocumented features and SEH tricks would not work. Currently it is rather far from being finished (I have to implement&debug WinAPI and COM thunks that cannot be automatically generated) but old games like "heroes of might and magic" are already working fine in a test environment.
A full Windows SDK will likely come out for ARM processors once it's finalized, if it's not already out. Have you checked in the Ultimate build of VS2011, or the express build?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of cause I'm talking about "ultimate" VS11, as express is designed to target mostly .NET (though ARM compiler is present there too).
And WDK that it published on MSDN does not allow creation of ARM drivers. I'm currently in a process of renewing my company's MSDN subscription, so I can't prove that myself, but I've read that on OSR forums.
I am waiting to hack my iPad and put win8 on it
I would hope touchpad would be the next viable option. Hp could still make more and just dump W8 on it. Thanks all of you for working this thread. I will be reading your progress as it unfolds. Good Luck devs and if I can find anything you will be the first to know.
Sent from my mwp6985 / Trophy using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Some information on Win8 "Apollo" is available. Apollo - is a name for a new "windows phone" OS from MS.
- Apollo is based on the same "desktop" code as Windows 8. No Windows CE at last!
- Apollo would provide the same user experience as old Windows Phone 7.x - Metro UI, People hub, builtin office apps, etc. Seems that software compatibility with WinPhone 7.x apps would be preserved, but this is just my own guess.
- All applications on Apollo are required to be signed, similar to Windows Phone 7.
- Device drivers can be written only by IHVs, MS and OEMs, not by ISVs. This would be a problem for antivirus vendors or tools like daemon-tools.
- There would be a "built-in" eMMC card with OS and vendor partitions, and maximum one SD card. eMMC supports NTFS, SD-card supports only FAT/exFAT.
Build-in eMMC would have C:\ drive letter, SD-card would be D:\ if present.
eMMC contains several partitions. Some of them would be made readonly during boot.
- Near Field Communication is built in.
- The same list of sensors as in WP7 Mango is supported.
- There would be BSOD like in a desktop OS
- Unproven, but it seems that only .NET ("Splash UI framework" and "Silverlight") APIs would be available to independent developers. So no native code again.
- Seems that x86 architecture is supported for Apollo too.
I know a few people have made threads like this before, but those were all before Windows 8 was released in its final version. Now that Windows 8 has been out for a while, how do you think it compares to Debian? The gestures and apps are cool ideas, but I don't think they were implemented as well as they could have been on the OS when it came to non-touchscreen devices. Apps are a good idea, but I spend almost no time on the start screen apart from checking mail and breezing past it on my way to search for something.
Drivers have been a nightmare for some users, me included, as a few random automatic updates (now turned off on my PC) rendered my wifi unusable without a complete reinstallation of all the Toshiba drivers. I haven't had any problems with things such as mouse drivers, but I've heard of others who had to get them from another computer and install them via a flash drive.
Graphics are superb on Win8, much better in my opinion than Debian's, but when it comes down to it, they just aren't that big of a factor when choosing an operating system. Debian, on the other hand, lacks fancy graphics while it has a much more ("power user", I guess) friendly way of dealing with files and customization when installing packages. Windows does have options while installing programs, but they are limited to what the installer offers to let you do.
As far as ubiquity, Windows wins hands down. With a Windows system, you will almost never be stuck with a file format that nobody around you can open, and Microsoft Office is just as widespread on school and work computers as it is on home computers. Debian, meanwhile, comes with OpenOffice, or you can install OpenOffice's newer branch, LibreOffice. Both use the .odf format, which is readable in Microsoft Word, but some formatting options and graphics don't translate nicely into Word format. Fortunately, they also include the .doc and .docx formats, though they restrict you somewhat on what your document can have in it (same translation issues). Back to ubiquity, programs are nearly always easier to install on Windows, and plugins such as Flash and Java require much less experience and work on many more browsers when installing than on Debian.
For customization, I like Debian better because packages can install either programs or give you new system changes, such as new window managers and graphics options. In Windows, you either have to change group policy settings, or edit the registry, both time consuming, inefficient, and risky tasks (not so risky for group policy, but whatever). Programs such as Wine (actually, just wine, AFAIK) can safely add a different file system type into Debian, while you have to use the much less well known program Cygwin to have a Linux-esque environment on Windows.
I could go on and on about information that's readily available on google, but I need to know, do you like Debian or Windows better? I've been running Debian on Virtualbox for a while now, and I like it, but the whole thing about it not being as widespread and well-supported (yes, I know it has a support community behind it, but you can google literally just about any problem for Windows) is what's holding me back. I've done a dual-boot arrangement in the past, but that doesn't work because I allot half my hard drive space to both OS's, then end up using only one. So I want to have only one OS installed. I don't use Microsoft Office anyway (LibreOffice all the way! ), but getting used to using pretty much ALL open source alternatives to common Windows programs will take more than the month of sporadic testing on a VM that I've done with it.
Is it worth the switch? Or is Windows 8 too good to give up?
Hi guys. For anyone else interested in this, some of you may also listen to podcasts like Windows Weekly or read articles from top Windows writers like Mary Jo Foley of ZDnet, Paul Thurott etc. Last I heard them say that it's 50/50, Micro employees are saying there isn't definitely an 8.2 (remember at this point Blue was in full dev last year), they could either skip to Windows 9, particularly as a branding refresh a la Vista.
What do you think? Will they? Do you want them to?
I do. I really think desktop users got shafted and I can't believe how many third party modifications it takes for me to get comfortable with Win 8. Reading the 'making win 8' blog I was excited. From the preview I was shocked so much was unfinished and gambled, unlike the Win 7 preview. The Xbox 180 rollback (and the firing of the Windows, Xbox chiefs and investor kick-out of the CEO) to me highlights a recognition of failure from a business point.
Edit - I'm going to upgrade my statement and say the world's largest PC manufacturer dissing the start screen and adding a third party menu - Pokki - is a result of feedback from customers and that I find it hard to believe how Microsoft couldn't add a full menu back in 9 at least alongside a start screen.
http://blog.pokki.com/2013/08/lenovo-pcs-now-come-with-pokki/
i don't care what they call it, as long as it's something worth upgrading to. other than my tablets, i have no reason upgrade any other computer i own or use to win8. windows 7 works fine for now.
Nice opinion piece, i couldn't care less what they call it.
As long as they don't A, force us to use metro all of the time or B, put the old start menu back in again ill upgrade to it.
SharpnShiny said:
Hi guys. For anyone else interested in this, some of you may also listen to podcasts like Windows Weekly or read articles from top Windows writers like Mary Jo Foley of ZDnet, Paul Thurott etc. Last I heard them say that it's 50/50, Micro employees are saying there isn't definitely an 8.2 (remember at this point Blue was in full dev last year), they could either skip to Windows 9, particularly as a branding refresh a la Vista.
What do you think? Will they? Do you want them to?
I do. I really think desktop users got shafted and I can't believe how many third party modifications it takes for me to get comfortable with Win 8. Reading the 'making win 8' blog I was excited. From the preview I was shocked so much was unfinished and gambled, unlike the Win 7 preview. The Xbox 180 rollback (and the firing of the Windows, Xbox chiefs and investor kick-out of the CEO) to me highlights a recognition of failure from a business point.
Edit - I'm going to upgrade my statement and say the world's largest PC manufacturer dissing the start screen and adding a third party menu - Pokki - is a result of feedback from customers and that I find it hard to believe how Microsoft couldn't add a full menu back in 9 at least alongside a start screen.
http://blog.pokki.com/2013/08/lenovo-pcs-now-come-with-pokki/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think - well, actually hope (so there's personal bias) - that the Windows team will come to its senses. A hybrid OS that runs on desktop/mobile and unifying look and feel was a good idea on paper. The problem was in trying to nudge desktop users to use Metro without touch capability. And that's where they are going to lose a HUGE segment of business.
Business wise most companies think 8 is another Vista and when XP reaches EOS they'll go to 7 and hope for the best with 9 - and it's coming. Historically Windows gets no more than 2 major updates in a life cycle and with 7 only getting one (so far) it's fair to suspect that Blue (8.1) may be it. Try to get more user approval on it and hope for the best with a new version. They could clean up 8, add a true "desktop/touch/hybrid" look/feel and slap a Windows 9 label on it... but here's hoping they'll spend the next 12-14 months really deciding what they want to do forward.
I really don't see the fuss over lack of a start button. What do people seriously use it for? Launching applications, shutting down the PC and accessing control panel (and related).
Launching apps can be done from desktop icons, modern ui tiles or simply go to modern ui and if the software didnt have a piece of crap installer when you start to type its name (dont even have to click a box or anything) it will list it. <- because that was so hard.
Shutting down PC, control-alt-delete or alt-f4 on the desktop or windows key + I to open the settings charm where you can click power > shutdown or here is a revolotionary idea for those with laptops or desktops within reach: press the power button and windows will prompt for shut down.
Control panel. Either try the launching apps thing above. Alternately, move the mouse to the bottom left corner so the little "start" thing appears, right click it, its right there.
I for one find windows 8 *easier* with keyboard and mouse than 7 was. I don't have a problem using modern ui apps with keyboard and mouse either. I have a word for those people who cannot work out how an app works on keyboard and mouse, its 6 letters long, starts with an R and has political incorrectness written all over it.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
I really don't see the fuss over lack of a start button. What do people seriously use it for? Launching applications, shutting down the PC and accessing control panel (and related).
Launching apps can be done from desktop icons, modern ui tiles or simply go to modern ui and if the software didnt have a piece of crap installer when you start to type its name (dont even have to click a box or anything) it will list it. <- because that was so hard.
Shutting down PC, control-alt-delete or alt-f4 on the desktop or windows key + I to open the settings charm where you can click power > shutdown or here is a revolotionary idea for those with laptops or desktops within reach: press the power button and windows will prompt for shut down.
Control panel. Either try the launching apps thing above. Alternately, move the mouse to the bottom left corner so the little "start" thing appears, right click it, its right there.
I for one find windows 8 *easier* with keyboard and mouse than 7 was. I don't have a problem using modern ui apps with keyboard and mouse either. I have a word for those people who cannot work out how an app works on keyboard and mouse, its 6 letters long, starts with an R and has political incorrectness written all over it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said. I'm a believe of progress, I find win 8 much more efficient as you already mentioned, unfortunately the great anti MS movement has done well in telling people what they should and should not like. Try learn and love... Simple
Sent from my Rooted Kobo Arc
SixSixSevenSeven said:
I really don't see the fuss over lack of a start button. What do people seriously use it for? Launching applications, shutting down the PC and accessing control panel (and related).
Launching apps can be done from desktop icons, modern ui tiles or simply go to modern ui and if the software didnt have a piece of crap installer when you start to type its name (dont even have to click a box or anything) it will list it. <- because that was so hard.
Shutting down PC, control-alt-delete or alt-f4 on the desktop or windows key + I to open the settings charm where you can click power > shutdown or here is a revolotionary idea for those with laptops or desktops within reach: press the power button and windows will prompt for shut down.
Control panel. Either try the launching apps thing above. Alternately, move the mouse to the bottom left corner so the little "start" thing appears, right click it, its right there.
I for one find windows 8 *easier* with keyboard and mouse than 7 was. I don't have a problem using modern ui apps with keyboard and mouse either. I have a word for those people who cannot work out how an app works on keyboard and mouse, its 6 letters long, starts with an R and has political incorrectness written all over it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To call me or anyone else that 6 letter word is clairvoyant of your personality. 18 years of using a start button doesn't go away quickly. Asking paradigms to change that fast is dang near impossible for most businesses. There should be at least a slight understanding of that.
In all fairness most of the big and powerful things you needed can be found in 8.1 preview by right clicking the Windows icon on the bottom right and does far more than I'll need. And with all due respect to your opinion, I have about 30+ different applications on my work PC that I use on a constant basis. Top 5 are in the toolbar (also having a challenge duplicating this in 8.1 preview - maybe someone can shed some light for me?) to avoid hitting that button. Rest of them are easily found because I set up my Start Menu to be as efficient as I need it to be. I'm trying to find a way to match that without having to go into Metro because honestly that takes more time. And please don't patronize me about going back to icons on the desktop - that's regressive to 3.1 and NOT progressive. Your power suggestions have also been around since at least XP so no new news there. I didn't know about being able to search for your apps within Metro and I will give that a shot and see if I reconsider. Moving the scroll bar on the bottom of metro to scroll to apps is VERY different than the touch response.
Notice I didn't trash the Metro UI concept, I think it's dead on for touch devices. I just think they can and should improve on the non-touch side where honestly most folks (and companies) do not need/want it... yet. Just like not every company embraces 64 bit OSes yet because they have yet to exceed the 4GB limitation. Again, just sharing my personal thoughts and those that I've heard at corporate levels so far. Not all of us are fortunate to be able to use the same OS at home and work. Many of us will always be behind the times in technology at the office - even if we work in IT.
Windows 9 or 99 - not a whole lot of difference
A side comment to the overarching theme of this thread: Windows 8.2 vs Windows 9 is purely a naming decision that has very little to do with what the actual product will look like. Certainly it has zero bearing on what features will go in.
It's almost certain that at the same time during Windows 8.1 development, the decision hadn't yet been made as to whether call the OS Windows 9, Windows 8.1 or what have you (hence the codename "Windows Blue").
Another good illustration of how naming doesn't mean a whole lot in Microsoft is the evolution from WinNT 6.0 to 6.1. On the client side the move was Vista -> 7 ("major" update), on the server line it was Server 2008 -> Server 2008 R2 ("small" update). But the magnitude of changes was of course very similar between both product lines.
Bottom line: don't get hung up on the naming aspect--it's like reading tea leaves. Look to the core of the product.
Before all the turmoil--reorg, lameduck CEO, Nokia acquisition--I was pretty confident of seeing Win9, as 8.1 was basically a polished 8, and 8 wasn't going anywhere. An 8.2 would only prolong the ignominy.
To have Win9, MS has to have an idea of how to substantively improve on Win8 (that users will buy into.) All present indicators are that that direction doesn't exist. The reorg will paralyze any new initiative, as will Ballmer's lameduck status. And digesting Nokia on top of those...well, turmoil would be putting it kindly.
There should be a new CEO next year (probably Elop, yuck). Lumias will be rebadged, and merged into the Surface effort. But integration and reorg for a company of MS' size will take 2-3 years at least. That almost certainly means we'll see another incremental Win release.
I expect 8.1's reception will be marginally better than 8, mainly because of XP's EOL and replacement purchases for those skipping over 8. The hardware (Haswell, Bay Trail) is better and will also help. But PC's glory days are over, more so because of MS' abandonment and ineptitude than from anything else. Not only on the software side, but hardware as well. OEMs are jumping off the listing ship, even faster now that MS is set to be a full-on competitor.
So how to fix Win 8.x within a year, with no new direction, and a paralyzed company? More TLC to its fast-shrinking cash cow, the desktop, would be a start. As before, I'd like to see a "Windows Classic" that again emphasize on desktop, perhaps with Metro as an optional component. I think a 1-yr allotment for this is doable, even given the dire circumstances. Metro, or Win Mobile (refurb'ed), can be an "essential" add-on, or a separate standalone. The step would be a good holding action.
This would require a revisit of MS' "one-size-fits-all" UI tenet, which isn't succeeding anyway. Metro on its own merits is nothing special, hence its force-feeding to Win users. But neither lame-duck Ballmer nor (likely) Elop has the vision to make a fundamental change. Elop did not turn Nokia around.
We'll see what comes out of the blender next year. For this year, I'll be upgrading to 8.1 and using it strictly as a desktop OS, ie an updated Win7. Metro will be excised, and all my tablet/phone needs will be (have been) met by Android. From what I see of the upcoming Win tabs, they all suck. High prices compared to Android, desktop apps that don't run well on tabs, and paltry selection of mobile apps (that are locked to MS' app store).
Anybody running 8.1 RTM (not RT) yet?
>unfortunately the great anti MS movement has done well in telling people what they should and should not like
Just have to comment on this. Get off the blame game shtick. MS' travails are its own doing, not from any "hater conspiracy" theory. Stop contributing to the childish squabbles.
>I didn't trash the Metro UI concept, I think it's dead on for touch devices.
I can't agree. Metro is still immature, as is MS' notion of mobile devices. Simple case-in-point: 8 does not support portrait use, most apps are landscapes only. 8.1's purported support doesn't compensate for the fact that current and most upcoming tablets will be 16:9. Try using one in portrait and see the awkwardness.
Metro has many other deficits, which I've pointed out before. Landscape orientation (and scrolling) is bad for long lists, among other things, which are best done vertically. Ever wondered why there still isn't a good file manager for Metro? Not to say that Android and iOS are perfect. Both have their foibles. But they're already far ahead in share and 3rd-party support.
>Windows 8.2 vs Windows 9 is purely a naming decision that has very little to do with what the actual product will look like.
What we're talking about isn't the numbering per se, but whether there'll be a substantive change for the next Win rev. The 8.2 vs 9 is a shorthand.
As far as substantive changes go, I can't predict the future, but I can say this. A few bugs can make a program completely unusable, but it doesn't mean that the program is necessarily total crap in its entirety.
Windows 8 isn't all bad. It has a few features which some users really don't like, but most of the new features aren't bad. They're good features solidly engineered. So it's very possible that an incremental release focusing on making these few problematic areas right could be a major hit.
A common perception is that Windows 8 is somehow so abhorrent that only a total rollback or a total redesign can possibly save the ship. I don't think it's an accurate assessment.
Its not a Blame game, its an observation from dealing with the public, in many cases for no justifiable reason or argument without substance a large portion of the geeky public/profession (note I am one as well) seem hell bent on slagging off anything MS.
It has its faults just as any organization does but some much of the tripe an miss information I have to wade through just to get to the root cause of the problem is staggering!! So no, its not about trying to partake in a childish game, its about trying to stop people being misled by so called experts and to make informed decisions based on fact
Sent from my Rooted Kobo Arc
>A few bugs can make a program completely unusable, but it doesn't mean that the program is necessarily total crap in its entirety.
Win8's issue isn't about bugs, but more fundamental: its design and structure, which were radically changed to fit the one-size-fits-all scheme. Users have not warmed to this direction, and at this point I can't see any change to Metro that can make touch use viable for desktops. While some here may differ on the finer points (or affiliation), it's safe to say that none here has yet to use Metro exclusively as a desktop replacement. It's almost a year since release. There are no more excuses.
>Windows 8 isn't all bad. It has a few features which some users really don't like, but most of the new features aren't bad. They're good features solidly engineered.
What's "bad" or "good" is an opinion. What's not opinion is Win8--ergo, Metro--adoption rate. It's abysmal. One may be an optimist and hope for salvation in 8.1 (or perhaps 8.2). MS certainly doesn't think 8.x will do so great, else it wouldn't have opted for the reorg, Ballmer wouldn't have been kicked out, and Nokia buy wouldn't be a necessity.
Put another way, it's not any one person's opinion that matters, but the collective opinions of Windows users. They've spoken, and I don't see any miracle on the horizon to change their tune.
People need to get the following in their head:
1) Desktop isn't going anywhere, stop dramatizing over the desktop vs metro bullcrap
2) Windows 8 does not force you to use metro, just the start screen, which is miles better than the old start menu.
3) Windows 8 metro works perfectly fine with keyboard and mouse. The R word is pretty much suitable for anyone who can't make the jump from start button to start screen. If you are that R, then you need to quit using a computer, that stuff aint for you.
4)Neither metro, nor the desktop will disappear in any subsequent versions of windows. Stop fearing/hoping.
5) it will probably take around 2 years until the next version of windows (9, momo, kiki whatever) comes along. Windows 8.1 is more like a service pack for windows 8.
garwynn said:
To call me or anyone else that 6 letter word is clairvoyant of your personality. 18 years of using a start button doesn't go away quickly. Asking paradigms to change that fast is dang near impossible for most businesses. There should be at least a slight understanding of that.
In all fairness most of the big and powerful things you needed can be found in 8.1 preview by right clicking the Windows icon on the bottom right and does far more than I'll need. And with all due respect to your opinion, I have about 30+ different applications on my work PC that I use on a constant basis. Top 5 are in the toolbar (also having a challenge duplicating this in 8.1 preview - maybe someone can shed some light for me?) to avoid hitting that button. Rest of them are easily found because I set up my Start Menu to be as efficient as I need it to be. I'm trying to find a way to match that without having to go into Metro because honestly that takes more time. And please don't patronize me about going back to icons on the desktop - that's regressive to 3.1 and NOT progressive. Your power suggestions have also been around since at least XP so no new news there. I didn't know about being able to search for your apps within Metro and I will give that a shot and see if I reconsider. Moving the scroll bar on the bottom of metro to scroll to apps is VERY different than the touch response.
Notice I didn't trash the Metro UI concept, I think it's dead on for touch devices. I just think they can and should improve on the non-touch side where honestly most folks (and companies) do not need/want it... yet. Just like not every company embraces 64 bit OSes yet because they have yet to exceed the 4GB limitation. Again, just sharing my personal thoughts and those that I've heard at corporate levels so far. Not all of us are fortunate to be able to use the same OS at home and work. Many of us will always be behind the times in technology at the office - even if we work in IT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't know me nor my personality. I think my choice of word is justified, nor did I call you it. I have not used the start button for 18 years, only about 10, but 10 years of start button usage I was able to throw away like an empty chocolate bar wrapper
I am running 8.0 not 8.1. Toolbar is working fine here. I also prefer a clean desktop, always have done, I do have My Computer, recycle bin and my account folder otherwise its empty.
You dont have to move the bar along the bottom of the start bar. On a multitouch trackpad (as on most windows 8 laptops and a few 7 laptops too, or a USB one) a 2 finger horizontal swipe, alternately it will respond to the scroll wheel on your mouse (or the scroll region on non multitouch trackpads or a 2 finger vertical swipe) and a 3rd option is to simply move your mouse against the edge and as you try to move the mouse further it scrolls in that direction. This works in apps too (although a few apps don't respond to moving the mouse against the edge in my experience, most do though).
The search function has actually changed between 8.0 and 8.1. In 8.0 start typing at metro it starts searching your PC by default but segregates results in apps, settings and files. Most desktop applications with a proper installer get listed under apps, a few things like putty or minecraft which dont have proper installers get lumped into files. In 8.1 it goes back to the old windows 7 style search without segregating the results. Both still have individual searches for store, bing etc (actually, here on 8.0 google chrome is listed as a searchable app too which is kinda neat, never noticed that until now). I find it incredibly quick to find things this way, just hit the windows key and type "beam" and its already listed Start BeamNG.Drive and Uninstall BeamNG.Drive as launchable applications, if I was searching for minecraft (pinned to start) I would need an extra click unfortunately but on 8.1 I wouldn't.
My only major metro complaints are lack of apps, lack of serial port access in the WinRT API (whether that be hardware, USB or bluetooth, not that windows distinguishes), blocking of localhost TCP or UDP connections (or any other network connection) and that control panel and file browsing should also be available in metro if metro is to be a viable system. On this machine yeah, perhaps I would rather use control panel in desktop mode, but it should be available on metro too. Lack of apps isn't something microsoft can do much about, that is entirely down to 3rd parties. I went to make an app but sadly microsoft say no serial ports and my application required it, I had a workaround which was to make the app communicate with a desktop application over a network and have the desktop application use a serial port, but thats both a) awkward and b) limiting as localhost is no longer possible so the desktop app would need to run on a second device which kinda defeats the point. I think 8.1 adds bluetooth RfComm support, it is possible to build up bluetooth SPP support in user code atop RfComm so at least 8.1 would allow bluetooth serial to an extent.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
I went to make an app but sadly microsoft say no serial ports and my application required it, I had a workaround which was to make the app communicate with a desktop application over a network and have the desktop application use a serial port, but thats both a) awkward and b) limiting as localhost is no longer possible so the desktop app would need to run on a second device which kinda defeats the point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you tried marshaling your data through the file system? Apps could communicate through metro app's local storage. It's hacky and it may require fiddling with permissions, but it could work depending on your latency requirements.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
You don't know me nor my personality. I think my choice of word is justified, nor did I call you it. I have not used the start button for 18 years, only about 10, but 10 years of start button usage I was able to throw away like an empty chocolate bar wrapper.
You dont have to move the bar along the bottom of the start bar. On a multitouch trackpad (as on most windows 8 laptops and a few 7 laptops too, or a USB one) a 2 finger horizontal swipe, alternately it will respond to the scroll wheel on your mouse (or the scroll region on non multitouch trackpads or a 2 finger vertical swipe) and a 3rd option is to simply move your mouse against the edge and as you try to move the mouse further it scrolls in that direction. This works in apps too (although a few apps don't respond to moving the mouse against the edge in my experience, most do though).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't say you meant it to me, just that there are a lot of people who would disagree with your thoughts. Please keep in mind - from a TS perspective we are outliers. From a corporate standpoint they have to look at the lowest common denominator - the users who muddle through using a computer just to get the everyday things done. They don't have a choice but to do that or not work. Not everyone even in Gen Y or the Millennials are tech savvy. (Women are sadly still behind the curve, something I'm going to make sure my kids avoid. Knowledge is power IMO.)
Your second paragraph is mainly targeting, again, a different segment than who I'm talking about. My concern is with the users that have box, wired KB/mouse and one screen and need it as simple as possible to do their job. These folks - some of which I am related to - are quite happy with their 2009 Core 2 Quad PC because it plays video and lets them browse the internet. Even if I build them another PC - and I did on the cheap recently - they have yet to touch it over the old system because they're comfortable with it. Ironic because you solve all their complaints and they still stick with what they know.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
I went to make an app but sadly microsoft say no serial ports and my application required it, I had a workaround which was to make the app communicate with a desktop application over a network and have the desktop application use a serial port, but thats both a) awkward and b) limiting as localhost is no longer possible so the desktop app would need to run on a second device which kinda defeats the point. I think 8.1 adds bluetooth RfComm support, it is possible to build up bluetooth SPP support in user code atop RfComm so at least 8.1 would allow bluetooth serial to an extent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What were you trying to use via serial? USB storage access? If so I think they're trying to pigeonhole it to the sever (SkyDrive) as that seems to be the way that it goes. All the reason why I keep very few apps with data on my Note 2 - and those that I do keep data locally.
daniel-s said:
Have you tried marshaling your data through the file system? Apps could communicate through metro app's local storage. It's hacky and it may require fiddling with permissions, but it could work depending on your latency requirements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hacky indeed, but then so was my first thought. Latency is an issue, but file systems might *just* do it actually. Would have to think about that a bit more.
garwynn said:
What were you trying to use via serial? USB storage access? If so I think they're trying to pigeonhole it to the sever (SkyDrive) as that seems to be the way that it goes. All the reason why I keep very few apps with data on my Note 2 - and those that I do keep data locally.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've not heard of USB storage being done through an old fashioned serial/COM port which is what I wanted to use. Some people do still use their old RS232 ports or similar. In my case, I was initially aiming to have a serial terminal which could be attached to a raspberry pi, I was also planning a remote control type app aim at robots powered by arduinos and other microcontrollers. Communication from PC to microcontroller is almost always serial, even the arduino boards which supposedly have a USB port on them then have a USB>Serial adaptor before communication with a microcontroller (FTDI on the nano, an ATMega8U on the uno which is then programmed to bit-bang USB before comms with the ATMega328 powering the uno itself and a few others on 3rd party boards such as the CP2100 series IC's, a few boards don't have USB ports at all and require an external serial adaptor).
Linux can commonly be setup to display the shell over a serial port, the raspberry pi does this by default, by addition of a serial cable between the pi GPIO and another PC (with appropriate adaptors for the 3.3v TTL on the pi and whatever is on the host PC) you can run software such as PuTTY as an alternative to SSH. This is commonly done on servers connected to the internet which may have SSH disabled for security reasons as an attacker would be required to have physical access to the machines.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Hacky indeed, but then so was my first thought. Latency is an issue, but file systems might *just* do it actually. Would have to think about that a bit more.
I've not heard of USB storage being done through an old fashioned serial/COM port which is what I wanted to use. Some people do still use their old RS232 ports or similar. In my case, I was initially aiming to have a serial terminal which could be attached to a raspberry pi, I was also planning a remote control type app aim at robots powered by arduinos and other microcontrollers. Communication from PC to microcontroller is almost always serial, even the arduino boards which supposedly have a USB port on them then have a USB>Serial adaptor before communication with a microcontroller (FTDI on the nano, an ATMega8U on the uno which is then programmed to bit-bang USB before comms with the ATMega328 powering the uno itself and a few others on 3rd party boards such as the CP2100 series IC's, a few boards don't have USB ports at all and require an external serial adaptor).
Linux can commonly be setup to display the shell over a serial port, the raspberry pi does this by default, by addition of a serial cable between the pi GPIO and another PC (with appropriate adaptors for the 3.3v TTL on the pi and whatever is on the host PC) you can run software such as PuTTY as an alternative to SSH. This is commonly done on servers connected to the internet which may have SSH disabled for security reasons as an attacker would be required to have physical access to the machines.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Old AS/400 systems used a serial connection to get to the system controller and the fix was to use the USB to serial dongle. Made for a pain in the butt because very few devices keep a 9 pin serial port on them anymore. (Drivers were a pain to find though). Probably the only way you'll be able to pull that off going further - it seems very (VERY) few boards have the 9 pin serial anymore, even on docking stations.
garwynn said:
Old AS/400 systems used a serial connection to get to the system controller and the fix was to use the USB to serial dongle. Made for a pain in the butt because very few devices keep a 9 pin serial port on them anymore. (Drivers were a pain to find though). Probably the only way you'll be able to pull that off going further - it seems very (VERY) few boards have the 9 pin serial anymore, even on docking stations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I have no problem using a serial port from windows 8 desktop. Microsoft just don't allow its usage from a windows 8 app.
My desktop PC which isnt even 2 years old does actually have both a full RS232 port and parallel port. I also have an FTDI cable (USB > 3.3v TTL serial) which works fine with my laptop, desktop and the pi itself actually (full FTDI drivers under raspbian and windows 8). Both of my arduinos are arduino nano's so also use an FTDI chip (using the same drivers as each other and the cable I have). One of my other microcontrollers is a bit of a pain but you can get it working with windows 8 too, have to disable driver enforcement before you can install them. Regardless, all 3 microcontrollers and on my desktop its native port are listed in device manager as usable COM ports, all of them work fine too.
One place you will still regularly find a DB9-RS232 port is scientific hardware. Many sensors/probes/data collection devices for use with a PC communicate via serial. Older devices (and a few new ones) from a full RS232 connector, some now use 3.3v or 5v instead and a few are advertised as being USB but in reality have USB>serial adaptors of some sort contained within.
Many android devices have a serial port available (usually 3.3v) via the headphone jack (often just sticking a resistor between mic and ground to trigger left and right audio function changes) or USB port (similar technique as the headphones) or more rarely the microSD
If anyone is interested in the podcast I mentioned, Windows Weekly, the URL is: http://leoville.tv/podcasts/ww.xml
In the lastest episode, Mary Jo Foley of here: http://www.zdnet.com/topic-windows/
tends to tell what's going on inside Microsoft. If you listened to back episodes she was talking about Blue right after 8 was released, she spills details really early and they do come true.
The other major host is Paul Thurott on the podcast, who writes here: http://www.winbeta.org/
The last thing they said, just as e.mote calculated, was that the company is in disaray and will slow down significantly since the Nokia acquisition and that it could have been an 8.2 but for a brand refresh they could skip to 9. 9 in that case would be a mixture of returning some of the key 7 features and polishing 8. I'll post here if there's any more, same if you guys know anything! I'm interested to see how this develops.
I remember going to the Win 7 launch at the time. One of the first things the Micro guy said on stage was that 7 was 'Vista fixed'. I couldn't believe he said that on stage. So instead of a fixer service pack they jumped to 7 and it was partially a brand refresh. Who knows now?
Raspberry Pi 2 spec:
A 900MHz quad-core ARM Cortex-A7 BCM2836 CPU (up from a single-core 700Mhz part)
1GB LPDDR2 SDRAM (up from 512MB)
Complete compatibility with Raspberry Pi 1 (software will need to be recompiled to take advantage of the new multi-core processor)
Identical form factor to the existing Raspberry Pi, which means it can fit into existing enclosures
10/100 Ethernet port
40-pin extended GPIO
4 x USB 2.0 ports
4 pole Stereo output and Composite video port
Full size HDMI
CSI camera port for connecting the Raspberry Pi camera
DSI display port for connecting the Raspberry Pi touch screen display
Micro SD slot
Micro USB power source
Its not going to be a full Win 10 like on a PC, its Win 10 IoT.
Well yeah it can not be full version still there is a windows support, I'm still waiting for Android support
Wonder if they will have proper display drivers with Win 10... Those are the reason Android hasn't been 100% successful in being ported over
Nypan sr said:
Its not going to be a full Win 10 like on a PC, its Win 10 IoT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But hopefully it will be more like more like the x86 Windows version without any dumb restrictions, as opposed to the Windows on ARM SKUs we've seen so far (Windows RT and phone) that have too many restrictions. I believe the current IoT version is prrety stripped down and runs win32 executables, but I guess it remains to be seen exactly what the Windows 10 IoT SKUs (x86 or ARM) will be like.
Either way this is good news, and especially as it's the first Windows on ARM release (that I'm aware of) that isn't pre-installed on a device, and can be installed and removed at will (again, unlike Windows RT/Phone device with a locked bootloader). So that at least is encouraging.
I know it is a silly question, apart from the company news, has anyone independently managed to get a developer copy to work? I scoured all over the web and have not been able to see any info with regards to that.
vulcanize said:
I know it is a silly question, apart from the company news, has anyone independently managed to get a developer copy to work? I scoured all over the web and have not been able to see any info with regards to that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no copy anywhere. At least, I managed Windows RT to boot with hardware-accelerated Qemu(and a basic Tegra3 emulation) if I disable the graphics driver. Still no input but that should just be some boring code to write.
black_blob said:
There is no copy anywhere. At least, I managed Windows RT to boot with hardware-accelerated Qemu(and a basic Tegra3 emulation) if I disable the graphics driver. Still no input but that should just be some boring code to write.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's sounds very interesting (maybe should have posted that on the Windows RT section)
as a couple of us would be interested in learning how you did that
xsoliman3 said:
That's sounds very interesting (maybe should have posted that on the Windows RT section)
as a couple of us would be interested in learning how you did that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I should clean the UEFI implementation and adapt the HalExtTegra3 to something cleaner without a hacked VersatilePB target. How to disassemble that lib?
A bluescreen is the result with the RTSM emulator. Does anyone have Windows RT BSP documentation or a disassembler?
Just noticed someone else who has done amazing things with Windows RT on generic ARM hardware
http://winocm.moe/projects/bringup/osports/2015/01/12/giving-windows-on-arm-a-hand/
I think Linux is much more important than windows support.