A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
The new business model surrounding the Windows 11 App Store is the biggest announcement
"Microsoft has always been trying to find a way to get back at Apple for the iPhone revolution that killed their market dominance in short-order. Their new Microsoft Store model could be a major win for them over time if Apple refuses to change their current App Store model in good time."
"While only time will tell if this strategy will actually be a winner for Microsoft, one thing is for sure – Microsoft's new store model has just set the Apple Store model on fire in techland and Antitrust commissions around the globe will only be emboldened by this move and push harder for major changes to Apple's App Store."
"While the security issue is still a good one for Apple, antitrust groups, in general, just aren't buying it. The only question now is, how far will Government's go to force change to the App Store (and Google Play)."
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
I can think of a lot of differences between Android running on WinIntel and iOS/iPadOS apps running an Arm Mac.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
I can think of a lot of differences between Android running on WinIntel and iOS/iPadOS apps running an Arm Mac.
I'm not referring to the actual technical detail required to implement these but the overall general concept.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
...
So supporting your customers and their billions of dollars of investment in your systems is a bad thing!
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that!
You're quite welcome, and I would add, how very astute it is of Microsoft to invite the No. 1 cloud service vendor, Amazon, to host their alternative to Google Play Store in Microsoft's App Store.
Next thing you know, Amazon is going to be invited to host Luna cloud gaming within xCloud.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
Sure, only those Amazon Apps won't be running natively on Intel, instead using Intel's "bridge technology", whatever that turns out to be.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
Sure, only those Amazon Apps won't be running natively on Intel, instead using Intel's "bridge technology", whatever that turns out to be.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
I can think of a lot of differences between Android running on WinIntel and iOS/iPadOS apps running an Arm Mac.
I'm not referring to the actual technical detail required to implement these but the overall general concept.
I walked away from Windows about 15 years ago and have been Mac ever since. I wouldn't take a Windows computer if someone gave it to me. Good luck Microsoft.
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app.
FUCK NO THANK YOU!!! That's an ATROCIOUS system for end-users, who will now have to deal with MULTIPLE payment processors, MULTIPLE billing points, MULTIPLE billing systems PASSWORDS, FUCK THAT!!!
Geez. 99% of the time I buy something outside of the Mac App Store, which is the bulk of the software I own, I just autofill my contact and credit card shit in Safari which takes like three seconds. But get real mad about it!
It’s not about speed. It’s about more and more online entities having you information and credit card data. Especially when you have no idea how seriously they take security and privacy. Also, the 3rd party stores with unvetted apps from anyone opens the door for criminals to much easily slip in malicious Apps.
from Parallels--Note: this article applies only to the virtual machines running on Intel-based Mac computers. The use of TPM modules in Parallels Desktop virtual machines running on a Mac computer with Apple M1 chip will be introduced in future updates. --so there is the potential for it running sometime in the future. As for VMware/Fusion, not sure if VMWare will ever run on M1 platform.
That's cool but VMs on INtel Macs won't be of any real use for serious gaming which is the only reason many Mac users have a PC or BootCamp. I can run GTAV or RDR2 at 2.5K on a 2103 Mac Pro with parallel GPUs in BootCamp for example. In a VM they won't even start. That said I use a PC and a GTX 1080 and run 4K, the Map Pro just got too hot.
As to M1s, I am running Windows 10 on my M1 test Mac using Parallels and I will go see now what that says about Windows 11 in the insider program test.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
No different than M1 Macs running iPad and iPhone apps natively if you think about it.
There is one difference: The M1 Mac does not have a touch screen, much less pencil support. It kinda limits what you can do with touch based apps. Simply: it only has laptop mode, not tablet mode -- it's not a 2 in 1 that can swing either way.
But, Apple could fix that deficiency anytime they chose. But then they would be in the same dilemma they're in with iPad: 2 in 1 hardware running an OS that can't adequately support it.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
...
So supporting your customers and their billions of dollars of investment in your systems is a bad thing!
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that!
You're quite welcome, and I would add, how very astute it is of Microsoft to invite the No. 1 cloud service vendor, Amazon, to host their alternative to Google Play Store in Microsoft's App Store.
Next thing you know, Amazon is going to be invited to host Luna cloud gaming within xCloud.
The conversation was about how you denigrated Microsoft for supporting legacy systems.
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app.
FUCK NO THANK YOU!!! That's an ATROCIOUS system for end-users, who will now have to deal with MULTIPLE payment processors, MULTIPLE billing points, MULTIPLE billing systems PASSWORDS, FUCK THAT!!!
Geez. 99% of the time I buy something outside of the Mac App Store, which is the bulk of the software I own, I just autofill my contact and credit card shit in Safari which takes like three seconds. But get real mad about it!
It’s not about speed. It’s about more and more online entities having you information and credit card data. Especially when you have no idea how seriously they take security and privacy. Also, the 3rd party stores with unvetted apps from anyone opens the door for criminals to much easily slip in malicious Apps.
Russian hackers retain control of thousands of U.S. private and government systems. They did it first by slipping malware into thousands of computer systems with a software update. Then they shut down the oil pipeline supplying almost the entire east coast with energy.
But for some reason Americans continue to think security is optional -- or that locking the screen door is adequate.
We've seen the sophistication of these hackers and the resources they have at their disposal. Can anybody truely say that next update to an app doesn't contain malware? Normal users and even most technical ones simply don't have the resources to screen those apps.
I'll rely on Apple to do that for as long as it is allowed by profit hungry developers with good lawyers and lobbyists.
These days cybersecurity (as well as public health) should be up there on the same level as military security. It makes no sense to invest trillions in sophisticated weaponry if an invader can simply walk around it. France recognized that in the 1930's when the Germans simply went around their Maginot line.
Aircraft carriers can't keep you safe if all the enemy has to do is use a hand full of hackers to cripple a couple computer systems -- or take over the nation's iPhones. That was Biden's message to Putin: We know you can do it. We've seen you do it. Don't do it again -- because we can do it better. It put cyberwarfare up on the same level as nuclear: there is no real defense except devastating retaliation.
The trouble is: it doesn't take a sophisticated nation to do it: just a couple good hackers or retired NSA contractors.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
...
So supporting your customers and their billions of dollars of investment in your systems is a bad thing!
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that!
You're quite welcome, and I would add, how very astute it is of Microsoft to invite the No. 1 cloud service vendor, Amazon, to host their alternative to Google Play Store in Microsoft's App Store.
Next thing you know, Amazon is going to be invited to host Luna cloud gaming within xCloud.
The conversation was about how you denigrated Microsoft for supporting legacy systems.
No. the conversation is about how MS has failed, over and over again, to take advantage of ARM, and hence, why I contrasted that with Apple, which is a year away from having its entire device architecture on ARM.
That MS has been unable to transition its customer and developer base to ARM due to legacy support is obvious. That MS has invited its primary cloud competitor to provide an ersatz Google Play store is hilarious, demonstration yet again how MS has completely failed in mobile.
Apple is no more a danger to Microsoft's business today than they were 10 years ago, but IMO neither one saw Google coming on so strongly and that threw a wrench in the gears. I'd also note that "the flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long". I'm not as confident in Google over the longer haul, 20 years out from now.
Betting man says MS and Apple win the marathon, with a dark horse contender breaking out if antitrust works the way it's intended to and levels out the field for all to them.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
There is a huge difference between "runs" and runs well. Time will tell.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
...
So supporting your customers and their billions of dollars of investment in your systems is a bad thing!
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that!
That's not "support" that's enabling. Just like welfare.
If MS doesn't provide value or an incentive for me to upgrade the status quo will remain. But let's be truthful with ourselves. People don't upgrade b/c they don't want to spend the money on the cascade that will come. Oh, need a new software, oh need a new printer, etc.
To tell the truth this level of "legacy support" is probably the only reason Windows can claim such high "installed" numbers.
Comments
https://www.theverge.com/22549385/microsoft-satya-nadella-interview-windows-11-decoder
"Microsoft has always been trying to find a way to get back at Apple for the iPhone revolution that killed their market dominance in short-order. Their new Microsoft Store model could be a major win for them over time if Apple refuses to change their current App Store model in good time."
"While only time will tell if this strategy will actually be a winner for Microsoft, one thing is for sure – Microsoft's new store model has just set the Apple Store model on fire in techland and Antitrust commissions around the globe will only be emboldened by this move and push harder for major changes to Apple's App Store."
"While the security issue is still a good one for Apple, antitrust groups, in general, just aren't buying it. The only question now is, how far will Government's go to force change to the App Store (and Google Play)."
https://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2021/06/microsofts-windows-11-declares-war-on-apple-by-bringing-a-new-app-store-model-to-market-taking-zero-commission-more.html
Next thing you know, Amazon is going to be invited to host Luna cloud gaming within xCloud.
The conversation was about how you denigrated Microsoft for supporting legacy systems.
That MS has been unable to transition its customer and developer base to ARM due to legacy support is obvious. That MS has invited its primary cloud competitor to provide an ersatz Google Play store is hilarious, demonstration yet again how MS has completely failed in mobile.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/24/22546791/microsoft-windows-11-announcement-features-updates
Apple is no more a danger to Microsoft's business today than they were 10 years ago, but IMO neither one saw Google coming on so strongly and that threw a wrench in the gears. I'd also note that "the flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long". I'm not as confident in Google over the longer haul, 20 years out from now.
Betting man says MS and Apple win the marathon, with a dark horse contender breaking out if antitrust works the way it's intended to and levels out the field for all to them.
There is a huge difference between "runs" and runs well. Time will tell.
If MS doesn't provide value or an incentive for me to upgrade the status quo will remain. But let's be truthful with ourselves. People don't upgrade b/c they don't want to spend the money on the cascade that will come. Oh, need a new software, oh need a new printer, etc.
To tell the truth this level of "legacy support" is probably the only reason Windows can claim such high "installed" numbers.