robaba

anonconformist said:

MplsP said:

For all the people mocking QC, they have a long history and a lot of experience in processor design, so they're not exactly 'new' to the game.

Ultimately, though, if they want to build a desktop-class processor, they need to have an OS to run on it. Microsoft has not shown any will to make ARM processors a viable alternative for windows. until they do, any non-x86 chip will be fighting with one hand behind its back.

Microsoft is largely doing what it can to make ARM processors a viable Windows platform, with the biggest problem being not only are they extremely constrained by the availability of high-performance ARM chips for running ARM-native code applications, even with the hardware/software support they have with running legacy Intel ISA native code with a major performance hit compared to native ARM code, the bigger thing is Microsoft has a business model of very long-term backwards compatibility, something that enterprise loves. The same thing that works for Microsoft for Enterprise is a HUGE weakness for Apple, as there’s very little “old” software that is in use, as Apple very quickly breaks old software with new APIs being introduced and old ones notably changing in behavior and/or being removed completely in a very short time period.

Making Windows work at top native ARM processor performance is already solved: making all ISVs and in-house applications move to ARM is an incredibly high amount of inertia to overcome, for those stated reasons and more. Microsoft being able to use Apple chips for their ARM platform by itself is not sufficient to move Enterprise over, even if Microsoft and Apple cooperated on that.

OutdoorAppDeveloper said:

darelrex said:

OutdoorAppDeveloper said:

I don't like their chances. Their arguments are weak. Their demands are ridiculous.
If you want to go after Apple's monopoly, you have to use the customer's right to chose what apps they can use on their iPhones. That is where Apple is the weakest.
For example, why can't I mine cryptocurrency on my iPhone if I want to?
Why can't I use BitTorrent if I want to?
Why can't I display a list of the WiFi networks around me?
Why can't I run a Windows or game emulator?
Why can't I choose any kind of Apple Watch face?

Does the consumer have the right to have these activities supported by every company's computer-based product? How about the consumer can buy a device that allows it, like an Android phone or a Raspberry Pi?

Yes they do actually. They do have the right to do whatever they want with the things they own. Legalese buried in some fine print no one reads does not in any way mitigate your right to install any software you want on the devices you own.