Really it was dead before it started, if given a chance it could have been so much more, but here's what one Analyst says:
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...-kills-windows-rt-future-arm-support-doubtful
In the time since Intel has dumped Billions into subsidies for its components in small devices (phones and tablets) without which it's unlikely there would be a single small device using their platform. Despite this ARM still rules on Phones and arguably Tablets as well. At least the ones that users don't complain about heat problems. If there was a knock on ARM it's that they were underpowered CPU wise. The knock on Intel's entries was they were underpowered GPU wise and drew too much Power in watts. Intel has gotten close but still lags in these critical areas but also in total SoC features requiring more parts per system. ARM on the other hand has pushed the envelope on GPU designs and done well on the CPU front also. The current iterations in early 2015 show promise of being very competitive in the CPU performance compared to the best low powered (watts) Intel SoCs.
From this we can not conclude that the ARMs race is over but without Intel subsidies it likely would be.
Microsoft's implementation of the RT Desktop was necessary. Preventing developers from using it for their apps and trying to force them into Metro was the mistake. They would have figured out how to use the Desktop UI and realized the benefits of Metro but forcing their hand was totally off putting and it still is. Lord knows you cannot force a developer to do anything they only work if they think they have total control and freedom to do as they please. Clearly Excel, Word, PowerPoint, OneNote, and all the standard Windows tools demonstrate the Desktop is viable for an ARM compiled app so imagine the devs dismay when they find you cannot go there with your own ARM app. We will get to how x86 Apps could have been handled in an ARM environment later.
More to follow...
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...-kills-windows-rt-future-arm-support-doubtful
One of the most striking reversals over the past three years has been Microsoft’s embrace and subsequent backpedal from the ARM ecosystem. In 2012, when Microsoft first demonstrated Windows on ARM (later named Windows RT), the technology world was in broad agreement that this bold move to support a non-x86 architecture would be a vital component of future Windows devices. Today, it looks like that support is dead or at least on life support. At its Windows 10 event earlier this week, Microsoft confirmed that there will be no Windows 10 for current users of Windows RT. Windows RT users will instead receive some unspecified “feature” updates.
In the time since Intel has dumped Billions into subsidies for its components in small devices (phones and tablets) without which it's unlikely there would be a single small device using their platform. Despite this ARM still rules on Phones and arguably Tablets as well. At least the ones that users don't complain about heat problems. If there was a knock on ARM it's that they were underpowered CPU wise. The knock on Intel's entries was they were underpowered GPU wise and drew too much Power in watts. Intel has gotten close but still lags in these critical areas but also in total SoC features requiring more parts per system. ARM on the other hand has pushed the envelope on GPU designs and done well on the CPU front also. The current iterations in early 2015 show promise of being very competitive in the CPU performance compared to the best low powered (watts) Intel SoCs.
From this we can not conclude that the ARMs race is over but without Intel subsidies it likely would be.
Windows RT: Maligned and mismanaged
The non-adoption of Windows RT was a perfect storm of poor decisions at multiple levels of Microsoft. The Tegra 3 SoC that powered the first generation Surface RT didn’t pack enough horsepower to really drive a top-tier tablet experience. Microsoft did a miserable job communicating the differences between Windows RT and traditional x86 Windows, tales spun of consumers taking the hardware home, firing it up, and then returning it when they realized they couldn’t run desktop applications.
Yep, yep, yep, yep.The non-adoption of Windows RT was a perfect storm of poor decisions at multiple levels of Microsoft. The Tegra 3 SoC that powered the first generation Surface RT didn’t pack enough horsepower to really drive a top-tier tablet experience. Microsoft did a miserable job communicating the differences between Windows RT and traditional x86 Windows, tales spun of consumers taking the hardware home, firing it up, and then returning it when they realized they couldn’t run desktop applications.
In retrospect, Microsoft’s decision to retain the desktop for Windows RT was a huge mistake. While it’s true that the desktop offered certain functions that the nascent Metro design wasn’t ready to replace on launch day, the sight of familiar icons and desktop interfaces primed consumers to expect the same degree of software compatibility and flexibility. Stripped of those features, Windows RT lost much of its appeal.
Microsoft's implementation of the RT Desktop was necessary. Preventing developers from using it for their apps and trying to force them into Metro was the mistake. They would have figured out how to use the Desktop UI and realized the benefits of Metro but forcing their hand was totally off putting and it still is. Lord knows you cannot force a developer to do anything they only work if they think they have total control and freedom to do as they please. Clearly Excel, Word, PowerPoint, OneNote, and all the standard Windows tools demonstrate the Desktop is viable for an ARM compiled app so imagine the devs dismay when they find you cannot go there with your own ARM app. We will get to how x86 Apps could have been handled in an ARM environment later.
More to follow...
Last edited: