Microsoft: Intel’s Windows-on-ARM talk ‘factually inaccurate’

Is anyone really surprised? As Business Insider reports, Microsoft has publicly addressed Intel’s claims about the ARM version of Windows 8, and in short, it sounds like the chipmaker wasn’t being entirely truthful. Here’s what Microsoft said, according to Business Insider:

Intel’s statements during yesterday’s Intel Investor Meeting about Microsoft’s plans for the next version of Windows were factually inaccurate and unfortunately misleading. From the first demonstrations of Windows on SoC, we have been clear about our goals and have emphasized that we are at the technology demonstration stage. As such, we have no further details or information at this time.

In case you missed our coverage yesterday, Intel claimed that there will be four different versions of Windows for ARM, and that none of them will be backward-compatible with existing Windows applications.

Microsoft’s rebuttal unfortunately stops short of specifically disavowing either of those claims, leaving the fear, uncertainty, and doubt mitigated but still present. I guess we’ll have to wait until Microsoft sheds more light on its next operating system to get a clearer picture. Until then, keep in mind that it’s in Microsoft’s best interest to make Windows on ARM as appealing an alternative to Android and iOS as possible. Backward-compatibility with legacy software would go a long way.

Comments closed
    • indeego
    • 11 years ago

    Hey I wouldn’t insert FUD talk into articles were I asked to report on them. It goes further because Cyril reports on products that he then reports the news on.

    As for commenting, anything goes. Isn’t that why we comment, to show our bias?

    Meh, whatever. Just reeks of /. “editorializing” rather than just compressing the news in a digestible format.

    • Kurlon
    • 11 years ago

    If this is FX32! polished up I don’t see any issues. I used it to play Starcraft on a 21164/533 back in the day.

    • mesyn191
    • 11 years ago

    You mean a JIT compiler? JIT’s are not particularly fast at all and have been around for a looong time and have never really lived up to the hype of providing native performance for cross platform software. Many times they’ve been pretty damn slow.

    And a quad core A15 @ 2Ghz will likely only have OK performance with native apps vs. current x86 chips much less vs. what will be available when Win8 is supposed to ship in 2013. For netbooks, MID’s, and super cell phones that is fine even great when you consider its likely very low power usage. But you’re fooling yourself if you think its performance when running a x86 emulator is going to be anything but slow. Likely very slow since most apps for x86 still don’t make very good use of 2 or more cores, which means you’ll be stuck with 1 or 2 ARM cores most of the time to do your emulation work.

    • NeelyCam
    • 11 years ago

    Now you’re just being mean. You know perfectly well that the last Jimmy was supposed to be Bobby.

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    Forget Intel & Microsoft, I want to hear more of [i<]your[/i<] story!

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    He admits he steals a lot, but that doesn’t mean he’s also a liar.

    • cynan
    • 11 years ago

    So let me get this straight. Were little Bobby and Jimmy sharing the same bed? If not, wouldn’t it be easy to solve who, in fact, is the bedwetter? If so, why does little Suzy care if she is in no danger of coming in contact with said bedwet?

    But the real interesting question is why little Jimmy would admit to wetting the bed to little Suzy? Is she an older sibling or playmate who’s authority commands truth from little Jimmy? Or is it that little Suzy is trying to get little Jimmy into her bed, when he’d much rather stay with little Bobby?

    Or maybe this was a ruse by little Bobby to get out of little Jimmy’s bed and into little Suzy’s, knowing all along that little Suzy had had her eye on little Bobby as a prospective bedfellow for quite some time…

    Wait, what does this have to do with Intel and Microsoft again?

    • 5150
    • 11 years ago

    Little Jimmy is really Ricky Henderson.

    • Scrotos
    • 11 years ago

    So why are you so intent on dressing me down about mere speculation on my part? Do you have a vested interest in this or something? I think it’s a neat idea and if the economics are there, I think it’s a viable thing to happen.

    Is it likely to happen? Nope. Intel has a history of “not invented here” syndrome when it comes to tech. Will Intel license Atom SoC stuff to other people who might try to make it happen? Maybe.

    If the alternative is between having a presence in 20% of the ultramobile market and a presence in 80% of the ultramobile market, well, what’s the better choice from a business standpoint? Blah blah blah marketing heads etc., fine and dandy, but money is money. I stand by my assertion that if there’s good money to be made or even mindshare by having “Atom” stickers on cellphone boxes, it’s a possible scenario.

    • Scrotos
    • 11 years ago

    Yeah, I think that was the StrongARM designers who they bought from DEC. Then they all ditched Intel so Intel stopped doing ARM stuff.

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    I’d be confused… Why does little Jimmy speak of himself in the third person? And if little Jimmy says “Little Jimmy is a liar” and he’s telling the truth, then anything little Jimmy says is a lie, including the fact that he’s a liar, which means everything he says is true, including when he says he’s a liar, which means…

    • Buzzard44
    • 11 years ago

    If little Jimmy says, “Little Bobby wets the bed.”
    Then little Bobby says, “Little Jimmy’s a liar.”
    Then little Suzie asks, “Bobby, do you wet the bed?”
    And then little Jimmy says, “Uhh…little Jimmy’s a liar.”

    I would be suspicious.

    • swaaye
    • 11 years ago

    Intel did build ARM CPUs less than 10 years ago.

    • NeelyCam
    • 11 years ago

    You’re quick to judge Intel. This was an Intel analyst meeting – I think it would be a horrible idea for Intel execs to lie to analysts. More likely they were trying to explain the company’s positioning in the future of the computing landscape to their best knowledge, to answer analysts’ questions about how they are going to stay profitable in the cellphone/tablet future of the business.

    I would instead question why Microsoft said Intel was wrong but didn’t explain how. It’s much easier for Microsoft to lie (or say nothing) when not talking to analysts.

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    They’d have to make a [i<][b<]lot[/i<][/b<] of money, or the Board of Directors would be looking for heads to roll over the billions already poured into competing with them. And those heads would be the ones attached to the necks stuck out to pursue such a strategy. Again, do you seriously think any VP-level exec is going to do that?

    • Scrotos
    • 11 years ago

    If they can stand to make more money that way, then yes, yes I do. Especially when they can sell their own chips AND hybrid ones. Kinda like IBM didn’t care who “won” the console wars this generation because they fabbed all of them anyway.

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    [quote<]An Atom core and some ARM cores on a SoC? No emulation needed and you can disable the Atom when no x86 code is needed. It'll cost die space, sure, but that's less of an issue every year[/quote<] You seriously expect Intel to license a competing chip architecture that it has poured billions of dollars of R&D funds and billions more of marketing/FUD funds into competing with??

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    [quote<]they will force no compatibility with old apps[/quote<] Instead, they will force new versions of the hundreds of thousands of existing programs. [quote<]It should not be too hard to recompile most of the useful Win apps[/quote<] Assuming the publisher/developer is still in business, and has the resources to do it, including the finaces, etc., etc. Windows-on-ARM trying to compete with multiple existing, well-polished competors, each of whom have thousands and thousands of apps already in the hands of consumers, without the ability to run existing Windows software = instant, epic, mega-fail.

    • RMSe17
    • 11 years ago

    If MS cares about battery time, they will force no compatibility with old apps. It should not be too hard to recompile most of the useful Win apps. Simpler OS, native execution speed, better battery life.

    • Scrotos
    • 11 years ago

    Ok, so I wonder… [url<]https://techreport.com/discussions.x/17307[/url<] Maybe MS will get something like the fabled PowerPC 620 which was to combine an x86 core and PPC for compatibility. An Atom core and some ARM cores on a SoC? No emulation needed and you can disable the Atom when no x86 code is needed. It'll cost die space, sure, but that's less of an issue every year. Either that or as Hattig mentioned, I wonder who owns the Transmeta patents? I lost track of who bought them up when they went under.

    • Rza79
    • 11 years ago

    A15’s will have a 30% higher performance per clock (ARM themselves said this).
    I don’t call that significant or at least not significant enough in any way to catch up with even a Pentium M core of 2003 (clock for clock / core for core obviously).

    • TaBoVilla
    • 11 years ago

    Think of IT* in terms of evolution… your butt must hurt =\

    • dpaus
    • 11 years ago

    sleazy* (what the hell, everyone else is ganging up on you….)

    • derFunkenstein
    • 11 years ago

    They’d certainly be peaceful in pieces.

    • jstern
    • 11 years ago

    I would edit it, but then it would kind of ruin the flow of your reply.

    • Hattig
    • 11 years ago

    Dynamic recompilation, and the fact that the software would be accessing Windows’ ARM libraries, would mean the application could feel pretty fast, even if the core x86 code isn’t high performance itself. I’m also considering that we are probably talking about Windows 8 on quad-core 2GHz+ ARM Cortex A15s by the time it is released – these will have significantly higher performance per clock than A9.

    • bittermann
    • 11 years ago

    pot, kettle, black…

    • sweatshopking
    • 11 years ago

    pieces*

    • ImSpartacus
    • 11 years ago

    Bias is a spectrum. TR is on it, just like every other journalism institution.

    No matter how you write it, somebody sounds like they are getting the shaft. I thought that this was a difficult subject that Cyril handled well.

    • grantmeaname
    • 11 years ago

    Because unbiased reporting totally exists.

    • mesyn191
    • 11 years ago

    You probably won’t even get 500Mhz PII performance out of a next gen ARM CPU emulating a x86 chip. Right now they’re still pretty mediocre overall performance wise, where they shine is performance per watt.

    • jstern
    • 11 years ago

    I don’t think it’s scared, but just being sleezy. Unfortunately that’s how these corporations get to the top, and even if Arm only would cut into 1% of their revenue, they would do the same thing. Think of if in terms of evolution, the animal who was willing to rip the other one into peaces survived to pass down his genes. It’s the nature of things.

    • Frith
    • 11 years ago

    The fact that Intel are trying to talk down their competition instead of promoting their own power efficient products makes it look like they’re rather scared. The fact that they have to resort to making things up to talk down their competition makes it look like they’re very scared.

    Intel is a company that have been fined for monopoly abuse and had to pay large settlements to both AMD and nvidia. It therefore seems that they’ll resort to any means to hang on to their cushy monopoly. Fortunately it looks like that monopoly will soon be coming to an end.

    • indeego
    • 11 years ago

    Thanks for inserting a tad bit of bias in the reporting, TR. Stay classy.

    • Hattig
    • 11 years ago

    I guess that they’re thinking of an x86 emulator then, even if it performs relatively poorly. Modern apps would get ported to ARM, so it is only older apps that wouldn’t, so even an emulator that felt like a 500MHz PII could suffice. Games would suffer, but this isn’t an issue as they suffer on Atom anyway.

    • Meadows
    • 11 years ago

    That’s so bad it’s good.

    • Palek
    • 11 years ago

    Alternative title: intel armed with false Microsoft-ARM intel, claims Microsoft

    Ba-dum pssh.

    • TaBoVilla
    • 11 years ago

    lol, intel is sore microsofty is going the arm way

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this post with your friends!