Re: Report: Arm cancelling contract with Qualcomm

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple
metal, just implying that it isn't supported by M$.

>
I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the
only ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.
>
Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.

 
It's not obvious.

>
You think Microsoft would forego an opportunity to tout the richness of
its Windows user experience?

They haven't done testing of Win11 on the new Macs, that doesn't mean
it wouldn't work.

The only obvious thing is that they don't want to tell you it's OK,
to do it.

>
Because they know that only disappointment lies in that direction.

How do you know?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.