Re: So How’s Dimdows-on-ARM Doing?

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

I only care to the extent that Winblows sells hardware ...

>
That hardware comes from the PC vendors, and their enthusiasm for
Windows- on-ARM is not exactly effusive as of late.
>

But M$ is going to support it more and more, too, there's no reason it
can't.

>
It’s not up to Microsoft. People don’t buy Windows machines for the sake
of Windows; they buy it for the apps they need to run on it. That app
support for running natively on ARM hasn’t exactly set the world on
fire, as I pointed out in the posting that started this thread.

 
"As I pointed out", it's still early.

>
Did you indeed? Weren’t your past postings along the lines of “the
revolution is here already”, and even that Windows-on-ARM might be
“unstoppable”?
>

You're expecting some instant
result, but it's been literally a month or two ...

>
Only if you discount all the decades of past failures of Windows, on ARM
and other non-x86 architectures. In other words, only if you behave
exactly like the sort of corporate fodder that swallows the management
marketspeak whole without even stopping to think about it.
>
Remember Einstein’s definition of insanity: trying the same thing over and
over, hoping for a different outcome each time.

It's not complicated, it's being fully developed, being sold
commercially, it just takes a minute to get it on solid ground.  I'd
be an early adopter, but the market will see the advantages, before
long.

--
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.