Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

Re:Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA by seanmcdirmid on Saturday January 19, 2013 @07:22PM (#5085416)

What is sort of weird is that Microsoft is the only company that is doing this with their own kernel. Everyone else (Google, Apple) have appropriated some other open source technolog for that (NetBSD for OS/X, Linux for Android) as if the kernel somehow wasn't a competitive advantage anymore.

I have no idea which approach is "better," this is just an interesting observation and might hint at the values of the companies involved.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA by trotsky on Saturday January 19, 2013 @08:25PM (#5085551)

I think building a tier 1 (or even tier 2) from scratch has gotten a well deserved reputation for being borderline impossible.

Just consider how many great efforts have crashed in the last 20 years: AmigaOS, GemOS (Atari), OS/2, BeOS, MacOS9, Palm, Symbian, WinCE and others. The ones that are still hanging on don't paint a much brighter picture.

I'm sure there are a few teams out there that would have a good shot, but the daunting task+access to good/free that your staff already has experience with... well.

That said, it's great MS is still at it - heterogenous infrastructure is probably a lot more resistant at a macro scale.

[ Parent | on HN ]