On 7/30/2012 1:40 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
While technically correct, the reality is that most ARM hardware made to run Windows 8 will inevitably be designed specifically with that intention and sold exclusively that way. No hardware vendor is going to release a separate version for the 1% that want to run something else.
So what? It isn't Microsoft or Google forcing locks on the OEM. Never mind that Android has a dominant market share in the mobile space and Windows RT currently has... lemme check... zero. One device that can run either OS just by flipping a bit in the baseband is the best way for an OEM to hedge against a Windows RT failure or slow start.
This is a Tivo-ization of hardware. Limiting what the user can do with hardware they bought.
I call it appliance computing. The vendor does what it deems necessary to ensure that the appliance (device and services) perform to advertised specifications for the lifetime of the appliance.
So given their stance on x86, any thoughts as to why Microsoft imposed this limitation on ARM? (Aside from the obvious one that they feel much more vulnerable in the mobile space, and there is no established user base to complain about the change.)
Refusing to run unsigned code is an effective method of preventing an operating system -- any operating system, not just Windows RT -- from being compromised. ARM running Windows RT is an appliance and appliances just work when you push the "on" button.
-- Rich P. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
