back to article Qualcomm, Microsoft drag apps for Win-10-on-Arm into 64-bit world

Qualcomm and Microsoft will finally let developers start building native 64-bit Windows applications for Snapdragon-based PCs. The 64-bit support is in Visual Studio 15.8 Preview 1, unveiled by Microsoft at its Build conference on Tuesday. As the two companies explained in their joint announcement, the Qualcomm-powered “ …

  1. Wiltshire

    Is it finally true? RaspberryPi.Net apps?

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Raspberry Pi is supported by and uses chips from Broadcom, the once and again arch enemy of Qualcomm. So there is still a way to go before we see such apps.

  3. Thoguht Silver badge

    You can already have .Net Core apps running under Windows 10 IoT on the Raspberry Pi.

  4. John70

    I got ASP.NET Core 2.0 web app running on Raspberry Pi 3 with Raspian.

  5. bombastic bob Silver badge
    Unhappy

    ".NOT" on RPi

    ".NOT" on the RPi, even with Raspbian???

    it BURNS us! Please, NO!

    What has been seen cannot be unseen, without 'brain bleach'... *burp*, I think my lunch is coming up...

    I'm looking forward to arm64 in general. However, it's already supported with clang and gcc. Who needs Micro-shaft's compiler, and ESPECIALLY who needs ".NOT" or C-POUND?

    Target LINUX! And no ".Not" CRapps. K-thanks.

  6. bytemaniak

    Re: ".NOT" on RPi

    You'd be surprised to learn how good .net core is compared to its retarded brother .net framework.

  7. big_D Silver badge

    x86?

    Up until now WoA has used 32-bit ARM "native" applications and x86 Win32 32-bit emulation. So, both the ARM and x86 code was similarly limited in memory use.

    The 64-bit ARM was always on the cards and should allow for larger datasets. Although x64 emulation is, AFAIK, still not going to happen.

  8. DougS Silver badge

    Why didn't they require ARM64 from day one?

    I just assumed they did...how stupid is it to start ARM support on Windows 10 in 2017 and not only support 32 bit AT ALL but make it the only option?

    Obviously Microsoft had no intention of making this succeed.

  9. big_D Silver badge

    Re: Why didn't they require ARM64 from day one?

    The OS is 64-bit, but UWP was limited to 32-bit at first.

    Possibly something to do with developer tools and timescales?

  10. rajivdx

    Re: Why didn't they require ARM64 from day one?

    The Emulation is for x86 WIN32 Apps, not UWP apps which are mostly architecture independent.

    x86 Win32 Apps are emulated on ARM64. This article simply states that you can now build Native ARM64 apps using Visual Studio - which I assume are 'WIN32' but could also be UWP. ARM64 has always been supported by Windows 10 on ARM from Day 1 - its just that Visual Studio is being released with support to build native ARM64 apps now.

    That's what I read from this article.

  11. rajivdx

    Re: Why didn't they require ARM64 from day one?

    Oh, when Windows was released on ARM (Windows RT), there were no mainstream ARM64 chips. (Yes, there were ARM64 chips then, just not so prevalent).

    That's why Windows was released on ARM32 first.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    At last...

    But is it too little, too late?

    Apple recieved a lot of slagging off for wanting to remove 32bit support from MacOS (even though it has been on the cards for years). Will MS get the same angst and even hatred from the user community?

    It will be interesting to see what happens.

    PErhaps the MS world simply does not care.

    All the software I've developed has been 64bit for at least 5 years but there again it has only been targetted at Intel CPU's. IT remains to be seen if there is any demand for ARM support.

  13. picturethis
    Childcatcher

    Re: At last...

    "Apple recieved a lot of slagging off for wanting to remove 32bit support from MacOS (even though it has been on the cards for years). Will MS get the same angst and even hatred from the user community?"

    I'm not completely sure, but wouldn't removing 32bit support from Windows completely kill VB6 apps? If so, then yes a lot of (legacy) apps would immediately be orphaned - and some of those apps are so old, the code/developers for them may not be available to port.

    If you still do work on a PC, you might be surprised at how many apps are VB6-based. I was very surprised when Windows 10 was in preview that VB6 apps were still supported.

    Also, it's interesting if you look at Task Manager on a running Win 10 x64 system, how many of the core OS services are still 32-bit - I wonder why? It seems a little strange - probably due to having to support 3rd party 32-bit apps?

    Heating up some popcorn to watch this one unfold over the next (5-10?) years.

  14. Waseem Alkurdi

    Re: At last...

    Go back a few years in time to Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger). It had initial support for 64-bit apps. Most apps, including system services, were 32-bit though.

    It took them another version, 10.5 (Leopard), to implement 64-bit system apps ...

    ... and another version to fully go 64-bit, going almost fully 64-bit system apps with 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and only running on x64-capable CPUs. And even then some other apps still ran 32-bit (iTunes/Front Row/...)

    Edit: And 32-bit apps are still supported to this day, only to be dropped soon.

    TL;DR: Transitions don't happen all at once lest people rage.

  15. johnnyblaze

    Dumb

    Win10-on-ARM is DoA anyway. Just consider it RTv2. This is MS thinking, "we fucked up mobile and lost all consumer confidence, but trust us with our wonderful 'always on' Windows 10 PC's running on ARM". This is just going to confuse so many people, but in reality this is just MS's next step do dumb down Windows, take control of everything, force people to the app store and make 'S mode' the default. Just watch!

  16. bombastic bob Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Re: Dumb

    "Just watch!"

    in HORROR! I hope they FAIL.

  17. Waseem Alkurdi

    Re: Dumb

    In that (theoretical) case, I would donate my time and skills to ripping out a custom Windows OS based on WinPE but with persistence - like a Live Linux ISO that has persistent mode, but on Windows.

    To hell with licensing issues, because I don't see a violation of the EULA in modding the WinPE image that ships with the Windows installer I own and have paid for.

  18. Waseem Alkurdi

    Re: Dumb

    I don't see why Windows 10 ARM is getting all this hate. If the evil-M$ plan actually happens, I can understand.

    But otherwise, this Win32-on-ARM is a great idea to me. It might eventually break the Wintel Cartel if laptops, desktops, and even servers ran it. It is slow for now, but who knows what it'll be in X years' time?

    On the flip side though, I've never seen a project that emulates other hardware and succeeds, save Sony's various emulators of old consoles for their newer ones.

  19. Mr.Bill

    Re: Dumb

    Its represents a big part oof the frustration that MS isn't focusing on just making the traditional Windows professional desktop OS on "big iron" machines the best it can be. All these years of diversion, compromising it on desperately trying to continue to "have it all" i.e. casual consumers and the windows 8 situation of not realizing the inevitable that average people only used windows because it was on PCs in the stores and they wanted to get on the internet, so they bought these machines as the prices became affordable. Now the smartphone came along and they should have realized along time ago that the PC had only been embraced by consumers because it was the only way onto the internet, the true "killer app". Other than that PCs were not an appropriate "device" for them. Those of us who used computers pre-internet, because we loved them as a tech tool and what makes them tick, are again the ones left using them as average consumers have moved on.

  20. karlkarl

    "the Qualcomm-powered “Always Connected PC” machines that started shipping earlier this year"

    It has the words "Always Connected" in the name. I can predict with out *any* shadow of a doubt that this product line will fail.

    I know it will fail. You know it will fail. Microsoft knows it will fail. Qualcomm knows it will fail. And yet they are producing them for the landfill anyway...

    Something isn't right here.

    These companies are effectively going to some English countryside and littering 100's of plastic bags there whilst laughing at us plebs. And there is nothing we can do about it. This is so frustrating :(

  21. Waseem Alkurdi

    @karlkarl

    Who said that products have to last for ages? Not how the market works. You and I, the plebs, only matter until the transaction is done.

    Companies generally favor products that last until the shiny-shiny wears off (rumor has it that the iPhone X is getting discontinued as soon as mid-'18 vs. the iPad 2 which had a good life from 2011 till 2015! And that's only Apple!) . Put yourself in their shoes (and forget your morals, companies don't have those!) and think: Would I make a tablet that (a) costs $500 and lasts 10 years or (b) one that costs the same and lasts one year or something, then drop support and make the poor customer shell out for the newest bling-bling?

    If I were a company, I'd choose (b). Money talks, $h!t walks ...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018