Microsoft is working to bring 64-bit Intel app emulation to Windows on ARM
neowin.net
neowin.net
AMD pioneered this version of the instruction set with AMD64, and Intel actually adopted it as Intel 64, with minor differences[0].
>Intel's project was originally codenamed Yamhill. After several years of denying its existence, Intel announced at the February 2004 IDF that the project was indeed underway.
If Intel wasn't so focused on the Itanium they would of beat AMD by years.
Anybody who was following the industry at the time knew about Yamhill at least by 2002, though Intel had conceptions on how to extend x32 to x64 well before that in a natural way, but instead went the resource and engineering draining Itanium route, allowing AMD to produce the first available chips.
While I only know murmuring on the peripherial about Intel's early x64, I'd love to hear insider knowledge about why management decided Itanium was so hot that they dropped everything about bringing x32 to its logical x64 conclusion.
* they would have beaten
Isn’t that exactly what the title says? Which bit are you quibbling with? Or has the title been changed?
In that case just call it x86 as a catchall. But if you're going through the effort to specify the 64 bit ISA, then "Intel's" stops being particularly correct.
Looks like bringing ARM power efficiency and crazy parallelism to windows is only a good thing for consumers.
AMD64 was announced in 1999 and the spec was out in 2000, with the first implementations in 2003ish IIRC, and Intel releasing its implementations starting 2006 somewhere. While there have been more extensions and new features since then, most of the really key ones from the basic perspective of requirements to run software were early. Which means we're at or rapidly approaching the big deal day when all possible patents expire on all core parts of the ISA. It'll definitely be very interesting to see what happens at that point. As well as Microsoft, it may be something Apple has been waiting for as well. Moving to their own chips for Macs would be a lot easier if they can just flat out implement x86-64 (or at least enough of it) however they want for a transition period or even permanently.
This turned around a little bit for the 8/8.1 and 10 mobile OS releases but not by much. A lot of stuff just wasn't possible on a Windows phone, even though the garden experience was exceptional.
To the contrary, I stuck with Windows phone forever. I loved it.
Linux, in contrast, gives complete control of the LDT except that the LDT may not contain call gates, long mode segments, or anything with DPL != 3.
Making this work safely, especially on x86_64, is a real PITA, so I can’t really blame MS for declining to support it.
The NTVDM port appears to be a legally dubious emulator.
Microsoft on the other hand has to keep literally everyone happy (90% of the world not on Linux or Mac). Ofc, they can't abandon backwards compatibility.
It is more expensive than the Pro 7, and the x86 emulation has been disappointingly slow.
Reviews have been poor on average, and it’s all reminiscent of the Surface RT debacle - except at least the RT was less expensive - not more.
What is the difference between x64 and AMD64?
Why is it called "64-bit Intel app" in the headline?
One official name among others. Linux distros tend to refer to it as amd64.
Intel then had to license it, but because it's Intel they refused to call it AMD64. So the industry as a whole just started saying x86-64 to mean both AMD64 and Intel 64 so that the general consumer wouldn't think that insert app wasn't compatible with both.
Intel might run into serious problems for whatever reason we can't even imagine today.
Apple switched from Power to Intel when IBM stopped being competitive in their area. Apple is rumored to also work on the switch to ARM.
It is usually a good idea to invest into a few alternatives if only it is to bring them up in negotiations.
Now, Apple sells about as many ARM based devices than all of the PC manufacturers combined [1] sell x86 chips. Apple will be its own best customer.
[1] Apple sold about 230-240 million iPhones, iPads, watches, AppleTVs and if it start selling ARM Macs it will add about 16-20 million to that number.
Supposedly ARM is more power efficient than the x86 family, so you'd get lighter laptops with longer battery life.
I would love to know from the HW experts here what happens when you start running your usual desktop workload on an ARM device. Does the power consumption stay low ?
looking at how quickly phones run out of battery when playing games, my feeling is that the ARM advantage is over-hyped, but I'd be interested in opinions from people who know this stuff.
I read two reviews which stated even 32-bit Chrome’s performance was terrible compared to the native ARM 64-bit Edge, and Photoshop, etc, are borderline unusable.
Stranger still, the Surface Pro X’s battery life has been reported to be on par or poorer than the less expensive Intel-native Pro 7’s - I’m rather confused by Microsoft’s strategy here.
The Surface RT didn’t work.
One thing that my previous Surface Pro 4 did was Connected Standby. It would usually be fine and wake up after an hour asleep just 1 or 2 percent battery down. But then other times I'd go to use it and it'd be at 20%.
So far this X has not betrayed me like that. It's been good for regular tablet use (not continuous) for 10 hour days, easy.
There's literally no upside to this. I just wish AMD puts out a great mobile CPU and we can have even better competition for Intel in laptop market.
So no thanks - I'll let Intel have their laptop monopoly if that means I can run standard x86 hardware with great support for non Windows OSes.
For one, I see Macs running on Apple’s own ARM chips a real possibility in the near future.
Even if the emulation is slow and barely useable, it can and will be refined using modern tools and practices in the future.
Trying something out that is out of the norm is the the whole point of innovation. I’m super excited to see Microsoft’s progress in this space.
So yeah I am cool with trying out things that have potential but something that has not upside and will never be good - because CS - I will justly call it stupid.