[Info-vax] VSI licensing policy (again), was: Re: VSI has a new CEO

[Dave Froble]

On 8/16/2021 12:53 AM, David Goodwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 10, 2021 at 12:14:37 PM UTC+12, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 11:50:13 PM UTC+12, John Dallman wrote:
>>
>>> Windows on ARM64 has real potential ...
>>
>> Just like all the previous attempts at porting Windows to ARM, no doubt. Here is a processor architecture that ships more units per year than the entire population of the Earth, and this is, what, Microsoft’s third or fourth attempt at doing Windows on ARM? (Windows RT, anybody? And what about the even more laughable “Windows 10 IoT Edition” for the Raspberry π?) And so far it has been sputtering along about as nicely as the previous ones.
>>
>> Is it any wonder that Microsoft is also trying desperately to turn Windows into Linux?
>>
>> And if a juggernaut with resources on the scale of Microsoft has realized that Linux has become an irresistible force, how is a minnow like VSI, which by all accounts has already permanently lost much of the potential customer base for its products with all the development delays, supposed to survive?
>
> Windows has run on i860, MIPS, x86, Alpha, Clipper, PowerPC, Itanium and ARM64. Possibly SPARC too (it was announced but I don't know how far Intergraph got or if it was ever demonstrated).
>
> I don't think it is reasonable to claim Microsoft failed to develop a portable operating system - the evidence clearly shows its unusually portable as far as proprietary operating systems go. Whether there is a *market* for non-x86 ports is an entirely different matter and not something you can really blame Microsoft for. They made it available, it worked, people weren't interested. I'm sure Microsoft could easily enough port Windows to RISC-V but there is little point in doing so if there is no one interested in buying it.
>
> Additionally, current Windows on ARM isn't their third or fourth attempt - its their first. They ported Windows NT to ARM once and have made it available in various editions ever since as they've tried to find a niche for it. As I understand it there is nothing in particular wrong with the current variant of desktop windows on ARM - its windows, it runs windows apps (including the x86 variety via a mechanism similar to Windows 2000 on Alpha as I understand it). The bigger problem, again, is an apparent lack of demand and lack of worthwhile affordable hardware. Are people actually asking to run windows on ARM computers? Are there actually worthwhile ARM computers with good (comparable to x86) performance outside of Apple?
>

That pretty much covers the issue.

WEENDOZE users are interested in cheap HW, and there sure is enough 
cheap x86 HW, and many really don't know or care about anything else.

There are some uses where WEENDOZE on x86 seems to be the only option. 
Look at what the gamers are using.

It might be a bit hard for ARM, or anything else to replace much of the 
WEENDOZE world.  Just how much cheaper can systems get?  The CPU isn't 
the only cost.  Intel and AMD are in a tooth and nail fight for 
performance, and users.  Neither has much of a chance to inflate 
pricing.  Big benefit for the users.

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486