Notebookcheck

Opinion | Windows 10 on ARM: DOA?

With the promise of all-day battery life, always-on LTE, and smartphone-like standby and resume, the first Windows 10 on ARM devices are here. Windows 10 on ARM may be great feat of engineering, but it does come with limitations unique to it, impacting what one can and cannot get out of an ARM-powered PC. Windows 10 on ARM is still in its infancy and, in its current manifestation, is better worth skipping for future refinements.

Windows 10 on ARM brings with it the promise of all day battery life, always-on LTE connectivity, and instant wake/standby. (Source: Windows Central)
Windows 10 on ARM brings with it the promise of all day battery life, always-on LTE connectivity, and instant wake/standby. (Source: Windows Central)

What was billed

When Microsoft showed what appeared to be Windows 10 running Win32 and UWP apps on a Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 back in December of 2016 at a Windows Hardware Engineering event in China, Intel probably had a panic attack. Using a specialized layer of emulation to allow the ARM SoC to run x86 code only when necessary, Qualcomm aimed to provide Windows PCs with always-Gigabit LTE, machine learning, and hardware security features. Unlike the crippled Windows RT offering that Microsoft had with Windows 8 on their Surface RT, Microsoft and Qualcomm pitched a "full" desktop Windows 10 experience running on an ARM SoC. The development had many in the industry take notice, and chief among them was Intel.

The American semiconductor giant had good reason to worry: Microsoft was partnering with a rival semiconductor company that directly threatened Intel’s lifeline — the mobile PC market. Worst yet, Microsoft’s Terry Myerson boasted that the devices would be hitting store shelves in late 2017. In June of 2017, facing fresh competition from AMD and Qualcomm, Intel took a combative approach and indirectly threatened both MS and Qualcomm with litigation. In a blog post commemorating 40 years of the x86 platform, Intel's Richard A. Uhlig wrote:

"We do not welcome unlawful infringement of our patents, and we fully expect other companies to continue to respect Intel's intellectual property rights."

To which Qualcomm replied that it was "very interesting" and was looking forward to launching "always connected Windows 10 PCs powered by the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 Mobile PC platform."

While Intel didn’t mention either company by name and probably had no intention to sue, it was a clear signal that they were not going to take the threat of Snapdragon-powered devices running Windows 10 laying down. But if Intel could have seen then what Windows on ARM turned out to be today, the sigh of relief from Santa Clara would have been audible to Qualcomm in San Diego.

Microsoft and Qualcomm sold the idea of Snapdragon-based PCs with multi-day battery life, always-on LTE connectivity, and smartphone-like standby/resume speeds — all while not giving up your favorite Windows apps. So, let's examine the current state of Windows 10 on ARM devices.

The small circuit board footprint of the Snapdragon platform will enable thinner and lighter PCs. (Source: Qualcomm)
The small circuit board footprint of the Snapdragon platform will enable thinner and lighter PCs. (Source: Qualcomm)

What was promised

During the first public demo of WoA, Microsoft promised a similar level of functionality as desktop Windows 10. Of course, no one expected Microsoft to portray the limitations of the platform in their first promotional video itself, but when there are issues with reproducing what was advertised, something is not right. The key promises Microsoft implied from the video are as follows:

  • Familiarity of WoA to desktop Windows 10 and how enterprise-level functionality, such as domain joining.
  • Browsing and inking with Microsoft Edge, which does seem to work well even with an external pen connected via USB. 
  • Running 32-bit Photoshop CC with the experience being described as 'great' including the near-instant application of a blur filter over an entire image.
  • Running a game of World of Tanks Blitz running at smooth playable frame rates to demonstrate gaming on WoA. 

The demonstration was done on a Qualcomm Snapdragon 820-powered PC with 4 GB of RAM (at launch, WoA only supported the Snapdragon 835 and up, but not the Snapdragon 820), with the implication that the then upcoming Snapdragon 835 would be an even better experience.

What was delivered

Unfortunately, Microsoft is yet to meet on a lot of its promises. Over a year after its debut, Microsoft finally published Windows 10 on ARM's set of limitations. WoA in itself is a 64-bit OS, but of the ARM64 variety. Therefore, apps coded for the x86 platform have to be emulated within WoA in order to be executed. This means performance of x86 applications like Photoshop is definitely not going to be as 'great' as advertised. The limitations of Windows 10 running on ARM chips include:

No support for native 64-bit apps — WoA can only run x86 code (32-bit) but not x86-64 bit (x64/64-bit) code. However, Microsoft is releasing an updated SDK that will allow developers to compile x64 code into native ARM64 code that can run on WoA.

No support for shell extensions — Apps that use shell extensions to show status such as Dropbox showing a sync status will not work unless recompiled for ARM64.

No support for x86 drivers and Hyper-V — WoA requires ARM64 drivers that are only directly available from OEMs or the ability of the hardware to work with inbox class drivers in the driver store. This means limited external hardware support than what is normally possible.  

No support for OpenGL — Windows has inbuilt support for OpenGL 1.1, with newer OpenGL versions usually provided along with GPU driver updates. Since WoA PCs won't be getting NVIDIA/AMD drivers, only apps and games made using the DirectX API in mind will work. Qualcomm does have OpenGL drivers for ARM, but it seems that Microsoft has little interest in porting those to WoA.

Of course, every platform will have certain limitations and WoA is no exception. However, Microsoft does not make these limitations very clear to those without an above average tech knowledge. People will just look at the fact that a WoA device runs Windows 10 and think that the notebook can run ALL their apps, legacy or otherwise. Don't expect the sales staff to educate people either. Only upon trying to run a legacy app will the customer start to feel the pinch and will start considering options of returning the notebook. Windows RT was a failure precisely for this reason — it was not marketed with its limitations addressed clearly.

x86 Emulation

From an average customer's perspective, the ability to run standard Win32 (x86) apps on WoA is great and should be able to cover most mobile needs in the event of an equivalent not being available in the Microsoft Store. However, from a technical perspective, any form of emulation equates to a less than ideal user experience. Microsoft's ultimate fantasy would be that all developers embrace the UWP model and transition their x86-64 apps to run universally across different form factors with app packaging, delivery, and updates being handled by the Microsoft Store. With phone out of the equation (at least for now), the strategy might not reap high dividends mainly because those on a PC can get 99% of their tasks done in a browser window without the need to download a dime and dozen apps while those on Android and iOS already have an app for everything, including the proverbial kitchen sink. Ever since Microsoft gave Windows 10 Mobile the boot, the concept of UWP and a one-Store-fits-all philosophy started to get somewhat irrelevant, with not many developers whole-heartedly embracing the concept.

x86 emulation schematic on Windows 10 on ARM. (Source: Microsoft)
x86 emulation schematic on Windows 10 on ARM. (Source: Microsoft)

In its current implementation, x86 support in WoA is more of a stop-gap measure. It's there for you to run an odd app or two but it would be foolhardy to buy into WoA just because Microsoft says it can run Chrome and Photoshop. As TechSpot notes in their detailed review of the HP Envy x2, performance via x86 emulation on the Snapdragon 835 SoC is slower than what you can get even from the Celeron N3450 — Intel's most basic x86 chip. The typical use-case for these notebooks is Edge and some UWP apps such as Mail or probably Groove and Netflix, but definitely not Photoshop or video encoding. TechSpot says that single-core performance of the Snapdragon 835 in x86 emulation is twice as slow than the Celeron N3450 and five times slower than the low power Core i7-7Y75. The x86 benchmarks shown below do not paint a very rosy picture. These numbers are to be taken seriously if you are contemplating the current crop of WoA devices to be more useful for anything other than content consumption.

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

(Source: TechSpot)
(Source: TechSpot)
(Source: TechSpot)
(Source: TechSpot)
(Source: TechSpot)

When we did our own comparison of some of the initial benchmark scores of the Asus NovaGo with other entry-level chips in our database, one thing was clear — the Snapdragon 835 in the NovaGo scored abysmally lower than many of Intel's low power offerings and only marginally better than the 'Braswell' Atom x7, that too only in a few tests. 

Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 32Bit
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
Xiaomi Mi Notebook Pro i5
1.46 Points ∼100%
Intel Core i7-7Y75, Intel HD Graphics 615
Eve-Tech Eve V i7
1.25 Points ∼86%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Cube i9
0.87 Points ∼60%
Intel Core i7-3520M, Intel HD Graphics 4000
Lenovo X230
0.84 Points ∼58%
Intel Pentium N4200, Intel HD Graphics 505
Asus R541N
0.6 Points ∼41%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
0.5 Points ∼34%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Chuwi Lapbook 12.3
0.5 Points ∼34%
Intel Atom x7-Z8750, Intel HD Graphics 405 (Braswell)
Teclast Tbook 16 Power
0.48 Points ∼33%
Intel Celeron N3350, Intel HD Graphics 500
Jumper EZbook 3
0.46 Points ∼32%
Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300, NVIDIA GeForce G210M
Asus UL50VF
0.41 Points ∼28%
CPU Multi 32Bit
Intel Core i5-8250U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
Xiaomi Mi Notebook Pro i5
5.95 Points ∼100%
Intel Core i7-7Y75, Intel HD Graphics 615
Eve-Tech Eve V i7
2.42 Points ∼41%
Intel Pentium N4200, Intel HD Graphics 505
Asus R541N
2.08 Points ∼35%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Cube i9
1.77 Points ∼30%
Intel Atom x7-Z8750, Intel HD Graphics 405 (Braswell)
Teclast Tbook 16 Power
1.75 Points ∼29%
Intel Core i7-3520M, Intel HD Graphics 4000
Lenovo X230
1.58 Points ∼27%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
1.5 Points ∼25%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Chuwi Lapbook 12.3
1.35 Points ∼23%
Intel Celeron N3350, Intel HD Graphics 500
Jumper EZbook 3
0.91 Points ∼15%
Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300, NVIDIA GeForce G210M
Asus UL50VF
0.77 Points ∼13%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Intel Core i5-7200U, Intel HD Graphics 620
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
7439 Points ∼100%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
OnePlus 5
6552 Points ∼88%
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U, Intel HD Graphics 610
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
5455 Points ∼73%
Intel Core i3-6006U, Intel HD Graphics 520
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
4914 Points ∼66%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Acer Spin 1 SP111-31-C79E
3821 Points ∼51%
Intel Pentium 3558U, Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
HP 350 G1 F7Z01EA
3016 Points ∼41%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
2952 Points ∼40%
AMD A6-9220, AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
2805 Points ∼38%
Intel Celeron N3350, Intel HD Graphics 500
Jumper EZbook 3
2648 Points ∼36%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Intel Core i5-7200U, Intel HD Graphics 620
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
3808 Points ∼100%
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U, Intel HD Graphics 610
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
2816 Points ∼74%
Intel Core i3-6006U, Intel HD Graphics 520
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
2593 Points ∼68%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
OnePlus 5
2075 Points ∼54%
Intel Pentium 3558U, Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
HP 350 G1 F7Z01EA
1898 Points ∼50%
AMD A6-9220, AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
1885 Points ∼50%
Intel Celeron N3350, Intel HD Graphics 500
Jumper EZbook 3
1500 Points ∼39%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Acer Spin 1 SP111-31-C79E
1385 Points ∼36%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
814 Points ∼21%
Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Intel Core i5-7200U, Intel HD Graphics 620
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
6932 Points ∼100%
Intel Core i5-7Y57, Intel HD Graphics 615
Dell Latitude 7285
6405 Points ∼92%
Intel Core m7-6Y75, Intel HD Graphics 515
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
5971 Points ∼86%
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U, Intel HD Graphics 610
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
5270 Points ∼76%
Intel Core i3-6006U, Intel HD Graphics 520
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
4415 Points ∼64%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Acer Aspire Switch 12S SW7-272-M3A0
4309 Points ∼62%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
3960 Points ∼57%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Acer Spin 1 SP111-31-C79E
3958 Points ∼57%
Intel Core M-5Y10, Intel HD Graphics 5300
Asus Zenbook UX305FA-FC004H
3713 Points ∼54%
AMD A6-9220, AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
2921 Points ∼42%
Intel Pentium 3558U, Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
HP 350 G1 F7Z01EA
2592 Points ∼37%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Intel Core i5-7Y57, Intel HD Graphics 615
Dell Latitude 7285
3271 Points ∼100%
Intel Core i5-7200U, Intel HD Graphics 620
Acer Extensa 2540-580K
3191 Points ∼98%
Intel Core m7-6Y75, Intel HD Graphics 515
Asus Zenbook UX305CA-FB055T
2931 Points ∼90%
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U, Intel HD Graphics 610
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
2510 Points ∼77%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Acer Aspire Switch 12S SW7-272-M3A0
2381 Points ∼73%
Intel Core M-5Y10, Intel HD Graphics 5300
Asus Zenbook UX305FA-FC004H
2038 Points ∼62%
Intel Core i3-6006U, Intel HD Graphics 520
Asus ASUSPRO P541UA-GQ1532
2012 Points ∼62%
AMD A6-9220, AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Acer Aspire 3 A315-21-651Y
1798 Points ∼55%
Intel Pentium 3558U, Intel HD Graphics (Haswell)
HP 350 G1 F7Z01EA
1468 Points ∼45%
Intel Celeron N3450, Intel HD Graphics 500
Acer Spin 1 SP111-31-C79E
1202 Points ∼37%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
1144 Points ∼35%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Physics
Intel Core m3-7Y30, Intel HD Graphics 615
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
3620 Points ∼100%
Intel Core i3-7100U, Intel HD Graphics 620
HP ProBook 440 G4 Z2Y47ES
3595 Points ∼99%
Intel Core i7-7Y75, Intel HD Graphics 615
Eve-Tech Eve V i7
3347 (min: 3339, max: 3351) Points ∼92%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
3067 Points ∼85%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Acer Aspire Switch 12S SW7-272-M3A0
2465 Points ∼68%
Intel Pentium N4200, Intel HD Graphics 505
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
2167 Points ∼60%
Intel Atom x7-Z8700, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail)
Microsoft Surface 3
1879 Points ∼52%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
1493 Points ∼41%
Intel Celeron N2920, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Acer Aspire E1-510P-2671
1485 Points ∼41%
Intel Celeron N2840, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
HP Stream 13-c002ng
1055 Points ∼29%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Intel Core i3-7100U, Intel HD Graphics 620
HP ProBook 440 G4 Z2Y47ES
1437 Points ∼100%
Intel Core m3-7Y30, Intel HD Graphics 615
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
1251 Points ∼87%
Intel Core i7-7Y75, Intel HD Graphics 615
Eve-Tech Eve V i7
1234 (min: 1228, max: 1268) Points ∼86%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Core m3
1206 Points ∼84%
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
Asus NovaGo
786 Points ∼55%
Intel Core m3-6Y30, Intel HD Graphics 515
Acer Aspire Switch 12S SW7-272-M3A0
730 Points ∼51%
Intel Pentium N4200, Intel HD Graphics 505
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
726 Points ∼51%
Intel Atom x7-Z8700, Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail)
Microsoft Surface 3
494 Points ∼34%
Intel Celeron N2920, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Acer Aspire E1-510P-2671
206 Points ∼14%
Intel Celeron N2840, Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
HP Stream 13-c002ng
203 Points ∼14%

Of course, those buying into these notebooks will not moan about comparative performance figures as much as they do about battery life or efficiently streaming YouTube and Netflix, but this does present an important premise. Is it actually fair to run x86 benchmarks on an ARM PC? Probably not. The OS is proper ARM64 code and runs x86 apps via an emulation layer. The x86 emulation, while great to have, cannot be expected to offer native code-level performance. A lot of PC benchmarks in vogue are x86 apps and, therefore, make no sense while benchmarking WoA PCs. Unless there are native ARM64 benchmarks available, a true evaluation of performance is not possible. We're not counting browser benchmarks here, rather a true Geekbench or 3DMark test optimized to natively run on WoA64. Nevertheless, when WoA notebooks are being sold on the promise of offering 'great' legacy application compatibility, it is somewhat concerning to see that legacy app performance is not on par with what is actually being advertised.

Pricing

For a PC that supposedly 'enlarges' the typical smartphone experience, the asking price of the Asus NovaGo at US$600 for 4 GB RAM and 64 GB storage is completely uncompetitive when compared to an iOS, Android, or even most PC competitors. Just upgrade from Windows 10 S mode to Pro and you will eat up most of the stock storage. The 8 GB RAM, 256 GB storage option would be a better bet, but that costs about US$800 — a price where you can get some pretty capable notebooks in the x86 lineup. The HP Envy x2 costs US$1,000 with 4 GB RAM and 128 GB storage — not to mention that the storage here is not an SSD but the typical UFS storage found in smartphones. Adding to the pricing would be an additional carrier plan, as well, as these devices are meant to be always connected on the move. All this means a significantly higher asking price with much worse performance and compatibility than typical notebooks just for a (not insignificant) boost in battery life.

The Road Ahead

Windows 10 Spring Creators Update will bring support for eSIMs. (Source: Microsoft)
Windows 10 Spring Creators Update will bring support for eSIMs. (Source: Microsoft)

 

Microsoft, however, has some neat things planned for how Windows 10 will be shaped going forward and the most visible effects of these developments will be seen with WoA. The upcoming Spring Creators Update (codenamed Redstone 4) will bring native support for eSIMs. You will be able to switch carriers and plans on the fly (possibly via the Store) instead of having to rely on a physical SIM. This is a great feature for anyone who frequently switches data plans on the move.

List of PWAs currently available in the Microsoft Store. (Source: Windows Central)
List of PWAs currently available in the Microsoft Store. (Source: Windows Central)

The Spring Creators Update also addresses the 'app gap' issue to an extent by enabling Progressive Web Apps (PWAs). PWAs are websites packaged in an app format like a web wrapper. However, they are much more than web wrappers and can leverage platform-specific features such as Live Tiles, Cortana, notifications, share contracts etc. These apps have a very small footprint and usually can be updated at the backend instead of having to download an entire app update. They are also platform-agnostic and work just as well in Windows like they would in Chrome OS. The initial days of the Spring Creators Update will see curated PWAs published under the Microsoft Store account with more to follow in the days to come. For WoA PCs that have constraints on data plans, storage, and processing, PWAs aim to offer a near-app like experience without the overhead of a native UWP app.

Upcoming versions of Windows 10 will feature different 'Composers' for different devices. (Source: Windows Central)
Upcoming versions of Windows 10 will feature different 'Composers' for different devices. (Source: Windows Central)

Microsoft also wants to decouple the traditional x86 legacy code from the UWP capabilities and will soon start shipping alternate shells to this effect. There will be a Windows Core OS upon which shells called 'composers' will be built targeting various device form factors. The 'Polaris' composer for example will target desktop PCs and tablets and is expected to be available for WoA PCs sometime during Redstone 5 or later. These composable shells can help deliver the exact intended device experience with possible addon functionality such as the ability to run x86 apps via remote servers. This means more a more leaner and efficient user experience and possibly, even more battery life.

It's not a great start, but it's a start

Windows 10 on ARM is still a work in progress. (Source: YouTube)
Windows 10 on ARM is still a work in progress. (Source: YouTube)

Any mobile platform needs to offer four main things to make it seem a worthwhile purchase: a great battery life, fluid and stable performance, proper device and software update support, and enough app selection to get your work done. While WoA does tick the first three boxes, it suffers from quality app selection. Edge and many apps in the Store, including Office, should take care of most online needs but many users are simply accustomed to look for Chrome. Add to the fact that running Chrome on WoA with many tabs open is not a very rewarding experience and that the Microsoft Store still does not have the weight of iOS and Android, it is better to define your use case, check whether a decent app is available for that, and then take the plunge. Think about it. Why would someone splurge a grand on a WoA PC when essentially, the core performance and experience is no different from a US$300 entry-level notebook or even an iPad?

For WoA to succeed, it needs developer acceptance. That comes via increasing market share, which again is dependent on developer acceptance and so the cycle continues. While it is glad to take note that Microsoft is offering the necessary toolset for developers to port x64 apps to ARM64, it is still not known whether developers will have access to the low-level aspects of the SoC. Can they take advantage of the Hexagon DSP or the Spectra ISP in the Snapdragon chips to better leverage their capabilities? It remains to be seen. 

WoA also inherits Microsoft's problem of perception among the masses. The Asus NovaGo and other WoA notebooks are definitely more capable than the iPad or a Chromebook and offer a nice productivity boost but people who pick these devices think that they are buying the full Windows experience. WoA notebooks ship with Windows 10 S mode on by default, which prevents running apps other than those installed from the Store. While WoA is far more capable than RT and of course iOS, public perception is what matters at the end. If their shiny new WoA notebook crawls at running Chrome with 15 tabs open, people will throw it in the bin. Microsoft would rather brand these notebooks and the OS itself separately from the traditional Windows offerings for perception's sake. The Xbox One runs Windows 10 code-indistinguishable from the PC but how many users are aware of that?

All said and done, WoA will only get better with time and with the evolution of more powerful ARM chips (assuming Microsoft doesn't axe it). Getting emulation right is not a huge problem for a company like Microsoft — remember how they enabled seamless backward compatibility for Xbox 360 games on the Xbox One? But in technology, the promise of a better tomorrow does not warrant an immediate purchase commitment today. The industry, developers, and users have invested a lot of time, money, and effort in x86 computing. It will be quite a task to bring a change and adapt them to new platforms poised for future mainstream acceptance. Therefore, while WoA makes for a delicious cake, it is still not worthy of the candle in its current iteration.

Source(s)

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > News > News Archive > Newsarchive 2018 03 > Opinion | Windows 10 on ARM: DOA?
Vaidyanathan Subramaniam & Douglas Black, 2018-04-12 (Update: 2018-04-13)
Vaidyanathan Subramaniam
Vaidyanathan Subramaniam - News Editor
I am a cell and molecular biologist and computers have been an integral part of my life ever since I laid my hands on my first PC which was based on an Intel Celeron 266 MHz processor, 16 MB RAM and a modest 2 GB hard disk. Since then, I’ve seen my passion for technology evolve with the times. From traditional floppy based storage and running DOS commands for every other task, to the connected cloud and shared social experiences we take for granted today, I consider myself fortunate to have witnessed a sea change in the technology landscape. I honestly feel that the best is yet to come, when things like AI and cloud computing mature further. When I am not out finding the next big cure for cancer, I read and write about a lot of technology related stuff or go about ripping and re-assembling PCs and laptops.