I think the fact that you have to pin a batch file via run32.dll and run it when you want to suspend your laptop on Microsoft’s own first party hardware means we can safely say that it’s never worked well on any version of windows 
I’m sure that some OEMs have done some thorough heroics to work around the ACPI implementation that MS provides in order to get it to work reliably on their hardware.
2 Likes
I interpret it to mean that testing is not Microsoft’s strong suit. I mean, if they have an automated test of the sleep API, it probably passes every time!
Sort of like someone pointed out to me that, technically I didn’t have to worry about passing emissions tests on my Diesel VW because technically it would pass those tests.
I suspect that the answer is partly an unpleasant view of what ‘ideal’ has come to mean; and partly down to this being a product of internal compromise, with just a dash of Microsoft lacking taste.
I’m not sure how much of it is mercenary, and how much involves them having really drunk the kool-aide; but Microsoft has definitely abandoned any serious attempt at “Windows is platform that runs your stuff and gets out of your way” at this point. They want apps and services and ‘consumer experiences’(that’s what the GPO that turns them off, Enterprise or EDU only, calls them at least); ‘suggested apps’ and twee little messages on your lock screen; and Cortana bugging you about how wonderful and useful she’ll be.
So, you get a bunch of clickwrap licenses and alarming looking personal data sliders(that would be more alarming if they actually offered control over all the settings). I’m sure that their UX people would prefer to just skip all that by defaulting to ‘yes’; but legal presumably told them that it wasn’t an option; and they weren’t going to resort to defaulting to ‘no’ and making these wonderful features opt-in(no doubt out of concern that, without discoverability, too many would be deprived of features they crave…). Unfortunately, while it’s a nasty step back from Old Microsoft; it’s not exactly out of step with the competition at this point: iOS and Android devices make accounts with their respective overlords effectively mandatory; and OSX pushes only slightly less hard.
As for the ‘compromise device’ part; I suspect that selling “Windows RT 2” internally was a no-go. Doing so would have provided the requisite austere purity of essence; but as a product it was a bloodbath before and would be at least as much again. The core of ARM-native or CLR-powered and architecture agnostic Windows applications is a howling barren wasteland; and it’s not like Windows is such a wonderful touch UI that anyone is going to put up with that when they could just get an iPad. So on goes mediocre x86 support and full win32. I’d love to know if the lack of 64-bit support is merely immaturity, a pragmatic decision based on how few 64-bit native applications are undemanding enough to actually run under emulation on ARM; or someone’s fond belief that the future is still UWP and it’s x86 only because it’s strictly for legacy application scenarios.
None of this, of course, explains why anyone would be feeling lucky about this thing’s chances vs. the iPad Pro. If you aren’t concerned about decent win32 application support; and are OK with a lousy tablet keyboard; you pay rather less to get a vastly more mature product; and it’s not every day that Apple is the value leader in personal computing.
1 Like
I was going to say “a big battery”
EXCEPT of course I don’t actually care about battery life as long as it’s more than a fraction of a second
the problem is the robustness of the power chain more than a specific battery technology
1 Like
Windows on ARM is seriously good, but the compromises are not what most customers are expecting. The power-efficiency of the platform is epic, and natively-compiled apps work smoothly.
Unfortunately, the lack of seamless support for x86 binaries (even at compromised performance), and the mis-alignment of customer expectations means that it gets crapped on every time Microsoft tries to make it happen. MS don’t understand their customers and the customers don’t understand the product. It’s infuriating.
These days, they’d probably wrap up their apps in Electron and call it a day.
(Probably why a monthly update of Visual Studio is a DVD-sized download.)
If I want an app to run well on ARM and x64, I compile it for both platforms on Lazarus/Free Pascal.
That is a tenuous definition of “working right”
1 Like
Famous developer’s last words, “Well, it works on my machine”.
(It’s awful. Your company’s flagship product is called “Windows” and you ship a piece of software that is incapable of running in more than one. This is definitely not a problem if, say, you are trying to examine a document and chat with someone about said document; as though you were using some sort of collaboration platform. At least you get to enjoy the speed and platform-native feel of Electron; and the bandwidth efficiency and quick logins of having a per-user install updated via Squirrel rather than a per-system install that doesn’t need to maintain a separate copy for every user of the system. This absolutely rocks in VDI scenarios.)
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
