F5F Stay Refreshed Software Operating Systems RT devices didn't receive W10 Mobile because they weren't approved for that platform.

RT devices didn't receive W10 Mobile because they weren't approved for that platform.

RT devices didn't receive W10 Mobile because they weren't approved for that platform.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2
H
Hofaaa
Junior Member
Find
49
09-25-2016, 09:28 PM
#11
It was definitely an RT enthusiast at the time, but I soon saw its shortcomings outweigh its benefits. I think it’s best to let it go and move on to something more recent.
Reply
Reply
H
Hofaaa
09-25-2016, 09:28 PM #11

It was definitely an RT enthusiast at the time, but I soon saw its shortcomings outweigh its benefits. I think it’s best to let it go and move on to something more recent.

Reply
Reply
M
Mind_YT
Member
Find
70
09-25-2016, 11:29 PM
#12
Choosing to remove Surface 1 and 2 was a strategic decision. Those two platforms didn’t perform well, which explains why Microsoft didn’t expand Windows 10 or Windows 10 Mobile there. It doesn’t make sense for them to target ARM-based processors, as they differ significantly from Intel and AMD systems. Each manufacturer has unique specifications. Windows must be tailored accordingly. This is why Windows Phone remained restricted to certain supported CPUs. In Android, Google supports a limited range of chips, while phone makers adapt the OS to their chosen processors. It seems more practical for broader compatibility. Ultimately, there isn’t a universal standard for ARM CPUs like there is for desktops or laptops (Intel/AMD). For Microsoft, developing an OS for outdated ARM chips may only benefit a niche audience, making it unprofitable from a business perspective.
Reply
Reply
M
Mind_YT
09-25-2016, 11:29 PM #12

Choosing to remove Surface 1 and 2 was a strategic decision. Those two platforms didn’t perform well, which explains why Microsoft didn’t expand Windows 10 or Windows 10 Mobile there. It doesn’t make sense for them to target ARM-based processors, as they differ significantly from Intel and AMD systems. Each manufacturer has unique specifications. Windows must be tailored accordingly. This is why Windows Phone remained restricted to certain supported CPUs. In Android, Google supports a limited range of chips, while phone makers adapt the OS to their chosen processors. It seems more practical for broader compatibility. Ultimately, there isn’t a universal standard for ARM CPUs like there is for desktops or laptops (Intel/AMD). For Microsoft, developing an OS for outdated ARM chips may only benefit a niche audience, making it unprofitable from a business perspective.

Reply
Reply
Pages (2): Previous 1 2