W10 Mobile x86 .exe Emulator

[a5cent]

There's no prove to me that MS had found something that can overcome this issue.

Yup. It is simply not possible to have a software based emulator emulate another type of CPU (with an incompatible instruction set) without incurring a performance hit that reduces performance by an order of multitudes. That's why a software-only approach to emulation is typically only feasible for older systems (like last gen consoles), where the newer system is simultaneously faster by an order of multitudes (allowing performance reduction and improvement to cancel each other out). HOWEVER, it appears there is something special about some of ARM's more recent CPU designs, that allows MS to accelerate x86 instruction translation on ARM. With some direct hardware support, the performance hit can NOT be circumvented, but it can be drastically reduced. So, while MS has not found a way to overcome the performance hit of software based emulation (that simply doesn't exist), MS may, together with ARM, have found a way to implement much of the heavy lifting in hardware, thereby significantly reducing the amount of work the software emulator must do.

Either way, as you say, we won't know how x86 emulation performs until they release the emulator. What MS demoed so far simply wasn't useful in terms of judging performance.

 

[a5cent]

I cant help but think there is some sort of cloud solution to this.

How MS has implemented x86 emulation on ARM is IMHO the least clearly outlined part of the next update. It's almost impossible to find detailed information. Assuming the little reporting we've seen so far is accurate, we can be almost certain of the following however:
1)
Emulation will run directly on the device (no dock, no cloud)
2)
The OS will run natively on ARM (without emulation). Only the installed Win32 desktop software for x86 is emulated.

 

[Tien-Lin Chang]

some external (docking) device taking the load from the SD835, then again the emulation might be done entirely from within the self contained unit.

If so then the NUC PC is already a good solution : portable size, great preformance(compare to mobile device) and full-windows UX from day 1....

It's like the continuum, you buying paticular phone, paying for the dock with comparable size/weight/price of a computer stick+USB hub+any phone and the later one provide way more complete OS experience......

 

[fatclue_98]

The OS will run natively on ARM (without emulation). Only the installed Win32 desktop software for x86 is emulated.

Which OS are we referring to? Mobile or desktop? Isn't what you're describing WinRT or reasonable facsimile?

 

[Rosebank]

I know one thing, if the device is NOT small enough and is simply a Tablet with Telephony I wont be buying it, I can go buy a tablet that does that now if I want, I want a MOBILE (small) device that fits in ANY pocket and not a Tablet that is cumbersome and needs its own chauffeur to carry it around. 6 inch is borderline for me. The wife would disagree....

 

[fatclue_98]

I know one thing, if the device is NOT small enough and is simply a Tablet with Telephony I wont be buying it, I can go buy a tablet that does that now if I want, I want a MOBILE (small) device that fits in ANY pocket and not a Tablet that is cumbersome and needs its own chauffeur to carry it around. 6 inch is borderline for me. The wife would disagree....

TMI

Sent from Alcatel Idol 4S with Windows via mTalk

 

[anon(50597)]

I know one thing, if the device is NOT small enough and is simply a Tablet with Telephony I wont be buying it, I can go buy a tablet that does that now if I want, I want a MOBILE (small) device that fits in ANY pocket and not a Tablet that is cumbersome and needs its own chauffeur to carry it around. 6 inch is borderline for me. The wife would disagree....

I agree. It has to be mobile (pocketable) and plug it into a dock/peripheral to do real work.

Sent from my Alcatel Idol 4S

 

[a5cent]

Which OS are we referring to? Mobile or desktop?

Specifically to W10oA, which is simply:

a) full W10 (the exact same source code) re-compiled for ARM.
b) with an x86 emulator thrown in.

Isn't what you're describing WinRT or reasonable facsimile?

In part. W10oA and W8RT are both mostly just re-compiled versions of the full W8 or W10 source code.

In contrast to W10oA however, W8RT explicitly prevented x86 desktop applications from being installed and, most importantly, it didn't include an emulator to run x86 software.

The desktop software W8RT could run (Office) was also re-compiled for ARM, so running that didn't require an emulator.

Whether we can call W10oA a facsimile depends on what we're judging I guess. In terms of how the ability to run on ARM is achieved, yes. In terms of its capabilities, specifically [edit] the ability to adapt to different screen sizes [/edit] and most importantly, to run x86 desktop software, no.

 

[Rosebank]

https://thewincentral.com/windows-1...coming-future-reveals-official-documentation/

 

[Rosebank]

https://thewincentral.com/windows-10-arm-x86-emulation-snapdragon-835/amp/

The classic or standard win32 apps can be installed and run exactly the same way as would expect on a normal PC. All of this action happens during the runtime through a custom Microsoft emulator, Windows on Windows (WOW).

 

[Rosebank]

https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2017/P4171
**FINALLY HERE WE HAVE X86 EMULATION DESCRIBED**
We also get to see ALL-8 CORES running and contributing which I mentioned in my very first post Brining the Forum thread full circle.

 

[Joe920]

https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2017/P4171
**FINALLY HERE WE HAVE X86 EMULATION DESCRIBED**

Nice video. The second presenter gives a pretty detailed description. Or so I believe because I only understood 5% of that.

 

[Drael646464]

There are limited applications for this on a smartphone sized screen. Running webapps via chromium engine. Maybe office, browsers. Some games.

It's perfectly possible on current hardware, but would be more useful for continuum and a TONNE more useful using ARM on tablets or notebooks.

The number of cores isn't actually an indication of power btw, additional cores are never fully utilised as well as the first one. Smartphone CPUs add more cores rather than more ghz, because of heat concerns. Which is why phones have more cores than high end desktops - its not actually a sign of power, its a way to eek out tiny bits of power when heat and size are constraints.

 

[Drael646464]

I know one thing, if the device is NOT small enough and is simply a Tablet with Telephony I wont be buying it, I can go buy a tablet that does that now if I want, I want a MOBILE (small) device that fits in ANY pocket and not a Tablet that is cumbersome and needs its own chauffeur to carry it around. 6 inch is borderline for me. The wife would disagree....

Well lets agree to disagree then.

I would absolutely buy a windows tablet with GPS, 4.5G, SMS etc. Especially if it was small enough to put in a bag, and had active stylus. There's nothing in android or ios that really compares to windows software, interopability, or stylus app support and I don't like those platforms as much. And windows generally speaking doesn't come with "the full deal".

Computer on the go, that doubles as a phone? Count me in!

BTW, windows on ARM is ABSOLUTELY not coming to smartphones this year, and probably not next either. They haven't got it ready for tablets/notebooks yet, their stated purpose for releasing it, and ontop of that work, they need to optimise the UI, and finetune the bejesus out of the battery optimisation to make a phone (plus also have a FF and implementation that is truly new, as satya stated of phones).

You are simply not getting a standard glass slab smartphone with WoA period. It might be a credit card sized clamshell. It might have 3d augmented reality. But not what you expect.

 

[Rosebank]

It might be a credit card sized clamshell. It might have 3d augmented reality. But not what you expect.

MS have made it quite clear since previous comments on this thread that the NEXT device wont be a phone as we know it, but thanks for reminding us of that, we have also seen a Patent for a device with a folding screen, lets agree anything is possible. We have a better understanding of matters from today at least. I do however stand by my point that a tablet is not what I want personally and I would not buy a PC/TABLET, I want a smaller device. Folding screen could make this a reality.

 

[Drael646464]

MS have made it quite clear since previous comments on this thread that the NEXT device wont be a phone as we know it, but thanks for reminding us of that, we have also seen a Patent for a device with a folding screen, lets agree anything is possible. We have a better understanding of matters from today at least. I do however stand by my point that a tablet is not what I want personally and I would not buy a PC/TABLET, I want a smaller device. Folding screen could make this a reality.

Well it'll come eventually, when the price of producing graphene at manufacture comes down. MS has the patent it shares with Samsung on the tech of the folding graphene OLED screen. The major hurdle for a seemless folding design is just the manufacture of graphene. Its kind of supertech stuff right now.

 

[mattiasnyc]

There are limited applications for this on a smartphone sized screen. Running webapps via chromium engine. Maybe office, browsers. Some games.

It's perfectly possible on current hardware, but would be more useful for continuum and a TONNE more useful using ARM on tablets or notebooks.

I think the promise of getting one small device that you carry with you and then scale upwards in size by connecting - whether it's called continuum or something else - is very exciting and promising. That would truly revolutionize things I think. The "usability" of windows on a small screen would be a moot point, because it'll adapt and so will we. If I only have the small screen I only use it for certain things. If I hook it up to a larger screen I use it for other things.

The number of cores isn't actually an indication of power btw, additional cores are never fully utilised as well as the first one. Smartphone CPUs add more cores rather than more ghz, because of heat concerns. Which is why phones have more cores than high end desktops - its not actually a sign of power, its a way to eek out tiny bits of power when heat and size are constraints.

Not really sure I agree with that though. Well designed applications do make use of all cores available. And the thing is that some processes get stalled if they have to wait for others to finish, so by making more cores available you can perform calculations in parallel which is a huge benefit as long as they don't need the resulting data from each other. So high end desktops have 8 cores these days.

 

[mattiasnyc]

MS have made it quite clear since previous comments on this thread that the NEXT device wont be a phone as we know it, but thanks for reminding us of that, we have also seen a Patent for a device with a folding screen, lets agree anything is possible. We have a better understanding of matters from today at least. I do however stand by my point that a tablet is not what I want personally and I would not buy a PC/TABLET, I want a smaller device. Folding screen could make this a reality.

I'd look for a smartphone-size device as well. I would however love to have a "dumb" tablet that hooks up to this new small device via continuum or whatever. Ideally we'd pay only for screens of different sizes, keyboards and mice - once - instead of also always paying for more processing power. So, smart"phone" + dumb tablet, dumb monitor and input devices. All connectivity via smart"phone".

 

[Drael646464]

Not really sure I agree with that though. Well designed applications do make use of all cores available. And the thing is that some processes get stalled if they have to wait for others to finish, so by making more cores available you can perform calculations in parallel which is a huge benefit as long as they don't need the resulting data from each other. So high end desktops have 8 cores these days.

That's partly because we are reaching nm limits, and moores law is broken.

More cores is better for some applications, but not currently most, even if its coded for.

You'll basically never see the processing fully evenly distributed.

Say you have 16 cores running 100 MHz and two cores running 800 Mhz - the later is going to be faster outside of software that specifically needs/is designed to run parallel, like neural networking.

Massively parallel is something that will happen in the future, but its better suited for certain applications. Graphics, machine learning. The difference is perhaps something like the difference between logic and creativity/intuition in the human brain.

Some processes really benefit from parallel processing, others not so much.

 

[Drael646464]

I'd look for a smartphone-size device as well. I would however love to have a "dumb" tablet that hooks up to this new small device via continuum or whatever. Ideally we'd pay only for screens of different sizes, keyboards and mice - once - instead of also always paying for more processing power. So, smart"phone" + dumb tablet, dumb monitor and input devices. All connectivity via smart"phone".

I'd never use just one device. Tablet and phone makes sense to me, or tablet and media device or all those and laptop, but I want to be part of the VR future, do those power tasks too. And I like second screening. So two devices is kind my minimum.