A little tidbit of news from the inside.

[Ed Boland]

A regular customer of mine works for one of the Azure teams. He comes in at least once or twice a week. Knowing he's a Microsoft employee, I always make time to have a little chit chat with him. He carries a Lumia 830 with the latest Win10 build, and we usually compare and discuss that.. But today, he said he had some news for me; "I'm flying up to Redmond, this week for several meetings about the Win10 launch.. And oh, btw, ARM based phones in September-October, and Intel based phones in January-February"

That's what he said.. Meaning the real "flagship phones" aren't coming until after the first of the year. You don't have to take my word for it, but if you're holding out for a flagship Windows 10 phone, you may want to wait just a couple months longer, and not jump on the first Windows 10 phones you see come out this fall.

Lucky for me, I have TWO lines eligible for upgrades!

 

[smoheath]

I have a feeling that the phones coming out this fall are flagships and the ones coming out in February will be business-esque phones, aka not flagships. Unless the new Intel mobile processors are crazy awesome, I don't expect the Intel phones to be as good as one with a snapdragon. I hope to be proven wrong though. Especially if they sneak in the ability to run desktop applications only when docked, I'd buy that so fast.

 

[slyronit]

How will the intel phones run ARM apps? Emulation? Doesn't sound too efficient.

Or the devs will have to recompile all their apps. I have a feeling not many will.

 

[Dewg]

How will the intel phones run ARM apps? Emulation? Doesn't sound too efficient.

Or the devs will have to recompile all their apps. I have a feeling not many will.

They won't have to. The store automatically compiles for different architecture and serves it up for the device. Note: this is for universal apps.

 

[a5cent]

How will the intel phones run ARM apps? Emulation? Doesn't sound too efficient.

Or the devs will have to recompile all their apps. I have a feeling not many will.

Requires no emulation at all! As I already mentioned elsewhere, for most apps it simply doesn't matter.

Most apps are written in a CLR supported language like C#, which similar to Java, is independent of CPU architectures like ARMv7 or x86.

For such CLR supported WP apps, compilation to native code occurs in the cloud, and the store will distribute a different version of the app depending on whether it's an ARMv7 or x86 based device asking for a download.

Note that the post above mine is incorrect, as this has absolutely nothing to do with "universal apps". The universal app concept is about an app's ability to run on different form factors running different OSes (W10, W10M and W10 IoT) and has zilch to do with CPU architectures. IOW, this will work perfectly fine, even if the app you're downloading is a not a universal app

The only time a Store app may not run on an x86 based device is when the app you're interested in was compiled to native code by the developer, which generally is only done for some games which are most often written in C/C++.

Even then though, the developer may quite easily compile and upload both ARMv7 and x86 versions to the store, so even that could work, if desired.

 

[Dewg]

Odd, it wasn't this way with RT on ARM processors. There were many apps that were compiled for Intel only. Gave a poor experience for RT owners initially. Then Universal apps came out. Now correlation does not equal causation, so I could be off base.

 

[a5cent]

Odd, it wasn't this way with RT on ARM processors. There were many apps that were compiled for Intel only. Gave a poor experience for RT owners initially. Then Universal apps came out. Now correlation does not equal causation, so I could be off base.

Something about that statement is off, since RT can not currently run universal apps. W10 and its variants, none of which are yet officially available, are in fact the first OSes that will run universal apps, so I'm sure you're confusing something here.

 

[Dewg]

Something about that statement is off, since RT can not currently run universal apps. W10 and its variants, none of which are yet officially available, are in fact the first OSes that will run universal apps, so I'm sure you're confusing something here.

Actually, it was introduced in Windows 8. From Microsoft Dev Network: A Universal Windows app is a Windows experience that is built upon the Universal Windows Platform (UWP), which was first introduced in Windows 8 as the Windows Runtime. Universal Windows apps are most often distributed via the Windows Store (but can also be side-loaded), and are most often packaged and distributed using the .APPX packaging format.

 

[anguilla1980]

For MS not to introduce everything in time for time for the holiday shopping season would be a HUGE fail IMO just from a marketing stand-point.

 

[a5cent]

Actually, it was introduced in Windows 8. From Microsoft Dev Network: A Universal Windows app is a Windows experience that is built upon the Universal Windows Platform (UWP), which was first introduced in Windows 8 as the Windows Runtime. Universal Windows apps are most often distributed via the Windows Store (but can also be side-loaded), and are most often packaged and distributed using the .APPX packaging format.

Ah, okay, I see what you're referring too. You are absolutely correct of course. It's just that the concept of what constitutes a universal app has changed with W10. A W10 universal app is no longer the same thing as it was in W8, and I thought you were using the more modern definition. In the article you linked to that is alluded to by providing a separate description for W10 universal apps.

However, I'm still certain that there was never an x86 based W8 store app, that achieved the ability to run on ARM devices, by becoming a universal app. One might say this is splitting hairs however, because a universal app that can't run on ARM phones is pretty much senseless. But at least technically, the ability to run on ARM devices was not achieved BECAUSE of that transition to a universal app, although it will have been achieved as part of it.

As stated in the article you linked to, being "universal" refers to an app's ability to run on different form factors, which is basically about sharing one API across phones, tablets and desktops. That article doesn't say anything about CPU architectures, because like I said, that is not directly related to the API issue which universal apps solve.

edit:
This may be an easier way to think about it:

As in your example, assume a Windows Store app that was originally targeted at x86 desktops/laptops and tablets. Saying that such an app will become a universal app implies it must gain two abilities it previously lacked:

a) it must achieve the ability to run not just on tablets but also on phones
b) since all windows phones use ARM chips, it must achieve ARM compatibility and can no longer be restricted to x86 chips.

Becoming a universal app is what allows the app to achieve (a), whereas (b) is more about compiler technology and only tangentially related to the universal apps platform. In the overwhelming majority of cases (strictly from a 3rd party developer's point of view), solving (b) won't require anything more than changing a compiler setting.

However, the question that was raised in this thread was how apps that run on ARM based phones could possibly run on x86 based phones. These apps don't have to be universal to do that. They could very well target no other form factor except phones. As such, they only need to worry about issue (b) mentioned above, whereas (a) is irrelevant.

 

[Dewg]

I see your point - well explained. As I said, correlation does not equal causation, so my observations may be off. However, I've never seen a "universal app" (as defined with Windows 8) that did not work with ARM processors (as it was designed to work for PCs, tablets (including the RT tablets), and phones (ARM). That does not mean they didn't exist.

 

[Keith Wallace]

Don't tell me these things. I've been on my 920 for almost 3 years. If I decide to pass on a 950/950 XL for an Intel-powered device, then it's delayed from the winter to the spring or summer, I'll be REALLY disappointed. I was basically screwed out of the 1520 waiting for McLaren, then the 930, and then W10 M flagships.

Unless Microsoft announces that the Intel stuff has a firm release date at IFA or some other time before the ARM stuff launches, I don't know that I would want to hold off and risk not having a new phone AGAIN. Maybe the W10 launch will have a decent phone around $200 that'll be a real improvement over the 920 (unlike the 830/640 XL), then I'll get it as a tide-me-over device. I can't stay on this 920 and its bad battery life forever.

 

[mmcpher]

And oh, btw, ARM based phones in September-October, and Intel based phones in January-February"
That's what he said.. Meaning the real "flagship phones" aren't coming until after the first of the year. You don't have to take my word for it, but if you're holding out for a flagship Windows 10 phone, you may want to wait just a couple months longer, and not jump on the first Windows 10 phones you see come out this fall.

So, after all of the recent statements from Nadella, about cutting back on the number of models and about MS's committment to Flagships's this year, he meant next year, but on the early side, at least as things stand now.. . .. And that we will have yet another release of mid-to-low-level phones in the interim, just to confuse and confound and purposefully disappoint everyone who took MS at their word when they indicated that the new phones would really show off WM's capabilities? So that will still be true into the future, but not today?

 

[a5cent]

I see your point - well explained. As I said, correlation does not equal causation, so my observations may be off. However, I've never seen a "universal app" (as defined with Windows 8) that did not work with ARM processors (as it was designed to work for PCs, tablets (including the RT tablets), and phones (ARM). That does not mean they didn't exist.

Yeah, I think we're on the same page now.

With the WP phone market consisting exclusively of ARM based devices, a universal app that can run only on x86 based devices makes zero sense. Like you say, although such an app could technically exist, I think it's safe to assume none currently does.

There is no rule stating that a WP8.x or W10M app must be a universal app however. I think it's guaranteed that we will see non-universal apps (e.g. targeting only phones), which will run on both ARM and (in the future) x86 based smartphones.

In a nutshell, that was my point.

 

[DavidinCT]

Don't tell me these things. I've been on my 920 for almost 3 years. If I decide to pass on a 950/950 XL for an Intel-powered device, then it's delayed from the winter to the spring or summer, I'll be REALLY disappointed. I was basically screwed out of the 1520 waiting for McLaren, then the 930, and then W10 M flagships.

Yea, I am wondering too. It will be nice to see a TRUE flagship from the ICON/930/1520 and I am on a ICON. I was thinking about seeing the fall lineup but, it makes me wonder if I should wait even longer. There are some limits to the ICON and higher spec'ed with expandable storage would tempt me.

If anything, the new models that come out in Jan/Feb (well, March/April as they are always delayed for some reason), and the 950/950XL (or what ever it will be called), the prices will drop on those. So if the Intel ones are so, so(business mid line models), and it's after 3-5 months after the 950XX release, then you can grab one for like $300 on the used market and never have to worry about a contact....

I guess that is one good way to think about it :/

I wont give up my unlimited data, so I don't get a promo price, so full retail is my only route on Verizon (unless I want to pay $500+ divided over 24 months). I have not been under a contract with Verizon in almost 10 years now....ugh, it's been a while, huh ?

 

[Iain_S]

well you can have flagships in both arm and intel, so sept/oct. Intel phones have not been proven yet, will have to see how those play out.

 

[anon(5383410)]

I'll just duck my head in and say you don't need Intel for a flagship.

 

[marratj]

x86 phone definitely makes sense to be placed in the business segment, especially with Continuum.

I just have to think about the countless announcements of phone manufacturers with Intel in the past (MeeGo anyone?)... how many x86 phones have been released exactly? There's one by Motorola that never got a follow up...

 

[slyronit]

No no, x86 on phones will not be good enough for business. They can't possible be faster than the Atom powered tablets at the most and they are not suitable for business either.

 

[rhapdog]

x86 phone definitely makes sense to be placed in the business segment, especially with Continuum.

I just have to think about the countless announcements of phone manufacturers with Intel in the past (MeeGo anyone?)... how many x86 phones have been released exactly? There's one by Motorola that never got a follow up...

Think about why x86 phones have never really taken off. Basically, they've just been an ARM competitor, running an OS built for ARM and they were incapable of doing anything that the ARM phones could not do.

However, with Windows 10 and Continuum, a phone with an Intel chip finally makes sense.

No no, x86 on phones will not be good enough for business. They can't possible be faster than the Atom powered tablets at the most and they are not suitable for business either.

These are processors that aren't on the market yet, which is why they won't be available in the Fall. You may be right about the speed, and may not be. We'll have to wait and see what Intel releases for these.

As far as being suitable for business, there are a lot of business people that don't need more power than an Atom powered tablet. My wife, for example. She's a business professional that uses her Windows 8.1 Laptop and Windows Phone 8.1, and her laptop is powered by an Atom. She won't let me buy her a new computer because she says it does everything she needs. She uses only a handful of Desktop Apps that are not power hungry and a few store apps. She would be an ideal candidate for such an Intel Windows 10 mobile phone in the future. She travels a lot, and this would definitely make her load lighter.

For an Architect, however, they need the power of the high end Surface Pro 3 at least when they go portable.

Not for everyone, no. But it would definitely have its place in a large portion of the business sector.