Apollo coming to all (1G/2G) Windows Phones!

anodynamic

New member
Feb 27, 2012
150
0
0
Visit site
Windows on arm is not x86 compatible.

That's quite obvious. I fail to understand what x86 has to with this discussion, though. MSFT is taking NT the same way as Linux and Apple's XNU, which is to port one kernel to several architectures. And, since WP7 apps aren't native, compatibility is only a matter of porting runtimes and libraries to work with the new kernel.
 

canesfan625

New member
Mar 31, 2011
489
2
0
Visit site
That's quite obvious. I fail to understand what x86 has to with this discussion, though. MSFT is taking NT the same way as Linux and Apple's XNU, which is to port one kernel to several architectures. And, since WP7 apps aren't native, compatibility is only a matter of porting runtimes and libraries to work with the new kernel.

yeah I edited my post earlier. I was thinking about something entirely different. I was misunderstanding the compiled for arm comment. X86 is rellevent to the endgame of everything windows 8 though
 

anodynamic

New member
Feb 27, 2012
150
0
0
Visit site
yeah I edited my post earlier. I was thinking about something entirely different. I was misunderstanding the compiled for arm comment. X86 is rellevent to the endgame of everything windows 8 though

Ah, I see. I guess I have to add one thing, though, and that is that Metro apps from MS Store will run both on ARM and x86 builds of Windows 8, since they are non-native as well for compatibility. I think there may be a bit of confusion to come before people start to make distinctions like "media tablets" (ARM) and "tablet PCs" (x86) after Windows 8 rolls out on that market.
 

N8ter

Banned
Oct 10, 2011
712
2
0
Visit site
NT has always run on multiple architectures. Since it was developed.

That's quite obvious. I fail to understand what x86 has to with this discussion, though. MSFT is taking NT the same way as Linux and Apple's XNU, which is to port one kernel to several architectures. And, since WP7 apps aren't native, compatibility is only a matter of porting runtimes and libraries to work with the new kernel.


Sent from my HD7 using Board Express
 

anodynamic

New member
Feb 27, 2012
150
0
0
Visit site
NT has always run on multiple architectures. Since it was developed.

Yeah. I guess the "extending it to current portable architectures" would have been more correct, since major non-x86 versions mostly have been for server type architectures. I think I remember reading somewhere that even if x86 was seen as the major market from the beginning they developed it for something else, to avoid using familiar x86-specific code, and then ported it from there.

Sometimes I wonder if I remember too much stuff... ;)
 

Carl Bytes

New member
Mar 1, 2012
10
0
0
Visit site
As I have posted before, Apollo upgradability is the reason why I bought my first wp7 phone after MWC. To be sure, I bought a 2nd Gen phone, HTC Radar. I think WP8 will be the same WP7 with full support and highly integrated to Windows 8 so there is no reason why current phones are not upgradable.
 

kyderr

New member
Mar 21, 2012
86
0
0
Visit site
Here's my take. Looking at the history here. All phones have short lives. The O/S can long outlive the hardware, but most people upgrade their phones every chance they get. Since Phone O/S is much more tied to hardware than desktop O/S hardware drives the replacement. Phone carriers need consumers to remain on their system, and they discount the hardware to keep the customer on contract. There is NO advantage from a business perspective to support older architecture. It is expensive. There is regression testing required and unlike desktops, there is not enough useable life life in a 12 month or 18 month old phone to make it worthwhile. I predict that there will be no upgrade for anything but the most recently released devices. Plus with Apollo featuring removable SD support, who would want a phone that does not have one.

I've been pretty active on other forums, but this is my first post here. Hi all.
 

canesfan625

New member
Mar 31, 2011
489
2
0
Visit site
Here's my take. Looking at the history here. All phones have short lives. The O/S can long outlive the hardware, but most people upgrade their phones every chance they get. Since Phone O/S is much more tied to hardware than desktop O/S hardware drives the replacement. Phone carriers need consumers to remain on their system, and they discount the hardware to keep the customer on contract. There is NO advantage from a business perspective to support older architecture. It is expensive. There is regression testing required and unlike desktops, there is not enough useable life life in a 12 month or 18 month old phone to make it worthwhile. I predict that there will be no upgrade for anything but the most recently released devices. Plus with Apollo featuring removable SD support, who would want a phone that does not have one.

I've been pretty active on other forums, but this is my first post here. Hi all.


Bit of a generalization don't you think? I don't know anyone personally who upgrades every chance they get. Not even those on Android not getting updates at all. Not "all" phones have short lives. This is just what we have come to expect by default because of Android devices being dropped after six months in most cases. If there is no advantage to support older architecture someone at Microsoft didn't get the memo before green lighting tango. Desktop comparisons do not make sense. The hardware issues are infinitely different. There will be plenty of life left in a Windows Phone at 12-18 months. This isn't Android. I've had my Arrive for longer than that and its still doing just fine.

by the way.. didnt the 3GS come out in 2009?
 

mparker

New member
Jan 13, 2011
352
0
0
Visit site
I think I remember reading somewhere that even if x86 was seen as the major market from the beginning they developed it for something else, to avoid using familiar x86-specific code, and then ported it from there.

It was originally written for the MIPS R3000, then ported to the X86 and DEC Alpha. It was later ported to the Itanium as well. So while it may not be as portable as Linux or OSX, moving it down to ARM was probably not that difficult; what was probably more difficult was finding and swapping out the various bits of the kernel that were inappropriate for SoC's (assumptions that memory was plentiful, optimizations that make sense when you have two dozen cores but not when you have four, features that were in there for SQL Server or COM, etc).
 

N8ter

Banned
Oct 10, 2011
712
2
0
Visit site
Yeah. I guess the "extending it to current portable architectures" would have been more correct, since major non-x86 versions mostly have been for server type architectures. I think I remember reading somewhere that even if x86 was seen as the major market from the beginning they developed it for something else, to avoid using familiar x86-specific code, and then ported it from there.

Sometimes I wonder if I remember too much stuff... ;)

Both NT Workstation and Server ran on different architechtures, and of course they shared the same codebase. Only difference is that the average consumer didn't use NT, they used 3.1x and 9x Windows consumer-oriented OSes up until XP.

That's all really just trivial info, though.
 

Eirenarch

New member
Nov 18, 2011
94
0
0
Visit site
Leaks from MS Nerd (he's leaked many things before and I can't recall any of them being false) says WP8 will come to current devices:

IAMA someone who 'leaks' information about Microsoft's future plans. AMAA : casualiama

There are some other interesting info and sadly he says he will be exiting "the game".

Once again this is not official (like all the other info we have currently).

Selected questions:

Q: Are there metrics when MS will dump WP7 (eg consistently low market penetration for 5 years, 2 good non-nokia OEM devices per year) or will they be in it, no matter what it costs?
A: In it no matter what it costs. That said, expect to see more cross-platform services, especially for iOS.

Q: Windows Phones 1st, 2nd gen and Windows Phone 8. Any hope for upgrades?
A: Yes, all current Windows Phones will receive a subset of Apollo. The carriers are the primary obstacle in the US. I hear Microsoft is pushing hard for a Mango-like delivery schedule, as are Nokia & HTC. Some Apollo features will be exclusive to the 3rd-gen devices expected to be released this fall on the MSM8960 platform.
 

dkp23

New member
Feb 3, 2012
1,494
0
0
Visit site
Reliable leaker also claim Windows Phone 8 is coming to all handsets | WMPoweruser

Reliable leaker also claim Windows Phone 8 is coming to all handsets
March 22, 2012 | By Surur

MSNerd, who has been pretty reliable when it comes to Microsoft leaks, is getting out of the business, and is dumping all his insider knowledge along the way.

There is much relevant on the Reddit page where he conducted the Q&A, such as that Zune is DOA, but the one hot-button issue which is bothering anyone considering buying a generation 2 Windows Phone is whether they will get Apollo eventually.

In response to the question he writes:

Windows Phones 1st, 2nd gen and Windows Phone 8. Any hope for upgrades?

Yes, all current Windows Phones will receive a subset of Apollo. The carriers are the primary obstacle in the US. I hear Microsoft is pushing hard for a Mango-like delivery schedule, as are Nokia & HTC.

Some Apollo features will be exclusive to the 3rd-gen devices expected to be released this fall on the MSM8960 platform.

If true this is rather good news, and something Microsoft need to start reassuring buyers about before the release of the Nokia Lumia 900.

On the other hand MSNerd also revealed that he is in fact not a Microsoft employee, so, despite his track record we he could still be completely wrong.

As usual, we shall just have to wait and see.

Grain of salt required.
 

jfa1

New member
Dec 15, 2007
2,567
1
0
Visit site
As always a grain or two of salt is required but he's been relaible in the past and what's he is saying is reasonable. He's saying different generations will be different subsets or parcels of Apollo enough to remain very functional but with a few perhaps very minor limitations. Enough to get through your contract in decent shape and get a newer phone on contract.
 

selfcreation

New member
Dec 16, 2010
3,287
9
0
Visit site
yeah and I cant see the limitations being THAT bad ,

no FFC , NFC ... maybe some ecosystem/crost-platform feature might be missing . I dont think its gona be a big deal.
 

mparker

New member
Jan 13, 2011
352
0
0
Visit site
yeah and I cant see the limitations being THAT bad ,

no FFC , NFC ... maybe some ecosystem/crost-platform feature might be missing . I dont think its gona be a big deal.

I'm concerned about memory and speed. I'd be surprised if WP8 uses less RAM than WP7.5; what I expect is that we wind up being able to keep fewer apps in memory resulting in slower switching. I also suspect that the kernel will be somewhat slower, though I'm not sure how noticeable this will be.

If I were Microsoft I'd do my best to get the Mango devices upgraded and running well but I don't think I would worry about upgrading 1st gen machines. They've got slower CPUs, slower GPUs, and slower flash memory. Also they'll be at the end of their contracts and the carriers and manufacturers are eager to sell them some new toys. To be honest, I don't want Microsoft pulling capabilities out of WP8 because they're worried about performance on those Gen1 devices, I want them looking forwards not backwards, I want them looking towards the hundreds of millions of devices they want to sell, not the few millions they sold last year.

Android gets a lot of heat for fragmentation but Google's been good about updating their own handsets (the Nexus line). But even there they haven't been afraid to cut their ties with the past. The Nexus 1 handsets shipped with Froyo, and were upgraded to Gingerbread the next year, but this year they were abandoned by Ice Cream Sandwich due to RAM/GPU constraints.
 

canesfan625

New member
Mar 31, 2011
489
2
0
Visit site
I'm concerned about memory and speed. I'd be surprised if WP8 uses less RAM than WP7.5; what I expect is that we wind up being able to keep fewer apps in memory resulting in slower switching. I also suspect that the kernel will be somewhat slower, though I'm not sure how noticeable this will be.

If I were Microsoft I'd do my best to get the Mango devices upgraded and running well but I don't think I would worry about upgrading 1st gen machines. They've got slower CPUs, slower GPUs, and slower flash memory. Also they'll be at the end of their contracts and the carriers and manufacturers are eager to sell them some new toys. To be honest, I don't want Microsoft pulling capabilities out of WP8 because they're worried about performance on those Gen1 devices, I want them looking forwards not backwards, I want them looking towards the hundreds of millions of devices they want to sell, not the few millions they sold last year.

Android gets a lot of heat for fragmentation but Google's been good about updating their own handsets (the Nexus line). But even there they haven't been afraid to cut their ties with the past. The Nexus 1 handsets shipped with Froyo, and were upgraded to Gingerbread the next year, but this year they were abandoned by Ice Cream Sandwich due to RAM/GPU constraints.

Why would the kernel be slower? The Windows 8 kernel runs better than Windows 7. Even to the point where the older the hardware the larger the increase over 7. There isn't anything at all to suggest any performance hit.
 

mparker

New member
Jan 13, 2011
352
0
0
Visit site
Why would the kernel be slower? The Windows 8 kernel runs better than Windows 7. Even to the point where the older the hardware the larger the increase over 7. There isn't anything at all to suggest any performance hit.

Windows 8 definitely is faster than Windows 7 - on the desktop. But on the phone the Windows 8 kernel will be replacing the old Windows Mobile kernel, which had decades of tuning to run well on small-memory devices with slow CPUs. Meanwhile the Windows NT kernel has had decades of tuning to run well on multi-cpu devices with hyperthreading and gigabytes of RAM; there are a lot of places in the kernel that now have those sort of assumptions baked in (the memory manager is now tuned to manage 16GB to 1TB RAM, the mutex logic is now tuned for poly-core systems running hundreds of threads, etc).

It is possible that the Windows 8 kernel as shipped in WP8 will be smaller and faster than the Windows Mobile 6.5 kernel that shipped in WP7/7.5 (20 yrs ago Windows NT 3.1 ran well in only 4MB after all). But it's by no means a slam-dunk, and Microsoft's unwillingness to publicly proclaim backwards compability with the Gen 1 and 2 devices should give us pause. I am skeptical that WP8 will support Gen 1 devices at all (I own a Gen 1 Focus), and while I hope that WP8 runs well on Gen 2 devices I won't be at all surprised if it doesn't.

I also wouldn't be surprised if WP8 actually ships as two versions, a legacy version for WP7 devices that runs the old WM6.5 kernel but has the new UI and WP7.5 API with parts of WinRT, while the Apollo devices run the new WoA kernel and the full software stack (WP7.5 API + WinRT API) minus the special Office-only desktop mode.
 
Last edited:

canesfan625

New member
Mar 31, 2011
489
2
0
Visit site
Windows 8 definitely is faster than Windows 7 - on the desktop. But on the phone the Windows 8 kernel will be replacing the old Windows Mobile kernel, which had decades of tuning to run well on small-memory devices with slow CPUs. Meanwhile the Windows NT kernel has had decades of tuning to run well on multi-cpu devices with hyperthreading and gigabytes of RAM; there are a lot of places in the kernel that now have those sort of assumptions baked in (the memory manager is now tuned to manage 16GB to 1TB RAM, the mutex logic is now tuned for poly-core systems running hundreds of threads, etc).

It is possible that the Windows 8 kernel as shipped in WP8 will be smaller and faster than the Windows Mobile 6.5 kernel that shipped in WP7/7.5 (20 yrs ago Windows NT 3.1 ran well in only 4MB after all). But it's by no means a slam-dunk, and Microsoft's unwillingness to publicly proclaim backwards compability with the Gen 1 and 2 devices should give us pause. I am skeptical that WP8 will support Gen 1 devices at all (I own a Gen 1 Focus), and while I hope that WP8 runs well on Gen 2 devices I won't be at all surprised if it doesn't.

I also wouldn't be surprised if WP8 actually ships as two versions, a legacy version for WP7 devices that runs the old WM6.5 kernel but has the new UI and WP7.5 API with parts of WinRT, while the Apollo devices run the new WoA kernel and the full software stack (WP7.5 API + WinRT API) minus the special Office-only desktop mode.


While I don't doubt that this could be the case that video of them running W8 on an Intel Atom just to make a point gives me a bit of hope. Supposedly its x86 and arm in one so who knows what they have done exactly.
 

mparker

New member
Jan 13, 2011
352
0
0
Visit site
The main thing I'm hopeful about is that among the Gen 2 devices the Lumia 900 will be the one specifically designed for upgradability to Apollo. By late last year the WP8 code would have been getting feature complete and they would have had a pretty solid idea of what sort of hardware would be needed to run WP8 pretty well. Because it's the big "hero" device for WP7.5, and because of Nokia's relationship with Microsoft, at this point in time it has probably been a test mule for Apollo for several months now. I'm really looking forward to a tear-down to see how much RAM is really on it. Not how much WP7 says it has (because the 512MB that it sees may be a limitation of the kernel) but how much RAM is actually present. If it ships with 1GB even though WP7 can't use more than 512MB then that would be a pretty good hint that the current gen devices that only have 512MB may be gasping a bit with WP8. But if it only ships with 512MB on board then that's a very encouraging sign for the Gen1/2 devices.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,910
Messages
2,242,883
Members
428,005
Latest member
COME ON WIN ANDROID (ADI)