Next SurfaceRT To Come With Qualcomm Snapdragon 800, LTE 157
recoiledsnake writes "Following up on our previous discussion of Microsoft selling discounted SurfaceRT tablets to schools (which fueled speculation about the future of Surface RT), Bloomberg is now reporting that Microsoft is fast at work on the next Surface RT which will replace the current Tegra 3 with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 chip which has stellar benchmarks against the likes of the upcoming Tegra 4, Apple A6X, and Exynos processors, especially in the GPU and graphics department. Since the SoC comes with 3g/LTE, this might be the first Surface to support integrated cellular data. There are also indications that there could be an 8" version, and that the new versions might be revealed alongside the Windows 8.1 preview bits at the upcoming BUILD conference, starting on June 26."
Whoopee? (Score:5, Funny)
Bloomberg is now reporting that Microsoft is fast at work on the next Surface RT which will replace the current Tegra 3 with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 chip
Will they also replace Windows RT with Windows? Because it seems awfully like they replaced Windows with new Folger's Crystals, and you can taste the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
The current Surface Pro does come with Windows 8 (the full version) and a Intel Core i5 Processor.
Re: (Score:3)
Have you tried Windows 8 on a tablet?
While Surface Pro is bulky and has a terrible battery life, the Windows 8 tablet experience is actually really good. It's powerful enough to run Visual Studio when docked, lighter than many laptops for carrying around, and has a good touch interface and stylus for using it on the subway or in meetings.
And there is no separation. If you want to fix a bug on the subway or navigate Youtube left-handed by touch while eating lunch at your desk, you can.
I used to be a .NET con
Re: (Score:2)
A better analogy would be they replaced your regular coffee with a mug of water and a picture of a cup of coffee. It looks somewhat like Windows but underneath it's nothing like windows.
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing is, it's actually exactly the other way around. The usual complaint about Win8 (and Windows RT) is that it doesn't look like Windows. However, "underneath" it's exactly Windows, aside from running on ARM (and you may be too young to remember, but the NT family - which includes Win7 and Win8 - has always come on multiple architectures; with NT6.2 they dropped Itanium and picked up ARM). Remove the restriction to Microsoft-signed binaries on the desktop, and you have a decent Windows machine w
Re: (Score:2)
However, "underneath" it's exactly Windows, aside from running on ARM
... And missing just about every Windows UI library that's been around for 20 years.
(and you may be too young to remember, but the NT family - which includes Win7 and Win8 - has always come on multiple architectures
By "multiple" you mean x86-32, x86-64 and IA64, right? Or do you mean further back when NT4 ran on MIPS, Solaris, and Power?
Remove the restriction to Microsoft-signed binaries on the desktop, and you have a decent Windows machine which simply requires that native apps be recompiled first
In theory, yes, assuming you aren't using any x86 platform-specific calls, or optimizations, or system components wholesale deprecated by RT, or any UI other than Metro.
(.NET apps run on-modified, and there's even some hacked-up support for Java and Python).
Kinda sorta, see above.
Re: (Score:2)
10 years ago everyone knew PDAs and phones were going to converge. They just didn't know if PDAs would gain phone calling capabilities, or if phones would get a PDA grafted onto them. It turned out to be the latter.
Similarly, everyone today knows these mobile computing devices and PCs are going to converge. Well, a portion of the PC fanbase is in denial. But I think everyone else, at lea
Ode to my Troll (Score:3)
O my troll,
You wish to deprecate me,
But you strengthen me by validating my comments,
You let me know that I interfere with your shilling
I am renewed in thee.
Microsoft can do whatever they want to it... (Score:1)
but it will still be an ARM version of Win8 that isn't compatible with what people want to run right now.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is the name. Why call it "Windows-whatever" if it can't run Windows applications?
I would have called the OS "Doors". The marketing department would have a field day with this. "Open new Doors to exciting possibilities" and other bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
> The problem is the name. Why call it "Windows-whatever" if it can't run Windows applications?
Guessing, but in the hopes that uneducated people will buy it thinking it's Windows?
Re: (Score:2)
I would have called the OS "Doors".
I AM THE LIZARD KING! *jumps off a chair*
Re: (Score:1)
It's not that they're trying to change anything. It's that they're doing nothing to dispel the serious misperception that using the name Windows on it creates. That's a problem and will cost them big when people realize they've bought a device based on false impressions.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
umm in each of those cases they didn't just outright drop support. it took several releases for support for the old to die.
surface wouldn't be that bad if you could port windows ce apps to it.. that's what is wrong with surface rt.
they should have called the os on surface rt something like "Metros" or Meteor or some shit like that. not windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft really gets a a hard time trying to change anything. When Apple dropped OS9 support when moving to OSX, or when they dropped PowerPC support moving to X86, or when they created a tablet that wasn't compatible with their desktop operating system, nobody did this much complaining.
When Apple dropped Mac OS 9 it was after around five years of providing the ability to run OS 9 applications via the 'Classic Environment' emulation layer on OS X 10.0 through to 10.4. When they dropped Power PC support you could continue to run PPC OS X applications on Intel OS X via Rosetta for around six years (10.4 through to 10.6). Although such architecture changes were not seamless there were quite lengthy transitional phases to lessen the impact on end users and developers.
When Apple created the i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When Apple moved from OS9 to OSX, you could still run OS9 in a padded cell. From PowerPC to X86, you could run both executables up through 10.4 or 10.5. Apple never claimed their iThings were little Macs, in fact they claimed they were a new kind of device, or an old one done well this time.
MS came out with something they called windows but wasn't because it couldn't run the same apps. And even the x86 version of their Surface is a frankendevice...see, it isn't a lap top, it isn't a pad, it's both. Only a f
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft really gets a a hard time trying to change anything. When Apple dropped OS9 support when moving to OSX, or when they dropped PowerPC support moving to X86, or when they created a tablet that wasn't compatible with their desktop operating system, nobody did this much complaining. But everytime MS tries to do anything that changes anything in anyway people say they are making bad decisions. ARM will have to get a lot faster before they can run real Windows and all the standard Windows applications on it. I really think the only major failings of their Surface line is that it's a little to expensive for what it is. Surface RT would be nice if the price was a little closer to the Nexus 7 than it is to the iPad, and their Surface Pro should be a little close in price to the iPad. But I think they got the basic idea and concept right.
Actually, Apple put a great deal of effort in the migration from Motorola 68k to PPC, and the initial Power Macs based on the PPC601 and 604 had the OS ported, and supported 68k apps through emulation. Apple also worked w/ ISVs in porting those apps from 68k to the 601, and that was how a number of them saw their speeds improve. As for the move from PPC to x86, they had already been working on x86 in parallel to PPC, and moreover, NEXTSTEP already existed on x86 to begin with. As a result, the transi
Re: (Score:2)
Apple had an advantage with their CPU migration: the new CPU was much faster than the old one. The PowerPC was introduced at 60MHz, whereas the fastest 68040 that they sold was 40MHz and clock-for-clock the PowerPC was faster. When they switched to Intel, their fastest laptops had a 1.67GHz G4 and were replaced by Core Duos starting at 1.84GHz. The G4 was largely limited by memory bandwidth at high speeds. In both cases, emulated code on the new machines ran slightly slower than it had on the fastest Ma
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The baffling thing is that RT could be alright. It could run re-compiled apps from anyone. Legacy software would be a problem, but anything actively developed would be ported with little effort. That would rock! There is actually a lot of really useful OSS software for windows. .. But you can't do this. You can, if you root the device. But it's unsupported.
Instead, MS wants you to buy software only through their app store. Just like apple devices. Trouble is, there is already a very active and very large de
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The silly thing is, aside from literally a single flag in the kernel*, it *is* just a simple recompile of Win8. Dig into that "jailbreak" on XDA-Devs, and you'll see it really is just a single value that needs to be changed. Microsoft really should have made a way for users to do that themselves. I can understand the value to some people of having a very locked-down system where all third-party code runs in a sandbox, but sometimes I want to run third-party code that *isn't* going to run in a sandbox, dammi
Theories... (Score:2)
Although MSFT claimed to lock down WinRT to force developers to target Metro so there would be lots of tablet friendly apps instead of win32 ports, my theories as to why MSFT really decided to have a locked down WinRT...
1. They are mostly using WinRT as a lever against Intel to get them to reduce the margins on x86 chips so that they can compete against android in the low-end tablet space w/ x86 chips. If this strategy is successful and intel capitulates, they didn't want too many consumer WinRT ARM win32
Was performance the problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what? (Score:3)
Until and unless they change "Windows" RT so that it lets non-Microsoft applications run on the desktop, no one cares. People aren't writing applications for Metro and aren't going to start. If they opened up the desktop, then at least many existing programs would work with just a recompile.
Why are the EU antitrust authorities letting them get away with this, anyway? (I'd ask the same about the US, but for all intents and purposes we don't *have* antitrust authorities.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Until and unless they change "Windows" RT so that it lets non-Microsoft applications run on the desktop, no one cares.
There are plenty of Windows 8 tablets out there that do exactly this. Windows RT is for people who want an iPad analogue. i.e. they have no want or need to install legacy applications on their tablet.
People aren't writing applications for Metro and aren't going to start.
There are currently 92,000 apps in the Windows store [metrostorescanner.com], and it's growing at an average rate of 591 apps per day. Using Apple's latest figures (from WWDC) for the iPad, the iPad appstore is growing at an average of 435 apps per day. This also includes some double counting for "free" and "paid" versions, which the
Re: (Score:1)
There are plenty of Windows 8 tablets out there that do exactly this. Windows RT is for people who want an iPad analogue. i.e. they have no want or need to install legacy applications on their tablet.
Except that people who want an iPad analogue just buy an iPad because they want to run iPad apps. You don't buy a product because of it's lack of compatibility with Windows.
Re: (Score:1)
Thats not an argument (Score:1)
There are plenty of other reasons to buy a Windows tablet over iPad..
If there where you would be arguing on those points. The frightening thing is Android manufacturers now outsell the iPad in the tablet market, is the shrinking iPad market(closed devices sold on brand rather than substance) really the market Microsoft should be chasing.
Re: (Score:1)
There are plenty of other reasons to buy a Windows tablet over iPad.
SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!
And remember we are discussing Surface RT here not Pro.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Aside from that, in no particular order:
Re: (Score:2)
That's a great list. The only thing on my wishlist is to lose the mandatory Appstore buying.
But I'm happy with a stock kindle fire HD, win8 on a laptop and Linux on other machines, so I'm easy to please.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are currently 92,000 apps in the Windows store [metrostorescanner.com], and it's growing at an average rate of 591 apps per day. Using Apple's latest figures (from WWDC) for the iPad, the iPad appstore is growing at an average of 435 apps per day. This also includes some double counting for "free" and "paid" versions, which the Windows app store bundles into one app.
It's funny how you apparently think that shines a positive light on the situation.
The iOS App Store has existed how long? And how many apps are on it? If the Windows Apps store were doing well, at this early point in its existence you'd hope the number of apps would be increasing an order of magnitude faster than that.
Re: (Score:2)
If the Windows Apps store were doing well, at this early point in its existence you'd hope the number of apps would be increasing an order of magnitude faster than that.
Why? Because someone would sit and browse through 4000 new apps a day, every day?
The reality is that as long as the major apps people care about are on the platform, and there is a steady treadmill of games to burn through, its good enough.
I'll never even see a tiny fraction of the apps on either app store. So the fact that they are "there
Re: (Score:2)
> Windows RT is for people who want an iPad analogue.
Then... why not get an ipad? Just wonderin'.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, but those features are available on Android, and it's a more mature product. The point is not so much "why RT" (although I could go there) but why push RT for people who are looking for an ipad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why are the EU antitrust authorities letting them get away with this, anyway?
Because Microsoft has been in mobile for ages and is nowhere near a monopoly there. Not even vaguely close. They have relatively little influence over the mobile market and what little they have traditionally had was related to their influence over the corporate market.
Re: (Score:2)
But they are attempting to use their monopoly on the desktop to leverage themselves into a better position in the mobile market (via Metro). Using a monopoly to leverage yourself into a different market is one of the things traditionally prohibited by antitrust law.
Re: (Score:2)
But they are attempting to use their monopoly on the desktop to leverage themselves into a better position in the mobile market (via Metro). Using a monopoly to leverage yourself into a different market is one of the things traditionally prohibited by antitrust law.
Yes, and if they are actually ever successful at it, then I'm sure the EU will do something about it. As long as they continue to fail spectacularly, there's no money in taking them to court. They can only justify fining them massively if they have actually benefited.
Gets it right on the third go (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft killed its Windows!? (Score:2)
This article isn't about a desktop, it's about the Surface RT... a tablet.
Windows 8 tuns all computing devices into poor tablets with keyboard gimmick. So I'm not really sure what you are arguing.
Re: (Score:2)
No wonder windows 8 was such a flop, the people in charge don't even know the difference between basic UI elements.
Re: (Score:2)
So MS throws the button back on and calls it a menu to try and fool desktop users
Microsoft has not once called the start button added in Windows 8.1 the "start menu". Go find a quote direct from a microsoft representative or blog stating as such. I'll wait all day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obvious troll is obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
so is Microsoft the good guy now? (Score:2)
with apple sucking up most of the world's money it seems like people think Microsoft will save them again
Re: (Score:2)
When did Microsoft save anyone from anything?
Re: (Score:2)
never been an IBM customer, have you?
I don't really understand (Score:1)
with apple sucking up most of the world's money it seems like people think Microsoft will save them again
I am not even sure what this means, if you are referring to the fact that Apple managed to launch a successful *tablet* and siphon up most of the early adopter money. As it did with the the Mp3 Player(The only market Apple managed to maintain in the lead in both the maturing...and now its decline), and Smartphone...the Tablet...Microsoft failed to compete with *All* of them. Its no secret of how they have managed to Destroy Nokia...a company Huawei said they would not buy this week because of its choice of
Re: (Score:2)
Thank Goodness! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is such good news! All the complaints about 'Surface RT' that I've heard so far have centered on how the Tegra3 is too slow, and doesn't have enough LTE. Nothing about how the hilariously perfunctory not-quite-office version of office is deeply touch-unfriendly, or being locked into Microsoft's walled garden store, or the relatively tiny application library. This should fix everything!
Re: (Score:2)
I expect the conversation went like this:
"You know, all the user feedback is that people can't run their Windows software on Windows RT, and the dedicated store apps are still lacking in breadth."
"Hmmm...let's fix that with the second release"
"Oooo! I know, we'll make the processor faster and add faster, expensive networking to it!!"
"That's a wrap, guys - lets get this thing into production!"
Hardware lifecycle (Score:3)
And all 15 of the people that bought, and kept, their Surface RT tablets are now going to be pissed at the 6 month product lifecycle.
With the deep discounts that Microsoft is giving on these things, they're getting dangerously close to "we can't even give them away."
Re: (Score:2)
Zune? Flop. Discounted and still flopped...
Windows Mobile Phones? Flop. And Lumia is even behind Blackberries
Surface? Flop. Give it for free to say we have marketshare.
Xbox One? Walking down the flop path, but some hope still exists...
Re: (Score:2)
Surface Pro is actually selling well. Surface RT not that well, but better than (for example) Chromebooks or most Android tablets. Nobody seems to be calling out Google for releasing "flops" though...
Windows Mobile was actually a reasonably popular smartphone OS in its heyday, although the smartphone market was tiny compared to today back then. Windows Phone is solidly in third place right now, and its share is growing (not explosively, but steadily).
Re: (Score:2)
although the smartphone market was tiny compared to today back then
Which was a direct function of practically every smartphone of the period being a major piece of shit. Smartphones only became slightly useable when RIM started getting traction with Blackberry, and the explosive growth we see today is due to iPhone and versions of Android that don't suck.
Did Microsoft try first? Sure - you could go all the way back to Windows CE for that. Did they fail for years? Also yes.
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly (Score:3)
The Good: RT gets us into ARM and it leaves behind a ton of baggage that has hindered good development on MS platforms.
The Bad: Microsoft can't market their way out of a wet paper sack. Looking at the commercials all I can tell is there's a snap on keyboard and people in Washington State like to dance. Moreover, even the BlackBerry Tablet had a bigger release profile and certainly better availability in stores. All of this lead to very few apps and developers that threw their lot in with RT early on getting burned.
The Ugly: Do a Pro Tablet, or do a RT tablet. Don't do both. Consumers have no idea what the difference is. The ones that bought an RT tablet feel pretty underwhelmed by the app availability.
Reliance on Wintel (Score:2)
The Good: RT gets us into ARM and it leaves behind a ton of baggage that has hindered good development on MS platforms.
I personally agree with you that Windows reliance(and advantages) of Intel and X86 have come to the end of their usefulness for Microsoft, and is now a massive albatross around its neck. At least they both get to sit with their 70% profit margins. Perhaps they should have done something sooner...or at least compete on price(Still find it hilarious that Apple haven't with their dropping profits)...at least they still have the lacklustre desktop market, unless Chrome...or got forbid a manufacture gets serious
Re: (Score:2)
intel could manufacture other chips in quite high quality(industry highest) if it came down to it.
the rt from ms is wanting mobile bucks. but it's not just that, it's tied into the windows 8 push for metro which is a push for becoming the distributor of sw on "windows" machines. rt is a trial on having only metro apps machine, with only sw from the ms store. because they have potentially tens of billions riding on that.
the desktop market isn't that lackluster.. it's where all the high margin big bucks sw is
Re:This is great (Score:5, Insightful)
Here ladies and gentlemen, we have a Reputation Manager hard at work.
High user number, low post count, all of which praise MS in some way.
The check's in the post.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it was so ridiculously gushing and inaccurate that I thought at first he was going for the "funny" mod...
Re: (Score:2)
Well, a troll will troll on a variety of subjects, as long as they get attention. A shill (paid or not) tends to promote one point of view only.
Re: (Score:2)
You have a point, but I think we established that the person in question only posts wildly pro-M$ stuff. That sounds to me more like a shill than a troll. Or at very least, a curiously specialized troll.
Re: (Score:2)
You miss the point. We all appear to be in agreement that he's lying. The discussion is about *why* he's lying.
What is obvious although perhaps unsaid is that none of us believe that the RT is either inspiring, or stronger and better performing than anything we're likely to want to own. Therefore, for the RT to get newer, faster guts is moot. We're not discussing the article because it's not interesting. Whereas, failed attempts at reputation management are mildly interesting, if only for the amusement
Seriously!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is
Re: (Score:1)
*Shakes the Magic Windows Eight Ball* and the answer is "always and every time".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Not everyone who likes the Surface RT is paid by MS. Mine is the best travel computer I've ever owned. Does everything I need it to do while on the road but is super light and has all day battery life. Sure, astroturfing happens (and not just by MS) but it's also true that people have been too quick to hate. The big complaint against RT at launch with the lack of apps and that is changing very fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes it's both.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone who likes the Surface RT is paid by MS.
I never said they were. It's just that first posts for most Windows 8 articles have been obvious shills for a while now, and this account stepped up the game by being a thinly veiled shill. That does not mean every pro-MS commenter is a shill, just that the the guys pouncing on the most visible comment frequently are.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone write an app for an unloved platform?
Re: (Score:2)
Because Win8 (and WRT) both use the same API (WinRT) and an app published for one is either automatically available for the other, or requires only a trivial recompile, and because while Win8 may be *relatively* unpopular, it's actually very widely installed. Write a Win8 app, put it on the store, sell it to people who have Win8 (and, conveniently enough with no extra work on your part, also to the people who have Windows RT).
Re:This is great (Score:5, Insightful)
Possible Microsoft shill detected.
Microsoft shill confirmed.
Microsoft FUD detected, presenting false data as facts.
More Microsoft FUD detected.
Obvious shill is totally obvious.
Re: (Score:1)
The amazing thing is that they can't seem to hide their breathless devotion when they do this. "I think it's great they are getting these in stores!" This reads like all the MS ad copy I've ever seen. It's always so forced and weird. Nobody talks like that! note my use of an exl. point. It's warranted. No one is that excited about any product, ever. Except for maybe bacon. Or, should I say, "bacon!"
Re:This is great (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple fanboys and consoles fanboys can be that excited, but they still wouldn't word it in that fashion.
"I think it's great they are getting these in stores!" sounds like the point of view of the seller, not the buyer.
As an example, a PS4 fanboy would say something like "I'll camp on the sidewalk for days if I have to, but I'm getting one on launch day! Xbox sucks!!1".
Re: (Score:2)
It literally sounds like something that Ballmer would say on stage.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple fanboys and consoles fanboys can be that excited, but they still wouldn't word it in that fashion.
"I think it's great they are getting these in stores!" sounds like the point of view of the seller, not the buyer.
As an example, a PS4 fanboy would say something like "I'll camp on the sidewalk for days if I have to, but I'm getting one on launch day! Xbox sucks!!1".
ms fanbois who do blatant shilling tend to work for ms or related company. it's like there's a reality distortion field in there what is appropriate to write as your own "opinion" then. actually I suspect it's because they believe their superiors inside the company are reading what they are posting on fb etc, which might not be that far from the truth - now if it really improves their position within company peers or not I don't know, but they seem to believe so.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone posting absurdly pro Microsoft posts on Slashdot? No I don't think shill is quite the word. I'd have to sum it up with successful troll is successful.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
The only difference between a Microsoft shill and an Apple shills is that Apple duped millions to be their shill and don't even pay them.
My [insert Apple product] is so fantastic and amazing because [ignores all reality and add excessive hyperbole to describe device an features]. That is why I buy one every 6 months!
BTW there are no Google shills because in spite of having the largest mobile platform nobody actually likes Android yet and only says they do to be alternative. It's like listening to Gotye an
Re:This is great indeed! (Score:2)
Yes, insanely great! Better than wild monkey sex!
Now you can run all your favourite Windows applications even faster than before!
Oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, leaving aside the built-in apps (of which the only really performance-sensitive one is IE), it's actually pretty easy to enable running traditional Windows apps on Windows RT. The "jailbreak" script is public and dead easy to use. .NET apps will run un-modified. Native ones need to be recompiled, but there's already quite a few which have been (including a number of games, which will definitely benefit from improved performance). Alternatively, there's also an x86 dynamic recompilation layer which
Re: (Score:2)
And he doesn't write very well.
Re: (Score:1)
I've got no feelings attached to Microsoft, good or bad. I don't care; they make products I can use - so I use them, they make products that suck donkey balls - I don't use them. I am very much a fan of using the right tool for the job though. What i dislike is fanboyism, Google, Apple, Linux, Microsoft or whatever, people blinded so badly by their religion are the worst kind of scum.
OP however has had nothing of value to contribute to Slashdot, as evident by his posting history. That earns him the brand of
Re: (Score:2)
For what it's worth, you actually can develop in .NET for Windows RT - either through official channels (the Windows Store supports all .NET languages, though you have to use XAML, HTML5, or DirectX for graphics, not WinForms or console or anything traditional like that...) or through development for "jailbroken" tablets (once the restriction to Microsoft-signed binaries on the desktop is gone, Windows RT will very happily run .NET 4.0 or later code, provided it was compiled for "AnyCPU" as is the default i
Re: (Score:2)
The general public definitely knows about and cares about the Surface.
It's some sort of device that teaches you to breakdance, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Now you guys have done it, he's going to end up in Room 101 at Redmond
Re: (Score:2)
Leaving aside the tens of thousands of Windows programs that it *is* compatible with (Windows Store apps are still "Windows programs"), it's actually quite easy to run re-compiled native apps or recent .NET apps on RT, and for closed-source native apps, there's a dynamic recompilation layer which does a decent job with older or low-demand software.
It's not (yet) possible to run anywhere near the full breadth of Windows software, no... but it'll run a reasonable portion of it, with more being added all the t