Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Windows Hardware

Dell is Reportedly Working on a Dual-Screen Windows ARM Device (theverge.com) 35

Dell is working on a foldable dual-screen device, according to a report. According to news blog WinFuture, Dell's supposedly forthcoming device would run Windows 10 and an unreleased Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 ARM processor. From a report: Dell's device is reportedly codenamed "Januss," and has been under development since last summer, but it's not clear whether the device will ever come to market. Dell was working on mobile Windows devices before, and those devices were canceled. Microsoft also canceled its own Surface Mini device, just weeks before it was due to be revealed. The Verge understands that the documents WinFuture has obtained are old, and that Dell could have altered its product plans by now.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dell is Reportedly Working on a Dual-Screen Windows ARM Device

Comments Filter:
  • by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday May 31, 2018 @07:03PM (#56707560)

    That's nothing! I dropped my iPhone and now it has roughly 17 screens*!

    * shapes vary from one screen to another.

  • This sounds a bit like the old Microsoft Courier. I really wanted one of those at the time but it never came to life
  • I can't think of any commercially successful attempt to put Windows on something that isn't an x86 PC. And I don't see why that thing would be any different.

    You get Windows for the huge software library accumulated over decades and because you get the best support for just about anything you can plug into your computer, graphic cards in particular.
    ARM devices like that lack the binary compatibility with everything that's written for x86 and lack the extensiblility of PCs that make good drivers so crucial. S

    • I was thinking the same thing really. As someone who has to support a bunch of Windows CE devices I would prefer anything else really.
    • Windows 10 for Arm devices has a 64bit emulation layer for non native applications.

      Balmer and Gates are gone. It would behoove us to think it's the same company it once was. I wouldn't under estimate them.

    • If it flops the HW will be available for cheap and somebody will port Linux to it. Win!
      Of course Dell could preclude the flop by offering it with Linux (I'd really like such a device) or Android, or at least supporting Linux development.

      • "Luckily" the Surface RT (which otherwise could have been an interesting bit of gear to salvage after Windows RT crashed and burned) 'fixed' that problem with mandatory secure boot(they strongly encourage it on the x86s; but there is the option to turn it off and, on some systems, mostly business class, the option to keep it on but provision your own trusted roots).

        Unless MS has had a change of heart about the matter I wouldn't be too optimistic about the prospects for 3rd party development; even if the
      • and somebody will port Linux to it. Win!

        That is going to be highly hampered by the fact that it's a Windows machine (thus relying on a SecureBoot UEFI bootloader).
        Unlike on the x86_64 world, where UEFI is *required* to allow end users to boot a 3rd party payload (either by disabling the SecoreBoot, or by adding their own signing key), there's no similar mandatory bootloader unlocking in ARM land.

        There's a risk that these devices come with a UEFI bootloader that will only exclusively boot kernels that have been signed by a secret key that only Mic

    • by Misagon ( 1135 )

      Windows 10 for ARM (64-bit) has an emulation layer for 32-bit x86 applications. It is supposed to be able to run old 32-bit programs, with their 32-bit DLLs transparently.
      Support for emulating x86-64 programs is not available, but is coming.

      Technical details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      • But "I wish I could run the same software on my tiny smartphone as I run on my giant over powered multi-screen workstation" isn't something you hear that often.

        Yes, Windows has a giant collection of legacy applications.
        But not much of them could actually be useful in a "smartphone with a soft-keyboard clamshell" form factor.

        In other word, very few users in of portable device are actually interested in running MS Windows software on their devices.
        (I think the above mentioned support for Office might be the o

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      "I can't think of any commercially successful attempt to put Windows on something that isn't an x86 PC. And I don't see why that thing would be any different."

      While this is true, it's not a good business plan for MS going forward.

      "You get Windows for the huge software library accumulated over decades and because you get the best support for just about anything you can plug into your computer, graphic cards in particular."

      This has not been true for a long time.

      Furthermore, when NT came out it ran on non-x86

      • Microsoft just realized 5 years earlier than Apple that X86 won. There were solid DEC Alpha machines, but then that was abandoned. And Sparc. And PowerPC was already failing to deliver.

        It's different now. Intel can't make low power processors. Some of us want a small, portable device that runs the main Windows applications, has great battery life, and always on functionality like an ipad.

    • You're just not in the business world.

      The only thing I need is MS Office, OneNote, Edge, Bing Maps, Wunderlist, and Spotify. I'd like to have Adobe Lightroom CC, but I'm sure they will make an ARM Binary in time.

      I've long been in the Surface camp, and I've tried to use an Ipad. But frankly, they suck. I have a top spec Surface Book 2, and it's great. I'd love it if MS made a 10" Surface tablet with an ARM processor that is actually good (i.e. 3:2 screen, high resolution - not the 1080p crap that was the

    • Unless the win32/x86 emulation layer they've been talking about is pretty solid and works well(and nobody goes power-tripping and tries for a "The Windows Store is your only option" play(as Windows RT did; and "Windows S" started by doing before it became a special install option for Windows Pro SKUs) they likely aren't going to succeed at "make some qualcomm thing act just like you expect a wintel to"; but Microsoft arguably has all the ingredients they need for a perfectly serviceable "Edgebook"

      The NT
    • I can't think of any commercially successful attempt to put Windows on something that isn't an x86 PC.

      Xbox 360.

      They gave up on that and went back to just using a PC for the basis of their console like they did the first time, but it wasn't because it didn't work right. It was just because it was unnecessarily expensive.

    • by Agripa ( 139780 )

      I can't think of any commercially successful attempt to put Windows on something that isn't an x86 PC. And I don't see why that thing would be any different.

      Microsoft really screwed that up with their attempt to leverage their desktop monopoly into portable devices which do not support a desktop interface and porting that back to desktop Windows screwing it up also.

      It does not take ARM to develop a usable ARM based desktop; all it takes is for Microsoft to screw it up for both themselves and Intel. Intel should have been working on a desktop replacement for Windows years ago just to keep MIcrosoft focused.

      You get Windows for the huge software library accumulated over decades and because you get the best support for just about anything you can plug into your computer,

      Not anymore and less all the time. Every revision of W

  • How about an ARM pizza box with PCIe slots, plenty of ECC DIMM slots, and a standard ATX power supply? No? Then I am not interested.

"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra

Working...