Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:05 pm
Contact: Website

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:57 pm

Slashdot today  http://is.gd/jF1TXq

"Microsoft has updated their WHQL certification requirements for Windows 8, and placed specific restrictions on ARM platforms that will make it impossible to install non-Microsoft operating systems on ARM devices, and make it impossible to turn off or customize such security. Choice quotes from the certification include from page 116, section 20: 'On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode. Only Standard Mode may be enabled' — which prevents users from customizing their security, and in section 21: 'Disabling Secure MUST NOT be possible on ARM systems' to prevent you from booting any other OSes."

Any comment/further views?

Bit worrying if true?



Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:02 pm

This is for hardware that is made for Windows 8.

Another good reason to avoid it.

Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Posts: 25399
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:33 pm

Hopefully this means MS will sell even less Win8 stuff on Arm. They really are in panic mode.
Principal Software Engineer at Raspberry Pi (Trading) Ltd.
Contrary to popular belief, humorous signatures are allowed. Here's an example...
“I own the world’s worst thesaurus. Not only is it awful, it’s awful."

Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:52 pm

Hopefully this means MS will sell even less Win8 stuff on Arm. They really are in panic mode.

I don't know why MS insists so much on ARM when software compiled for older versions of Windows (x86) won't even work. I know they are betting on Metro UI to take over the tablet market and that it doesn't use any compiled language, but IMO the main selling argument for Windows on ARM tablets would be the compatibility with older desktop apps.

Maybe they just should have been putting WP7 for tablets.

Back to the blocking - There has been some talk about "Secure Boot" on desktop among linuxers but I didn't know there was plans to introduce it under ARM.

This is seriously pushing Microsoft into the "consumer electronics" thing.

Whatever, I don't think this is going to really have any effect on the RasPi, apart from maybe having more people turning to a fully-unlocked device.

Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:00 pm

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sat Jan 14, 2012 5:01 pm


Does Microsoft management live in a dream world where nobody sues them for abuse of monopoly?

Given that they have already lost several lawsuits at quite high cost (notably EU) and spent billions defending others, you'de think they wouldn't go for a clause guaranteed to spark another set?

Or is it that their lawyers are in charge and want more money to defend the indefensible?

Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sun Jan 15, 2012 4:41 am

I doubt Win8/Arm will get anywhere near "monopoly" levels of sales.  (At least one would hope)

User avatar
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4258
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 3:16 pm
Contact: Website

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:10 am

You don't need monopoly power to be guilty under anti-trust law. IIUC, Microsoft is at more risk of being found guilty because it has an existing monopoly that it can leverage.

Sherman Act, Section 2

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Don't worry about the pocket-change; the main discourager is injunctive relief, triple damages and legal costs.

By William F. Adkinson, Jr., Karen L. Grimm, and Christopher N. Bryan

Section 2 also proscribes “attempt to monopolize.” Attempted monopolization requires proof “(1) that the defendant has engaged in predatory or anticompetitive conduct with (2) a specific intent to monopolize and (3) a dangerous probability of achieving monopoly power.” Although this paper—and, indeed, most of the legal and economic debate—focuses on monopolization, much of the discussion applies to both of these closely-related offenses.

The anticompetitive conduct requirement is assessed using the conduct standards of the monopolization offense, although courts have observed that conduct that is illegal for a monopolist may be legal for an aspiring monopolist, as certain conduct may not have anticompetitive effects unless undertaken by a firm already possessing monopoly power. Moreover, the “specific intent” to monopolize does not encompass “an intent to compete vigorously,” rather, it entails “a specific intent to destroy competition or build monopoly.” Finally, the “dangerous probability” inquiry focuses on the same factors used to assess monopoly power in monopolization  claims, although a “dangerous probability” of attaining monopoly power generally can be demonstrated with less market power than is needed for establishing actual monopoly power.

Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:03 am

Re: Windows only on ARM?

Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:43 am

My guess is they want to stop hobbiest from doing what has happened to like.. the HP touchpad (where it now runs android and ubuntu)

Return to “General discussion”