Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #687817 > unrolled thread

Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-22 21:55 +0000
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-22 22:50 +0000
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 19:03 -0400
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-22 21:09 -0400
      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 22:00 -0400
      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-23 06:20 +0000
        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-23 07:05 +0000
        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-23 07:13 -0400
          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-23 09:52 -0400
            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-24 00:38 +0000
              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-24 06:16 +0000
                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 03:30 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-24 16:58 +0000
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 13:19 -0400
                      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 13:35 -0400
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 14:22 -0400
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-24 18:41 +0000
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 14:50 -0400
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-24 19:08 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 15:32 -0400
                                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-25 15:25 +0000
                                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-25 12:39 -0400
                                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 16:36 -0400
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-24 18:51 +0000
                      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 00:20 +0000
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 20:58 -0400
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 06:52 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 03:10 -0400
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 05:44 -0400
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 03:18 -0400
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 02:52 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-04-09 17:00 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-25 08:53 -0400
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-25 15:35 +0000
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 02:45 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-26 15:38 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-27 19:50 +1100
                                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-27 15:52 +0000
                                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-28 19:43 +1100
          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-23 23:37 +0000
            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 08:54 -0400
              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-24 17:14 +0000
                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 13:21 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 15:59 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 00:45 +0000
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 21:44 -0400
                      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 06:48 +0000
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-25 08:52 -0400
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-03-25 13:02 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-25 09:16 -0400
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 17:30 -0400
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 02:41 +0000
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 02:37 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-26 08:33 -0400
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-03-26 12:45 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 17:13 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-26 17:21 +0000
                                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-03-27 07:25 -0500
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 20:31 +0000
              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-24 20:38 +0000
                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 19:27 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-24 23:36 +0000
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-24 21:34 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 07:05 +0000
                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 12:04 +0000
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-26 19:43 +0000
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 15:46 -0400
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 20:18 +0000
        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 00:29 +0000
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-22 21:09 -0400
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-22 22:08 -0400
      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-03-23 07:08 -0400
        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-03-23 07:17 -0400
          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-23 15:10 -0400
            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 00:36 +0000
              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-24 06:21 +0000
                Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 11:15 -0400
                  Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-24 17:48 +0000
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-24 16:59 -0400
                    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-25 01:19 +0000
                      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 02:15 -0400
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 08:33 +0000
                          Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 03:13 +0000
                            Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-26 20:31 +0000
                              Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-27 19:57 +1100
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 03:07 +0000
                      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-03-25 08:26 +0000
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-25 06:14 -0400
                        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-03-26 03:46 +0000
        Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-23 23:38 +0000
    Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-03 20:32 +0000
      Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-04 01:47 +0000

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

#687817 — Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A “Frequently-Returned Item” On Amazon

It’s clear Windows users have no clue about this Windows-on-ARM thing
that Microsoft keeps trying to push. They just expect their software
to work. But ARM-based Windows machines still require too many
workarounds and suffer too many limitations, and the users are having
great difficulty seeing the point to them.

<https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-powered-surface-laptop-7-gets-frequently-returned-item-warning-on-amazon>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#687821

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:55:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-powered-surface-
laptop-7-gets-frequently-returned-item-warning-on-amazon>

There has been a discussion in another thread about how aware the average 
user is about the OS they are using. Like the original Windows RT flop, 
they hear Microsoft, Windows, and Surface and click 'Buy'.

They wouldn't know ARM from AMD. I don't know how far Microsoft or vendors 
like Amazon would have to go to educate them or, once educated, if they 
would buy an ARM Surface. That would leave the geeks who know what 
Snapdragon or ARM implies, not a huge market. 

While Microsoft is a huge company they don't have a very good track record 
of being able to focus on more than a couple of things at a time and right 
now it's AI.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687822 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>It’s clear Windows users have no clue about this Windows-on-ARM thing
>that Microsoft keeps trying to push. They just expect their software
>to work. But ARM-based Windows machines still require too many
>workarounds and suffer too many limitations, and the users are having
>great difficulty seeing the point to them.
>
><https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-powered-surface-laptop-7-gets-frequently-returned-item-warning-on-amazon>


Yeah.  Well, they're just people returning it because they have no
concept of how to make it into a Linux PC, fuck Win11Copilot bullshit.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687827

On 2025-03-22 5:55 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> It’s clear Windows users have no clue about this Windows-on-ARM thing
> that Microsoft keeps trying to push. They just expect their software
> to work. But ARM-based Windows machines still require too many
> workarounds and suffer too many limitations, and the users are having
> great difficulty seeing the point to them.
> 
> <https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-powered-surface-laptop-7-gets-frequently-returned-item-warning-on-amazon>

The reality here is that Microsoft should have had a compatibility layer 
for most of the software ready on day one, much like Apple did. Say what 
you will about Apple, but they provided users a decent bridge from 9.2.2 
to X, from IBM to Intel and from x86-64 to ARM.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687829 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A �Frequently-Returned Item� On Amazon

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>On 2025-03-22 5:55 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>> It’s clear Windows users have no clue about this Windows-on-ARM thing
>> that Microsoft keeps trying to push. They just expect their software
>> to work. But ARM-based Windows machines still require too many
>> workarounds and suffer too many limitations, and the users are having
>> great difficulty seeing the point to them.
>> 
>> <https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-powered-surface-laptop-7-gets-frequently-returned-item-warning-on-amazon>
>
>The reality here is that Microsoft should have had a compatibility layer 
>for most of the software ready on day one, much like Apple did. Say what 
>you will about Apple, but they provided users a decent bridge from 9.2.2 
>to X, from IBM to Intel and from x86-64 to ARM.


Microsoft gives people the ability to have an ARM system with
Win11Copilot, Linux would be far better of course, but these returns
are obviously the result of the shock of it working a new way.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687840

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:09:22 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> The reality here is that Microsoft should have had a compatibility
> layer for most of the software ready on day one, much like Apple did.

They already do, but it’s not enough. ARM chips are supposed to offer some 
kind of energy-saving advantage, but you don’t get that through a 
compatibility layer.

> Say what you will about Apple, but they provided users a decent bridge
> from 9.2.2 to X, from IBM to Intel and from x86-64 to ARM.

Somehow they managed to sell those transitions to their user and developer 
base as steps forward. Microsoft has failed to do the same.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687841

On Sun, 23 Mar 2025 06:20:45 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:


> Somehow they managed to sell those transitions to their user and
> developer base as steps forward. Microsoft has failed to do the same.

I've never worked with Apple devices so I don't know how their development 
cycle is. Microsoft developers have had a few too many instances of 
bait'n'switch to be eager to jump on the latest bandwagon. Silverlight is 
one example. UWP is more recent.  Develop your app and it will run on 
Windows 10, 11, Windows Mobile (the ill-fated hone) XBox, Hololens, and 
everywhere! They tried to take a page from Apple and UWP apps would only 
be distributed through Windows Store. It was deprecated in 2021.

MAUI was the heir. If it sucks, call it something else and hope nobody 
notices. It has Xamarin DNA. It might help if they ate their own dogfood 
instead of using Electron for VS Code and other projects.

Meanwhile, they've been trying to drive a stake through Winforms heart for 
years with very little success. WPF is headed for the nursing home. 
Blazor? Maybe.

You never know when MS will go off chasing the latest squirrel. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687849

On 2025-03-23 2:20 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:09:22 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>> The reality here is that Microsoft should have had a compatibility
>> layer for most of the software ready on day one, much like Apple did.
> 
> They already do, but it’s not enough. ARM chips are supposed to offer some
> kind of energy-saving advantage, but you don’t get that through a
> compatibility layer.
> 
>> Say what you will about Apple, but they provided users a decent bridge
>> from 9.2.2 to X, from IBM to Intel and from x86-64 to ARM.
> 
> Somehow they managed to sell those transitions to their user and developer
> base as steps forward. Microsoft has failed to do the same.

Well, users seem to be happy with their Snapdragon-equipped machines 
regardless of what the press says. I'm getting the feeling that this is 
overblown, designed to make Microsoft look bad in Apple's favour.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687864

On Sun, 3/23/2025 7:13 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-03-23 2:20 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:09:22 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> The reality here is that Microsoft should have had a compatibility
>>> layer for most of the software ready on day one, much like Apple did.
>>
>> They already do, but it’s not enough. ARM chips are supposed to offer some
>> kind of energy-saving advantage, but you don’t get that through a
>> compatibility layer.
>>
>>> Say what you will about Apple, but they provided users a decent bridge
>>> from 9.2.2 to X, from IBM to Intel and from x86-64 to ARM.
>>
>> Somehow they managed to sell those transitions to their user and developer
>> base as steps forward. Microsoft has failed to do the same.
> 
> Well, users seem to be happy with their Snapdragon-equipped machines regardless of what the press says. I'm getting the feeling that this is overblown, designed to make Microsoft look bad in Apple's favour.
> 

It all has a certain kind of familiarity.

   https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/26/24186432/microsoft-windows-on-arm-qualcomm-copilot-plus-pcs-prism-emulator

I checked my (weird) computer store, and the price of these items seems
to be around $1500, and they are all "Sold Out". Not much chance of needing
to return one to that store :-)

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687925

On Sun, 23 Mar 2025 09:52:28 -0400, Paul wrote:

> It all has a certain kind of familiarity.
>
>    https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/26/24186432/microsoft-windows-on-arm-qualcomm-copilot-plus-pcs-prism-emulator
>
> I checked my (weird) computer store, and the price of these items seems
> to be around $1500, and they are all "Sold Out". Not much chance of needing
> to return one to that store :-)

Weren’t there supposed to be other vendors besides Microsoft, offering
Windows-on-ARM machines? What happened to them?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687929

On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:38:59 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> Weren’t there supposed to be other vendors besides Microsoft, offering
> Windows-on-ARM machines? What happened to them?

https://www.xda-developers.com/best-windows-on-arm/
https://www.windowscentral.com/hardware/laptops/best-windows-laptops-with-
arm-processor

They are all rather expensive for what they are. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687933

On Mon, 3/24/2025 2:16 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:38:59 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> 
>> Weren’t there supposed to be other vendors besides Microsoft, offering
>> Windows-on-ARM machines? What happened to them?
> 
> https://www.xda-developers.com/best-windows-on-arm/
> https://www.windowscentral.com/hardware/laptops/best-windows-laptops-with-arm-processor
> 
> They are all rather expensive for what they are. 

The Quqlcomm executive needs a new Lambo.
That's why the price is that high.

It's worth about $450-$500 :-)

Maybe we should do a pricing exercise, to see what
it would cost to make a frugal "RPi plus glass screen"
of our own.

And, there is competition.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687955

On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:

> And, there is competition.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/

For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops 
that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed 
'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.

I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that 
has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were 
they thinking?'. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687960

On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
> 
>> And, there is competition.
>>
>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
> 
> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
> 
> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
> they thinking?'.

The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD CPU, 
you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those 
computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more than 
a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux going 
forward.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687964

On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>
>>> And, there is competition.
>>>
>>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
>> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
>>
>> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
>> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
>> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
>>
>> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
>> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
>> they thinking?'.
> 
> The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux going forward.
> 

IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.

Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.

The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687968

On 2025-03-24 1:35 p.m., Paul wrote:
> On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>>
>>>> And, there is competition.
>>>>
>>>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
>>> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
>>>
>>> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
>>> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
>>> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
>>>
>>> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
>>> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
>>> they thinking?'.
>>
>> The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux going forward.
>>
> 
> IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
> Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
> which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
> and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
> Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.
> 
> Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.
> 
> The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.

It is linked to Secure Boot, yes. It should be noted that the fTPM 
stuttering isn't a constant thing; it can happen while you're watching a 
movie, playing a game or simply browsing the web. It lasts about three 
seconds and then goes back to normal. I imagine that with Secure Boot 
disabled, it doesn't manifest. However, this is a problem which also 
seemed to occur in Linux with Secure Boot disabled (as far as I know) 
which prompted Torvalds to call for disabling the random number 
generation in the kernel.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687969 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> > On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> >> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
> >>
> >>> And, there is competition.
> >>>
> >>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
> >> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
> >>
> >> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
> >> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
> >> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
> >>
> >> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
> >> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
> >> they thinking?'.
> > 
> > The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD
> > CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those
> > computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more
> > than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux
> > going forward.
> 
> IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
> Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
> which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
> and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
> Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.
> 
> Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.
> 
> The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.

  AFAIC, this 'AMD stuttering' issue is old and fixed 'news'.

  See the January thread 'This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS --
If Your Time Is Worth Nothing' in these groups.

  See Andrzej Matuch's post [1] in that thread and my and his responses.

  As mentioned in my last response [2], in my case there was a BIOS
firmware update.

[1] Message-ID: <z0ldP.24349$DPp5.18068@fx01.iad>
[2] Message-ID: <vl92ie.qp8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687972 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon

On 2025-03-24 2:41 p.m., Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>> On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And, there is competition.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
>>>> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
>>>>
>>>> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
>>>> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
>>>> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
>>>>
>>>> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
>>>> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
>>>> they thinking?'.
>>>
>>> The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD
>>> CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those
>>> computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more
>>> than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux
>>> going forward.
>>
>> IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
>> Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
>> which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
>> and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
>> Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.
>>
>> Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.
>>
>> The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.
> 
>    AFAIC, this 'AMD stuttering' issue is old and fixed 'news'.
> 
>    See the January thread 'This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS --
> If Your Time Is Worth Nothing' in these groups.
> 
>    See Andrzej Matuch's post [1] in that thread and my and his responses.
> 
>    As mentioned in my last response [2], in my case there was a BIOS
> firmware update.
> 
> [1] Message-ID: <z0ldP.24349$DPp5.18068@fx01.iad>
> [2] Message-ID: <vl92ie.qp8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>

Except that it's not fixed. Some manufacturers might have provided a 
BIOS to fix the issue, but most have yet to do so on the laptop side. My 
model computer, the Zephyrus GA401QM, hasn't had a BIOS update since 
2023. Everyone expected that the 415 update would fix the issue since it 
was repeatedly mentioned by users, but ASUS never bothered to fix it. 
The most likely reason is because they can't.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687977 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2025-03-24 2:41 p.m., Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> >>> On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> And, there is competition.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
> >>>> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
> >>>>
> >>>> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
> >>>> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
> >>>> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
> >>>> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
> >>>> they thinking?'.
> >>>
> >>> The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD
> >>> CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those
> >>> computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more
> >>> than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux
> >>> going forward.
> >>
> >> IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
> >> Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
> >> which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
> >> and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
> >> Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.
> >>
> >> Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.
> >>
> >> The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.
> > 
> >    AFAIC, this 'AMD stuttering' issue is old and fixed 'news'.
> > 
> >    See the January thread 'This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS --
> > If Your Time Is Worth Nothing' in these groups.
> > 
> >    See Andrzej Matuch's post [1] in that thread and my and his responses.
> > 
> >    As mentioned in my last response [2], in my case there was a BIOS
> > firmware update.
> > 
> > [1] Message-ID: <z0ldP.24349$DPp5.18068@fx01.iad>
> > [2] Message-ID: <vl92ie.qp8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
> 
> Except that it's not fixed. Some manufacturers might have provided a 
> BIOS to fix the issue, but most have yet to do so on the laptop side. My 
> model computer, the Zephyrus GA401QM, hasn't had a BIOS update since 
> 2023. Everyone expected that the 415 update would fix the issue since it 
> was repeatedly mentioned by users, but ASUS never bothered to fix it. 
> The most likely reason is because they can't.

  In the previous thread, Andrzej references
<https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-acknowledges-ftpm-stuttering-issues-promises-a-bios-fix-in-may>

  From that, I understand that AMD supplies the fix to the manufacturers,
which of course have to integrate it in their firmware. If those
manufacturers - in your case ASUS - fail to do so, that's hardly AMD's
fault. That's the risk of using fTPM, instead of a real TPM.

  As I said, my system was fixed and - as I mentioned in the other
thread - that is a (2022) (HP) *laptop*.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687982 — Re: Windows-on-ARM Laptop Is A ?Frequently-Returned Item? On Amazon

On 2025-03-24 3:08 p.m., Frank Slootweg wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2025-03-24 2:41 p.m., Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 3/24/2025 1:19 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-03-24 12:58 p.m., rbowman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 03:30:50 -0400, Paul wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, there is competition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/08/ryzen-ai-300-performance-review-
>>>>>> impressive-cpus-even-if-you-dont-care-about-ai/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For $1600 it is more than competitive with similarly priced ARM laptops
>>>>>> that might be able to run a full range of software someday. The claimed
>>>>>> 'up to 18 hours' of battery life reduces the major ARM selling point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm glad to see I'm not alone. I have an Acer laptop with a Ryzen 7 that
>>>>>> has a silvery finish and white backlight that had me asking 'what were
>>>>>> they thinking?'.
>>>>>
>>>>> The one thing those reviews never mention is that by using an AMD
>>>>> CPU, you're going to be facing fTPM stuttering because none of those
>>>>> computers come with a discrete TPM chip. For most, it's little more
>>>>> than a nuisance, but it's one that you can only avoid by using Linux
>>>>> going forward.
>>>>
>>>> IDK. I have a spare computer, with a Zen3 in it, and no stutter to be seen.
>>>> Presumably this is with the Secure Boot enabled ? I have another Zen3,
>>>> which is the machine reserved for Secure Boot testing, it has no TPM
>>>> and uses the AMD fTPM, and no stutter there either. It has booted Linux
>>>> Secure Boots and Windows Secure Boots, as part of testing a while ago.
>>>>
>>>> Both machines, the BIOS version is the most recent. Both got flashed up.
>>>>
>>>> The difference with laptops, is the BIOS support may not be as generous.
>>>
>>>     AFAIC, this 'AMD stuttering' issue is old and fixed 'news'.
>>>
>>>     See the January thread 'This Is Why They Say Windows Is A Great OS --
>>> If Your Time Is Worth Nothing' in these groups.
>>>
>>>     See Andrzej Matuch's post [1] in that thread and my and his responses.
>>>
>>>     As mentioned in my last response [2], in my case there was a BIOS
>>> firmware update.
>>>
>>> [1] Message-ID: <z0ldP.24349$DPp5.18068@fx01.iad>
>>> [2] Message-ID: <vl92ie.qp8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
>>
>> Except that it's not fixed. Some manufacturers might have provided a
>> BIOS to fix the issue, but most have yet to do so on the laptop side. My
>> model computer, the Zephyrus GA401QM, hasn't had a BIOS update since
>> 2023. Everyone expected that the 415 update would fix the issue since it
>> was repeatedly mentioned by users, but ASUS never bothered to fix it.
>> The most likely reason is because they can't.
> 
>    In the previous thread, Andrzej references
> <https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-acknowledges-ftpm-stuttering-issues-promises-a-bios-fix-in-may>
> 
>    From that, I understand that AMD supplies the fix to the manufacturers,
> which of course have to integrate it in their firmware. If those
> manufacturers - in your case ASUS - fail to do so, that's hardly AMD's
> fault. That's the risk of using fTPM, instead of a real TPM.
> 
>    As I said, my system was fixed and - as I mentioned in the other
> thread - that is a (2022) (HP) *laptop*.

Did the latest (or any previous) BIOS update mention fixing fTPM 
specifically? I ask because it is also possible that the problem is 
still there but that you haven't yet encountered it.

-- 
God be with you,

CrudeSausage
John 14:6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web