vanderbilt

vanderbilt, 2 days ago (edited 2 days ago)

Nobody will buy the hardware if they can’t commit to supporting the software. In a previous role, I was responsible for advising purchasing decisions for my company’s laptop fleet. The Surface X (Arm edition) looked cool, but we weren’t willing to take the risk, because at the time Microsoft had far worse transitional support than they do now. It’s gotten better, but no one in their right mind is going to make the kind of volume purchases that actually drive adoption until they demonstrate they are in it for the long haul. It’s a chicken and egg problem, and Microsoft doesn’t care what hardware you are using, so long as it is running Windows or using (expensive) Windows services.

vanderbilt, 2 days ago

I firmly maintain that if Microsoft gave a shit about ARM, they would be defaulting every one of their compilers to produce fat x86/aarch64 binaries. The reality is, however, that they don’t care about the hardware so long as it is good enough.

vanderbilt, 5 days ago

OMG is it bad. We used a couple WD drives for a surveillance camera array and they didn’t last a year. Two drives failed 9 months apart. Ended up going on Blackblaze and picking what looked best for our XFS Raid 10 having learned that lesson the hard way.