First I was amazed with them getting Xbox 360 (PPC) games running at full speed or better on the Xbox One (x86) and now we have x86 on ARM.
They have some wizards working on this stuff.
Edit: I wonder if Dave Cutler is involved in this x86 on ARM stuff? I think he was with the Xbox 360/Xbox One.
EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games_compati... "Unlike the emulation of original Xbox games on the Xbox 360, the Xbox One does not require game modification, since it emulates an exact replica of its predecessor's environment – both hardware and software operating systems."
I stand corrected.
> Xbox 360 games run within an emulator on Xbox One, which means you'll be able to use most features from both systems while playing games, such as screenshots, broadcasting, and Game DVR.
So they probably can get away with static recompilation.
looks like api translation like wine does. ...which is rather easy if you wrote the original api.
If not using Visual Studio, search for 'Acquire on its own' on the page. There is a link in that section.
It uses Hyper-V so you will need a Pro version of Windows.
At the very least make it a pro feature.
But look at the timing. Everyone was nagging on google for years about slow emulator. They didn't do shit for years. Microsoft released an emulator, which was superior in almost all aspect. Just after that Google released new emulator. and now it does make sense to discontinue that project.
Sure is convenient for VMware that you can't run Virtualbox and VMware Workstation at the same time
Absolutely a business decision by Microsoft, and not a limitation of the x86 chip
No it didn't. If platform specific solutions make sense then we should use platform specific solutions. Not everything has to be cross platform and 100% identical across all platforms.
It's astounding that people still try to ignore the last 30 years of evidence of this.
>Trying to be identical across 3 platforms always means adopting the lowest common denominator and always results in being equally shit on every platform.
In that case we're fortunate that Xcode isn't cross platform.
Linux users should get the best possible experience on the system, so should the windows users. If a better emulator is available on windows why should they get shafted? Linux tools even have the advantage that they may not need full emulation in the first place, but instead we end up with the worst of both worlds.
> Android Studio and the emulator work very well on all 3 platforms.
In my experience nothing about android development works very well on any platform. I'm not a huge fan of MS, but windows phone development and tools are an absolute dream in comparison.
And again, we've got 3 decades of evidence that show precious few good cross platform solutions, so investing the saved money into making a better product doesn't seem to work.
You seem to be under the impression that if you develop a cross platform solution that it's going to be inherently inferior. I disagree with that and the new Android emulator is proof of that. It's superior to the MS Android emulator in every way and it's also available on all 3 platforms.
>In my experience nothing about android development works very well on any platform.
In that case you probably don't have much experience developing for Android.
>I'm not a huge fan of MS, but windows phone development and tools are an absolute dream in comparison.
If developing for windows platform is a dream then why is their app store a cesspool filled with horrible looking apps?
They hire PhDs capable of sorting out the incredible whiteboard and phone CS exercises for something.
Also apparently all those Phd weren't able to do what GenyMotion guys and girls were happily developing.
Coincidentally, that was around the same time that Microsoft filed an Amicus brief supporting Oracle (in Oracle v. Google) arguing that APIs should be copyrightable[1].
Did that Project Astoria implement Android APIs? Would Google go after Microsoft in court had they officially released this? My guess is "yes" to both these questions. Nothing says wilful infringement louder than submitting a legal document to the courts spelling out why you think what you're doing (Astoria) is wrong.
1. http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20130221153759...
https://blog.rthand.com/post/2017/05/02/good-bye-visual-stud...
Also probably licensing issues, for games with tech that old
I think they're kind of doing this already with Windows Defender App Guard [1] thing, which for one is a mouthful, second, it should have nothing to do with the exploitable Windows Defender code [2].
It should be part of Windows' lower-level systems, so that not much can interact with it, and it should be available for all apps, not just Microsoft's own apps. Windows on ARM, Project Centennial, App Guard, and more, prove that Microsoft has the ability to do that.
If they don't do it, it will only be for political reasons like not wanting Chrome users to benefit from the same technology, or wanting to sell it as "value-add" to enterprise customers, or whatever (basically the same BS they're pulling with Bitlocker).
[1] https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2016/09/27/application-g...
[2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/05/windo...