Windows on Devices
windowsondevices.com
windowsondevices.com
and no validation (client nor server) on the form...?
And a different domain name (rather than using a page on microsoft.com)?
My spidey sense is tingling.
EDIT: It's down. In case people were curious: http://i.imgur.com/9zUIPSf.png
http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-staffs-up-its-evolving-intern...
I think more will be known tomorrow as tomorrow is Microsofts' "//Build/" conference.
This is one of the presentations titled "Windows and the Internet of Things" - http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2014/2-511
And possibly this session? http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2014/2-536
Anyway, it looks like the site has been pulled (for now), as it's showing that the site is no longer available.
Yup, looks like this is a real thing and will show up soon as part of a //Build/ conference.
Have them use an Arduino or something with a nice older-person-friendly IDE and run a serial line to their windows box or something.
My weapon of choice, 10 years ago was always a PIC micro, I prefered them to the Atmel, and I'd mostly write in MASM using my own IDE that provided some useful additions to the macros I normally used (branch highlighting etc).
This was great for hobby stuff, stuff only I'm working on. I know precisely how long an instruction or macro will take, I can make really accurate timings. Great! I even got an In Circuit Debugger.
I can't really drop down to that stuff on an Arduino, so I'll end up with a few PICs for doing the signals interfacing stuff, ok that's fine. But that means I'm normally wanting more of the 'intelligent' uC.
Which is why I like my .Net Fez board. It's great for hobbiests, whilst the TinyCLR is frustratingly behind .Net, it's still better than Java in many ways.
However, I look at the price of that, and I look at a mobile phone. I can happily talk to a PIC via the audio jack for most things. I've got a brilliant touch screen, controller, wifi and enough memory to run complex things written in a high level language. It even has a battery too.
Which is why I can't help but feel there is a missing trick with hobby micro electronics at the moment, more effort should be around re-purposing the ultra cheap hardware that is a mobile phone.
$(document).ready(function () {$('.signup-button').click(function (e){location.href = '/Home/Thanks/';});});
Even if they slash license prices by a huge amount, I can't see MS giving them away for single digit prices.
For example, Zeiss Microscopes control panels from 2006 use Windows CE. I am not sure what the advantage is today. GCC competes well with VS and more people know Qt.
MS can give this away for free as it isn't a market that they own.
And PocketPC could do almost everything an iPhone could do about... 5-6 years before the iPhone came out. Windows CE was clearly ahead of its time, but the support from Microsoft was terrible: they kept it low-key, too long.
I had a top-of-the-line PocketPC phone for three years. Saying a PocketPC could do almost everything an iPhone could do is like saying that a nail file could do almost everything a Haas CNC machine could do.
In 2007 Apple released a phone that could only run web-apps without hardware support. At the time this got a big meh from me since it looked like a toy compared to my phone.
I think this says it all, joke or otherwise.
But you've done a good job of highlighting why I was being sarcastic.
If you've got an MSDN ultimate it's very easy to get going. If you don't, then it's quite hard, compared to say using the TinyCLR on the .Net Fez things [1] which are easy and by comparison designed to be fun.
Most of the places where embedded linux is used X isn't even really appropriate. Why would you use windows for things that don't even have screens?
Just because Microsoft won't sell you the NT kernel without a GUI on top doesn't mean that NT kernel is forever welded to a GUI.
Also, there's been a few implementations of a full UNIX subsystem on Windows. Intermix and Services For UNIX come to mind. Also check out Colinux if it's still alive.