- #APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD PRO#
- #APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD SOFTWARE#
- #APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD PC#
#APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD SOFTWARE#
On the Mac, this code is known as Rosetta, the same translation software that Apple used to facilitate the transition from the PowerPC to X86. Like Windows on ARM, Apple also uses code to translate instructions written for X86 processors into instructions its ARM chips can understand. AppleĪpple seems to be headed down the same path.
#APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD PRO#
So if a consumer tries to download the 64-bit version of the Zoom app on the Surface Pro X, they’ll be faced with a big, fat error message preventing its installation. That’s a roadblock between a consumer and an enjoyable experience, and my bet is it’s one of the biggest reasons why Windows-on-ARM PCs haven’t sold well.
#APPLE MAC EQUIVALENT TO MICROSOFT WORD PC#
What Zoom doesn’t tell you, of course, is that a Windows on ARM PC still can’t run a 64-bit app in emulated mode. You won’t find it on the Microsoft Store, forcing you to go to Zoom’s site. Let’s say you want to download the Zoom videoconferencing app on Microsoft’s Surface Pro X. Microsoft has never made any real effort to inform consumers of what the ARM platform entails, what its limitations are, and what options there are to overcome those limitations. How Windows emulates instructions coded for X86 processors into code ARM chips can understand are summarized in a dry support document on Microsoft’s site. But that’s exactly what Microsoft asks consumers to do. No consumer wants to wade through developer documentation to understand why they should or shouldn’t buy a product. Long battery life and always-on connections have sold Qualcomm-based PCs, but the software has always held it back. Here’s how Microsoft stumbled along the way, and where Apple could go wrong too, unless it learns from those mistakes. Two years later, that article still feels necessary. When Asus launched its NovaGo laptop with a Qualcomm processor inside, we explained the pros and cons of the architecture, especially what it could or couldn’t do. But as Apple navigates its transition from Intel X86 Macs to Macs designed around its own ARM silicon, I can’t help but think of the things I wish Microsoft and Qualcomm had worked on to help facilitate the Windows on ARM experience. If there’s any lesson that Apple should learn about supporting apps that run on both X86 and ARM, it’s this one: Tell users which apps support which processor, and actively guide them toward the best experience.
0 kommentar(er)
