So after playing with my Surface for 5 days now, it is obvious there is a lot of capability in the back end through the Desktop. II have networked printers, and drives at both home and office going, streaming content etc. It is very capable for what it is, way beyond any other Ipad and Android tablet out there. So it seems to me it is just a matter of time before some XDAer figures out a way to unleash it and possibly load other programs (non-RT) programs some way. We know the official MS word is no, but it seems to me it is a fully capable Win8 machine that just has some goierners on it and limited processing power, just waiting to be cracked.
Am I just dreaming?
I would love to see this happen. The one thing holding me back from purchasing one. I'd love a Windows 8 Pro version tablet at the Surface RT pricing but wouldn't we all...
I dont think rt can run x86 app properly. Because the cpu is not as good as x86 core. I am interested in porting rt to compatiable device such as tergra 2 and 3 pad.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
liu2002 said:
I dont think rt can run x86 app properly. Because the cpu is not as good as x86 core. I am interested in porting rt to compatiable device such as tergra 2 and 3 pad.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think it's necessarily about the Tegra being "as good" as an x86 - the issue is that you'd need an emulator, or the source for the x86 app which you'd then need to re-compile for ARM. I believe MS made a developer toolkit available that allows simpler conversion from x86 to ARM but it's still up to the app vendors to do it.
In theory, the same code could compile for both x86/64 and ARM (RT), but VS2012 will not allow you to compile an ARM desktop app. There is no legit way to write/compile a desktop app on RT. Its an arbitrary BS limitation put in place by MS. You cannot side load apps, everything must come through the MS store, RT enterprise being an exception... which doesn't help us. And the MS store will only offer Metro apps. MS office shows that's desktop apps are fully possible, albeit recoded/recompiled for ARM, but MS will not allow it. In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Skitals said:
In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you say that?
Because its not allowed, only metro style apps published through the app store are allowed. Even if you compile compatible desktop software, the OS won't run it. Its a closed sandbox.
At best we can hope for a "homebrew" community to compile open source software, and find some hacks to get it running.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Hello,
I’m a happy owner of the Surface RT and I just wanted to add my 2c.
I think that Metro UI is great for tablet, but lacks apps !
So I cannot understand why Microsoft didn’t include .Net on this platform ! I think the main goal and the first “Homebrew” must be recompilation of Mono for ARM. As this will allow us develop a lot of programs, quickly and using “good” tools (Visual )
I just started to study WinRT and I’m already hitting a lot of blocks (For instance, I cannot find a way to open Shared Socket ! So if any other app listen on 1900 port, I lose my SSDP discovery... )
But I think recompilation of Mono is definitely a way to go ! I think i’ll try it this week-end, if I have some time, but It’s sure I will not be able install on my surface As for now it seems to be impossible to enter Testing Mode on it.
Jurion
jurion said:
So I cannot understand why Microsoft didn’t include .Net on this platform !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think people seem to be missing something here (well, not just here, on other threads/forums.blogs too). MS have essentially (it’s really quite impressive) ported over the entire Windows OS to run on ARM – and this includes all of .NET v4 with supporting libraries/DLLs.
You only have to pop to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319 on your Surface RT to see – all the same libraries for the same version of .NET a x86 desktop seem to be there - including Linq, SQL, reflection etc.
Now, this could be really great news! I’d bet that it would be entirely possible for standard .NET applications (by standard, I mean programs that only use managed code and nothing legacy) to be reasonably easily recompiled to run on ARM - ideally as easyily as changing a drop-down!
Furthermore, this is all supported in Visual Studio, it’s just locked down a bit - I’ve been able to compile, with VS2012 (and a minor tweak to remove the ARM compile block) a simple command line EXE for ARM (using .NET calls – though only in C++ which is a shame). The problem is, as soon I open it on Surface, I get an error saying the ‘digital certificate’ couldn't be validated – a common issue which has a simple fix documented online. The catch... that the instructions to remove this block don’t work with secure boot enabled, and - at present - we can’t disable this on the Surface (on normal PCs this can be turned off in the bios).
So – the key to all this, is for MS to open it up (not impossible, but who knows if or when) or for someone to get round this secure boot/certificate requirement. I’m sure there’s some smart people on here with abilities to work on, and hopefully succeed in doing this. Even if people aren't able to work a way round this block, I'm hopefully that eventually MS may release some firmware update tools that someone can hack to switch off UEFI secure boot. Or perhaps someone at MS or a partner may leak some file/app/boot that unlocks this for dev/enterprise purposes.
I look forward to it happening!
T
Skitals said:
In theory, the same code could compile for both x86/64 and ARM (RT), but VS2012 will not allow you to compile an ARM desktop app. There is no legit way to write/compile a desktop app on RT. Its an arbitrary BS limitation put in place by MS. You cannot side load apps, everything must come through the MS store, RT enterprise being an exception... which doesn't help us. And the MS store will only offer Metro apps. MS office shows that's desktop apps are fully possible, albeit recoded/recompiled for ARM, but MS will not allow it. In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything doesn't have to come through the MS store, you can install applications that you build in Visual Studio 2012 for Windows Store, create an appx package and choose not to publish it in Windows Store. VS2012 then creates an appx package as well as a PowerShell script that you can run on Surface, accept security warning, get the developer's license on the device (it's free) and that's it!
It is fairly obvious why MS does not allow installation of "Desktop" apps on ARM tablets. Otherwise dev's would get lazy and just recompile desktop apps for ARM. The experience on a touch tablet would not be great on (unmodified) Desktop apps, hence Microsoft set this constraint on Windows RT in order to push dev's towards making a proper touch friendly app. The result is of course the lack of apps initially, but in the long run the benefits will be a greater experience as the apps would be optimized for touch.
Sure there are obvious downsides to this strategy, but the decision itself makes a lot of sense from a useability standpoint. You already read the complaints in reviews about "Office" not being Metro-style and unfriendly to touch. However this is naturally a decision due to time constraints, because MS would have also preferred to not include a desktop on RT. Office is the selling point now, to gravitate people towards RT and when there is enough demand, the touch friendly (Metro) apps will flow in eventually
Backflipping said:
I think people seem to be missing something here (well, not just here, on other threads/forums.blogs too). MS have essentially (it’s really quite impressive) ported over the entire Windows OS to run on ARM – and this includes all of .NET v4 with supporting libraries/DLLs.
You only have to pop to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319 on your Surface RT to see – all the same libraries for the same version of .NET a x86 desktop seem to be there - including Linq, SQL, reflection etc.
Now, this could be really great news! I’d bet that it would be entirely possible for standard .NET applications (by standard, I mean programs that only use managed code and nothing legacy) to be reasonably easily recompiled to run on ARM - ideally as easyily as changing a drop-down!
Furthermore, this is all supported in Visual Studio, it’s just locked down a bit - I’ve been able to compile, with VS2012 (and a minor tweak to remove the ARM compile block) a simple command line EXE for ARM (using .NET calls – though only in C++ which is a shame). The problem is, as soon I open it on Surface, I get an error saying the ‘digital certificate’ couldn't be validated – a common issue which has a simple fix documented online. The catch... that the instructions to remove this block don’t work with secure boot enabled, and - at present - we can’t disable this on the Surface (on normal PCs this can be turned off in the bios).
So – the key to all this, is for MS to open it up (not impossible, but who knows if or when) or for someone to get round this secure boot/certificate requirement. I’m sure there’s some smart people on here with abilities to work on, and hopefully succeed in doing this. Even if people aren't able to work a way round this block, I'm hopefully that eventually MS may release some firmware update tools that someone can hack to switch off UEFI secure boot. Or perhaps someone at MS or a partner may leak some file/app/boot that unlocks this for dev/enterprise purposes.
I look forward to it happening!
T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm, sorry my bad, didn't look enougth to find .Net assemblies.
As for open it for MS, may be, maaaay be it's the same scheme which they followed with Windows Phone 7.
No native developpment for 7.0 -- 7.8
But they open it for 8.0
May be they just want to force people developp Metro app to populate the store first.
So where's the best place to get one?
I'm looking into buying one very very soon, I found some on ebay for $585 with the cover, That sounds like a win to me. I wish QVC had it, That'd be lovely.
I'm praying we get a work around for all this, But still If the device isn't made for it, I can't be mad that it doesn't do it, That's like being angry that my car doesn't fly.
But it's such a tease, it worries me that I'll have an entire desktop, Sitting, Obselete, With nothing but Office, which I wont even use.
Can't_Live_Without_My_Evo said:
I'm looking into buying one very very soon, I found some on ebay for $585 with the cover, That sounds like a win to me. I wish QVC had it, That'd be lovely.
I'm praying we get a work around for all this, But still If the device isn't made for it, I can't be mad that it doesn't do it, That's like being angry that my car doesn't fly.
But it's such a tease, it worries me that I'll have an entire desktop, Sitting, Obselete, With nothing but Office, which I wont even use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is made for it. It has the full desktop, and the full desktop Office suite. Its a big tease. The whole "do more" campaign advertises you can "click in" and have full laptop productivity with touchpad and mouse/keyboard. Except the only software to take advantage of it is desktop IE and Office.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Related
So I was wondering if its possible for someone to create or start developing an application that can emulator x86/64 code on an arm architecture?
What x86 code, exactly, do you mean? Do you mean running native x86 code directly or do you mean taking Java or .NET code and running it?
Ultimately, pretty much *anything* is possible to emulate. However, emulating it in a way that it can run in a reasonable amount of time is unlikely to happen. There are just so many things that are limited in the RT version of the .NET Framework.
ok, im not exactly best qualified for this but ill try and explain
in short, no, you could potentially make an emulator for a given program, but to make some be all end all x86 emulator to cover everything would be massively inefficient and probably not possible
you primary obstacle is that RT uses managed code, that means MS tells you want you can and cant do, it gives you the frame work if you like and you can build what you want within that frame work but step outside it and do your own thing isn't possible (yet)
once you got over that barrier, next up would be to port every single function and call sent to the CPU to an ARM equivalent, ARM is like a tadpole compared to Blue Whale of X86 so it wont do everything on chip meaning youd need to also convert it in software to something it can do
It would be like trying to blow a golf ball through a garden hose
however, small limited programs that don't rely on many hardware functions and with limited calls outside of its own program would potentially be possible to emulate assuming you can get native code to work anyway
Surface RT - Paperweight
Surface Pro - Glorified Tablet/Notebook
Just go with the Pro, it will make life much easier. The whole emulator debacle isn't even necessary if you just go with the logical choice.
I mean the Tegra 3 is awful as an SoC--I don't know what moron said Quad A9's are better than A15's, not to mention the GPU is junk compared to an SGX.
Overall Micro$oft shot themselves in the foot.
qhdevon43 said:
So I was wondering if its possible for someone to create or start developing an application that can emulator x86/64 code on an arm architecture?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Visual Studio 2012 could technically support building desktop applications to run on Surface RT and other RT (ARM) tablets. However, at this time, Microsoft is also allowing Microsoft signed applications. And, I heard that if you disabled that check in the registry, then you get blocked by RT. It is definitely possible that in the future, Microsoft might allow desktop applications to be recompiled for RT.
In the meantime, Remote Desktop is wonder in that I can connect to my Windows 8 laptop and use it to run any application with almost full touchscreen functionality. So, combining a Surface RT and a Windows 8 computer is ideal for me.
wrexus said:
Actually Visual Studio 2012 could technically support building desktop applications to run on Surface RT and other RT (ARM) tablets. However, at this time, Microsoft is also allowing Microsoft signed applications. And, I heard that if you disabled that check in the registry, then you get blocked by RT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Add it stands, you can't even really disable UAC without breaking Metro in full Windows 8 (the UI setting to disable it doesn't really disable it). They have that thing locked down pretty well!
You can enable test-sign mode on RT, this would allow you to run your own ARM desktop apps, signed by your own cert, not with MS one. This is absolutely legal, but it can be closed by MS in some of the new hotfixes (and they'll definitely will, when this mode would be used to run cracked apps).
It is really possible to make a working x86 CPU emulator that would allow you to run x86 windows programs on RT. Just remember my port of "heroes of might and magic" 1 and 2 for Windows Mobile - it was more difficult to make it, as WM had a more limited Win32 API than Windows RT has.
I'll make a nearly universal emulator for RT when I'll buy a device, project is already started and has good results. But I'm waiting for a device that is based on quad-core Snapdragon S4. I would not recommend buying Tegra devices, 4-core Krait beats them in CPU and 3D speed. And high CPU speed would be necessary for smooth x86 emulation.
Quad A9's are better than A15. If you wasnt too busy kissing jobs ass, you would know this. Tegra line is alot better that any apple "cpu"
Ace42 said:
Surface RT - Paperweight
Surface Pro - Glorified Tablet/Notebook
Just go with the Pro, it will make life much easier. The whole emulator debacle isn't even necessary if you just go with the logical choice.
I mean the Tegra 3 is awful as an SoC--I don't know what moron said Quad A9's are better than A15's, not to mention the GPU is junk compared to an SGX.
Overall Micro$oft shot themselves in the foot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@Jaxidian: Disabling UAC disables Mandatory integrity Controls, which is how the sandboxes for both IE and Metro-style apps are implemented. Metro-style apps check, when they are launched, if they are running in such a sandbox, and exit if they aren't.
Disabling UAC is, and always was, a terrible, idiotic thing to do, and I truly don't know why MS made it an available behavior. Just set it to auto-elevate without UI instead, if you really can't stand having proper principle of least privilege in your OS. This is a little more complex (you have to use the Local Security Policy editor, which can be launched by typing "secpol.msc" into Run or by going into the Administrative Tools) but is a much better solution as things which explicitly want to be run with limited permissions (sandboxing) still can be.
@dazza9075: Dosbox is an x86 emulator that is already available on other ARM platforms. It just doesn't support the (many) x86 opcodes that have been added since the 386. It certainly can't do 64-bit. However, it's fine for running old DOS programs, including games. Somebody should port it to the Windows Store if possible, or at least see about making a homebrew build of it that we can run on RT devices. This is totally not my area of expertise or I'd do it myself.
A full x86 emulator, like Microsoft's old Virtual PC for Mac (except running on ARM instead of PPC), is technically possible. It's just hard. It sounds like some people are already working on this, though.
Regarding publishing DosBox, Bochs, Qemu, ScummVM and other emulators to Windows Store - they would be unable to pass the certification. Read the requirements here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh694083.aspx
3.9 All app logic must originate from, and reside in, your app package
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For emulators - app logic resides in an emulated program that is typically not present in app package.
By the way, Microsoft Internet Explorer can't pass this check too - as it downloads and executes flash from web. But MS is already known for its double-standards.
The other reason why those apps may be refused:
3.5 Your app must fully support touch input, and fully support keyboard and mouse input
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Old programs (games at least) may be unusable without keyboard or mouse. My own program was refused for this reason, because it is unusable without hardware keyboard.
It is possible (and really easy) to port Bochs or DosBox for RT as a "desktop" application (making a "metro" port would be a bit more difficult). I can do that myself when I'll get hands on a Krait-based quad-core RT device, if someone would not port them earlier.
Regarding Tegra 3 vs Krait - Krait is not directly based on A9 nor on A15.
mamaich said:
You can enable test-sign mode on RT, this would allow you to run your own ARM desktop apps, signed by your own cert, not with MS one. This is absolutely legal, but it can be closed by MS in some of the new hotfixes (and they'll definitely will, when this mode would be used to run cracked apps).
It is really possible to make a working x86 CPU emulator that would allow you to run x86 windows programs on RT. Just remember my port of "heroes of might and magic" 1 and 2 for Windows Mobile - it was more difficult to make it, as WM had a more limited Win32 API than Windows RT has.
I'll make a nearly universal emulator for RT when I'll buy a device, project is already started and has good results. But I'm waiting for a device that is based on quad-core Snapdragon S4. I would not recommend buying Tegra devices, 4-core Krait beats them in CPU and 3D speed. And high CPU speed would be necessary for smooth x86 emulation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mamaich said:
Regarding publishing DosBox, Bochs, Qemu, ScummVM and other emulators to Windows Store - they would be unable to pass the certification. Read the requirements here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh694083.aspx
For emulators - app logic resides in an emulated program that is typically not present in app package.
By the way, Microsoft Internet Explorer can't pass this check too - as it downloads and executes flash from web. But MS is already known for its double-standards.
The other reason why those apps may be refused:
Old programs (games at least) may be unusable without keyboard or mouse. My own program was refused for this reason, because it is unusable without hardware keyboard.
It is possible (and really easy) to port Bochs or DosBox for RT as a "desktop" application (making a "metro" port would be a bit more difficult). I can do that myself when I'll get hands on a Krait-based quad-core RT device, if someone would not port them earlier.
Regarding Tegra 3 vs Krait - Krait is not directly based on A9 nor on A15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But its only a matter of time before we figure out a way to sideload metro apps without going through the store.
Right now 8.1 is a preview but what happens when it is fully released? Will windows RT auto update to it even if we don't like 8.1 and want to stay on Windows 8 RT?
I know you can disable auto-updates by hacking the registry but Id rather not have to do that.
Any way to keep automatic updates but ensure your system never upgrades to 8.1?
Why? 8.1 works great.
ap3604 said:
Any way to keep automatic updates but ensure your system never upgrades to 8.1?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows RT is supported by WSUS. I never tested it myself, but you can setup your device to get updates not from MS site but from your local WSUS server - and just don't approve there the updates you don't like.
And similar to earlier service packs - there would be an "8.1 blocker" (look for Win7 SP1 blocker here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=22464). As this is just a registry key - it may work on RT too.
Dane Reynolds said:
Why? 8.1 works great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One massive issue with 8.1 which is enough to keep a large user base from updating: jailbreak.
Once there is a jailbreak for 8.1 though, then your argument would be valid.
Not sure why you wouldn't want to run updates but so far Windows 8.1 rocks! Makes RT so much better.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
One massive issue with 8.1 which is enough to keep a large user base from updating: jailbreak.
Once there is a jailbreak for 8.1 though, then your argument would be valid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You talking about a jailbreak for 8.1 RT? Is so what type of stuff can you do with the jailbreak?
Dane Reynolds said:
Why? 8.1 works great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
phantomlightgames said:
Not sure why you wouldn't want to run updates but so far Windows 8.1 rocks! Makes RT so much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not on the Asus Vivo RT it doesn't :silly:
8.1 really f#&@'s up the trackpad
Wow that's good to know.. I'm currently running it on a Dell T3500 desktop both Surface RT & Pro.
Are you sure it's not a driver issue. Maybe Asus have some updates available for track pad?
@Dane Reynolds: You new here? The Windows RT jailbreak has been a pretty big deal - especially on the RT Dev&Hacking sub-forum here - since its initial reveal over half a year ago. It removes the signing restrictions that Microsoft uses to lock out third-party desktop apps. With the jailbreak, you can:
1) Run .NET 4 (or later) desktop programs.
2) Run open-source Win32 desktop programs that were recompiled for RT (there's a list of them; check my sig).
3) Run a handful of programs specifically written for Windows RT tablets, including an x86 emulation layer.
4) Run various non-.NET legacy programs (some x86 through the emulation layer, some Java through IKVM, some Python through an incomplete port, Perl, Ruby, Lua, and a bunch of game engines).
5) Install third-party drivers (such as the open-source program Process Hacker uses).
Windows RT 8.1 breaks the method used to jailbreak RT 8.0. There are people working on getting it back - the OS is a hell of a lot more useful when you can run things like PuTTY and 7-Zip and even WebKit-based web browsers - but until them, most people that hang out around here are either dual-booting 8.0 and 8.1 (if they have enough space) or just sticking with 8.0.
GoodDayToDie said:
@Dane Reynolds: You new here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, I've been here since RT was released, I heard about the jailbreak but was never interested, but the only reason I wasn't interested was I never found any fun stuff to do with the jailbreak.
Dane Reynolds said:
Nah, I've been here since RT was released, I heard about the jailbreak but was never interested, but the only reason I wasn't interested was I never found any fun stuff to do with the jailbreak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no fun stuff? Quakes 1, 2 and 3. Numerous other games, MAME I think.
Python.
.NET
FreeDownloadManager
a torrent client
An html5 browser other than IE (hopefully chromium or Firefox eventually)
PuTTY (would be an absolute must have for me)
Loads of other software many either useful or fun or both.
It really opens up the desktop side of RT
Damn, quake sounds fun and I could use chrome ... I kind of regret getting 8.1
I see the use for a jailbreak but I think it brings the OS backwards. These desktop apps aren't optimized for touch. I think building apps for the new interface is the way to go.
Funny; I get around fine using touch on the desktop (no, my fingers aren't even tiny). Well, except for typing. That sucks, Desktop or Metro. So, I have a Touch Cover, which makes typing a lot nicer. It also has a trackpad, so I only use touch when it's better than using a trackpad.
So, now I have a keyboard and pointing device, in addition to touch, for the device to be useful to me. Care to explain to me again why using apps which are amenable to all three input methods, instead of only one, "brings the OS backwards"? Because the way I see it, taking a multi-input device and excluding all those apps which aren't (over) optimized for a single form of input is a hell of a lot *more* backward...
Dane Reynolds said:
Damn, quake sounds fun and I could use chrome ... I kind of regret getting 8.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love quake and doom, been playing through doom again on my PSP actually (CFW-PRO to effectively jailbreak the PSP, then there are 2 or 3 ports for PSP)
Chrome isnt out for RT yet. GoodDayToDie had a look, but its complicated. Kudos to him for taking a look anyway, but so far 1 guy on his own hasnt managed to do it. Firefox also has its own issues. We may or may not see them eventually though. The jailbreak would be the first step before you could run them though.
As for 8.1. Trig0r has 8.0 recoveries for the surface RT which you could use to downgrade. Hopefully someone will get 8.1 jailbroken soon too, but microsoft patched the exploit that was being used before.
Thanks, I might ask for a recovery as I love gaming, speaking of gaming i know the Surface's hardware isn't high enough to run games but i was wondering if Onlive would be releasing an app for RT.
That would actually be a legitimate use for OnLive... wasn't sure I'd ever see one of those.
Surface (Pro or RT) are fine for light gaming, or for running older games. The RT does actually have NVidia graphics, they're just really underpowered. The Pro has only Intel graphics, but the Intel GMA for the i5 might actually be more powerful than the RT's Tegra 3 (haven't checked). In any case, there are lots of games known to work (if not always at max resolution / quality) on the Pro, and the RT has a number of older games which have been ported over working fine, and some old x86 games that run in the dynamic recompilation engine also working (though so far as I know, none of those ones are 3D).
ap3604 said:
Not sure why you wouldn't want to run updates but so far Windows 8.1 rocks! Makes RT so much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not on the Asus Vivo RT it doesn't :silly:
8.1 really f#&@'s up the trackpad
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I own VivoTab RT 3g - no problems with trackpad in 8.1. Currently I have no major problems with 8.1 except for the blinking screen issue that is present in 8.0 too. Even VPN works fine, so I finally can connect to my workplace and read email with Outlook, use RDP or Citrix Receiver.
I know this is a potentially dangerous post, but I'm looking for suggestions for things to port. I make no promises that I'll be willing/able to port any suggested software.
Some ground rules before you hit 'reply'
1) Don't ask for Chrome. I won't port it. Period.
2) The source code must be available and not have any _obvious_ specific ties to non-open source code. Eg: some proprietary or closed source library which it depends on.
3) Code must be in C or C++ (I can deal with porting some assembly if needed)
4) Project must be of a _reasonable_ size for 1 person. Honestly, I do this on my own and in my spare time. Some apps can be just massively overwhelming to port. That being sad, sometimes the big ones are also easy.... so use your own judgement here.
5) Tell me why you want it ported. Whats your "use case".
6) Drivers aren't out of the question, but they generally take significantly more work.
Feel free to +1 others suggestions.
Ok.. <puts on protective gear>.. fire away!
Cheers!
Thanks for all your awesome work.
While this isn't an app, I think that the kexec kernel-mode driver idea that was tossed around earlier would be waay more useful than an individual app. Every time it was brought up somebody said "Oh, that won't be much work." And then nobody did anything :-/
So, I'm hugely grateful for the time you put in here, but I think I'd be even huger-ly grateful-er if you opened the door to other OSs.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
What would be good is:
http://ekiga.org/download-ekiga-binaries-or-source-code
But I'm pretty sure it uses some libraries not avail
I wish XNA could run on Windows RT. It'd be funny to see Terraria and Magicka on Windows RT...
Firefox would be nice, but without a Thumb-2 JITter, it's not worth it.
Would be nice to have InSSIDer. I use it a lot on my laptop, rather leave it at home.
https://github.com/metageek-llc/inSSIDer-2
Myriachan said:
I wish XNA could run on Windows RT. It'd be funny to see Terraria and Magicka on Windows RT...
Firefox would be nice, but without a Thumb-2 JITter, it's not worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would say to take a look at monogame. It can actually build microsoft store apps including ARM support, so coercing it into functioning on the windows desktop may be possible. Otherwise it might end up being a rule 4 :/
There are hacks out there to run terraria on MonoGame instead of XNA, most of them pretty complete but sometimes have the odd graphical glitch. A full source port to MonoGame would be far more reliable, and actually very simple, but sadly its closed source (although not obfuscated).
One of the supposedly more reliable ones: http://www.terrariaonline.com/threads/wip-monogame-terraria-terraria-for-linux.72997/
Isn't rule one covered by rule four?
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Isn't rule one covered by rule four?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No.
People can have bad judgement.. so I'm making an explicit point about Chrome.
Personally i Was really disappointed by the lack of a transmission remote app when i discovered métro interface!
Plus there are many utorrent app...
SO, i think TR Gui source code is available, i think there is many people interested, And i think it will not be too difficult to develop, that can be a wonderfull idea (especially for me ) to make this one
Just found one. TCPMP, this player worked great during the PocketPC/Windows Mobile era. It moved from open source to a commercial different version which is closed source but I believe the link below has the source.
http://www.hpcfactor.com/downloads/tcpmp/
This would bring about a player that supports MKV playback.
lambstone said:
Just found one. TCPMP, this player worked great during the PocketPC/Windows Mobile era. It moved from open source to a commercial different version which is closed source but I believe the link below has the source.
http://www.hpcfactor.com/downloads/tcpmp/
This would bring about a player that supports MKV playback.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no source code downloadable from that site. All the links are non-existent. Please post the source code if you have it.
Cheers!
bfosterjr said:
There is no source code downloadable from that site. All the links are non-existent. Please post the source code if you have it.
Cheers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does this help http://code.google.com/p/tcpmp-revive/source/browse/#svn/trunk
mr djé said:
Personally i Was really disappointed by the lack of a transmission remote app when i discovered métro interface!
Plus there are many utorrent app...
SO, i think TR Gui source code is available, i think there is many people interested, And i think it will not be too difficult to develop, that can be a wonderfull idea (especially for me ) to make this one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2101891
mr djé said:
Personally i Was really disappointed by the lack of a transmission remote app when i discovered métro interface!
Plus there are many utorrent app...
SO, i think TR Gui source code is available, i think there is many people interested, And i think it will not be too difficult to develop, that can be a wonderfull idea (especially for me ) to make this one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the problem with the current torrent apps are you either have to pay to get the ability to download files in the background, or the app doesn't support it. I'd like to see a free torrent client that allows background downloading, even if it means speed has to be throttled a bit.
To the OP what is your favorite browser? If it is not Chrome(or Chromium), do you think it is possible to port that browser? At this point I'll even take Safari as I am starting to hate all the crashes that occur for me in IE.
bigsnack said:
I think the problem with the current torrent apps are you either have to pay to get the ability to download files in the background, or the app doesn't support it. I'd like to see a free torrent client that allows background downloading, even if it means speed has to be throttled a bit.
To the OP what is your favorite browser? If it is not Chrome(or Chromium), do you think it is possible to port that browser? At this point I'll even take Safari as I am starting to hate all the crashes that occur for me in IE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Safari is not open source so cannot be ported.
Chrome is a rule 4 - or in other words is too much effort for 1 man to do in a reasonable time frame.
Firefox is also a rule 4, plus its a ***** to get it to compile properly under microsoft tools apparently, plus its javascript engine is raw ARMv7 JIT whereas windows RT bugs with that and would require a THUMB2 JIT. Chrome also would have javascript issues, although in chrome you can have an interpreted javascript engine I think which would just be hideously slow in comparison.
Opera - Closed source.
The list goes on unfortunately. Browsers are complex creatures. Most will come under rule 4 though.
bigsnack said:
I think the problem with the current torrent apps are you either have to pay to get the ability to download files in the background, or the app doesn't support it. I'd like to see a free torrent client that allows background downloading, even if it means speed has to be throttled a bit.
To the OP what is your favorite browser? If it is not Chrome(or Chromium), do you think it is possible to port that browser? At this point I'll even take Safari as I am starting to hate all the crashes that occur for me in IE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What the hell are you doing to get all these crashes? I have yet to have IE crash on 8 or 8.1 on RT in desktop or metro.
My only suggestion would be a gui SFTP client. This is probably the one utility I am currently missing on my Surface RT (I use ssh to remote into Linux systems both for work and personal use, point #5). To clarify, I do use the psftp client in the putty suit, and that works well enough, just takes a bit more time and effort than something like winscp. I can continue to use this if an gui alternative is not feasible.
I recall someone requesting winscp at some point in the past, so I searched around this forum and I did find a couple of people that took a stab at it, but with no results, and I haven't found a clear explanation on what the hang up was. Looking at the readme winscp appears to be written in c++ at least (point #3):
To build WinSCP you need:
- Embarcadero C++ Builder XE2 Professional.
- Copy MFC source code from Borland C++ Builder 6 Professional and
build its Unicode version (see readme_mfc.txt).
- nasm from http://www.nasm.us/
- To build 64-bit version of drag&drop shell extension, you need
Windows Platform SDK:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/bb980924
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am unsure if the aforementioned Windows Platform SDK is available for Windows RT, or if it is even needed since Windows RT is not 64-bit.
Is nasm the problem? It looks to be an x86/x64 assembler... which of course wouldn't work on ARM... unless I just don't get what an assembler is...
Not being much of a coder I also don't know if one can import a Borland C++ project into Visual Studio, so maybe that is also a problem too.
So I guess I'm not sure on a lot of the points on the ground rules list...
domboy said:
My only suggestion would be a gui SFTP client. This is probably the one utility I am currently missing on my Surface RT (I use ssh to remote into Linux systems both for work and personal use, point #5). To clarify, I do use the psftp client in the putty suit, and that works well enough, just takes a bit more time and effort than something like winscp. I can continue to use this if an gui alternative is not feasible.
I recall someone requesting winscp at some point in the past, so I searched around this forum and I did find a couple of people that took a stab at it, but with no results, and I haven't found a clear explanation on what the hang up was. Looking at the readme winscp appears to be written in c++ at least (point #3):
I am unsure if the aforementioned Windows Platform SDK is available for Windows RT, or if it is even needed since Windows RT is not 64-bit.
Is nasm the problem? It looks to be an x86/x64 assembler... which of course wouldn't work on ARM... unless I just don't get what an assembler is...
Not being much of a coder I also don't know if one can import a Borland C++ project into Visual Studio, so maybe that is also a problem too.
So I guess I'm not sure on a lot of the points on the ground rules list...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Borland C++ is an alternative set of 3rd part C++ tools. Would take a bit of work to get a borland project to compile it under microsoft tools.
Nasm is an x86/x64 assembler yes. Assembly language is pretty much the lowest level of programming possible before writing in raw hex or binary. It is *HIGHLY* CPU dependent. Specifically the set of commands available in assembly is the plain text form of the exact instruction set the CPU has available which for x86 is different from ARM. The fact that nasm is required means that the project will have assembly in it, therefore an RT port will not be undertaken (one of the rules in the OP).
Sorry man, its proprietary tools and parts of it are unportable anyway. Doesnt mean another SFTP client can't be ported, just this one.
Here's my wishlist. I've poked at some of them, but I don't really have time to finish any of them.
WinPCap - Iirc, the biggest issue was that it was written targeting an older version of NDIS. The usecase would be to provide network support for BOCHS.
QEmu - There's a build of QEmu that builds on MSVC called WinQEmu, but it's dynarec recompiles to x86 only. I believe the official QEmu repo doesn't support MSVC, and I don't know if it can recompile to THUMB-2.
A good IRC client - X-Chat and mIRC run poorly under the emulator, and the few .net clients I've tried are meh. X-Chat has too many GCC-specific requirements, and mIRC isn't open source, I just want a good IRC client.
An X Server - I've been unable to find an X server that builds with MSVC, or anything short of Cygwin for that matter, but I'd love to have one.
Calibre is a good eBook manager I think this is the correct source code https://code.launchpad.net/calibre
I'm not good with this source code stuff so if its to much you dont need to make a port but if you can it would be appreciated thanks
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 4
cx1 said:
What the hell are you doing to get all these crashes? I have yet to have IE crash on 8 or 8.1 on RT in desktop or metro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Browsing news sites and/or using Spotify.
First off, it is silly that I cannot post a reply straight into the thread, and have to create a new thread in an unrelated area of the forums, as I am a new user (or have less than 10 posts).
Ok, as regards the Windows RT and lock down of the Desktop Applications development, how do the internal programs get past this block? As per many other comments it would appear that Windows RT is a recompilation of Windows 8 and has many like for like .dll's, etc. If the Office 2013 suite can run under the desktop, is it because Microsoft has signed the app with a certificate that is not available to other developers? Does this mean that under the previous EU ruling they are breaching some law in that they are using resources to give themselves an advantage that other developers cannot take advantage of?
I think the only reason they have locked down Windows RT like this is so that this cheap OS does not eat into their regular Windows 8 sales. Certainly I bought a Windows RT device because it is more compatible with my work habits (due to Office 2013) than the Android and iPads I have used in the past. If I could easily use tools like PuTTY, then there would be little reason for me to use a normal laptop or other device.
I doubt Microsoft really watches these discussions in any serious way, but one of the key reasons I chose Windows RT over Android and iPad is because when I need the flexibility of many windows open at the same time and side by side I can do that, but when I want the uncluttered quick environment then New UI does that as well.
Samsung, with Android, is starting to allow a couple apps together, but try to run an Excel Spreadsheet and read your banking web site at the same time to transpose the figures into your budgeting file, and iPad/Android are tedious but Windows RT is a breeze, it is what Windows does best. Microsoft should understand that apart from everything else they do, they provide an OS and should let developers get the most out of that OS, just like Android and iPad developers can push those OS's.
oucarso econcomy
What's more awesome is that new users can't post outside links either. This might be of interest to you www[dot]makeuseof[dot]com/tag/how-to-jailbreak-your-windows-rt-device-and-run-unapproved-desktop-software/
Thanks for the link
My post came as a result of researching the Jail Break idea, I had not seen that page yet. I downloaded the patch and it worked very well. Pity it does not detail why the program goes to the internet the first time it is run, but I assume it is to get the certificate?
Seems like most posters are really happy to have PuTTY working (which is exactly what I wanted). Is it hard to create a New UI App?, maybe someone just needs to compile PuTTY as a New UI app as a terminal emulator should be pretty straight forward.
While I understand that new Intel chips are just around the corner, Surface RT is only $400.00 (64Gb, Touch keyboard) so pretty cheap, so being able to sit on the couch and browse emails, internet and also manage my Linux boxes is really good.
I can do the same thing on my Android TAB, but it is tedious changing screens all the time. New UI has the same problem, always flicking between all the programs. This is what Windows does best, so don't understand why MS would take away from that tried and true model, except they are probably trying to protect their full Windows 8 investment. Instead what they will find is the Windows RT dies a quick death and that is a wasted investment (if that happens they should have just made a New UI only version and got Office to work within that environment if Office is the main reason for the Desktop in Windows RT).
start windows 95 Help on surface rt, really need the program electronic workbench 5.12, via an x 86 emulator, it is not.
I will use bochs, downloaded the BIOS file and VGA in tab CPU put the bad CPU, but still does not work. The configuration file can only be downloaded in the format of the bxrc format, the txt he does not understand. If that happens, put Please setup and working windows 95 image
I kind of doubt anybody else is going to bother with the effort needed to get Win95 running (it would run very slowly, although I suppose it was intended to run on very slow CPUs...) on a first-gen Surface RT, but hey, maybe I'm wrong.
Anybody familiar with Bochs configuration want to weigh in on the configuration issue? I never really did much with it.
GoodDayToDie said:
I kind of doubt anybody else is going to bother with the effort needed to get Win95 running (it would run very slowly, although I suppose it was intended to run on very slow CPUs...) on a first-gen Surface RT, but hey, maybe I'm wrong.
Anybody familiar with Bochs configuration want to weigh in on the configuration issue? I never really did much with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really need the electronic workbench 5.12 "want to run it in any way, it is not a resource, the minimum requirements in the area of pentium 200 MHz
You'll be lucky if you get that equivalent of speed, actually. Typical estimate is order of 10x overhead for emulation, which means each core of the Surface RT is basically like a 130MHz x86 chip. Unless the emulator runs across multiple cores and the program does too (unlikely), you probably won't get much.
Have you considered running it on a real PC and just having the Surface remote desktop into it? Unless you're somewhere without an Internet connection, that's at least a little more likely to work.
Deleted due to forum software screwup
If they can run windows 95 on Android wear, Surface RT is certainly capable. If that's what you want to do, and have the ability to get it done knock yourself out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZx-LJH5J_I
Whether or not it's *possible* to run 95 wasn't really in question - people have, in fact, booted later versions of Windows via emulators - but rather whether it's a practical way to run even a very old program.
If anybody were still maintaining the RT x86 dynamic recompilation layer, I'd say to work on getting it working in that; the performance is a lot better when you don't have to support an entire OS and can execute OS library code in native instructions rather than emulating even the low-level functions. However, I don't think even the source code for that program was ever released. :-/
Weigh in here
Deleted due to forum software screwup
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What happened? HAHA
Also I would like to weigh in here. You (mickel2255) should have done a simple forum search. Gooddaytodie has a list and in it is an x86 emulator that I tested with electronic workbench 5.12 and it works no problem.
List of desktop apps for hacked RT devices http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=36534446
Click to expand...
Click to collapse