Netduino home hardware projects downloads community

Jump to content


The Netduino forums have been replaced by new forums at community.wildernesslabs.co. This site has been preserved for archival purposes only and the ability to make new accounts or posts has been turned off.
Photo

Windows on Devices? When?


  • Please log in to reply
126 replies to this topic

#1 Strut

Strut

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:55 PM

Has anyone heard anything more about Windows on Devices? I was at Build this year and Microsoft was really pushing the "Internet of Things" and promised Windows 8 would be coming to hardware such as the Intel Galileo board, and it would be free. Their website  https://windowsondevices.com stated the SDK would be out this spring... well, today is the last day of spring. I can't find anything on the net as to a status. Anyone know anything more?

 

How will this initiative fit in with Secret Labs road map? Is any new hardware coming?

 

Thanks,

 

*edit for spellcheck fail*



#2 Spiked

Spiked

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 10:08 PM

Look at their web site (https://www.windowsondevices.com/). They claim a person can not have used both Win32 and WinRT for development. Of course that is not true, it is an artifact of web designers that have no clue, but I suspect it continues to represent leadership at Microsoft, non existent.

I filled out that form months ago, nothing. What a way to run a company.



#3 Chris Walker

Chris Walker

    Secret Labs Staff

  • Moderators
  • 7767 posts
  • LocationNew York, NY

Posted 21 June 2014 - 07:16 AM

Hi Strut, Spiked:

Without speaking for the IoT team at Microsoft, I do know they have been and are continuing to work on this.

Regarding the form asking about Win32 vs. WinRT development experience...the Galileo boards have 8MB of flash on them. That's a very tiny bit of storage space and definitely not enough for WinRT, etc. For the first set of developers stepping into Windows on Quark, Microsoft may be acting carefully to set good expectations by getting boards to developers that are already comfortable with headless servers, C/Win32 development, etc. Or they may be gauging which pieces of the solution to tackle first.

While low-power, low-cost microcontrollers (like the STM32 family used on Netduino) make up the vast majority of applications for IoT and wearable electronics, x86 and Cortex-A microprocessors (including Windows on Quark) open up quite a few higher-resource applications. Someday the Quark micros may even scale down to the point where Cortex-M micros shine today. I for one look forward to the continued evolution, and we will continue discussing the possibility of using Quark in our own products with Intel.

In any case, we'll be here to help developers get and use the best tools for the job--whether that be for hobby projects or commercial products. We're here to help build the Internet of Your Things.

Chris

#4 Spiked

Spiked

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 21 June 2014 - 02:23 PM

Chris I was referring to the combobox choice when you signed up for information.  Instead of a check box, like the (incomplete) 'which dev boards have you used?' section, they ask what experience do you have, pick one; Win32 or WinRT. Anyone even vaguely technical would know there should be a lot more choices, and not exclusive.

No instead, they handed the web site off to some 'designers', and never followed up on what was produced. And like I said, even if you fill out the form and request more information, you never hear anything, from anybody.

I used to work at Microsoft, I left around the time this sort of 'management' started to become the norm. I truly feel sorry for the technically competent people at Microsoft. I hope the MF team can make something happen anyhow, but looking at their track record the last few years - I wouldn't invest much.

 

edit: I see they changed it in the last 12 hours. Hmmmm.



#5 piwi

piwi

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 24 June 2014 - 02:43 PM

Hi All,

 

just registered on the windowsondevices web site, replied to their confirming email and some seconds later they replied again:

 

Quote: "Thank you for signing up for the Windows Developer Program for IoT.  Well let you know when your kit has shipped."

 

So appearantly something has changed ....

 

Cheers,

 

Me.



#6 baxter

baxter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 415 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 01:07 AM

Hi All,

 

just registered on the windowsondevices web site, replied to their confirming email and some seconds later they replied again:

 

Quote: "Thank you for signing up for the Windows Developer Program for IoT.  Well let you know when your kit has shipped."

 

So appearantly something has changed ....

 

Cheers,

 

Me.

Got the same message ...

Interesting that they ask if using Spark IO (Spark Core) as a development board. I bought one and it does WiFi quite well. It has the  same footprint as the Mini; just a bit longer.



#7 Fred

Fred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:24 AM

Does anyone have any info on what to expect from this? They clearly show a Galileo, so it's a safe bet that that's the hardware. Is it likely to be running .NET MF?

 

I have to add that it's shocking that "Netduino/.NET MF wan't included in the list of dev boards you'd used. I know it's not the most popular environment, but on Microsoft's own site...



#8 Fred

Fred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 26 June 2014 - 10:54 AM

A bit of searching revealed nothing concrete, but I'm now starting to suspect it could be Windows Embedded rather than .NET MF. I guess we'll find out soon enough.



#9 CW2

CW2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1592 posts
  • LocationCzech Republic

Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:31 AM

In the dotnetConf 2014 session New Innovations in .NET Runtime Andrew Pardoe said:
 

38:45 "It is a full x86 computer... and it boots Windows..."
...
"The IoT team is working closely with .NET team..." ... "The IoT team of course has .NET Micro Framework..." "We also work closely with IoT team to make sure that the .NET Framework will work on devices like the Intel Galileo..."



#10 Fred

Fred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 26 June 2014 - 12:45 PM

Thanks. That pretty much clears it up. Personally I think MF makes more sense than Windows Embedded or RT, but as the original Galileo runs Linux it had me wondering.



#11 Dr Who

Dr Who

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 261 posts
  • LocationNYC

Posted 27 June 2014 - 11:14 PM

Hi Strut, Spiked:

Without speaking for the IoT team at Microsoft, I do know they have been and are continuing to work on this.

Regarding the form asking about Win32 vs. WinRT development experience...the Galileo boards have 8MB of flash on them. That's a very tiny bit of storage space and definitely not enough for WinRT, etc. For the first set of developers stepping into Windows on Quark, Microsoft may be acting carefully to set good expectations by getting boards to developers that are already comfortable with headless servers, C/Win32 development, etc. Or they may be gauging which pieces of the solution to tackle first.

While low-power, low-cost microcontrollers (like the STM32 family used on Netduino) make up the vast majority of applications for IoT and wearable electronics, x86 and Cortex-A microprocessors (including Windows on Quark) open up quite a few higher-resource applications. Someday the Quark micros may even scale down to the point where Cortex-M micros shine today. I for one look forward to the continued evolution, and we will continue discussing the possibility of using Quark in our own products with Intel.

In any case, we'll be here to help developers get and use the best tools for the job--whether that be for hobby projects or commercial products. We're here to help build the Internet of Your Things.

Chris

 

Hello!

Chris, I don't know if you saw my separate thread on something that happened concerning the http://www.windowsondevices.com site, but here goes: They contacted me again concerning the fact that my information might need to reentered into the thing. This was the physical address in fact. (That means Chris should you want to send me something PM me and you'll get it.)

 

Which is preposterous because I know it was entered correctly the first time. The fact that they wrote back to me at my business address confirms that they retained something. Then they confirmed that something is happening, I'll believe it when the board arrives soon.



Doctor Who
"This signature does not exist!"

#12 Chris Walker

Chris Walker

    Secret Labs Staff

  • Moderators
  • 7767 posts
  • LocationNew York, NY

Posted 27 June 2014 - 11:25 PM

Thanks. That pretty much clears it up. Personally I think MF makes more sense than Windows Embedded or RT, but as the original Galileo runs Linux it had me wondering.

Different solutions to solve different problems. If you're building a PC-class device (high-end home automation hub, ATM, etc.) then you'll want Windows for IoT. In many ways it may be displacing applications where Windows CE makes sense.

For the vast majority of Internet-connected things, you want a lower-power, simpler, less expensive Cortex-M based solution. Many of those are great for NETMF today, and more will be in the future. For the super-cheap solutions...there are 8KB flash chips and ASM/C :) But CONNECTED devices...tend to lend themselves to a powerful framework like NETMF.

Chris

#13 Fred

Fred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 29 June 2014 - 08:05 PM

Some more info (from Build back in April) shows that it's more like a version of Windows Embedded than NETMF. Skip to about 51:00 to see a demo of an app built and deployed to the Galileo.

http://channel9.msdn...uild/2014/2-511



#14 pounce

pounce

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 30 June 2014 - 04:09 AM

A couple of days ago I got an email from the IoT team asking for my address and other bits so they could send me a kit. Looks like things are moving forward.



#15 zei0

zei0

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 03 July 2014 - 11:36 AM

Hi All,

 

just registered on the windowsondevices web site, replied to their confirming email and some seconds later they replied again:

 

Quote: "Thank you for signing up for the Windows Developer Program for IoT.  Well let you know when your kit has shipped."

 

So appearantly something has changed ....

 

Cheers,



#16 Fred

Fred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 03 July 2014 - 12:51 PM

That's what I got about a week ago. Such quick replies that it had to be automatic. Nothing since.



#17 sfx

sfx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 05:38 AM

Hi All,

 

Looks like there has been an update:

 

http://blogs.windows...am-for-iot.aspx

 

Nathan



#18 Dr Who

Dr Who

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 261 posts
  • LocationNYC

Posted 15 July 2014 - 04:18 AM

Hi All,

 

Looks like there has been an update:

 

http://blogs.windows...am-for-iot.aspx

 

Nathan

 

Hello!

But not enough. They still have not said much about the device. Further they imply that they have shipped kits, and that the need has overwhelmed their abilities to ship them to the rest of us. On a different page they mention that the user must wait until the firm releases a firmware update for the device. However setting up the host for the developer cycle requires a particular release of VS. The VS2013 in an Express form as it happens.



Doctor Who
"This signature does not exist!"

#19 sfx

sfx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 15 July 2014 - 05:30 AM

Hi Dr Who,

 

Yes, that's true. Unfortunately, I also noticed (or at least couldn't find) references to either the Netduino or NETMF on the IoT Developer portal...

 

Nathan



#20 JoopC

JoopC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 15 July 2014 - 07:12 AM

IoT and .....Intel Galileo, as far I can see based on C++,..... come on...are they for real?  (I have seen the video of Steve Teixeira)  Then I must do 4 steps back, and I have seen  "Hello World" already. There is realy nothing that I can not make with a Netduino Plus 2. and last but not least, Visual Basic and C#...so easy to use in comparison with C++.

 

About a overwhelmed response, yes when you give the devices for free.... :)

 

Even with the little memory of the Netduino (that is the only bottleneck for me) I can win every contest with 2 fingers in my nose. And I am not a prof.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

home    hardware    projects    downloads    community    where to buy    contact Copyright © 2016 Wilderness Labs Inc.  |  Legal   |   CC BY-SA
This webpage is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.