From: david+usenet@zx.net.nz   
      
   In article <10bhqe4$uqv$3@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid says...   
   >   
   > On Wed, 1 Oct 2025 12:11:43 +1300, David Goodwin wrote:   
   >   
   > > IIRC the *reason* for the i860 port first, and then the MIPS port,   
   > > was to ensure that the operating system was developed from the start   
   > > with portability in mind.   
   >   
   > We already know that one of the design goals for Windows NT from the   
   > beginning was ?portability in mind?. The question was whether it   
   > achieved that. Ultimately, it did not.   
      
   You've yet to give a good reason to believe it isn't portable. The fact   
   it has been released on six architectures and publicly demonstrated on a   
   seventh would suggest you are wrong.   
      
   > > So the MIPS port achieved its purpose. Once the job was done,   
   > > Microsoft sold their hardware designs to MIPS Technologies who used   
   > > it as a basis for a line of workstations until SGI bought the   
   > > company.   
   >   
   > So, having done the port and climbed that mountain, it was realized   
   > that climbing portability mountains in a proprietary OS is hard, and   
   > so the Windows NT team soft-pedalled that particular design goal from   
   > that point on ... ?   
      
   As you have previously established, Microsoft is a for-profit company.   
   Their goal is to make profit, not to support as many platforms as   
   possible for as long as possible whether or not there is worthwhile   
   demand for Windows on those platforms.   
      
   Selling a product for a hardware platform that can no longer be   
   purchased is not a path to profit, as such spending any amount however   
   trivial on that platform is to act counter to the companies goals.   
      
   > >> The MIPS version of NT didn?t last long, either.   
   > >   
   > > The MIPS version was never very popular to begin with - today the   
   > > hardware is flying pigs rare.   
   >   
   > I already mentioned that MIPS processors outship x86 by about 3:1,   
   > last I checked. You wouldn?t call x86 ?flying pigs rare?, would you?   
      
   Set top boxes and routers were not the target market for Windows in the   
   90s, and they are clearly not a market Microsoft is interested in   
   pursuing today.   
      
   In the 90s Windows NT was only released for IBM PC compatibles, and   
   platforms which conformed (to varying degrees) to the ARC standard.   
   Later from the 2000 after ARC ceased to be relevant, EFI was adopted as   
   a new standard.   
      
   > > By late 1996 no one was buying Windows NT for MIPS systems anymore, so   
   > > Microsoft stopped maintaining it.   
   >   
   > People still buy them and run Linux on them, which is why Linux still   
   > continues to support them.   
      
   Yes, but no one is being paid to maintain Linux support for early 90s   
   MIPS workstations, and no one is buying Linux for these platforms   
   either.   
      
   This is fine as as profit is not the goal and "for fun" is a good enough   
   motivation. Microsoft clearly has other goals and motiviations.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)