The stuff Hacker News actually recommends.

Desktops and mini PCs · Microsoft Windows Dev Kit

Microsoft Windows Dev Kit 2023

5owners with an opinion
40%of verdicts positive
1/0positive/negative since 2024
0happy after 3+ years

Praised for performance and ease of use; criticized for reliability and support.

What people wrote

Likes it
I have been tinkering with the Windows Dev Kit 2023 which shares the same SoC as this board. Linux support has been improving but with only third party kernel patches. GPU support has been okay but I have noticed oddities at higher resolutions. Speaking of, none of the display port options could provide 4K at 120Hz so maybe this is one area that the Q8B can prove to be more capable; it is supposed to have an HDMI 2.1 port and two DP 1.4 capable usb-c ports.
Doesn’t like it
Can't wait for it to be complete trash in Windows and continue to suffer the same issues I've had with every snap dragon powered windows machine including the devbox 2023. GPU driver will crash under heavy web rendering loads (twitter gif heavy threads), It will probably be undercooled causing P cores to be kneecapped push applications to the E cores as soon as it warms up, and never let them go back. Although I will note the MS ARM devbox at least was adequately cooled, if poorly vented so this was a rare occasion. On top of that linux support will be non-existent leaving you to struggle as microsoft's most underserved user population. Good luck anyone who makes the dive, even as an ARM enthusiast I gave up on qualcomm products as a whole.
Likes it
I am not sure where you got that from. Windows runs great on ARM. I got one the Windows Dev Kit 2023 (it's an 8 core ARM PC with 32 GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD). I ran run Windows, Office, Visual Studio, GIT, etc. I suspect a lot of games will not run but everything else works fine. This includes x64 (x86 64-bit software). Also, MS has made a lot of their software ARM compatible. Office 365, Visual Studio, and Visual Studio code all have native ARM binaries. In Visual Studio's case, it has fewer features than the x64 version (mostly fewer supported SDKs). Overall, I can't tell I am even running on an ARM system because it feels like an x64 system. It is responsive, fast and just works.
Doesn’t like it
Does Linux work on it? No, not yet. It may need some custom firmware like you see in the instructions for the Surface. Support for the Qualcomm chip did land in v6.0 of the Kernel - https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b6a6535b339776d32fa... I just had mine arrive today, which I wanted to enroll as an ARM64 build agent (with Firecracker) for self-actuated ( https://docs.actuated.dev ) - this does actually work with Asahi Linux and the Mac Mini M1, but that was double the price for half the RAM. So far, it's not looking good, with Ubuntu Server 22.04 and 22.10 both crashing after the Grub menu. I'm sharing progress here: https://twitter.com/alexellisuk/status/1585562359254421504?s...
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
Yeah, Qualcomm is behind the M1, but the funny thing is that Qualcomm is already ahead of a lot of the Intel product lines, if they were willing to compete at the lower end of the PC market. For example, why does the Surface Go 3 still sell with a "Core i3" or "Pentium Gold 6500Y" in it, when it could have this Qualcomm chip in it. Qualcomm's Gen 8 is approximately 3x faster while also being lower cost and having lower power draw! Why does a $500 Go 3 ship with "4GB Ram" and "64GB eMMC" when this Qualcomm devkit can ship with 32GB ram and 512 nVME SSD for just $100 more? These are the products that should be Qualcomm-ified, it would be an immediate improvement to people buying this, over any other current PC comparable. Instead, the consumer version of this Windows devkit is a "Surface Pro 9", which when equivalently spec'd to the devkit, comes out to $1900 USD. At that price, nearly any Intel / AMD / Mac comparable is a way better pick.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
There's a lot of the "it has less geekbenches than the M1 so it must be a total piece of crap" going on. I have a far less performant 8cx Gen 1 laptop with similar experience to you. It's no workstation but general usage and browsing work as well as you'd expect a modern laptop. With great battery life and total silence. This thing is basically the most performant ARM soc on the market with a lot of memory, fast storage and good connectivity. Not bad at all for the price. Not to mention there's a good chance this might be the first cost-effective ARM Linux workstation.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
> There's a lot of the "it has less geekbenches than the M1 so it must be a total piece of crap" going on. It's not that it benches worse than an M1, but rather that it doesn't do well against comparable x86 laptops. The whole reason M-series sells as well as it does is because people don't feel like they're giving up generations of power increases by buying them. Low power ARM laptops have been a thing for a long time in the form of Chromebooks, and adding Windows to the equation alone isn't enough to get most people to take notice. For Windows on ARM to work, the hardware it's running on has to be at least as powerful as mainstream x86 laptops.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
I'm so hyped about this. I'm sure this won't be M1-levels of performance, but I'm glad to see Microsoft move towards ARM. I can totally see in a few years more manufacturers building ARM-based SoCs to run on laptops, desktops, etc. Makes me happy I TA'd a course on ARM programming 10 years ago.I'm extremely bullish on ARM's future.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
The difference here is that the M1 in the M1 mac mini is faster than Apple's phone SoC (the A16). The Qualcomm 8cx gen 3 (what a terrible name) in this machine is NOT faster than even Qualcomm's phone SoC (the 8 gen 1), let alone Apple's phone SoC. It's absurd to be selling a desktop PC that's weaker than a phone.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
> The Mac Mini is what you get if you want to make a Mac or iOS app This is probably closer to the Mac Mini with M1 that they shipped to kick-start the Apple Silicon transition for desktop apps. Because if I was a windows programmer for today's customers, I can't really build things on a "Windows on Arm" device like this. Like Apple before, I hope this is just the first salvo against the Windows+Intel, before we all switch to Arm chips (including Intel fabs).
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
Sure - if you need all 32GB for development work, it is a great deal. But, with a processor slower than a midrange modern Intel laptop, good luck using it to its full extent without feeling quite slow. So slow you might almost prefer a 16GB M1 Mac mini with swap for the rest despite the VM. Plus, if you read Microsoft documentation on Windows on ARM so far, Microsoft doesn't actually expect you to use an IDE on these machines - but rather run your code remotely on them. You'll be a lot happier with your IDE running on a more powerful machine. Of course, if you do that, the lack of a GPU on the M1 for a Windows on ARM VM becomes not really an issue.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
Maybe I am missing the point, but why wouldn't you rather buy a NUC instead of this slow box? I get it MS wants to be like Apple, meticulously copying anything that pops up there, but their brand is associated with different "experiences" and their main value lies in backwards compatibility and open hardware ecosystem.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
This is Microsoft's second go at a developer-focused ARM kit. You may recall the first was called the Snapdragon Developer Kit [1] and was a miserable machine. It appears Microsoft has already pulled it from the Microsoft Store [2]. There is no other supported desktop/CI/etc. solution for Windows on ARM. (Mac mini with Parallels/VMware is a popular unsupported alternative. It may still be your fastest.) Seems like a truly decent machine (ordered one) but I'm not sure if there's remaining appetite for Windows target-specific development. After years and years of development platform missteps and PC usage pattern changes, I fear web (electron, etc.) has become good enough for Windows users. [1] https://developer.qualcomm.com/hardware/windows-on-snapdrago... [2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/d/ecs-liva-mini-box-qc710-de...
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
Very interesting to see that it has a built-in NPU. Such co-processors are increasingly being included in recent high-end mobile phone platforms, used mostly to accelerate image processing algorithms. Seems like this is a sign of things to come in Windows platforms too, since Microsoft are including an NPU in this devkit. The PC of the future may well end up being CPU+GPU+NPU as standard, much as it is CPU+GPU today.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
Previous laptops and current surface devices do support ARM, but IMO nothing MSFT has put out has been serious. (Looking at you Surface Pro X). This targeted solution correctly identifies the main problem with Windows on ARM. Lack of developer support. Outside of internal MSFT dev support no one has taken Windows/ARM support seriously. I hope these dev kits represent a wider market push that ultimately leads to better Windows laptops on ARM. (Ones that can close to gap with the current MacBook lineups).
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
Exactly. Apple have the advantage of being able to tell consumers that if they want a new Mac, then they get no choice. They'll have to buy an M1 or M2. Despite of this Apple knew that M-series computers needed to be better than the previous Intel lineup, and noticeable so. An ARM based Windows computer isn't a bad idea, I just question if Microsoft is able to deliver on it. Picking the same manufacturer, who repeatably failed to deliver usable ARM processors for desktop and laptops seem like a obvious mistake. This isn't their first attempt either, so why would I trust that this won't fail, like the last time? Apple had done this before an architecture transition before, Microsoft haven't, and I doubt they have the will to ensure that it will succeed. They are too tied up in the x86 world, too busy with Azure and they don't have the attention of the consumer market. In terms of price, it's really close to the Mac mini. Factor in performance, then this thing is a bad deal. The form factor is right for many uses, but I don't get who the potential buyers are.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
800$ in Canada, at that price point it’s impossible to justify buying it instead of an M1 Mac Mini for 100$ more as a general use machine, especially given the sorry state of Windows-ARM. Given it’s a dev kit companies won’t care about cost, but I can’t see many being sold to independent/small developers, the excitement just isn’t there.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
There's a lot more use-cases though, of both systems. If you want a "good" small computer and you already have a screen (or want to buy cheap ones) then these systems are fantastic. Performance is completely fine for moderate-to-heavy workloads (assuming the heavy workloads are bursty) for the Mac mini, and hopefully this. Both systems are what you would get if you didn't need a display or keyboard already, they're desktop replacements with a small footprint, and fantastic for the majority of computer workloads including a lot of development ones.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
I don't know why you would buy one, even if it were available, unless power-efficiency was a crucial component for a server. Can you imagine what you could get, on eBay, in a small form factor, for $600? I made off with a i3-8100T (about 3/4s as powerful, 35W TDP), with 16GB of RAM, and a 256GB SSD in an ultra-small-form-factor case for less than $150. For $600, it makes absolutely no sense against anything used. Let's say it drew 50W vs 20W total use at 10 cents per KWh. It would take 5 years to save $130, if you ran it 24/7/365. A $450 used Intel small-form-factor system would run circles around it in performance (especially after any emulation / code conversion) and you'd break even.