<<...Microsoft...got caught up by this unreliability, leading to a falling out with Intel. Microsoft’s recent ARM push with Windows 10 is a result of that falling out; the software giant believes that Intel needs a counter to its dominance...>> <<...Microsoft, I’m told, fabricated the story about Intel being at fault. The real problem was Surface-specific custom drivers and settings...>> ...Just a thought about this. The WoA effort, however it turns out, is going to be an expensive proposition, with the potential to disrupt or dilute the core of Microsoft's hardware sales. Why would Microsoft undertake such an effort, in effect wasting money and possibly threatening sales, based on an internally-concocted lie? That makes no sense to me. Another thing. Thurrott characterizes his other internal source as having a "take" on this subject. That's an odd way to put it. Either Microsoft lied or they didn't (or, even more likely, it was an honest disagreement of exactly whose fault it was) so that source would have been able to say that Microsoft lied. Period. Why would there be a "take" on such a black and white situation...?