ARM’s virtualization support is pretty complete.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Silicon Macs to Feature New Boot and Recovery Interface, New Mac Sharing Mode Replacing Target Disk Mode
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I really don't see why. Probably most buyers in the future will be unaware of the CPU change, unless they are bringing legacy Windows applications to run in a hypervisor or via BootCamp - and this is a small minority.
As long as the machine runs the available software well, few care what is inside the box. Which is as it should be.
[automerge]1593151126[/automerge]
Well, there are already 128 core ARM chips running in data centers (ARM Neoverse N1 design), so the core technology (no pun intended!) is already there. Apple will add lots of bells & whistles to the SoC, but fundamentally, there is no problem creating a workstation ARM CPU with similar or lower TDP.
Last edited:
Boot Camp definitely adds flexibility to the hardware that is very nice to have on an Intel Mac. I can't imagine that Windows 10 for ARM64 won't make its way to the Mac. It would benefit Apple to have SOME form of Windows capability that's native to the architecture (rather than being emulated like it was in the Connectix Virtual PC days) and it would benefit Microsoft HUGELY considering that the main complaint about Windows 10 for ARM64 is that it hasn't been given fast enough hardware. The Apple Silicon Macs could be the exactly what Microsoft needs to champion this variant of Windows 10!
Boot Camp will be going away. I think 10's of millions is a little high. Most colleagues of mine that have a Mac at home with their iPhone's, iPads's and use a Win Box for work, simply bring a work Win Laptop to and from home if they need to access their companies system with a Win Device. Granted, I know more people with iMacs than MBP's.
The only reason for Boot Camp any longer IMO is for the Mac user who also wants to be a "casual" Win PC gamer without wanting a separate box for each. But, that's simply my opinion.
Your opinion seems to come from a very limited window of experience. Application support for Windows dwarfs what it was for macOS prior to Catalina by craptons. It definitely rivals iOS, if not exceeds it. To sit here and say that the only reason for Boot Camp is to appease casual gamers is about as asinine of a thing you can say in 2020 that doesn't concern politics, racism, or the pandemic.
Sure, you can satisfy the need for a PC by buying a PC IN ADDITION TO your Mac. However, if you don't want to have an army of devices, a Mac that can dual-boot with Windows saves you a fair amount of money.
Just because you don't have a need for Windows outside of the context of casual gaming or whatever purpose a work laptop can provide, doesn't mean that there aren't additional use cases.
You cannot run Intel versions of macOS on an ARM Mac. Nor will you be able to run any x86 OS natively on an ARM Mac. All the post is saying is that Apple is not preventing us from downgrading to an older version of macOS or dual-booting with older macOS releases in addition to the latest, should it be needed. This functionality exists on an Intel Mac (and did on the PowerPC Macs before them); on a T2 Intel Mac, you have to change Secure Boot settings. The difference is that on a T2 Intel Mac, the settings are globally to the entire computer whereas the Secure Boot settings on an ARM Mac can be set to each installed operating system environment; so some can be set to full security while others are set to lower security.
As for the GPU performance, considering that Intel integrated graphics (used consistently on anything that isn't a 4K 21.5" iMac, 5K 27" iMac, iMac Pro, Mac Pro, or 15"/16" MacBook Pro) have always been subpar for anything that requires performance, I'm sure that the ARM equivalents to machines that had only Intel integrated graphics will be markedly superior.
I'm not sure why such a claim is absurd. I'm not saying that every Mac user will be using Boot Camp or that even half do, but certainly among the high end Mac users; those who use the Mac as a computer and not as an over-glorified Chromebook, there are plenty that use it. I don't use it to dual-boot my Macs (because I have the luxury of having many PCs lying around that are all newer than my current newest Mac).
But when a Mac looses support for the latest macOS (and therefore triggers a two year countdown clock until it stops getting security patches and becomes a security hazard), I am very appreciative that I can wipe the drive completely, and install a version of Windows onto it that will very likely still be supported for another 9 MORE YEARS THEREAFTER! People forget that Microsoft's support timeline on long-term releases puts both Apple and Canonical to shame! You buy an ARM Mac and Apple decides, like it periodically does for its other ARM based platforms, that it can't keep supporting that Mac, you have two more years of security update support and then it's time to either buy a new Mac or disconnect that one from the Internet. I'm willing to bet that the Mid 2012 13" MacBook Pro that I have (not my primary Mac) will still be able to run a supported version of Windows 10 well past the point where the first ARM 13" MacBook Pro stops getting security updates from Apple and has to be discarded.
Boot Camp is just the means of partitioning your drive such that when the Mac's firmware boots your Windows Install Media (which it can do without the presence of "Boot Camp"), it has a partition to install to that can co-exist with the Mac partitition installed to the same drive. That and drivers for all of the Apple hardware for Windows. That's it!
All that has been said is that Apple isn't using that same tool anymore. Given the differences in Windows 10 for ARM64 with things such as OS licensing and given the differences with the Apple Silicon Mac firmware, it may not make sense to package Windows 10 for ARM64 and install it on our Macs in the same ways that we did for x86 Windows in Boot Camp on Intel Macs.
All that to say that while "Boot Camp" is going away, the process of dual-booting or virtualizing Windows 10 (even if it has to be the ARM64 version) is still up in the air. I wouldn't hold my breath for software that's natively written for ARM and Apple's chips to virtualize (and effectively emulate or translate) a whole x86 operating system. That seems unlikely. But Microsoft and Apple can, at the very least, give us something similar with Windows 10 for ARM64. The only downside would be that, in that version of Windows 10, 64-bit x86 apps couldn't run. But, 32-bit x86, 32-bit ARM, and 64-bit ARM would be fair game.
I wouldn’t buy any Mac right now.
The New ones to come will be too new, the older ones would make no sense unless you need a machine.
I have a 16’’ and a 15’’ MBP and plan to not waste money now on anything until 2-3 years from now.
what I read from this article is that there will be an AppStore only mode for Apps and an open App from anywhere.
If true, then I am sure there will be some support policies there
If you need a Mac now, then an Intel Mac now isn't a bad idea. If you're a high end customer, it actually makes sense to buy now. 16" MacBook Pros are still more powerful than Apple's CPUs. Same for anything heftier/faster than that. If you're in the market for a lower-end Mac, a non-retina 21.5" iMac, a MacBook Air, Mac mini, or 13" MacBook Pro, then, yeah, I'd totally advise waiting unless you couldn't.
But I know people clinging to 2011 Mac minis and things that are capped at High Sierra (which is about to lose security update support in the fall). For those people, waiting might be a bad idea.
Right, you can't use Rosetta to translate a whole operating system. Just an app package.
It was. It was just late and I was being dumb. I ended up watching it and then later realizing that's what the post was linked to and referring to. Easily one of the most interesting videos from WWDC 2020.
The screen size difference isn't that substantial. Plus your 2015" MBP is going to be supported for at least another three years before it is left out of being able to run the latest OS.
Rumors are all pointing to the first Macs to make the jump being the iMac and the 13" MacBook Pro. The 13" MacBook Pro makes much more sense as, depending on the thermal efficiency of the processor that they use, they can effectively merge the 13" Pro and the Air to be a single low-end Mac with touch bar that is otherwise feature equivalent to the 13" Pro, but is as thin as an Air. I'm not saying that they will do this, but they may very well be able to do this. Otherwise the 13" Pro makes the most sense to go first. It's one of the most popular Macs and Apple already has ARM chips in the iPad Pro that beat any CPU that Apple has ever put inside of any 13" Intel Mac laptop. The same cannot yet be said about the 16" MacBook Pro. I'd give it another year.
iPad Pro with the Smart Keyboard? The 12.9" model's keyboard is more ergonomic than the 11" one is for sure.
You won't be able to run an x86 Virtualization app on ARM Macs. It's not fully clear if an ARM Virtualization app running on an ARM Mac will be able to virtualize an x86 machine as a VM. I feel like I read something that said that wouldn't be possible. For ARM Macs, I'd imagine that you'll be limited to ARM platforms, in which case, the oldest Apple OS that you'll be able to virtualize will be Big Sur (being that it will be the first publicly released on that platform). Given that, I'm pretty sure that x86 Windows 10 and Ubuntu (32-bit or 64-bit) will not be able to be virtualized on Apple Silicon, but ARM64 Windows isn't out of the question. It just becomes up to Microsoft to make that available for use like that.
You say that like all virtualization runs the exact same way!
They were running an ARM version of Debian. If the ability in that version of Parallels allowed for x86 based OSes, then they'd have shown off Ubuntu on it instead. It's not a guarantee that there'll be Windows virtualization support at all. But if there is, it'll most likely only be the ARM64 version because it's an ARM Mac and not an x86 Mac.
Windows 10 for ARM64 will run 32-bit x86, 32-bit ARM, and 64-bit ARM with no modification. The only thing it won't run is 64-bit x86. And I'm not just talking Windows Store apps, I'm talking WIN32. So, anyone rocking a really old business critical Windows app from 2003 is probably going to be just fine. Same with games from around that era. Try running anything more recent, and you might have issues. The Office apps are natively available for ARM. And here's the thing: If Apple popularizes Windows 10 for ARM64, more Windows apps will be ported to the architecture because more and more the industry will see that ARM is the future and start heading there.
There is PLENTY of incentive for both Microsoft and Apple to make Windows 10 for ARM64 on Apple Silicon Macs a thing that not only happens but happens well. Apple needs to not lose Mac users. Boot Camp was/is a great thing that many Mac users rely on. That's how it benefits Apple. Microsoft's endeavors with Windows 10 for ARM64 have been a disaster because they were premature and the hardware really wasn't up to par yet. If, suddenly, all of the Mac users that use Boot Camp could showcase how powerful Windows 10 can be on 64-bit ARM, that would convince more OEMs to join in and for software developers to make a similar move. They want that variant of Windows 10 to succeed just like Apple wants ARM macOS 11 to succeed.
It's cool. Don't get me wrong. But it isn't without its share of drawbacks. Mac Sharing Mode is not a Target Disk Mode. It's cool, and probably more secure ultimately, but not as utilitarian. Also a menu to select things I was much more quickly able to select with the keyboard is meh.
NetBoot and NetInstall are gone on any T2-chip Intel Mac. Safe to say it won't be making a comeback on Apple Silicon machines. In theory, the current iMac is the last currently sold Mac with support for it.
I agree. Turning your Mac into an SMB share isn't as useful. However, I'll bet this was done in the name of security.
Microsoft and Adobe seem to be likely to be first this time. If you are wanting a 16" MacBook Pro or Mac Pro, I'd buy now. Or at least wait to see if there aren't more Intel-based models to come sooner. Same with the iMac Pro if that's going to continue to be a thing. If you are wanting a 4K or 5K iMac, then I could see valid arguments for and against waiting. If you are wanting a 13" MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, Mac mini, or non-Retina 21.5" iMac, I'd absolutely wait. Those are likely getting refreshed first (as the ARM technology to surpass the Intel processors and graphics on those exists today). The others likely need more time.
Do what you need to do. Craig just confirmed no Boot Camp support. You'll still be able to use Virtulalization if you really need that method.
He mentioned that the Boot Camp Assistant won't be there. Given that much of what Boot Camp even does is specific to the x86 UEFI implementation, that's not surprising and should be expected. That doesn't mean that there won't be some other way to get Windows 10 for ARM64 on that machine natively in a similar fashion. Apple and Microsoft could team up to sell Windows 10 for ARM64 in the Mac App Store such that when it finished downloading, you'd run it and that would do everything Boot Camp ever did down to automatically handling driver installation and everything else. Completely conceivable. The question is whether or not that will happen and frankly, it's too early to tell for sure (Boot Camp didn't appear until half-way through the period in which Intel Macs were replacing their PowerPC equivalents and it didn't exit beta for another year and a half thereafter). Similarly, there's no reason why Parallels for ARM Macs won't support Windows 10 for ARM64. I seriously doubt that it will support x86 Windows or x86 Linux or x86 macOS as that'd require actual translation/emulation, but you never know.
It's called a Hackintosh.
Look, Catalina killed off a lot of apps. It's to the point where my investment in the Mac platform is about to change substantially. Not unfair for someone to look at the Mac right now and say "if I can't have Windows too, I'm out". A Mac will boot and run all three platforms natively. We're not even sure if the Apple Silicon Macs will be able to dual-boot with a Linux yet, let alone anything that isn't a version of macOS. Y'all can say "Linux will natively run on anything" all you want. But we haven't found an easy way to load Android on an iPhone yet, and those two both run natively on the same architecture.
Even if the number of active Boot Camp users hovers around 2 million. That's still a substantial amount of users. And it's not like both Apple and Microsoft don't stand to make money on any effort that gets Windows running on an Apple Silicon Mac.
Folks, it appears my initial comment regarding BC user base being an order of 'tens of millions' has got some special attention. I even saw someone's comment stating that such number is the product of my imagination. So, I'm providing some evidence to consider. I'm attaching screen shot of one of the download pages of trackpad driver for BC. Since publishing it there 1 year ago it has been downloaded more than a million times by unique users. But not every Mac got built-in trackpad, right? Now add users of an iMac series, Mini series, Pro series. Now add the fact that I don't particularly promote the driver (few forum posts are the joke... this driver has no banners, no promoting YouTube videos, nothing). So obviously it's minority of users who downloaded it, i.e. only those who own MacBook and are aware of the existance of that driver. Statistically, isn't it an evidence the total BC user base is at least one order bigger than this downloads counter? And I'm providing only one screen shot, although actually the sum of counters across all download mirrors is close to 2 millions. That's why I personally have confidence the community is truly that big. And of course Apple knows this better than I do (surely they have their BC Assistant app stats). That's it, folks.
Peace,
Vlad
It is more important to be able to run x86 os’s than macOS. Does that help?
[automerge]1593165583[/automerge]
I think you missed the point. The point is that I want to use macOS, but I need to use x86 unix and Windows. It is a perfectly reasonable thing to criticize a company for doing something that will require you to stop using them as your vendor. I have been using macOS as my primary driver for about a decade now, and if they do not come up with a solution to this problem, then I will need to stop using macOS.
Last edited:
Craig held back in his interview yesterday. While he did confirm there will no longer be any direct 086 booting into Windows he was cheeky about what would be available. He stated Apple was very aware of the users wanting this, but it could only be through emulation.
I got the impression there will be new very efficient emulation software coming. He was simply not going to open up fully about it.
He did make the statement "The will be some very efficient(performance) emulation software. Gruber pushed him hard on it.
[citation needed]
only if customers see value in windows on arm. Given that a goodly number of the people who do use it, would want to run some obscure app that is windows only, there’s no guarantee said obscure app is rebuilt for arm or will work reliably under i386 emulation.
Given that most people likely download the driver on a new boot camp install and never again the concept of unique visitors is pretty meaningless. That could just as easily be 500K people who installed it on the same Mac twice.
also, MacBooks are by far the most popular Mac lines, without a doubt. It’d be extremely generous to suggest that iMacs, minis and pros combined make up as many Mac sales as MacBooks.
Well, I think I have about 6 years before I am going to need to upgrade from my new Mac, so that is about 5 versions of macOS for them to figure something out. Here's for hoping!Craig held back in his interview yesterday. While he did confirm there will no longer be any direct 086 booting into Windows he was cheeky about what would be available. He stated Apple was very aware of the users wanting this, but it could only be through emulation.
I got the impression there will be new very efficient emulation software coming. He was simply not going to open up fully about it.
He did make the statement "The will be some very efficient(performance) emulation software. Gruber pushed him hard on it.
Apple could “make money” selling troll dolls, too, but when you are a company of apple’s size not every money chase makes sense.
People running windows are not people using apple’s services. Supporting windows just makes it easier for mac-inclined people to use apple software less often. And the number of people may be 2 million now but it’s been getting smaller and smaller over time.
Apple won’t support any form of bootcamp. In interviews they’ve flat out said it, and told people to use virtualization.
I run windows, and I use apple's services A LOT. You are using your own personal experience to come to conclusions about an entire segment of Apple's customers. You cannot virtualize Windows. Your understanding of the technology is incomplete. You can only virtualize ARM operating systems, and there is at this moment not a public available version of Arm Windows.
If they do not find a solution then they will loose me, and many other people, as an iCloud customer, Apple TV customer, iPhone customer, iPad customer, Apple Watch customer, and obviously, a Mac customer. Apple is a huge company, but they are not likely to throw away life long customers. This is a huge issue with developers, and I guarantee that Apple Is aware of that. Not supporting windows is a deal breaker for a massive amount of people, and just because you don't personally see the value in Apple keeping customers, it doesn't mean that apple does not.
you can virtualize the ARM version of windows, which has a 32-bit x86 emulator built into it.
Which of us doesn’t understand the technology?
(I designed numerous x86 cpus by the way, so maybe don’t be accusing people of not understanding things)
Please point me to a public iso of windows arm.
Oh stop it. Obviously microsoft doesnt sell it - yet.
But you took my point which was that Apple says they are definitely not supporting bootcamp, and that apple says you will have to rely on virtualization if you want to run other operating systems, and you pretended what i said is “no problem folks! Just use virtualization to run windows!”
I never said that.
My point is:
1) if you want to run windows you are probably **** out of luck
2) though, of course, it’s technically possible to run windows (assuming MS goes along with it, which they’d have to do for bootcamp too, by the way! If there is no arm iso available, how are you going to bootcamp?)
So everyone stop with the “bootcamp is needed!” and “bootcamp will definitely happen!” It won’t.
Even if Microsoft wants windows on mac, all you will get is windows in a VM.
As of right now it is not possible in any sense. Microsoft will likely release a public version of ARM, and at that point there will be no reason for boot camp to also come back in either next years macOS update, or the one after that. Until either of those things happen, it is not possible, and the concern that people are expressing towards it not being possible is legitimate.
Yes, they should absolutely be concerned. My point is only that apple will do nothing to solve it (they won’t support bootcamp) so it’s in Microsoft’s court - VM is available, and MS has to decide whether to release Arm Windows for it. But any time complaining about apple and bootcamp is not going to get anywhere.
It is not entirely up to Microsoft though. If Apple wants to move away from a decades long industry standard for personal computers, then it is on them to make sure that they are not losing customers due to it. If they want to retain customers then coming up with a solution for this should be a priority. Whether that be through customized virtualization, high performance emulation, or ARM bootcamp with a Windows version of rosetta 2, there should at least be a solution from the people that are creating the problem. It is entirely worth the time to express concern of this, because it makes it apparent to apple that they have a problem that they need to fix. I guarantee that apple watches these forums to see what people are thinking of their decisions, and if this helps show them that they need to solve this problem, then discussion on the topic is more than worth it.
Fact of the matter is apple doesn't need to support Windows anymore. It's on Windows to provide a proper arm version. People would be whining at MS.
First, the 12.9" iPP with smart keyboard is bigger, clunkier, more expensive, and less capable than an MBA. It certainly doesn't solve the problem that I don't want carry 2 laptops around. I don't understand why anyone would buy that smart keyboard.
Second, fwiw, I have a 10.5" iPad Pro my kids use to watch youtube. I cannot begin to describe how much I hate it and it's UI as a computing device. I find it clunky, counter-intuitive, and a horrible, miserable experience. It's a hacked together design by people who clearly hate technology and don't use the iPad. I could go on for pages about how much I loathe iPadOS and exactly why, but I understand that will not be the popular opinion here and I don't need everyone else to hate iPad to make me feel better about my life choices.
Suffice to say, I'd rather use 386 with Windows 3.1, Trumpet Winsock, and NCSA Mosaic than an iPad as my primary internet device. It's still a smoother, more intutive interface than iPadOS.
To be fair, iPad could be a good product, it just needs the UI rebuilt completely from scratch by people who actually love the concept of a tablet computer.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Apple don’t owe you or anyone else a way to run Windows apps.
They do not, but then they will not be receiving my money. That's the entire point of this topic. They do not need to do anything, but if they do not find a way to fix this problem, then a lot of people are going to be leaving the ecosystem.
Emphasis on your money. That’s fine - if the product doesn’t suit you, then don’t buy one. No one is saying you have to use an arm Mac if you don’t want to.
That’s your opinion and you’re free to hold it. Doesn’t mean it carries any weight or that anyone else will take it seriously, but you’re free to believe what you wish.
They are allowed to lose customers if they want to.
And they clearly don't mind losing these particular customers, because they figure they'll gain an order of magnitude more customers than they'll lose, both because they are no longer contributing to the legitimization of Windows (and more particularly the idea that Mac is only acceptable because it also runs windows), and because they are focussed on bringing the iOS/ipados developer ecosystem to mac to create much more new software.
If developers start leaving the Apple ecosystem, because they cannot get everything done with one machine, then that is going to end up harming the overall ecosystem. This seems like it could very well result in a regression back to before Mac OSX finally opened the Mac back up. Apple has done a very good job of predicting the future of computing in the past, but the key part of that is the "in the past" part. Everything apple has tried to push through in the last 5 years has been an objective failure. People are still using a ton of adapters for any computer that only supports USB c, the Touch Bar is still a gimmick, and their effort to overhaul the keyboard ended so badly that they had to implement a 4 year replacement program.
If they are right on this, and in 5 years 50% of new laptops are powered by ARM, then this is all moot anyways. If they are wrong, then this very well could end up hurting the platform more than anything. The people that they are trying to attract are the sorts of people that probably could use an iPad to do everything they need to do anyways. The Mac brand is as successful as it is, because people associate it with being able to get things done. If the first step into this is an announcement of the removal of a power user feature then that doesn't exactly spell well for what the brand is supposed to represent. Power users use Macs, and if they are not supporting power users anymore, then the entire brand identity will potentially be harmed.
I am really curious why so many people are arguing in favor of Apple removing a feature. This whole thread is literally people who use boot camp on a regular basis being told by other people that they are wrong for wanting a feature that Apple has been providing for nearly 2 decades. It's really weird. If you do not use bootcamp, then this whole topic should be completely irrelevant to you. Continuing to tell people that they are wrong for wanting to be able to use their computers similar to how they have been using them for years is really strange.
I bought a Macbook 2 days ago with hopes that they will find a solution for this by the time I need to upgrade next. Until they announce a real solution, I will not be buying any apple products. If there is not a solution by the time I need to upgrade my computer, then I will happily leave the ecosystem. I do not have any emotional attachment to Apple, and I will continue to use whatever platform is the best. For the time being, it is perfectly reasonable for us to voice our concern about a trillion dollar corporation potentially dropping the ball on providing well used features to a large segment of it's customers.
That's dumb.
Developer: "i need to get everything done on one machine. I need to code for mac, iphone, windows, javascript, all on one machine."
Apple: "sorry. no windows anymore, at least on x86 and unless microsoft decides to help you."
Developer: "well, if i cannot get everything done on one machine, i am leaving the apple ecosystem! I'm going to buy a Dell!"
Apple: "ok. have fun 'getting everything done' on your Dell. Except your dell won't run Xcode, so no Mac, iphone, iPad, apple watch, apple tv, CarPlay development for you! We wish you the best, though!"
You can setup a remote build server for that. You do not need to own a Mac to submit for App Store connect.