You can also setup a remote build server for building windows apps. You do not need to run windows on your local machine to build window apps.
The logic being displayed here is baffling.
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
You can also setup a remote build server for building windows apps. You do not need to run windows on your local machine to build window apps.
The logic being displayed here is baffling.
It’s getting late so I’m just gonna cherry pick a few pearlers here.
You are aware that Mac OS X existed before Macs used intel chips right? The move to arm may be an upheaval for some but it’s nothing compared to the changes from os9 to X
Why would 50% of laptops need to use arm for Apple to be “right”? Surely they’re “right” if they can successfully design, manufacture and market Macs using their own arm based CPUs.
I still say you’re vastly over estimating how many people use boot camp, but regardless of that, claiming “what the brand represents” is an odd way to assume that they should continue to devote resources to support a competing operating system as a bootable target.
Yeah, but running apps on Windows is more important, bar none. Mac represents what 10% of the overall market? If your overall app experience is less than ideal on a platform due to build limitations then the Mac platform will always be the one that gets the shaft.
Ah, so this is the crux of it. If windows is most important to you, use a windows machine.
But importance isn't just tied to market share. Mac is 10% of the *PC* market, sure. But Apple is almost the entire PROFIT share of the mobile market, and the mobile market is much bigger than the PC market.
So if you want to develop for platforms where developers make money, then iOS is by far the most important ecosystem.
That is simply reality. There are more people using Android than iOS, and there are more people using Windows than macOS. A developer with limited resources will always prioritize the place where the customers are. If Macs can do it all then that is great, and it is a huge benefit to people looking for a development environment. If they cannot, then people will choose where they want to devote their resources, and it will be towards the platforms with the larger overall market share.
Android app sales are 5% of the mobile market profits. iOS generates 80% more app revenue than Android. Market share is meaningless if android users won't pay for apps.
(not to mention that you can easily code for android even on ARM macs)
They are the largest share of profit for the platform manufacturer, but not for developers. They may still be the larger share of profit for developers in the US, but who cares? The only market where Apple dominates is North America, and the world is a lot bigger than that. Huawei absolutely crushes Apple in everything, and you would be a fool if you were trying to prioritize your development for a platform that is entirely failing to gain traction outside of a handful of markets.
**** it, I’m done with this. If you think windows is so important, go use it. No one is stopping you. Continually making up asinine scenarios to somehow prove that a niche feature is somehow a core requirement for any user shows how little you understand other people’s use of Macs or computers in general (really, a dev who has apps for iOS and macOS and the web and windows and android but is somehow limited to a single computer and thus a single actual person doing any dev work? Yeah ok I think we can stand to lose a fart soundboard app that’s just A repackaged Web page.)
This is such a funny conversation/debate. This isn't the old Apple vs Microsoft. The old MSFT would think "What can I do to enhance the position of Windows or Office, at all costs." The new MSFT says "I'd love to make applications or services available on the Mac as long as I can get revenue from it.
You can bet that MSFT is working on making some changes to make this ARM transition easier for developers who use Mac - because they will make money from it. Just wait - announcements will be made.
You can bet that MSFT is working on making some changes to make this ARM transition easier for developers who use Mac - because they will make money from it. Just wait - announcements will be made.
I think that before the transition is complete that there will be an announcement to what the solution will be, and it very well will come in a joint project between Apple and Microsoft.
Nope. Worldwide app market: iOS share of the app market is 80% higher than android.
I highly doubt that, especially since no one even knows what the profits are for most Android stores around the world. Do you have a source that includes profits from the Huawei App Store?
Seriously? You are going to bring Huawei into it? Are they even allowed to sell android at this point?
This one says apple app store produces 65% of the mobile app store revenue.
I won't spend my day googling for you, but if you google you will see estimates varying from 65-80% depending on the analyst.
Huawei has a larger global market share than Apple. This is only showing Google Play, which is itself only a fraction of the Android Market. This is all completely besides the point though, and I really do not care to continue arguing about market shares when that has little to do with the underlying topic.
The point is that boot camp, and x86 virtualization, is for as we know right now going away. There are no plans as we know at this moment for a solution to either, and arm virtualization does not count, because it is by definition not x86. There will very likely be a solution at some point, but until there is a solution, we must assume that there isn't a solution. It is very clear by looking at the reaction to this, not just in this forum, but around this site, and on other sites that this could be a problem, and that is a deal breaker for many people. It may not be for you, but that is again besides the point. If you do not need to use boot camp, then this does not affect you, but it will affect many people.
Oh whatever. I’m sure there are a bajillion Huawei developers that are millionaires. Yep, Huawei is where the action is.
Good thing I can still develop for Huawei devices on arm macs.
Your point is silly. Nobody who develops for mac/ios is going to say “never mind all that. The lure of Huawei requires me to buy a dell.”
They will not buy a dell, they will buy a matebook. There are more people in the top 10% of global wealth in China than there are in the US, and the amount of difference between the two continues to grow in favor of China every year. Huawei is a completely legitimate platform, and the company itself is right now on track to pass Apple in global revenue by 2026. They also right now do not charge commission on their distribution platform at all, and they very likely are generating more global wealth than Apple. I do not see how anybody could write them off as you seem to be. They are without question one of the most significant tech companies in the world, and the only way that someone could act as they are not would be ignorance.
Nobody cares about Huawei. Are you Huawei's dad or something? I mean you've completely derailed the conversation and seem to just keep bringing up Huawei at every opportunity.
We need some numbers...I think there was a survey that suggested only 2% of Mac owners use Boot Camp. I'm sure a percentage also use hypervisors to run Windows or Linux, but these are relatively small numbers.
Apple is hoping that iOS users - who are a more significant user pool than BootCamp users - will be tempted to move to ARM-Mac if they can run their favorite iOS apps on a laptop or desktop.
We know Apple's history: "Apple giveth, and Apple taketh away....."
From my perspective as an IT consultant, I see far more developers using cloud services these days, than running VMs or Mac BootCamp.
I used to use Linux and Windows VMs all the time, but these days I just spin up AWS or Azure instances when I need them. It only costs a couple of cents and hour, and someone else gets to manage the hardware.
Sure, there are limitations - most VMs don't come with GPU support (although this is available) - and USB devices can be difficult to use with remote machines, but for a lot of stuff it's an easier solution.
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.
1. The fact of the matter is that BOTH Microsoft and Apple are being cagey on the subject. That may be the absence of evidence but it is not the evidence of absence.
2. If you flash back to WWDC 2005 and the time period leading up to and even past Macworld 2006 when the first Intel iMac and 15" MacBook Pro were announced, Apple's stance on getting Windows to boot on their systems was that they were not going to do anything to expressly allow it. It wasn't until April of that year when they'd issue firmware updates for those two models and the then-recently announced Intel Mac mini that allowed for booting and installation of Windows XP along with creation of a drivers disc via Boot Camp.
Given both of these things, fine, Craig said in the interview that there will be no direct booting of any other operating system. If you believe that is set in stone, then you really don't know your Apple history.
I challenge you to the same. You mention far many more times that it's a niche use case and have nothing to back that up with. If nothing else, the number of people in this thread that have stated that they use it relative to those that balk at it says more than a snarky "citation needed".
32-bit x86 WIN32 apps do JUST WORK in Windows 10 on ARM64. This is not news. And, while Windows 10 on ARM64 isn't widely out there, the reason is that it hasn't been well received DUE TO POOR HARDWARE SPEEDS. If Microsoft wants an opportunity to prove that Windows 10 on ARM64 can be worth a crap, THIS IS THAT GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY.
They're already trying to shift their development base to more modern app design anyway. Providing further reason to consider ARM as a viable alternative target to x86 MIGHT ACTUALLY have an effect.
Okay, your notion that people running Windows are not people using Apple's services is downright silly. The only two services people on Windows are not using is tv+ and News+, neither of which have that huge of a following. Plus, that's only really true of News+; tv+ can be used in Windows via a browser. All of Apple's other services (iCloud, Apple Music, the iTunes Store, etc.) are available to use in Windows. You can sync any iPod, iPad, or iPhone with a Windows PC. So, no, not buying that at all. Sorry.
As for Apple telling people that they won't support any form of direct booting: If you recall WWDC 2005, they said the exact same thing then too. They KEPT saying it up to and even after the release of the first Intel Macs at Macworld 2006. It wasn't until mid-way through the hardware transition that they reversed course, offered a firmware update to support BIOS emulation and the beta of the Boot Camp assistant. I get that Craig made the comment that direct booting another operating system won't be supported. If you believe that Apple makes these statements and that they're set in stone then you REALLY don't know your Apple history.
Actually, no, the louder you complain, the more they listen. Case in point, the butterfly keyboard. Case in point the demand that precipitated the original release of Boot Camp in 2006 against similar notions of "it's never going to happen, don't even ask". Attitude like the one you're espousing is what gets people nowhere.
It's honestly on both parties. Windows 10 on ARM64 is not distributed the same as the x86 variants. At least not for Home and Pro. It's also not licensed the same. Microsoft needs to adapt this to support Macs (for either direct boot or virtualization in another ARM OS) first and foremost. Then Apple needs to work with them on drivers and a means of installing it. Substitute Apple for Parallels or VMware if Apple is going to remain firm on their stance that ARM Macs will only be able to boot macOS on ARM. It's not insurmountable so long as all necessary parties have a desire to work on it. If the agreement has Microsoft put Windows 10 for ARM64 on the Mac App Store with Apple's coordination and blessing, then both parties stand to benefit as do users.
And you still haven't presented any reason to suspect that anyone is overestimating anything as far as the Boot Camp user base is concerned.
Why do you care so much about people complaining about a feature you don't even use. If they use or even depend on it, let them vent. What's your problem anyway?
Yeah... Granted this is just a guess, but I assume it's closer to maybe one million.
Sure, it was a pleasant convenience for a portion of macOS fans that Apple's move to Intel CPUs also allowed native use of Windows. Notwithstanding, if a significant problem with your purchase decision is that a Mac isn't compatible with (running) Microsoft Windows, there's a notable glitch in your selection method. You buy a Mac for macOS. Similar to a person that buys a Microsoft Surface Pro shouldn't complain it doesn't run macOS or buy a PlayStation 4 and complain they can't install Mario Kart.
And, yes, "options are nice." Apple provided Boot Camp and related packages, and said, hey, if you want to use Windows on your Intel CPU Mac, go ahead, here's stuff to make it work. They haven't made that offer or promise for Apple Silicon CPU Macs nor are they required to.
Maybe Apple has been in discussions with Microsoft about Windows compatibility and the upcoming Macs and both will embrace and provide the functionality. Perhaps not.
I don't know what you need. However, if the apps you prefer using and the games you prefer playing/desire are only compatible with Microsoft Windows, then I will indeed say, you should purchase a personal computer designed for Microsoft Windows, possibly one that is gaming-centric/optimized.
...
I don't mean to come off rude, just a reminder about the reality of making determinations and solving your own problems.
Last edited:
Even when the data is in front of you, you're exaggerating things. I went through this thread, and tried to mark posts (but grouped by user, because expressing an opinion multiple times doesn't make it more 'important') according do:
- wants BC
- thinks BC usage is "significant" (as in, not low)
- thinks BC usage is "low"
- stated no clear opinion.
Out of 65 unique posters, I saw 7 that "want BC", 5 that "think BC usage is significant", 10 that "think BC usage is low" and... wait for it. 49 who made no comment on the matter.
Even some of the people who use BC agree that it's not widely used.
Counter claim: you haven't presented any reason to suspect that my claim of "Every person everywhere always wears 'odd' socks, every single time they wear socks" is overestimated.
Bootcamp is an opt-in "feature", with a cost involved. It is not the default state of any Mac. Thus, the claim that needs to be verified is "a significant number of people use bootcamp". As "your side" (I hate that term but I honestly dont remember all your names or who claimed it first) is making that claim, it's your responsibility to back it up. I see lots of assumptions about who is highly likely to be using it. I dont think anyone has supported your claim beyond their own personal use or assumptions.
Conversely we've had people (some who even use it themselves) saying that it's vary rarely used by colleagues/associates amongst a wide group of people.
I'll add my own anecdotal input too:
Several years ago I was doing contract work for a development agency that had somewhere between 100 and 200 staff/contractors spread across every continent except Antarctica. By far, it was a Mac shop. People could choose what they wanted, but it was by far, a Mac shop. I knew of 3 people who chose Windows PCs. At the time, being able to test stuff in Windows-only browsers from a virtual machine was an amazing benefit. In the time I work with them - around 4 or 5 years - I don't recall ever seeing or hearing about anyone using Bootcamp in that agency, for anything.
Does that mean I think it was never used? No, of course not. (Heck even I tried it once, for ***** and giggles. I found it to be less giggles, more of the other one.) But I don't believe any significant usage would have gone un-noticed. "hold up Bob, I just need to reboot my computer to test this in Windows" isn't something you can somehow miss during a conversation.
There is now massively less need for that very usage of Windows-only apps for web-focused developers. That doesn't mean no one uses it. But remember, no one said, no one uses bootcamp, or no one needs bootcamp, or even you are wrong for wanting bootcamp.
All that is being said is, "bootcamp is not a widely used tool". That's it. Nothing more.
In my experience (no more or less anecdotal than yours), it's still important. It's not important among the vast majority of home users, but it's still important.
And it seems that neither of us have any information to support any claim that it is or isn't a widely used tool.