Why do you assume that your use-case is not working anymore? As long as you can get Windows running, you can stream via Xbox companion app.
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 Transitioning Macs to Custom Chips With 'Incredible' Performance Starting Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why do you assume that your use-case is not working anymore? As long as you can get Windows running, you can stream via Xbox companion app.
Thanks, did not know that - I think it's going to be a rough experience:Win10 for ARM definitely exists. Non-ARM apps on Win10 ARM are emulated. So, it's possible we could get Bootcamp as well as VM support through VMware/Parallels.
Windows on Arm documentation
Learn more about running Windows on PCs powered by Arm processors. Find guidance on how to build Windows apps for Arm64 devices or iteratively update your existing Windows app to take advantage of Arm64 native capabilities.docs.microsoft.com
"PCMark 8 works but the Creative test crashes and the Work test takes so long it’s pointless to run. PCMark 10 launches but the standard test is not supported. Cinebench R15 is 64-bit only and doesn’t run. Premiere is also a 64-bit only app these days. Blender has a 32-bit version but requires OpenGL 2.1 so it doesn’t work. MATLAB stopped providing a 32-bit version recently, but older x86 versions don’t work. And Sandra doesn’t work as I believe it needs to use an x86 driver. That’s eight benchmarks that don’t work, while nine did work, so about half."
Of course it's going to improve, but considering MacBook prices - and recent macOS flakiness, I will probably go to a Linux / Win10 laptop instead and customise the UI...
I'd say you have no idea, what you are talking about since apparently you never worked on a CPU design - your questions make this perfectly clear. So where should i start, when you are lacking the basics? I can try to formulate a bit more beginner friendly if you like.
Regarding the number of registers i am specifically comparing x86 vs ARMv8 and not generic RISC vs CISC - as i made it clear in my post.
Does the streaming of Xbox games work on the Windows 10 for ARM? But, to answer your question, Why do I assume it, the answer is: Because Apple hasn't mentioned one thing about Windows being able to run on the ARM-based Macs, yet they mentioned Linux. I don't think this was just an omission. You can't ignore the elephant in the room, so the reason Windows wasn't mentioned is due to some sort of issue they are having with running Windows on the ARM-based Macs. I'm sure they tired and there was an issue they couldn't overcome or it hasn't worked well so far.
could be, though it's architected in a way that really makes it just a composing engine over the kits (for now)
[automerge]1592934476[/automerge]
He's switched from defending x86 to defending the "concept" of CISC in general. And ignoring that the difference between RISC and CISC is generally *defined* by things like "CISC has few registers because operations read and write directly to memory" and "CISC, all else equal, needs more pipe stages" (because he starts comparing to exotic architectures which are not "equal" in all other respects. It's sort of pointless continuing when, as you note, there's a lack of basic micro architectural understanding.
Not sure why running native x86 benchmarks matters.
Not sure why one would run these under Windows on ARM rather than the native macOS versions?
When did you last purchase a machine? When were you planning to buy your next one? Why would you make any decision until you have some actual data about what these machine really are if you do not need to make a purchase today?
Windows RT was windows 8.x built for arm32.
That it was a commercial flop is irrelevant. My point is that Microsoft started “releasing” “the real windows” (as opposed to the previous windows ce, windows mobile etc which were completely different systems) on arm, a decade ago, and still haven’t managed to ship native office for it.
Your calm logic is not welcome here. I'll thank you to depart the premises with utmost dispatch.
You know what they say about assuming things.
No, you should not expect to be able to run x86 <anything> VMs and it’s not even safe to assume windows on arm VMs will work either.
Engineers and technical designers are usually very bad at relating to end users and also understanding how most users actually use technology.
Seems to be a couple of self-proclaimed CPU experts here that apparently think they know more than anyone else about how a computer both works and is used, when all they’ve mostly focused on is designing just one out of many components.
And they’ll probably take this as an insult even when it’s actually not. The point I’m trying to get across is that technology and hardware itself is useless on its own. It’s only good as a concept. It’s how it’s deployed and used that is the deciding factor, not the individual components.
Seems to be a couple of self-proclaimed CPU experts here that apparently think they know more than anyone else about how a computer both works and is used, when all they’ve mostly focused on is designing just one out of many components.
And they’ll probably take this as an insult even when it’s actually not. The point I’m trying to get across is that technology and hardware itself is useless on its own. It’s only good as a concept. It’s how it’s deployed and used that is the deciding factor, not the individual components.
Thats right, as i am having issues replying with a factual response - because i would have to dive deeper into architectural issues and not just scratching the surface - which in turn would leave you more puzzled.
I can however tell you this, every GP CPU architecture developed in the last 30 or so years have the properties i did mention to some degree, including RISCV and there are very good reasons for this. That is because architects learned from early mistakes.
Pretty sure they just won't work.
Someone needs to design a box you plug into your thunderbolt port that has an x86 on it and lets you run software on it.
I don't feel nearly as bad having a mid-2012 MacBook Pro (that isn't able to run macOS 11), and a Windows machine, while waiting on these new machines. Intel isn't going anywhere, but they're going to miss more revenue, as Apple leaves, and AMD takes more again.
I mean technically that could just be an x86 Mac mini, using ip over tb, and software each side to copy the binary, setup a socket, etc over eg ssh. Heck for VMWare you can already use it to connect to a remote esxi server over the network.
Indeed, it is not yet confirmed so i can give no guarantees apparently. I can tell you 2 things:
1) XBox app works on Windows ARM including game streaming
2) Windows ARM runs on a Linux VM (KVM) for instance on the Raspberry PI4.
So it is mostly up to Apple at this point. And there could be more issues potentially as for instance the question if there will be GPU and other drivers for Apple HW for Windows?
Perhaps you can first start of by demonstrating what I say as being inaccurate.
No, that's not true. That's just Microsoft's marketing. Non-ARM apps cannot be emulated on ARM. It's impossible. Only the most basic 32-bit apps work. There's not a single real-world commercial C++ application that works correctly. Everything that works is .NET. They're either painfully slow, or don't run AT ALL.
The benchmarks are an indication - especially if they don't work
There are no native macOS versions of the pro software that I use - and there never will be - e.g. Zuken CadStar, Altium Designer, 3D EM simulators (inc. Sonnet Software, Agilent ADS), Tektronix Signal-Vu (for real-time signal analyzer control and post-processing)
Whereas I prefer macOS for the day -to-day report writing, research and reading PDFs, web-based work and browsing, email and general terminal work.
Early 2021 would be a time-frame to replace my 2018 rMBP15 machine - which has butterfly keyboard issues as well, though not serious enough to miss it for 2+ weeks.
Looking at longer term trends for software and hardware investment for my business.
As I work at multiple client locations, always prefer using a single laptop rather than cycling around with 2 large workhorses - especially because keeping a MacBook and Win10 machine file synced is not easy (no - cannot use cloud services due to the nature of the NDAs and companies I work with)
This seems to be largely reflected in PE Ratios
Intel is "cheap" right now at an 11 PE
Apple is a 28 PE
AMD is 135 PE
nVidia is 71 PE
Apple's challenge is that it's so large that to grow earnings to justify that PE is not trivial.
Because people who need Windows means x86, not ARM. It's not about being able to run .NET applications, which already run fine everywhere. The issue is legacy x86 applications, which don't run on ARM.
If they run today on the Mac, why wouldn’t they when recompiled with Universal 2?
It is a depreciable asset yes, but I usually go for 5-6 years of life with my desktop macs. Three years wouldn't cut it for me, and I wouldn't want to be stuck on the intel platform when all the interesting things are happening on the other side.