Craig Federighi: Native Windows on M1 Macs is 'Really up to Microsoft'

[mazz0]

Do they allow you to install ARM Linux then? No licensing issues there.

 

[d7d19285f0bd48]

This is a big deal especially for businesses that invested heavily in Intel Mac’s over the years that need windows to operate alongside macOS.

Eh. Its not as big of a deal as it was even 10 years ago with the Tech Bubble 2.0 pushing browser/server based systems/technology into the mainstream.

Hell, you can even run legacy A/S 400 or Microsoft Project on the web/via a web browser these days. 🤷🏼‍♂️

 

[novakk86]

Common MS, I have no problem with license. I want run trying MSFS and Solidworks on speedy M1 chips.

What solidworks on windows on arm? You can play angry birds and that's it. Seriously, not even skype has a native woa client.

 

[pratikindia]

I have Windows on every Mac I use regularly. I would absolutely buy and install Windows on a new Mac if they made it possible.

You don’t have to buy Windows anymore. You can install without license and it will work. Some customizations won’t work, but its fine.

 

[shplock]

That would instantly make the MacBook one of the most popular Windows machines. It would decimate the Surface line of Microsoft products, especially the Surface Pro X.

By that same logic Microsoft would never have allowed MacBooks to run Windows x86 but they do.

 

[bniu]

That would instantly make the MacBook one of the most popular Windows machines. It would decimate the Surface line of Microsoft products, especially the Surface Pro X.

I doubt Nadella would mind, imagine all the revenue he could make with all those windows licenses to Mac users, and no need to support the hardware.

 

[shplock]

I have Windows on every Mac I use regularly. I would absolutely buy and install Windows on a new Mac if they made it possible.

It is possible, maybe not natively with Bootcamp (yet) but it can be done. Parallels showed in the WWDC 2020 event when apple announced Apple silicon that they are creating a version that will run on the M1.

 

[shplock]

Does this mean that the M1 MacBooks could conceivably dual-boot ARM Linux, given the right device drivers?

Yes because Parallels are creating a version of their software that runs Linux. They showed that off at WWDC 2020.

 

[shplock]

This is interesting. I didn’t even know there was an ARM version of Windows.

If I get an M1 MBP, I’ll still have my spiffy new 6-core Intel mini for virtualization, but it’ll be interesting to see what the future holds here.

The M1 can do virtualisation, that capability was showed off during WWDC 2020

 

[shplock]

Is there any chance Windows on an M1 is not through BootCamp and is more similar to Parallels?

That is what can be done at the moment (technically speaking). Natively is another matter.

 

[shplock]

I don't think you can run linux on any modern macbook at the moment. I'm all for it - I just don't think it'll happen.

Actually it can. Parallels showed Linux running on Apple Silicon back in WWDC 2020

 

[shplock]

It’s going to take Microsoft a while to do this but ever since Steve Ballbag left (hot though he is) they’re cool enough to do it. The limitation is - there’s no way apple would have involved them early on in the process. My guess is they’ve had sample Apple Silicon for around a year tops. I am sure they are getting on with this because
1) it makes sense commercially and for the dev community many of whose use macs, and
2) the more they get experience with ARM architecture the better - and it is in their best interests to push themselves here!

You give MS too much credit and assume that they know what they are doing.

 

[shplock]

Which won't let you run Windows because Windows for ARM is not available to end-users.

I am pretty sure that Rosetta 2 will sort that out.

 

[shplock]

Both Apple and Microsoft need to work together to bring Windows to market that can boot on the M1 machines.
The M1 based macs are not booting the same way as a run of the mill PC clone anymore, in fact they need boot code that's signed by Apple.

Even when skipping over the need to boot, a Windows copy compiled to run on ARM based machines is not going to have what it takes to make use of the entire Apple Silicon based mac (it's not enough to have ARM code, you also need to use the M1's GPUs, the M1's neural engine, all of the management of the system, etc. to make full use of the hardware capabilities the machine offers.

Even what Crossover does is only short term: it relies on the abilities of rosetta 2 - and that's unlikely to survive more than a few years after the last mac was sold using an Intel CPU before macOS goes fully Apple Silicon native as it's just a means to power through the transition, not a permanent solution.

In short I see this more as Apple stretching out a hand to MSFT to try to pull them in the bath and work together on what comes after bootcamp. But for MSFT to do that, MSFT will have a hard time selling the move to the likes of HP and DELL etc. who'll have a huge competitive disadvantage as they will not have access to the Apple M1 productline now nor in the future. And no other CPU comes even remotely close to the M1 at this time.

So in the end Apple is a hardware company and they told MSFT to play by their rules now, if they want to run on their hardware. They can do it simply because of how much more advanced the hardware is compared to the "standard" components used in the wintel world.

As a user: go without windows if you can. It'll make your life _much_ easier - I have -.

Dell and HP have no need to access the M!. They do not make their own OS.

 

[novakk86]

I have Windows on every Mac I use regularly. I would absolutely buy and install Windows on a new Mac if they made it possible.

Windows on arm != Windows
The software you have installed windows for just isn't there for Windows on arm and emulation is nowhere near as good as Apple’s solution.

 

[shplock]

Yeah, this is exactly what so many of us have been worried about. It's easy for Mac fanboys to decry any need to run Windows at full speed, but that's just not the real world for so many people. For many persons in my circle, both personal and professional, the ability to run Windows was in fact KEY to their ability to switch to Mac, period. Unless they wanted to lug two systems around all the time, which let's be real, the majority of people don't want to do.

I certainly home that the murmuring we've been hearing about Microsoft getting off their arse and actually making a good version of Windows for ARM is true.

The key fact is that very few people need to run Windows on Mac. For those who need to then there will be a way but it is not as important as you think.

 

[shplock]

Careful. Apple's CPUs dropped support for 32 bit applications completely. For good reason, it's probably good for 10% to 15% additional speed, but 32 bit support is gone. I wouldn't make any guesses what ARM code is running on Windows ARM.

I would, it is simple logic as explained.

 

[shplock]

I agree. M1 Macs lose the dual-OS flexibility and that can be a deal breaker for some.

I really don't know if the Windows-on-Mac market is big enough to warrant Microsoft doing this work, but I hope so.

These Macs are so powerful, that even many Rosetta2 apps run faster than native Intel, which is absolutely incredible.

For my part I use a company-issued Windows machine for work; all my Apple hardware is for personal use. And we've officially gotten to the point where the Apple hardware exceeds my ability to severely tax the hardware in any way.

Actually there was a whole section of WWDC that showed the M1 CAN dual boot and there is no problem except in people's minds.

 

[shplock]

I want native Linux on this, please.

Unfortunately, Apple is not very good at documenting their stuff, so Intel Macs with T2 are a sad story last I've had a look (not for Secure Boot — T2 is the sound chip too, and all hardware monitoring is done with it too).

Linux can run on M1, that was showed at WWDC

 

[shplock]

and yet microsoft just had their biggest ever quarter for the Surface product line (over $2B)

Because most of those machines were bought by Microsoft themselves.

 

[shplock]

I need run x86 windows not the half baked ARM windows. Without that, no ARM mac's for me.

Ultimately there is no difference to you between x86 and ARM windows.

 

[shplock]

That doesn't help sway MS to play nice with Apple if M1 laptops decimate Surface Pro X.

Hp and Dell have laptops that outdo the Surface and yet MS still license Windows to them.

 

[cult hero]

Wow. That's actually way more interesting than I would have expected. I just presumed the door was closed there but... shows what I know!

Seems like if it could run on an M1 it could also run on the A series as well.

I haven't dual-booted in years. I feel like the need for a majority of people using it has sailed as Mac counterparts—including MS Office—have caught up. (Before you respond, I am certainly not saying all people who use it. I'm not saying your use case isn't important to you. I am just saying you're a much smaller demographic than was considered worth holding back for.) Also, Bootcamp always felt like a total also-ran. It was pretty clear it was a product Apple supported as a necessary evil.

 

[shplock]

Microsoft will only build an ARM version for the M1 if they feel there is demand for windows based applications. MS Office has always been hugely popular with many Mac users BUT I am sure the number crunchers at Microsoft will have been already hard at work looking at the number of Windows installed on Intel Macs and the number of Microsoft applications being used on Macs because those Mac users will be the ones who would be installing Windows and Windows applications on to their M1. These figures are important because it will tell Microsoft if it is worth investing the time and money into making Windows ARM and Windows ARM applications. If the projections come back that not enough Windows installs and applications will make it worthwhile for Microsoft to spend time and probably millions on developing Windows for M1 Mac's then they wont.

Except that is wrong because MS will want to grab as many customers possible. How can they do that if they do not offer as product.
It is like saying you run a coffee shop but will not open a 2nd shop in an are because you do not think you will get a load of customers initially and yet totally ignore the growth factor.

 

[shplock]

Which is the MAJORITY OF THE WORLD. Yes, even in the US, where Macs have a decent user base it is only about 15%, so Windows is still the most used OS for both professional and personal computers in the US. In the creative fields, where MacOS is well appreciated Apple enjoys only 29% of total users, and in Gaming Microsoft crushes with a whopping 97%.

Which is why this will happen and people need to stop getting their knickers in a twist.