Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

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

Suckfest 9001

macrumors 65816
May 31, 2015
1,245
1,828
Canada
the 4790k launched in 2014. If backtrack 4 years from 2013 (give Intel a final year 'polishing' of design and roll out) then you get to 2009. Srouji left Intel in 2008.

There are older processors that have problems so some of rot started in his tenure, but he also didn't have a chance to catch it either after he left. ( lots of other folks didn't catch it either both inside and outside of Intel.) I suspect Apple may have sniffed out more their fair share of problems with Intel when they started intense , detailed semantic gap matching between Intel x86 and ARM (subset that Apple was tracking). But yes.... Intel should have been looking earlier.
That’s a lot of defence without citation lol, is that because he’s at Apple now?
 
Comment

DrV

macrumors member
Sep 25, 2007
53
27
Northern Europe
The andwer is very simple. After 5-6 years (if not earlier) macOS version compatible with these M1 macs will stop receiving updates. Hence the only safe way to continue uding them will be to install Linux, or other OS that will still receive updates. Virtualisation inside the, then unsupported/unpatched version of macOS, does not help you in this respect.
So, as as a result, this means fast obsolence. Needles to say, that is quite bad news for the environment, and for the owners of those machine, sadly :-(

I do not quite follow what you mean by saying virtualization does not help. If I have a virtual machine image, I can use it in virtually any computer. I have been using same VMware images on three different host operating systems.

The same applies to Docker containers. Their greatness is in the fact that Docker provides always the same Linux API regardless of the host.

Using native versions of the tools is a bit more prone to platform changes. Still, I would think homebrew is there to stay. (And if it isn’t, Docker is.)

Of course, Apple may do whatever in the future. But if I look back the last fifteen years with OS X/MacOS, the number of Linux tools not available as native MacOS tools has been decreasing.
 
Comment

theorist9

macrumors 6502a
May 28, 2015
562
306
The andwer is very simple. After 5-6 years (if not earlier) macOS version compatible with these M1 macs will stop receiving updates. Hence the only safe way to continue uding them will be to install Linux, or other OS that will still receive updates. Virtualisation inside the, then unsupported/unpatched version of macOS, does not help you in this respect.
So, as as a result, this means fast obsolence. Needles to say, that is quite bad news for the environment, and for the owners of those machine, sadly :-(
More like 10 years, if things continue as they've been. Generally the last OS you can install comes out 6–7 years after the hardware release date: The the oldest MBP, MBA, and iMac onto which you can install Big Sur are all from 2013; the oldest Mini is from 2014. Then that OS continues to receive updates for 3 years.

That may not be the case for new Intel Macs, b/c of the transition to AS. But hopefully it should continue to be the case for new AS Macs.
 
Last edited:
Comment

theorist9

macrumors 6502a
May 28, 2015
562
306
The demand for Windows ARM on Apple silicon will come from the business sector because for the rest of us, having a dual boot MacOS and Windows OS is a gimmick. If there is enough demand from the business sector for it and for programs to run on it that would allow Microsoft to turn a profit then they will do it otherwise they wont.

The business sector will be the driving force because there are many businesses, companies and traders out there who use Windows and Windows software to operate and run their business. If a Mac using business wants to do business with a Windows using business, and vice versa, along the line there will be incompatibilities, businesses do not want to have to spend valuable time making edits and changes to files because of minor incompatibilities when converting mac files to windows files and vice versa. If a business wants clients, they have to make sure they can operate with the client on all levels which includes the computer operating system they use and the software programs they use because if the client senses there is going to be problems, the client will go else where and the business loses out.

It therefore makes business sense for businesses that solely use Mac computers to be able to run native windows programs which match those that the client use. For example, an engineering firm is trying to win a multi million dollar contract but they only use Mac computers and the company they are trying to win the contract with only uses Windows software. So naturally it would make sense for the Mac using company to have a machine that can run both operating systems because the potential client would want to know that if any software issues occurred, the mac using company would be able to handle it without any problems and having a dual booting OS machine, of course the business would be able to say yes.

I have two mac computers at home that are dual boot (bootcamp) and I did it because I wanted to see how both machines would handle windows. I used the windows portion for about 2 days, thought it was cool then went back to MacOS and have not used windows on those machines since. I am sure the same can be said for many of us general consumer users. Microsoft is not going to develop Windows ARM for the likes of us because they know people like us will not use Windows as our daily driver, we will revert back to OSX. The business sector on the other hand will buy Windows ARM, they will also buy software produced for it and they will use it continually, they will upgrade, purchase new software and even purchase service agreements to make sure the software continually to function 100%.

Question is, is there enough people in the business sector to make it worthwhile for Microsoft to develop ARM for the M1 mac's or will it be a case of such businesses having to go out and purchase a Windows based computer. We will have to wait and see.
Not sure if Windows for ARM is going to help in the way you describe. If, for some reason, a business needs their consultant to run the exact same Windows x86 application they do, unless it's 32-bit, it won't run on Windows for ARM (because ARM Windows can't run x86 Windows apps natively—it has to be done though an emulator, and MS's emulator [at least currently] only works for 32-bit apps).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nicole1980
Comment

Maconplasma

macrumors 6502a
Sep 15, 2020
588
372
Um, your question was how it’s beneficial to Microsoft. This is one possible answer. Whether users want that is an entirely different question.
Well if you think Apple will want to license Microsoft to work on M-series Macs to help stop production of Mac-specific gaming when Apple is trying to get their products into gaming then Apple is a stupid company. And let's be honest, Apple is not a stupid company. There are plenty more reasons why Microsoft may benefit for allowing Windows on M-series Macs. To say to stop Apple from getting Mac-specific games is stupid.
 
Last edited:
Comment

s66

macrumors 6502
Dec 12, 2016
297
345
It's nice that you are able to live without Windows. The sad fact of the matter is that the Mac still can only run a fraction of the amount of software that a Windows PC can. Therefore, getting Windows to work on an Apple Silicon Mac will reenable users to be able to run every application.
Being completely windows free has been a long process, I've worked on it for many years. The start was easy enough and I got to a point of having only a very few things left in short order simply by having a mac (was using unix machines before that - coupled with a wintendo laptop for when I needed to exchange files with others like word documents etc.).

But for the last decade, I had one last thing I needed: testing websites we make in MSIE and Edge.
That last need is now gone as we've changed our policy to "have a standards compliant browser" and be done with the stuff holding us back both on the web and requiring me to keep our websites compatible with antiquated, proprietary browsers.
That meant I could stop my subscription on Parallels and get rid of it all earlier this year.

The windows only thing before MSIE and Edge was a piece of junk software to manage a PBX we had.

The freedom of not having to do windows anymore is huge.

My next target to get rid of is MSFT Office and Google services, but I can't convince others to make the move yet.

It's not without consequences: it means everything I buy that needs to hook up to a computer is checked to have mac versions of the software needed and if it's not there: to seek a competitor that doesn't have that windows-only requirement. But it's a small price to pay not to have to do windows anymore.
Sometimes it still backfires: A Logitech Harmony remote we use will have to get replaced when it needs to be reconfigured next time as Logitech's software is not mac friendly anymore (was ok when I bought it).

To be honest: the majority of end-users can get there easily. After all most users are happy even on an iPad.
- Just don't buy stuff that needs a windows machine only (pretty easy to check, and if you do it consistently not that much of a hassle)
- And adapt to the mac versions of software and/or alternatives of software. They do exist, sometimes even better than the "traditional" choice in the windows world, sometimes it requires learning to use the alternative.

When I first started this, the grief I got when exchanging files was much higher than what it is today to be honest. E.g. word documents back when using Office for Mac 2008 with users on a windows Office 2007 was troublesome in many cases. Now it's mostly painless (actually as much pain as between windows machines). And the same goes for other big packages to be honest.
Some of the proprietary stuff like Visio are harder to deal with to be honest, but the very few that I communicate that even have such a license know better than to send me their files by now.
 
Comment

chucker23n1

macrumors 601
Dec 7, 2014
4,634
5,824
Well if you think Apple will want to license Microsoft to work on M-series Macs to help stop production of Mac-specific gaming when Apple is trying to get their products into gaming then Apple is a stupid company.

I didn't say anything remotely like that, and that doesn't even make sense.

First of all, Apple doesn't care much about helping Microsoft.

Second, it's not clear to which extent Apple's help is needed.

Finally, the scenario (which wasn't mine) would be that Microsoft, not Apple, wants to prevent Mac ports.

And let's be honest, Apple is not a stupid company. There are plenty more reasons why Microsoft may benefit for allowing Windows on M-series Macs. To say to stop Apple from getting Mac-specific games is stupid.
I doubt it's a major factor, yes.
 
Comment

chucker23n1

macrumors 601
Dec 7, 2014
4,634
5,824
Not sure if Windows for ARM is going to help in the way you describe. If, for some reason, a business needs their consultant to run the exact same Windows x86 application they do, unless it's 32-bit, it won't run on Windows for ARM (because ARM Windows can't run x86 Windows apps natively—it has to be done though an emulator, and MS's emulator [at least currently] only works for 32-bit apps).
Well, Microsoft has already announced that x64 emulation is coming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theorist9
Comment

BanjoDudeAhoy

macrumors newbie
Aug 3, 2020
22
32
I once semi-jokingly said to a friend that the best Windows laptop I ever had was a MacBook Air (because of the trackpad and keyboard). If we get Bootcamp or the like on M1 Macs then this may well stay true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abazigal
Comment

theorist9

macrumors 6502a
May 28, 2015
562
306
Well, Microsoft has already announced that x64 emulation is coming.
Thanks, I didn't know that.

Just found this article, saying it was supposed to be released this month for those on the Insider release program (https://www.extremetech.com/computi...emulation-officially-coming-to-windows-on-arm). Not sure if that has happened yet.

Hopefully, with the added attention, they'll also get it to run better than their current 32-bit emulator, whose performance has been reported as hit-or-miss.
 
Comment

theorist9

macrumors 6502a
May 28, 2015
562
306
I wonder if Federighi is honest here or it's just false advertising. After all they won't let linux run on the M1.
Pragmatically they do. Federighi even references Linux already running on the M1 in the article. Apple showed Linux running on macOS on Apple Silicon back at WWDC 2020.

Apple doesn't let it run Linux run "raw" on the hardware. That's actually firmware boot issue, but not technically running. if the user can open a new linux terminal window and start/stop a apache service launched from a linux binary and then install a new version of linux Postgress and install linux kernel bugfixes into the OS image .... how is the Linux operating system not running ? All those raw binary opcodes executing on the M1 and it is not running on the M1?

Federighi is being precise. It is folks trying to loop in pre-boot issues that are drifting from the truth. That grumbling is more about "control" than about "running".
The WWDC AS/Linux demo used Parallels. How exactly does Parallels work? I had previously thought Parallels wasn't an emulator, and thus the OS's it virtualizes need to be able to run natively. Thus I thought the fact that Parallels could run Linux on an AS Mac meant Linux can be run natively there.

I.e., with my Intel Mac I thought what Parallels did was to create a virtual partition in which I could run Windows (or Linux) natively, simultaneously with MacOS. Since Windows was running natively, it ran much faster than it would through an emulator (see https://everymac.com/mac-answers/wi...lels-virtualization-emulation-comparison.html )

However, I just found this article, indicating Parallels is in fact an emulator (
https://www.parallels.com/blogs/what-is-a-virtual-machine/?amp ), i.e., that rather than creating a virtual partition in which Windows/Linux is running natively, it creates an x86 hardware emulation layer on top of which Windows/Linux can run. This would mean that, when Apple was demonstrating Linux-through-Parallels at WWDC, it actually wasn't running natively, but rather on top of Parallels' x86 hardware emulation layer.

So I'm confused.
 
Last edited:
Comment

peter2

macrumors regular
May 15, 2007
243
376
I do not quite follow what you mean by saying virtualization does not help. If I have a virtual machine image, I can use it in virtually any computer. I have been using same VMware images on three different host operating systems.

The same applies to Docker containers. Their greatness is in the fact that Docker provides always the same Linux API regardless of the host.

Using native versions of the tools is a bit more prone to platform changes. Still, I would think homebrew is there to stay. (And if it isn’t, Docker is.)

Of course, Apple may do whatever in the future. But if I look back the last fifteen years with OS X/MacOS, the number of Linux tools not available as native MacOS tools has been decreasing.
Virtualization does not help if the underlying hypervisor (macOS in this case) is not supported anymore - potentially full of security holes. What you want then is to replace macOS with an OS that still receives updates. Apple won’t allow you to install/boot that replacement OS though...
 
Comment

mi7chy

macrumors 604
Oct 24, 2014
6,795
7,790
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.

Microsoft uses AMD, Intel and Qualcomm so no issue supporting another if it makes financial sense.

M1 devices can't compete with Surface Pro X if someone needs 1.7# device, superior webcam, touch screen, pen input, LTE, use Microsoft software and services, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peter2
Comment

Abazigal

Contributor
Jul 18, 2011
13,522
11,942
Singapore
Microsoft uses AMD, Intel and Qualcomm so no issue supporting another if it makes financial sense.

M1 devices can't compete with Surface Pro X if someone needs 1.7# device, superior webcam, touch screen, pen input, LTE, use Microsoft software and services, etc.

It’s just as well. The surface pro X already has a hard enough time competing on its own merits. I is not certain there is even much overlap in potential customers for the MBA and SPX.
 
Comment

panjandrum

macrumors 6502
Sep 22, 2009
395
496
United States
Then don't buy a Mac. I run my entire insurance office on Mac software only. The few Windows machines we have are for emails and Office. If I primarily needed Windows I wouldn't have bought any Macs. Some of you should listen to yourselves here saying you can't get along in life without Windows. Then don't buy a Mac. Why spend $$$$ on a Mac only to install Windows? That's stupid. That made sense back in 2006. Today it doesn't.
You know, reading original posts is pretty much always a good idea, and yet amazingly enough it's never quite caught on. You're arguing the exact same point countless other mac fanboys have loved to argue (a valid point of view to those who only need Mac software, and which I *specifically mention* in my original post; but still a point of view that exists in a bit the ever-increasing world of reality-denialism). Nobody said this is about running majority Windows software; it's about wanting to be able to use a Mac; wanting to buy a Mac or Macs for your personal use, family, business or school, but absolutely NEEDING to use one or two or a handful of often very specific and/or custom software packages that ONLY run on Windows. Or heck, even WANTING to run a handful of Windows-only apps is a valid reason to wish it would stay possible, it's just a want instead of a NEED. In education (for example) there are a ton of crappy old Windows apps that simply aren't ever going to be updated for Mac. Things like Math assessments that teachers need to use. Now, I've already figured out one way around this for now, if we start moving staff to ARMacs - I'll use an existing brute-force MacPro with Parallels running a bunch of auto-launching Windows VMs and then create specific instances of Chrome Remote Desktop (or a similar utility) inside each VM so each teacher can easily remote into their own Windows VM whenever needed. No real Windows boxes required. But that's a system with a lot of potential failure points. Of course if you wanted to run all or nearly all Windows software you would buy a Windows machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peter2
Comment

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,734
503
Redondo Beach, California
Does this mean that the M1 MacBooks could conceivably dual-boot ARM Linux, given the right device drivers?
I think it is almost certain we will see Linux on the M1. But no current Arm-based Linux distribution will run on M1. It is more than just "drivers". The M1 is a complex chip with a cross-bar switch for memory, many non-CPU cores. It will take a while for Linux developers to understand the M1. But first, they need to get their hands on one of them. That could take a while.

I'd expect to see Docker running on M1 first and that could be almost as good as booting Linux.
 
Comment

avonord

macrumors regular
Mar 8, 2007
116
24
Gotta be blunt here. Are you listening to yourself? Why in the world would anyone buying a Mac want game developers to be discouraged from writing Mac-specific games? That's so ridiculous. It's just the opposite in fact. People want more Mac-specific games since Windows ports generally suck so badly. Don't buy a Mac then if that's your frame of mind. I realize you were addressing my question but then your money should be invested in a Windows machine, period. Obviously you're a Windows fan that is supporting Microsoft's well being. SMH. Apple doesn't make Macs for people to use Windows on them. There would be no point in Apple making MacOS at all then. By your mindset we as consumers should only be running Windows. I can't believe after all these years some people still have this mindset.
Dude. I was answering your question on why Microsoft would want to allow windows on arm to run on apple silicon. I already have my m1 mini on order. Chill.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: Maconplasma
Comment

Emanuel Rodriguez

macrumors 6502
Oct 17, 2018
352
580
Would ARm windows run on a M1 with “just” new drivers? I’m not sure, as M1 design is Apple unique but using Arm instruction set...
Microsoft clearly has an interest in the Mac community as they release Office for Mac...
The base ARM instruction set is the same everywhere (it's required to be). The only question is whether or not ARM Windows would take advantage of the M1's more advanced features. It doesn't have to, and it'd still run great even if it doesn't, but it would run better if it does.

If the laptop can boot multiple operating systems, there is no doubt that Microsoft could make it happen.
 
Comment

Emanuel Rodriguez

macrumors 6502
Oct 17, 2018
352
580
He's right. Windows ARM exists, and works well, but is still OEM only.
There's no reason it couldn't stay that way. Would be interesting if Microsoft could work with Apple to streamline the bootcamp process, and install Windows right from a downloaded Apple OEM image. Would make things a bit simpler when it comes to driver installation.
 
Comment

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2003
1,399
3,291
Anchorage
This is actually incorrect. Apple's CPUs support the full ARM instruction set. They may have added their own, but that doesn't mean Windows wouldn't work. Standard ARM is a subset of Apple's ARM, so anything that will run on it will run on Apple machines. That's why Parallels is able to virtualise standard ARM Linux distros on M1 Macs.

I would like to point out that even if MS Windows is re-compiled for the M1 architecture that doesn’t mean you would be able to run normal MS windows apps. Those would all have to be re-compiled as well. If X developer doesn’t want to port an App to native OSX I seriously doubt they’re gonna want to spend the effort to get it working on the MS Windows version for the M1 Mac.
 
Comment

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2003
1,399
3,291
Anchorage
We have already done this dance a long time ago....

If emulation isn’t going to be fast enough then you might wanna look into the x86 processor cards.



If they could do it back then maybe they can do it again.... 😂
 
Comment

Tech198

macrumors P6
Mar 21, 2011
15,280
2,002
Australia, Perth
i question the whole value of the "it's up to Microsoft"

Apple's just pushing a ball down a steep hill.

Even if was possible, Arm-based version of Windows wasn't popular for a reason. Microsoft will go where the money is, which is the larger native x86.
 
Comment

Manzanito

macrumors 6502a
Apr 9, 2010
511
650
That doesn't help sway MS to play nice with Apple if M1 laptops decimate Surface Pro X. :p
But the revenue generated from selling windows on arm licenses to mac owners could compensate the profits lost because of a drop in surface units sold.

Anyway, surface offers things macs don’t, like touchscreen and stylus support.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.