This isn't possible (yet). There are a couple ways it might happen, but no firm timelines. The M1 native versions of Parallels/Fusion that are coming out soon will be able to run virtual machines of other Arm-based OS's, but they won't have an x86-64 processor emulation layer and so can't run x86 Windows. See DrV's post with more details (above, #75 in this thread).
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.
CrossOver Allows x86 Windows Apps to Run on Apple M1 Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You do know of OpenRCT2? It runs natively on Intel Mac's so I'm guessing Rosetta 2 will work it fine, and guessing an ARM version will be out at some point since it supports so many platforms. https://openrct2.org . I use it to get my RCT addiction satisfied .
I have no needs - whatsoever - of running Windows apps...
...and, yet, this is awesome!
I Remember - back in the day, about 20 years ago - running Borland IDE emulated in Virtual Desktop (?) on my PowerBook G3 aka Pismo. I could finish about half of my assembly programming assignments on that. That was cool. Back then, the Pismo ran Windows emulated quite nicely, albeit slowly. I can only assume emulation software has become better since.
...and, yet, this is awesome!
I Remember - back in the day, about 20 years ago - running Borland IDE emulated in Virtual Desktop (?) on my PowerBook G3 aka Pismo. I could finish about half of my assembly programming assignments on that. That was cool. Back then, the Pismo ran Windows emulated quite nicely, albeit slowly. I can only assume emulation software has become better since.
Last edited:
No Big Sur build out as yet, but it should be out - soon, I hope.
You’re misunderstanding the linked article. Wine works to run ARM Windows applications on ARM platforms. It doesn’t run x86 Windows applications on ARM platforms.
You’d need to add an additional x86 binary translator/emulator to make x86-on-ARM work. WINE itself explicitly does not do that (the clue is in the name...)
An emulator simulates the actual hardware while a translator turns the code into something the CPU can understand
Right. Or another way of explaining it is that translators like Rosetta2 are like re-compilers.
Instead of taking source code and turning it into CPU instructions like a normal compiler, they take CPU instructions for one architecture and convert it into instructions for another architecture.
The statement I was addressing was "WINE simply won't run on a non x86 processor (without something like Rosetta)" That version runs on an ARM Platform does it not?
Nevermind there is Hangover "a project started by Stefan Dösinger and André Hentschel to run x86_64/x86_32 Windows applications on aarch64/ppc64le/x86_64 Wine." It does this via "a modified version of Qemu" and "thunks, lots of them handwritten to understand in which situation a pointer is valid and in which situation it could point to a random address and should be ignored, and how to handle writes to resulting structures in case of errors etc."
To build this project you need:
- The dependencies to build a 64 bit Wine (./configure --enable-win64)
- The dependencies to build qemu (in particular glib)
- x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc (exactly this name)
- i686-w64-mingw32-gcc (exactly this name)
- About 5gb of disk space
Wow this run very very bad!
i remember my c2d 2007 MacBook Pro could do better with boot camp...
i remember my c2d 2007 MacBook Pro could do better with boot camp...
The fact that it runs reasonable well at around 20 to 30fps before dipping into single digit fps with water scene points to bottleneck with either iGPU (hardware) or DirectX to Metal graphics API wrapper (software). Rosetta 2 doesn't appear to be the significant bottleneck here.
Meanwhile, on the Linux side DirectX to Vulkan wrapper has very little overhead and compete with DirectX in frame rate. Perhaps Apple should've adopted industry standard Vulkan to remove one potential bottleneck.
Meanwhile, on the Linux side DirectX to Vulkan wrapper has very little overhead and compete with DirectX in frame rate. Perhaps Apple should've adopted industry standard Vulkan to remove one potential bottleneck.
Last edited:
I figured it would blow goats out of a catapult.
I tried ax86 emulator on the PowerPC and ugh that was sloooow.A game running through multiple levels of emulation on a v1.0 low-end chip that's built on an entirely different architecture than the one it was designed to NATIVELY run on. And at this early stage, people are complaining about dropped frames!!! Give it a chance!
Yes, you are right. All fanless 10 watts ultrabooks can run this game under varios layers of emulation with zero optimization.
All those people so quick to say gaming on Apple devices is a no-go, really need to see how it develops over the next few years. With the chips Apple are starting to build now, I’m sure developers are going to start to come on board. It all depends on how many people buy these new computers and what the demand is.
if Apple release some ridiculous powered GPU it’s going to be hard for game developers to ignore.
if Apple release some ridiculous powered GPU it’s going to be hard for game developers to ignore.
Exactly. This is a great proof of concept. These people had, what, 2 days to work on this? Give them a few months, or better yet, give them a helping hand.
I'm waiting for the M2 or whatever they'll call it. My work Mac has 40gb of RAM (16-16-4-4) and for just a handful of projects at work, I really need at least 32. I'd like to run a few apps that currently don't work on Wine, but if they keep making improvement, we'll definitely have a winner.
You obviously lack any technical knowledge so you don’t see the meaning of this demonstration.
Maybe those benchmark columns in other news are easier to understand for you.
Does anyone know if this also includes Microsoft Remote Desktop? I’m pretty ready to pull the trigger now, but my wife has been using the MacBook for her work from home and it needs to be able to run that. The late 2013 MacBook Pro we have is running it though it’s slowing down. But if the M1 can’t run that yet then we still have to wait...
While i'm in general impressed what I have seen the M1 do
(- especially when i take in to account that this is the Cheap one that i should compare to Intel I3 )
This is a Clear example of what it CAN NOT DO - fps drop to 7 (or even lower) and a screen freeze - NOT impressed with the user experience - it might still be nice showcase if you know all the engineering behind it - how powerful it its to give this level of performance.
But for most of us, who are USERS... we tend to focus on the USER experience.. witch here is really bad.
(- especially when i take in to account that this is the Cheap one that i should compare to Intel I3 )
This is a Clear example of what it CAN NOT DO - fps drop to 7 (or even lower) and a screen freeze - NOT impressed with the user experience - it might still be nice showcase if you know all the engineering behind it - how powerful it its to give this level of performance.
But for most of us, who are USERS... we tend to focus on the USER experience.. witch here is really bad.
Remote Desktop is a native 64-bit macOS app, so Rosetta 2 should be all that is needed to get it running. And Microsoft is still releasing updates, so the next update will probably be universal and Apple Silicon native.