Microsoft Brings x64 Emulation to Windows on Arm PCs

[alien3dx]

Well, Apple can drop legacy support willy nilly. Microsoft even today still has to retain 32bit x86 support and even some win9x stuff. The fact that Windows 10 64bit can run 32bit x86 transparently is already an achievement imo. Now Microsoft has to emulate all of those into ARM. Obviously the wall is much higher than Apple's.

Maybe some people don't have this experience.

Windows also once support ITANNIUM (Intel 64 Bit proc) even in a very small market. That time era alternative only Red Hat.

 

[topdrawer]

kinda backwards

 

[canesalato]

If Windows for ARM ran natively on M1 hardware, I would buy a MacBook Pro

 

[anson42]

You got that right! I'm happy for windows users if they can use windows on a Mac but there is no
way I would install windows on a mac.

If you can virtualize Windows then you can avoid the inconvenience of Bootcamp. I used to run Windows in Parallels but I gave that up after finding native macOS and Linux – also running in Parallels – replacements. But if I had to again, a virtual machine is a good way to go. Hopefully we'll see that kind of support on M1 Macs in the near future because that seems to be one major blocker for many folks wanting to make the move.

 

[4jasontv]

If you can virtualize Windows then you can avoid the inconvenience of Bootcamp. I used to run Windows in Parallels but I gave that up after finding native macOS and Linux – also running in Parallels – replacements. But if I had to again, a virtual machine is a good way to go. Hopefully we'll see that kind of support on M1 Macs in the near future because that seems to be one major blocker for many folks wanting to make the move.

The issue I have seen is that local solutions have all been terrible for me. I have had better luck virtualizing on a server and streaming via a web browser than using Parallels. It eats up less local resources, has less lag, and is more compatible. Plus, it's a lot easier for me to justify reoccurring server costs than a subscription for a program that does one thing half baked.

 

[Alan Wynn]

If Windows for ARM ran natively on M1 hardware, I would buy a MacBook Pro

Apple was clear that it will not run other operating systems native.

 

[Analog Kid]

Pretty unlikely that they would know about it, but Intel would have hidden it from Apple, hence I would not count on it.

Yeah, that was just a standard "I'm not omniscient" disclaimer...

Here is a partial list:

1. It would require them to provide low level documentation for many systems for which they would not want to do that.
2. It would prevent them for changing the hardware interfaces at will. One of the big wins for their approach is that they hardware, silicon and software teams work together to produce the best product. Not having outside clients makes that possible.
3. It would create security issues (requiring they provide access to the secure enclave would be an example).
4. If Microsoft produced a terrible implementation, it would have an impact on the perception of the Apple Silicon product as a whole.

I'm certain Apple already has that low level documentation for their own teams. Alternatively Apple could provide the libraries to interface with their custom coprocessors. I'd suspect the first would be more likely.

I agree the ability to quickly iterate their designs is a key AS advantage. It wouldn't be on Apple to make MS keep up though, it would be on MS to fully utilize the hardware if they wanted to maximize their performance. As far as MS producing a terrible implementation, MacOS would provide a performance reference-- if we see Windows lagging MacOS at the same task on the same hardware, that should make MS look bad, not Apple.

I'll admit to not being all that familiar with how the secure enclave works, but if access can just be granted to someone then it can be stolen which makes it less than secure to begin with. I don't know for sure, but I doubt it's as simple as Apple having exclusive access to that functionality.

When the made the transition last time, they were in a much weaker position then they are now.

Were they? I'm having a hard time finding a good reference, but best I can tell Apple's PC marketshare was about 5 or 6% worldwide in 2006 when BootCamp launched and it still seems to be about 6 or 7% now.

Taking limited time from the engineers who would have to make this happen would be bad for them. It is not a cost issue, it is mindshare issue.

If it's not a cost issue, hire more engineers. Hire them in Seattle if that's best. Or, put more of the burden on Microsoft.

A perfect example as to why they would not want to do it. Currently, Apple’s Silicon team has one customer. Wether intentionally or two this would mean there were at least two. That is bad for them and they will want to prevent it.

Yeah, you're not wrong. But, again, I see this as more of an MS agility question than an Apple issue. I would fully expect Apple to take a MacOS first approach and leave it to MS and a liaison team in Apple to work out the kinks. The platform won't be a mystery here-- Apple will have it working for MacOS.

Microsoft cares about Microsoft. If hurting Intel is good for Microsoft, they will not care.

Right, but they'll be much more hesitant to burn bridges than Apple was because Apple took control of their own destiny while MS would be changing who they're dependent on. I’m not sure how this would play out in practice because Intel is at least as dependent on MS as the other way around.

One thing we will see is the difference between custom silicon and generic silicon, unless Microsoft spends a lot of money for a very small market and tries to develop their own.

I don’t expect that MS will make their own chips. I could imagine some other commodity player coming in though. It’ll take time though for anyone else to get good enough at it.

I doubt that. I do not think they see how bad their current situation is.

Sadly, I think you’re right...

 

[Dave-Z]

I found it amusing how the Windows version number jumped from 8 to 10, and stayed there perpetually

That was mostly because of lazy developers. When they would check which version of Windows was being run, they would only look for a leading 9 (i.e. Windows 95, Windows 98); if Microsoft had versioned their OS as Windows 9 it would have caused older applications to think they were being run on a really old operating system and things would break. Skipping to 10 fixes that easily.

Microsoft is also sticking with version 10 because with 10 they've switched to a more continuous release schedule in which they put out two upgrades a year as just regular updates. So in a sense there are no subsequent major releases, just a constant stream of new features and bug fixes.

Maybe they know something is coming soon from the x86 world that moots the M1 but otherwise, Windows risk being relegated to an inferior platform.

I doubt Microsoft has any additional information that Apple wouldn't also have; they're both big players in the market. As for what's coming in the x86 world... nothing? I mean, Intel's been pretty stagnant for years. AMD actually has some great hardware out that more manufacturers are now taking advantage of (though clearly not enough). AMD chip performance is really good compared to Intel, a lot closer to Apple's M1 from what I've read (when comparing performance to watt).

Windows is not going to be relegated anywhere, at least not anytime soon. It has a strong foothold in Enterprise markets and is still widely sold on consumer systems. But none of that matters because Microsoft already knows the world is changing and they are pivoting to being a services provider.

Why does ANYONE want to use Windows? Outside of development efforts and those would be very slim, I can't see why anyone would.

Because it's a solid operating system. Seriously. It's easy to be an Apple user on a forum and say, "Windows sucks." I know I swore I'd never return to Windows, but I have because it's works surprisingly well. Much like a Mac I never reboot my system unless there's an update that requires it (which realistically is about once a month; every 4-6 weeks). Memory management is amazing. My Surface Pro 7 has 16 GB RAM but I can easily get by with 8 GB (including some limited virtual machines with GUIs installed).

Windows has so much of what I need right out of the box. I have access to Linux terminals, Hyper-V for virtual machines, Chromium Edge is so good it makes Safari look like a joke. Hardware-wise the Surface line is a bit expensive but the Microsoft "tax" is a lot less than Apple's "tax". I absolutely love that I can use my Surface Pro 7 as a tablet, then attach a keyboard to have a full laptop, or plug in a monitor and have a desktop system. It's incredible.

The only thing that sucks about Windows machines is that hi-DPI displays tend to kill the battery.

Windows 10 today is not what Windows 7 was years ago. It's genuinely a great operating system and, given the choice, I'd use it over macOS without hesitation.

Apple was clear that it will not run other operating systems native.

Apple was clear about the exact opposite:

“We are giddy”—interviewing Apple about its Mac silicon revolution

Craig Federigh said the following in the above-linked interview:

As for Windows running natively on the machine, "that's really up to Microsoft," he said. "We have the core technologies for them to do that, to run their ARM version of Windows, which in turn of course supports x86 user mode applications. But that's a decision Microsoft has to make, to bring to license that technology for users to run on these Macs. But the Macs are certainly very capable of it."

 

[lusty]

So then Apple is following Microsoft because Microsoft released ARM support in 2017 and ARM laptop in 2019?

Sure, maybe Apple's M1 is faster but you're comments are funny because of how wrong you are

2012 actually for both. You may be thinking of Windows 10 but 8 also ran on Arm

 

[PickUrPoison]

2012 actually for both. You may be thinking of Windows 10 but 8 also ran on Arm

I’m not sure what exactly is being “first”-ed, but Apple made an ARM (touchscreen!) laptop last millennium.

Few remember the eMate 300 though.

 

[JosepPont]

0%: Chance that Microsoft will make Windows run on Apple Silicon.

100%: Chance that somebody else will do it.

In a near future wee will see the Hackindows! xD

 

[Xenobius]

What is Windows?

 

[alien3dx]

That was mostly because of lazy developers. When they would check which version of Windows was being run, they would only look for a leading 9 (i.e. Windows 95, Windows 98); if Microsoft had versioned their OS as Windows 9 it would have caused older applications to think they were being run on a really old operating system and things would break. Skipping to 10 fixes that easily.

Microsoft is also sticking with version 10 because with 10 they've switched to a more continuous release schedule in which they put out two upgrades a year as just regular updates. So in a sense there are no subsequent major releases, just a constant stream of new features and bug fixes.



I doubt Microsoft has any additional information that Apple wouldn't also have; they're both big players in the market. As for what's coming in the x86 world... nothing? I mean, Intel's been pretty stagnant for years. AMD actually has some great hardware out that more manufacturers are now taking advantage of (though clearly not enough). AMD chip performance is really good compared to Intel, a lot closer to Apple's M1 from what I've read (when comparing performance to watt).

Windows is not going to be relegated anywhere, at least not anytime soon. It has a strong foothold in Enterprise markets and is still widely sold on consumer systems. But none of that matters because Microsoft already knows the world is changing and they are pivoting to being a services provider.



Because it's a solid operating system. Seriously. It's easy to be an Apple user on a forum and say, "Windows sucks." I know I swore I'd never return to Windows, but I have because it's works surprisingly well. Much like a Mac I never reboot my system unless there's an update that requires it (which realistically is about once a month; every 4-6 weeks). Memory management is amazing. My Surface Pro 7 has 16 GB RAM but I can easily get by with 8 GB (including some limited virtual machines with GUIs installed).

Windows has so much of what I need right out of the box. I have access to Linux terminals, Hyper-V for virtual machines, Chromium Edge is so good it makes Safari look like a joke. Hardware-wise the Surface line is a bit expensive but the Microsoft "tax" is a lot less than Apple's "tax". I absolutely love that I can use my Surface Pro 7 as a tablet, then attach a keyboard to have a full laptop, or plug in a monitor and have a desktop system. It's incredible.

The only thing that sucks about Windows machines is that hi-DPI displays tend to kill the battery.

Windows 10 today is not what Windows 7 was years ago. It's genuinely a great operating system and, given the choice, I'd use it over macOS without hesitation.



Apple was clear about the exact opposite:

“We are giddy”—interviewing Apple about its Mac silicon revolution

Craig Federigh said the following in the above-linked interview:

thus shall not use windows , still old times shall ie in macos upon safari. And they should remake safari for windows again. Icloud have. Notes i access via browser. Only biggest missing is messages and airdrop. Reality how the i transfer file via macos via cable . I'm no idea ..

 

[lusty]

I’m not sure what exactly is being “first”-ed, but Apple made an ARM (touchscreen!) laptop last millennium.

Few remember the eMate 300 though.

View attachment 1692165

First to port their main OS to Arm I’d assume

 

[cupcakes2000]

I wonder if, assuming windows on arm gets a proper public release, and assuming it works with some kind of virtualisation software - whether apples Rosetta 2 software with be able, (or be tweaked to be able) to translate windows software.
That would be a boon for Apple if windows on a Mac could run legacy x86 windows software faster than windows machines were capable of.

 

[PickUrPoison]

First to port their main OS to Arm I’d assume

Thx, for letting me know, I didn’t have the interest to go back and see what they were arguing about.

I’ll never understand where ms thought they were going with ARM. iirc they went wrong right from the start, providing no capability for developers to port existing desktop apps.

 

[Marshall73]

I used to need a windows vm running on my MacBook Pro to run some support tools for clients but these are now Mac compatible and it’s been over a year since I needed the VM. I did keep a windows box at home to remote onto from my iPad Pro for a while but now that I am on my M1 Air I have no need for that either. The growing support from enterprise has been slow but is finally, for my needs, complete.

 

[ScottishDuck]

As much as it’s true that Microsoft’s x86 emulation efforts are comparatively poor compared to Rosetta 2, it should also be noted that a lot of the heavy lifting attributed to Rosetta 2 is actually because apple partially implemented x86 instructions in the M1 silicon.

 

[AnthonyHarris]

Not a competition... proceeds to put down rivals product. Okay, triggered

I’m saying it isn’t a competition because Apple has already won with regard to performance.

Edit: We can all argue over who did what when/first, but it’s irrelevant, so shh!

And anyone that comes here to tell me that Microsoft’s implementation of ARM is better than what Apple have put out will be laughed out of the forum.

 

[Xenobius]

As much as it’s true that Microsoft’s x86 emulation efforts are comparatively poor compared to Rosetta 2, it should also be noted that a lot of the heavy lifting attributed to Rosetta 2 is actually because apple partially implemented x86 instructions in the M1 silicon.

Where did you get this nonsense from?

 

[AnthonyHarris]

Surface Pro X is better as a package with LTE, better webcam, form factor, lower weight, thinness, touchscreen, pen input, etc. whereas Apple just put a new M1 SoC in old shells.

The Surface Pro X is a very limited machine with regard to software compatability/lack of speed, so it is more in line with the iPad Pro than any laptop, and the iPad Pros specs are better in pretty much every single way.

We will all laugh at the Surface Pro X again next year when it continues to fail to open a single photo in PhotoShop without being reduced to one frame a minute.

 

[jdoyle]

Slowsetta 1.0

 

[Maximara]

Sorry, how are you running Windows 10 Arm on your M1 Air?

Likely ala Video details ARM Windows virtualization on M1 Macs, nearly 2x faster performance than Surface Pro X. Next question.

 

[Maximara]

Apple licensed the instruction set architecture from ARM. What this means is that Apple agreed to implement the instruction set (but may implement instructions outside the instruction set).

So, M1 is binary compatible with ARMv8.4 (or lower ARMv8) code. Microsoft has nothing to do with it.

The possible difficulties arise from device drivers (including boot) in virtual environments.

We have already seen that not all ARM is created equal even at Apple. While they demoed Docker running on their prototype with the A12x it was found that Docker don't run on the M1 even though both Macs used Big Sur.

 

[Maximara]

Slowsetta 1.0

Reminds me of that old joke some Mac users back in the late 1980s and early 1990s; "Abort, Retry, Fail. Microsoft for have a nice day"