Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Microsoft Says ARM Windows Virtualization on Apple Silicon Macs 'Not a Supported Scenario'

Not surprising really. Microsoft have built themselves a fairly robust hardware business over the last ten years. It’s clear they see a future in that and so why would they openly invest in a feature that would benefit the competition?
 
dapa0s said:
Because you need to. There's no universal tool fit for every purpose.
Click to expand...

I don't care about every purpose. Just MY purposes. the M1 has been weighed, measured, and found wanting. I will check back with the Mx in a couple of years. But for now, MBP16 is the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Black Magic
I’d be curious on what the performance would be like for a straight up emulation solution similar to SoftWindows or Connectix VirtualPC. The software would emulate an x86 CPU at the base level and install whatever compatible OS and software on top of that. The final versions of these emulators for PowerPC Macs just prior to the Intel transition, while not ideal, were at least workable. CPU performance has grown considerably since then so an emulated solution could theoretically provide similar performance to a 5 year old Windows PC, which for many would be fine.
 
bradman83 said:
I’d be curious on what the performance would be like for a straight up emulation solution similar to SoftWindows or Connectix VirtualPC. The software would emulate an x86 CPU at the base level and install whatever compatible OS and software on top of that. The final versions of these emulators for PowerPC Macs just prior to the Intel transition, while not ideal, were at least workable. CPU performance has grown considerably since then so an emulated solution could theoretically provide similar performance to a 5 year old Windows PC, which for many would be fine.
Click to expand...
UTM is just such solution. Unfortunately it's way too buggy so far and Windows 10 x86/64 is WAY heavier than what we ran back then, so performance on the M1 isn't very good, especially if you are trying to run it on a MBAir! Something faster might make it acceptable speed.
 
iBluetooth said:
Why would MSFT want to limit their operating system to not running on M1? I think Parallels did a good solution, but I am afraid to buy that now as it may not last.
Click to expand...
I can tell you from a Ferengi POV, that it's not in MS interest, at least from a $$$ standpoint. Do you think they'd be able to recoup the R&D cost? Then there's the cost of support. Bottom line, there is no profit in it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wyrdness
bradman83 said:
I’d be curious on what the performance would be like for a straight up emulation solution similar to SoftWindows or Connectix VirtualPC. The software would emulate an x86 CPU at the base level and install whatever compatible OS and software on top of that. The final versions of these emulators for PowerPC Macs just prior to the Intel transition, while not ideal, were at least workable. CPU performance has grown considerably since then so an emulated solution could theoretically provide similar performance to a 5 year old Windows PC, which for many would be fine.
Click to expand...
If anyone is fine with 5 year old Windows PC performance then they should buy a 5 year old Windows PC rather than going through such lengths to try to shoehorn Windows into a Mac. If it's really THAT important for someone to run Windows then a Mac is absolutely the wrong machine for them.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: wyrdness, Black Magic, brucemr and 1 other person
4743913 said:
I don't care about every purpose. Just MY purposes. the M1 has been weighed, measured, and found wanting. I will check back with the Mx in a couple of years. But for now, MBP16 is the way.
Click to expand...
Did you seriously quote the Bible to refer to a computer processor? Wow.

ok, great, good on you mate.
 
So it's unsupported but might still run. Isn't that just the usual level of support we get from third party OS's running under virtualization? The real key is whether virtualization vendors support native acceleration drivers over the defaults.
 
Not surprising when Apple doesn't follow universal standards like UEFI BIOS and makes everything proprietary. AMD Zen 3 on 7nm on my Lenovo Legion Slim 7 has better performance per watt than my Macbook Air M1 at 5nm so upcoming 5nm Zen 4 will put it further ahead. Plus, AMD can run MacOS, Windows, Linux, BSD, etc. bare metal. M1 is looking like a repeat of PowerPC.
 
sirozha said:
I’m not quite sure how Microsoft may be able NOT to license Windows on ARM for use in a virtualized environment on Apple Silicon.
The only way they could do it is ban any virtualization of Windows for ARM on any platform.
Click to expand...
They don’t sell Windows ARM licenses at retail or through enterprise. They are sold only to OEMs.
 
Freeangel1 said:
Goodbye ARM Mac
Hello Intel or AMD Mac.

APPLE ditches INTEL
So in turn Microsoft Ditches APPLE.

See where the APPLE WALLED GARDEN GETS YOU.

I can't live without my Windows 11. sorry.
Click to expand...
Then get a Windows 11 PC. Microsoft hasn’t “ditched” Apple. They produce Office 365 and Edge, which run natively on Apple Silicon. My guess is that neither Apple nor Microsoft see Windows compatibility as a key priority for Macs. It isn‘t 2006 anymore.
 
mi7chy said:
Not surprising when Apple doesn't follow universal standards like UEFI BIOS and makes everything proprietary. AMD Zen 3 on 7nm on my Lenovo Legion Slim 7 has better performance per watt than my Macbook Air M1 at 5nm so upcoming 5nm Zen 4 will put it further ahead. Plus, AMD can run MacOS, Windows, Linux, BSD, etc. bare metal. M1 is looking like a repeat of PowerPC.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed the Hackintosh community for years, may I ask what's your current setup that runs MacOS and any up-to-date website you can direct me? Thanks, cheers!
 
Lights87 said:
Is there a realistic worst case scenario where even windows 10 is not available via parallels for M1 macs? I absolutely need some features of the windows version of microsoft excel debating whether to get an m1 mac
Click to expand...
No, Windows 10 on ARM works flawlessly.
 
Sasparilla said:
Odd for Microsoft to lock out those potential sales - they must think they'll come out ahead by denying themselves those. We certainly know which side of the equation Intel would want Microsoft to be on here.
Click to expand...
Supporting a platform they have no control over does not seem like a great way to spend resources. But Windows currently runs great under Parallels on M1. I suppose the market will decide
 
This is a huge problem for Apple Silicon Mac. With Intel Mac, you can still use Windows through boot camp which allow you to use windows software. But now, not anymore even with ARM version of Windows 11.
 
In related news, I will *not* be installing a cloth Kia seats in my Lexus.

In all seriousness, I don't game and only use Windows for work purposes and that still works fine through virtualization (my company runs AWS). I know other use cases (particularly gaming) need Windows, but I doubt the absence really impacts many business users / non-gaming consumer users.
 
Because Microsoft is making it's own inhouse ARM processor for Windows platform that will supposedly do exactly what M1 is doing for Apple.
 
iBluetooth said:
Why would MSFT want to limit their operating system to not running on M1? I think Parallels did a good solution, but I am afraid to buy that now as it may not last.
Click to expand...
The same reason Apple limits Mac OS to just one architecture (with just half a dozen computer models)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back