I don't see anything groundbreaking about it really. It's just a VM on a remote server sold as a service. These have been around forever.I guess this is Microsoft's answer for Windows for Apple Silicon. Just stream it.
Still quite groundbreaking imo. This also means people on older machines who cannot upgrade to Windows 11 might be able to do so through this (assuming the minimum requirement is not Windows 11).
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.
Microsoft's New Cloud PC Service Can Stream Windows to Mac and iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Partner's old MacBook Pro is getting creaky - and she would like a new one. 16". But the combination of a VMware VM running Windows and having to keep to an older version of MacOS results in jet engine fan noise much of the time. (Can't remember why that is - but there is a specific reason she cannot go to Big Sur.)
She needs two apps under Windows - Corel Draw (the MacOS version is a horrendous price for her use) and a piece of software which is highly specific to a piece of hardware and simply cannot be substituted.
Getting a last-of-the-Intels MacBook seems like a non-optimum move.
This offering seems a reasonable possibility.
That's a HUGE assumption, but I'm certainly hoping they do. To now, it's all been targeted at businesses.
Could be interesting and even useful.
My use-case would be developing iOS/iPadOS etc apps but with components of the software developed using Windows tools via Visual Studio, and technologies such as Xamarin. All doable with ease on the same machine using an Intel Mac and Fusion. Not currently doable using AS. I'm watching the Parallels/vmWare developments with interest, but this could be a workable alternative, assuming you have a reliable high speed internet connection, which I normally do. If I connect using RDP it would be great if I can expose local networking in a controlled and firewall manner to the cloud, allowing my remote Windows OS to access selected parts of my local network, including the Apple build tools, which is how Xamarin/VS works currently. Possibly dangerous, from a security point of view, but interesting....
My use-case would be developing iOS/iPadOS etc apps but with components of the software developed using Windows tools via Visual Studio, and technologies such as Xamarin. All doable with ease on the same machine using an Intel Mac and Fusion. Not currently doable using AS. I'm watching the Parallels/vmWare developments with interest, but this could be a workable alternative, assuming you have a reliable high speed internet connection, which I normally do. If I connect using RDP it would be great if I can expose local networking in a controlled and firewall manner to the cloud, allowing my remote Windows OS to access selected parts of my local network, including the Apple build tools, which is how Xamarin/VS works currently. Possibly dangerous, from a security point of view, but interesting....
Because it works 365 days out of the year. Apparently, it doesn't work on February 29th.
So iMac? A PC with above average computing power? His question still stands why uses this? If you said iPad or chrome book it would make more sense. iMac is way more powerful.
You don't think that Microsoft are getting sick of customers paying Citrix a fortune for something to make Windows more available? Rather than getting that money themselves.
So you are paying twice? Once for the Windows license on the company PC, and again for the Windows 365 licence?
it depends on your network speed.
I do something similar with a Windows VM setup for my iPad at home via VPN. If I need more advanced activity that the iPad can't do, I just use RDP to remote to the windows box. There's lag due to network performance sometimes. But overall, it works really well. I imagine this would be no different, if not better performing since it's on more robust servers and networks.
I also do similar for my staff at work usin VMWare Horizon's and thin client workstations. Users get a cheap dinky little thin client that when they power on, automatically connects to a centralized broker, and serves the users a temporary Windows VM dedicated only to them. Which then shuts down upon logoff
I see this as Microsoft recognizing with the "work from home' push of the last year, they want a competing product to the VMWare Horizons or Citrix, but with Microsoft recent direction of cloud services and Azure platform for everything, This is Microsoft's way of keeping you on their physical servers for their own purposes rather than providing an on premise version (like VMware)
The thing most end users don't realize is that with Microsoft, you don't just pay twice... you pay multiple times on-end.
Windows server? You don't just pay for that server, you have to pay for every single client that touches that server. using Windows as DHCP? every client must have a client access license.
setting up a windows server with VSphere HA? thats TWO licenses!
Setting up a cloud azure windows? Windows licenses, CALs AND Azure licensing.
Microsoft LIcensing is one of the most barbaric Anti-trust and anti-competitive abuses of their market position in the industry and nobody seems to want to question it.
EG: My Windows E5 licensing package gives me 200 windows 10 licenses for my users to install on up to 5 devices.
These 200 licenses cannot apply to windows 10 VM instant clones in Vmware, and I'm forced to have paid for annother 100 windows 10 licenses just for the VM clones. Than each of those required numerous CAL's since they touch numerous different windows servers.
the whole thing is a joke and 2022 I've already told executive here I will be migrating as much off windows as possible. It will likely save my organization hundreds of thousands of dollars in Microsoft licensing a year.
Not necessarily. If you are using an iPad, MacOS or Linux, you're only paying Microsoft once.
From a corporate point of view, it may make sense to some. IT can keep a fairly consistent control on the OS. Perhaps a few less barriers with other hardware failure. Given there's a crunch of silicon availability over multiple sectors including PC builders, this might help alleviate some of the hardware replacement cycles as well. As mentioned before though, this model is nothing new.
I work remotely using RDP and RDS to many machines and applications all the time sharing a 50Mbps internet connection without issue for its intended purpose.
Edit: hmmm... on second thought maybe there is a second cost there, but if it is priced like Azure servers, I think the OS is covered in the price of the monthly service.
Last edited:
these articles (here and elsewhere) are creating a lot of confusion among readers, this service is not for consumers and not even for freelancers, this is a service for companies with a certain numbers of employees, you cannot just rent one unit and use it at home (unless again you are an employee of one of these companies that have a contract with Microsoft)
Nah, this still requires an Internet connection, which means there will still be a market for virtualization. Unless Parallels can't figure out how to run Windows at a decent speed on Apple Silicon.
A terminal that can be powered via PoE is significantly less powerful than a iMac. Saying it would look like a iMac seems to have confused people that aren't familiar with the concept.
This is how an iPad will run windows before MacOS. I am so fed up with apple deciding what I can run and what I can't run on my devices that have been paid thousands of dollars
I can see it being very popular for businesses to do that. It is very expensive to buy, power, and cool offices full of Dell's. And even the lightest machine is markably more powerful than the needs here. A support centre with 1000 staff could easily have people just go to the first free desk and login to their environment that also follows them home if Covid 25 turns up.
Except that in the cloud means not available where you have no signal.
I won’t be ditching parallels anytime soon.
Yep. I could see a lot of the companies I work with use this strategy.
Isn't this old tech? I heard you can deploy systems in the cloud for a very long time now. You can even stream an OS using VNC since the black and white screen macintosh, am I right?
My head blew up when I learned that in the olden days computers originally worked like this as the client"terminal" was basically just a window to access the OS that laid in the main server.
Any way, neat way to replace VM if it really works as if native.... and have no problem Microsoft employees reading your files
My head blew up when I learned that in the olden days computers originally worked like this as the client"terminal" was basically just a window to access the OS that laid in the main server.
Any way, neat way to replace VM if it really works as if native.... and have no problem Microsoft employees reading your files
Looks like a winner for the target market of business customers (Office 365 Business and 365 Enterprise license holders). It gives their users the same desktop on multiple platforms so they can pick up a task where they left off on their Windows, Mac, or iPad client.
I don't know if enterprises will adopt this, because most of them are already balls deep in Citrix. However this seems like a good option for Azure based companies who have O365 at it's core.
Will Parallels survive without business customers?
This offering is for Office 365 Business and Enterprise license holders. Some spend a lot for Parallels licenses now and could dump most of those licenses and the associated support issues and costs.