I’d say they’re pretty damn close. I’ve been running an ARM Linux VM using the tech preview before this one and it was really stable for day-to-day work.
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.
Parallels 16 for M1 Macs Gets Technical Preview 2 Update With New Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Looks like it's about $6b for devices and c. $22b for Windows. The devices are a larger proportion than I expected. But it's revenue, not profit, and I imagine Windows has much higher profit margins than the devices.This is actually easy to find.
Filing shows where Microsoft is really making its money; reveals M&A spending; adds Netflix, Hulu, Tencent to list of rivals
Microsoft may be toying with the idea of buying Tik-Tok, but more than ever, its bread-and-butter is basic cloud services and server software for businesses. Speaking of M&A, Microsoft was… Read Morewww.geekwire.com
Given that breakdown, it’s safe to say Microsoft is happy for you to use their services and software regardless of what you are using them on, whether that’s a Mac or an Android tablet, as long as it makes them money. And it’s been that way for years.
Well then you're saying that Macs are useless unless they can run Windows. By this logic there's no reason for Macs to exist. We should only be buying Windows machines since they can do everything that Macs can do. Every time I tell people here about post types like yours they don't believe anyone would say such a thing if they are on an Apple forum. I honestly don't know why Apple bothers to make Macs if the world thinks they are nothing but useless expensive toys if they can't run Windows. SMH.
"targeted to specific audiences"? Like the ones who use web-browsers, watch streaming video, run Office productivity software (including MS Office), use e-mail, video conferencing, chat, take and process photos, listen to, record or compose music, edit videos, use social media....
Or software developers writing desktop or web-apps in all the major languages, using common dev tools (OK...Docker isn't ready, I'll give you that).
Those "specific" audiences that comprise 95-98% of computer users?
Must be a niche product..... that is only a toy...right....<SMH>
I am sure companies like VMware and Parallels are working at ways of running x86 VMs on M1 (VMware has implied as much in a blog post, but with no ETA). That may take a while, just because it's moving outside their core expertise.
It's interesting that Codeweavers already has Crossover Wine working - programs which work under Wine seem to function as well on the M1 as they do on an x86 Mac.
It's interesting that Codeweavers already has Crossover Wine working - programs which work under Wine seem to function as well on the M1 as they do on an x86 Mac.
worthless. APPLE gated community only on APPLE silicon
Thats why I'm sticking with Intel.
So your Video encodes 2 minutes faster on ARM.
BIG DEAL. Backwards compatibility and choices RULE.
Thats why I'm sticking with Intel.
So your Video encodes 2 minutes faster on ARM.
BIG DEAL. Backwards compatibility and choices RULE.
Every damn laptop I have had before this M1 has been so hot while holding it on my stomach but this one doesn't get hot at all, NEVER go back to Intel.....
The xbox is irrelevant here, they don't sell the xbox's OS separately. Glad you've restained yourself from bringing up mouses. It's interesting, that "people here" are an irrelevant minority when they want a feature/product you don't like, but relevant when it comes to Windows sales.
You can't say that Microsoft doesn't make money on Windows licenses because they do--a very large amount of money. But what I think you are saying is that selling individual licenses isn't something that Microsoft makes much money on. Their large licensing deals with OEMs is where Microsoft makes money on Windows not individual licenses sold at retail. OEMs aren't going to pirate Windows obviously.
I suspect that if a legal version of Windows on ARM is going to happen, it will only be through a license deal with Parallels and/or VMWare. That way they don't have to worry about the pirating problem. Of course this might mean that neither Parallels nor VMWare are allowed to sell the VM software without a copy of Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is pretty famous for requiring such restrictions (though I don't know if they can legally require it there are plenty of ways to get the same effect).
It looks like Docker is working on getting QEmu x86 emulation working on the M1. Their documentation implies it is already working but I haven't done any extensive testing to see if that is true. A very simple container that ran x86 Linux and did command line
uname -m and it showed x86_64.Edit: I haven't had any success at getting QEmu x86_64 emulation working directly on the M1.
Last edited:
This is disturbing. I need to run Windows in a virtual Window fo an M1 Mac to be useful. Until then I will stick with my 2019 MBP.
Not getting it the wrong way, but let's not get emotional about Microsoft making 'anti-Mac ads'. Of course, they would be happy if you bought a Surface as it's more revenue for them. No surprise there...
Samsung is also making 'anti-Apple ads' but they are still happy to sell hundreds of millions of screens and possibly other components to Apple, and they even produced silicon for Apple until very recently. At the end of the day, these decisions are about whether something makes business sense (and are on a billion-dollar scale), not about emotion. Emotion is what drives marketing (i.e. ads).
If Microsoft sees that Windows for Arm runs well under Parallels, if there is demand (from corporate users, developers and others) and if they have minimal costs in marketing and selling that by bundling it with Parallels and letting them handle that, they will license it.
They have not licensed it yet because it does not run perfectly (it runs well enough but there are issues) but I am sure this is under consideration in Redmond.
It is also beneficial for Microsoft to get more traction for Windows for Arm to encourage developers to port their applications so they will not say no to a couple more million devices running that particular version of Windows.
Last edited:
This entirely depends on the software you need (or want) to run.
If it's available on Apple Silicon, is reliable, well supported, and runs faster, why would you choose Intel?
Would you choose a 1990's Ford that does 12 miles to the gallon (20L/100km) or a Tesla?
Apple Silicon is clearly not a silver bullet for everything - gaming is limited, and x86 VMs are (currently) a no-go. Your favorite or essential software may not be supported.
At the end of the day, does it do what you need, and is the user experience good? In my case, it is, and I have little need for backward compatibility to things I no longer need or use (like Windows VMs). I still have some older Wintel PCs for legacy software, and there is a good selection of pay-as-you-go cloud services if you don't want to maintain multiple machines.
And if you're doing a lot of video encoding, 2 minutes faster, 20 times a day, is a significant amount.
The M1 Macs just fly....it's a fantastic experience, and is only just the start.
Have you thought about running Windows in an Azure, AWS or GCP instance? Or using one of the gaming-oriented services that provide remote PCs? Do you need to cut and paste between VM and host?
To the people replying in this thread: did you even read the article before posting it?
It's already possible to run Windows 10 for arm in Parallels, and it already run most Windows x86 apps.
If you want to whine at least do some researches before writing down a rant.
It's already possible to run Windows 10 for arm in Parallels, and it already run most Windows x86 apps.
If you want to whine at least do some researches before writing down a rant.
Just because it is possible doesn't make it legal. Most businesses and professionals won't use unlicensed software. It's just asking for trouble. On the other hand, if you are testing Parallels and Window on ARM for future use, that is probably not much of a problem.
I wonder if Parallels has made any changes specific to Windows 10 for ARM64. My guess is not, seeing as it's not an officially supported guest OS for Apple Silicon just yet.
The Apple Silicon version of Parallels, like the Intel version of Parallels, isn't emulating. It's using the same architecture as the host OS.
No. VirtualPC, as far as the Mac is concerned, ran virtual machines that EMULATED x86 on PowerPC. In that case, there was an actual architecture emulation happening.
The Apple Silicon version of Parallels, like the Intel version of Parallels, isn't emulating. It's using the same architecture as the host OS.
I remember having some version of Mac (PowerPC or whatever came before) where you also had a Pentium chip on a card that you stuck into an expansion slot (SCSI? PCI?) that allowed you to run Windows natively. I think.
Too bad we can’t expand our Macs so much anymore.
Too bad we can’t expand our Macs so much anymore.
Nobody from the automation industry uses Apple (if not running virtual machine with Windows). Don't get me wrong I love Apple hardware, but I hate the fact that in order to buy Apple M1 I still have to carry another PC with me.
Last edited:
In a few years, I'll just be traveling with two laptops due to this ARM switch. It isn't just Windows for me but Intel based applications on Linux. Parallels is dead on arrival for me with M1.
Yes, I use Quicken 2020 for Windows and it works about the same on the M1 MacBook Air as it did on my Ice Lake MacBook Pro.
It would be very easy for Microsoft to prevent the Windows on ARM beta from running on M1 Macs right now. For starters, they could allow downloads only directly from Windows on ARM PCs. They could add a check that does not let it install if it detects an Apple hypervisor or non-Qualcomm processor. They could file legal action against Parallels.
Of course Microsoft would prefer someone buying a Surface Pro over a MacBook or iPad. But that doesn't stop them from selling Office for Mac and iPad, or making Edge available for Mac.
Clearly never had his testicles roasted editing videos on his lap.
The number of users running the technical preview of Parallels on an M1 and an insider version of Windows on Arm has to be vanishingly small compared to the effort required to stop its use. That doesn’t mean that Microsoft won’t block it in the future. It’s also possible that Microsoft hasn’t made a determination about supporting the M1 yet.
I think everyone making the assumption that running WoA on the M1 is a slam dunk from Microsoft are getting ahead of themselves. We really don’t know what the thinking is inside of Microsoft. The silence on this policy is quite stark. Microsoft isn’t really known for keeping its future plans secret.