Producing an ARM based virtualization App and being able to run windows (x86 platform) are two different things
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.
Rosetta Won't Support x86 Virtualization Apps Running Windows
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm guessing that Parallels and VMware will be working on this, but it's not going to be an easy process.
Current Virtualisation works well because in general your Windows OS in Parallels is talking to the hardware. There are a few low level instructions that previously required software emulation, but in general those are now handled by the Intel VT instructions built into x86 chips. So when you run Windows on a Mac via Parallels it's almost like just running it installed in Bootcamp, there will just be a lightweight hypervisor or similar routing the instructions.
That's a whole different ball game with ARM, you can't virtualise x86 on ARM so Parallels would need to move to entirely emulating an x86 system and that's going to have a significant performance impact. For normal applications, that in general won't need the instruction access that virtualisation software does, you can use something like rosetta to translate on the fly, that's what windows 10 on ARM does with win32 applications, but even that has a performance hit.
Sure I can run an ARM Android or Raspberry Pi emulator on Windows, or an ARM iPhone emulator on a Mac, but doing things the other way round, that's a pretty big deal. I have no doubt that the performance of Apple's ARM chips is going to be impressive, but I don't think it can compete with Intel or AMD offerings at the moment and even when it can, having to emulate x86 is never going to provide the performance that you currently have on Intel based Macs.
Current Virtualisation works well because in general your Windows OS in Parallels is talking to the hardware. There are a few low level instructions that previously required software emulation, but in general those are now handled by the Intel VT instructions built into x86 chips. So when you run Windows on a Mac via Parallels it's almost like just running it installed in Bootcamp, there will just be a lightweight hypervisor or similar routing the instructions.
That's a whole different ball game with ARM, you can't virtualise x86 on ARM so Parallels would need to move to entirely emulating an x86 system and that's going to have a significant performance impact. For normal applications, that in general won't need the instruction access that virtualisation software does, you can use something like rosetta to translate on the fly, that's what windows 10 on ARM does with win32 applications, but even that has a performance hit.
Sure I can run an ARM Android or Raspberry Pi emulator on Windows, or an ARM iPhone emulator on a Mac, but doing things the other way round, that's a pretty big deal. I have no doubt that the performance of Apple's ARM chips is going to be impressive, but I don't think it can compete with Intel or AMD offerings at the moment and even when it can, having to emulate x86 is never going to provide the performance that you currently have on Intel based Macs.
Easy! There is MS office for Windows on ARM. This is a native 64 bit ARM application.
You can use it on Surface pro X for example.
Exactly the same as the common Windows X86 version.
Linux also has feature heavy applications like LibreOffice and GIMP. You can compile them for ARM
and use them on various ARM hardware. Exactly the same as on Linux/X86.
i was going to pull the trigger and get parrallels years ago
i'm probably ok that i didnt - i use separate osx ios win hardware
i'm probably ok that i didnt - i use separate osx ios win hardware
Also consider knowledge set. Does Paralells have the skill set to write an emulator? Its a lot more complicated to produce a X86 emulator then tapping into the hardware's virtualized technology. I'm not saying virtualized apps like Parallels is easy to create but rather its a completely different skill set.
This has never been a hardware issue, a PC could quite happily run Mac OS in the same way that a Mac can run Windows. It's purely a software licence and driver support problem, Apple don't want you to do it so they prevent it via the Mac OS licence where as Microsoft don't care if you're running Windows on a Mac, they just want you to be running Windows.
Hmm. No windows= no Revit= no buy for many Architects I know. A lot of us like to run Revit on Imacs because the hardware looks so much better than windows PC boxes.
Just because Rosetta doesn't support VM software doesn't mean that software makers can't create a native, Apple silicon-based virtualization solution. In other words, update Parallels to work natively and not require a Rosetta translation layer.
As a developer, I'm curious about the technology Apple is going to release in order to run efficiently docker on new macs. Without a good support of containerization Apple risks to loose many professionals in the software development sector.
For me at least, without the ability to run a full fledged windows environment at the outset, I would not get a new mac. Both environments are important.
VMware used to offer emulation (I still have a copy of VMware fusion 2 from the PPC days), so I don't see why they wouldn't do it again. But the best solution might be to run ARM Windows in a VM, which then has the ability to run x86 Windows apps through emulation.
I doubt that they do - at least not quickly. Although there are x86 emulators around that they might build on.
Day 1, looks like no Windows on ARM Mac. Day 365? I would rate the chances as better than 50/50.
I reckon that Microsoft may end up being the saviour here. They currently produce a Windows on ARM product that supports 32-bit x86 apps and seem set to launch a version that supports 64-bit x86 apps too.
In 2022 I could see a combination of options such as slowish Windows emulation, plus remote desktop access to a cloud server, a game streaming service, plus ports of Windows apps as filling the gap for a lot of users. For the rest... well the Dell XPS range is fairly nice!
Many web and backend developers use Macs (and linux) ... what they need is docker and linux support for ARM which already exists...
Furthermore this move by Apple coupled with the above, will result in 50% of production and developer cloud vms in the next 3 years to migrate to ARM, which means linux, docker (and any other containerization technology) will be optimized even more for it...
Microsoft will follow with proper arm support for windows... they already started despite their crap implementation...
Yes some may be feel disappointed now... and try to move to windows... then after 6 months of crappy font rendering, numerous unneeded software and bloatware, telemetry even to monitor if you "cough", missing crucial quality developer productivity and utility apps, missing the Apple ecosystem integration and many more... will migrate back to Macs and if needed they will build a secondary pc or esxi box or cloud vm, just for selected software.
I program in .NET Core heavilly the past year and use SQL Server... I use SSMS and SSIS a lot and need windows (for pure .NET Core development Rider destroys Visual Studio), but i remote desktop either from a Mac or an iPad pro to a pc dedicated for that...
Conclusion... don't get panicked... wait and don't be the first adopters... 90% of the obstacles will get resolved in the near future... and don't move to windows prematurely because most of you will get disappointed!!!!
Furthermore this move by Apple coupled with the above, will result in 50% of production and developer cloud vms in the next 3 years to migrate to ARM, which means linux, docker (and any other containerization technology) will be optimized even more for it...
Microsoft will follow with proper arm support for windows... they already started despite their crap implementation...
Yes some may be feel disappointed now... and try to move to windows... then after 6 months of crappy font rendering, numerous unneeded software and bloatware, telemetry even to monitor if you "cough", missing crucial quality developer productivity and utility apps, missing the Apple ecosystem integration and many more... will migrate back to Macs and if needed they will build a secondary pc or esxi box or cloud vm, just for selected software.
I program in .NET Core heavilly the past year and use SQL Server... I use SSMS and SSIS a lot and need windows (for pure .NET Core development Rider destroys Visual Studio), but i remote desktop either from a Mac or an iPad pro to a pc dedicated for that...
Conclusion... don't get panicked... wait and don't be the first adopters... 90% of the obstacles will get resolved in the near future... and don't move to windows prematurely because most of you will get disappointed!!!!
I teach in a college, and all of the Macs in our labs are set up to dual-boot Windows.
Losing BootCamp capability is going to force some difficult decisions when the next upgrade cycle comes around.
Losing BootCamp capability is going to force some difficult decisions when the next upgrade cycle comes around.
Wont support may be misleading they can't support it, most Virtualisation these days depends upon Intel vt-x extensions, Intel ISA is proprietary so apply can't emulate it. The best support Apple can give for Virtualisation on its chip is provide ARM Based Virtualisation extensions, but in order to run a windows the windows has to be ARM Windows. Which is why Apple Demoed Linux, which probably was ARM Based.
According to AppleInsider only 2% of Macs run Boot Camp. Obviously when you add Parallels and Fusion that number goes up, but I doubt that even 10% of current Mac users run Windows. Whatever percentage it is is skewed toward developers and “power users” who tend to be more vocal.
Windows compatibility was a double-edged sword. Sure, it enabled the “switchers” in the mid 2000s, but it isn’t as if there was a big migration of apps from Windows to the Mac. If anything, marginal apps were less likely to make it over, since people who really wanted them had the option of running Windows on their Macs.
They might still support Bootcamp because Microsoft provides ARM Windows on Surface X. The real problem is Would Microsoft optimise their Binary Translation layer to work properly. Cuz many of those x86 apps run poorly on ARM on Windows.
The A12Z is already faster than the Ice Lake i5 in the new MacBook Pro and it is basically a 2 year old design. I’m sure Apple has faster chips ready for the first Macs with Apple Silicon. That’s not to say that x86 emulation will be any good on them, but they should run native code very well.
Not surprising. And there is an ARM version of Windows 10 for those that really need it.
Most that need to work with VMs do so remotely, rather than running the VM on their machine. This poses an issue for some general users but most serious VM users shouldn't see much impact here.
Most that need to work with VMs do so remotely, rather than running the VM on their machine. This poses an issue for some general users but most serious VM users shouldn't see much impact here.
Am I the only one that remembers the microcode vulnerabilities with the Intel microprocessors?!?
I'm sure security / privacy (which is Apple's big selling point these days) factored heavily into this decision to switch. I think this was debated for a while due to Intels delivery schedule problems not synching up with Apple's demands. But, the surfacing of the Intel chip security vulnerabilities was probably the tipping point.
Apple has said that Boot Camp will be present only on Big Sur for Intel Macs.
Have we ever had a major MacOS release that didn't require us to buy an upgrade for Parallels? Doesnt seem like big news the current one won't work on the next Apple release. Now, if parallels next update doesnt support both Arm and Intel, well that's their fault.
It’s possible Microsoft will make a retail version of Windows on ARM available, but unlikely, at least for now. For starters, a MacBook Pro would likely run it faster than Microsoft’s own Surface X. Second, it probably isn’t a big enough market. Apple sells about 16-20 million Macs a year. Maybe 10% (probably far less) run Windows in any form.
That said, if Microsoft thinks making Windows on Arm available for Apple users will improve its popularity overall, it might release it eventually.
