I was afraid of that. As a software developer, being able to run Windows through virtualization was a huge part of the appeal of a Mac. I could develop on a platform I prefer and test on the one that 95% of my company's clients use. This will probably be a dealbreaker for me, unfortunately.
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
Since 1987 I have been using Macs for my professional work. I will truly have to start purchasing Windows PC to continue my work. I think the transition could be great for consumers, but for some professionals this will be then end.
I am too, in this situation.
Luckily I wasn’t a ‘Pro’ back when I had my iBook. That transition did not cause me any trouble whatsoever
Today, dual-boot truly gives the best of both worlds, and quick restarts on my 16’ really make this process feel seamless.
Also, you can bet my 2009 Mac Pro isn’t going anywhere soon. I may have thrown in the towel at Catalina, but now it lives a second life with a 2060S and a 650Ti if I wish to boot Mojave. And after that? A third life as a file server, maybe.
These are many pages old at this point, so it may not have been worth my time to reply since both posts have probably have better replies by the point but... in case they don't...
In the case of commercial products, Parallels own advertising on their site for Parallels desktop promotes the product as a way of running Windows on macOS. While they have not announced any plans to emulate x86 and continue supporting existing VMs from older Macs, they definitely have people who know how to pull that off. They're already a year ahead of their biggest competitor (VMWare) because they ship the only VM solution capable of simulating a modern DX12 graphics card. I've been using VMWare Fusion for the past 10 years, but it sounds like I'll probably end up switching products in a few years when AppleCare runs out on my primary Mac and it's time for me to get another.
There's a brief statement on CodeWeaver's forums from an employee regarding this. My interpretation of the post is that they think the existing build should work on ARM Macs right now via Rosetta - WINE is not virtualization so Rosetta should be able to translate it. In another 3 years or so when Apple is fully on ARM Macs and wants to drop Rosetta to save space, that is probably when CodeWeavers will have to deal with the situation.
It is extremely safe to say that. Apple isn't going to be the one to confirm that, unless Microsoft wants to sell ARM Windows directly to Mac users. Apple was never responsible for the Virtual PC and Virtual Machine products in the past and there already exist open source solutions for emulating Windows. Someone already posted earlier in this thread (after my post) about an open source QEmu port to iPad which was capable of running older games. From that standpoint, it's already been done since iPad apps will run natively on Apple Silicon Macs. I'm not talking even about commercial products yet, but there are also similar solutions for ARM based 'computers' like the Raspberry Pi to run Windows via emulation. In short, "it's safe to say there will be ways to run Windows" because it has already been done before on ARM platforms.
In the case of commercial products, Parallels own advertising on their site for Parallels desktop promotes the product as a way of running Windows on macOS. While they have not announced any plans to emulate x86 and continue supporting existing VMs from older Macs, they definitely have people who know how to pull that off. They're already a year ahead of their biggest competitor (VMWare) because they ship the only VM solution capable of simulating a modern DX12 graphics card. I've been using VMWare Fusion for the past 10 years, but it sounds like I'll probably end up switching products in a few years when AppleCare runs out on my primary Mac and it's time for me to get another.
They released the 64-bit Catalina version back in December. I mentioned in another thread that I feel sorry for them, because they put a bunch of effort into that only to have it be mostly negated a year later. However, there have been experiments in the past that combine WINE with x86 emulation - all of the .exe's are emulated but then call native WINE builds of various Windows DLLs. There's a wiki page on the WineHQ site about doing this with ARM linux.
There's a brief statement on CodeWeaver's forums from an employee regarding this. My interpretation of the post is that they think the existing build should work on ARM Macs right now via Rosetta - WINE is not virtualization so Rosetta should be able to translate it. In another 3 years or so when Apple is fully on ARM Macs and wants to drop Rosetta to save space, that is probably when CodeWeavers will have to deal with the situation.
Solved the same way as one can do currently.
I do both ARM and x86 linux server code development. I currently use an x86 MacBook and remote desktop (or X or VNC or ssh) to my ARM servers (Pi 4's) and AWS Gravitron instances.
So, next year, I'll just swap: use an ARM MacBook, and remote desktop (or equiv.) to something like an Intel NUC running Linux, x86 Docker, Windows VMs, et.al. or to Azure.
There was a time that this would have been a showstopper for me. I was once a heavy user of VMWare Fusion to run a variety of images (Windows and Linux) on demand. Now I see no point. I run my Windows and Linux images on demand in AWS.
I suspect that the move to cloud computing figured prominently in Apple’s decision to modernize the platform without worrying about supporting every OS.
I suspect that the move to cloud computing figured prominently in Apple’s decision to modernize the platform without worrying about supporting every OS.
Well.. so Apple is transforming its Mac line into niche products? Maybe I can live without bootcamp but I do need to find a way to run the apps I need like Matlab, Android Studio etc. and some games too. Otherwise I'm going to build a real good looking mini itx pc with my Dan Case I left in the basement for upcoming days.
There are many native ARM builds of Linux, therefore they are running a non-x86 version. This means you can't run a native x86 Windows build at all. You would need an ARM version of Windows.
If you have a VDI capable workflow then this works well.
But that's why I struggle so hard here. Why break the workflow for so many to gain, so far, only claims of better battery life? The VDI capable workflow would work just as well on an iPad Pro and afford all the same benefits marketed here. Allowing developers and professionals flexibility to pick the right tool for their workflow.
It was very odd to me during the keynote that they didn't really have anything to market to developers on what this change brings. It felt more like a pitch to consumers with stuff like battery life and performance per watt concerns.
The keynote is targeted more toward consumers. Take a look at the State of the Union video, or some of the sessions about moving apps to Apple silicon for more detail.
Did anyone post this link yet? Not specifically saying they'll be able to run Windows on Mac, but it would be the page to watch as they say they'll add more information as it's developed.
www.parallels.com
Application and Desktop Delivery | Parallels RAS
Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) is a complete application delivery and VDI solution empowering the creation of digital workspaces! Read more.
www.parallels.com
So why not run Windows for ARM? Is it that much different from regular Windows?
I imagine a lot of people who used to heavily rely on virtualization, like me, have found native solutions or server development use things like Docker.
Even in web development we found having a dedicated Windows machine was way less of a pain than having to mess around with VMs and frankly, it’s so much less painful than a decade ago.
Most of my VMs have been Linux for the last 4-5 years.
In the circle of devs I work with all of us used Windows VMs or Bootcamp years ago. None of us do now. I’m certainly not speaking for everyone but I can’t imagine my group is unique.
Even in web development we found having a dedicated Windows machine was way less of a pain than having to mess around with VMs and frankly, it’s so much less painful than a decade ago.
Most of my VMs have been Linux for the last 4-5 years.
In the circle of devs I work with all of us used Windows VMs or Bootcamp years ago. None of us do now. I’m certainly not speaking for everyone but I can’t imagine my group is unique.
You do know that VMWare is already doing optimization for ARM. They announced it in a tweet. If they are doing it then so is paraells. Everyone needs to calm down
please provide a factual basis for your statement that a version of MS Office for Apple's Silicon --- not ARM mind you but apples SoC with a lot of other custom components for graphics, memory, ML, etc -- won't be the full version? There is no technical reason you could not port the full MS Office suite to Apple's SoC.
Does like no one pay attention
You do know that VMWare is already doing optimization for ARM. They announced it in a tweet. If they are doing it then so is paraells. Everyone needs to calm down.
You do know that VMWare is already doing optimization for ARM. They announced it in a tweet. If they are doing it then so is paraells. Everyone needs to calm down.
This is concerning.
I was afraid something like that would come and seeing only a Virtualized Linux in the demo made my feeling a bit worse; actually that was correct.
Virtualization has been quite widely adopted in the last decade. I see a lot of (usually Linux) VMs sent by one dev to another in my field, and nobody cares what machine was used as a host to generate the VM (Mac, Win, or Linux). Now, if even for Linux hosts a special ARM version has to be generated, this compatibility goes away, and I see a lot of people who will not like this change.
It is too early to complain, we have to watch the news and see what will work in six months, but this is definitely a growing concern for me...
I was afraid something like that would come and seeing only a Virtualized Linux in the demo made my feeling a bit worse; actually that was correct.
Virtualization has been quite widely adopted in the last decade. I see a lot of (usually Linux) VMs sent by one dev to another in my field, and nobody cares what machine was used as a host to generate the VM (Mac, Win, or Linux). Now, if even for Linux hosts a special ARM version has to be generated, this compatibility goes away, and I see a lot of people who will not like this change.
It is too early to complain, we have to watch the news and see what will work in six months, but this is definitely a growing concern for me...
Judging from this thread, this demographic thinks they’re much bigger than they really are.
No 64 bit Windows programs and even 32 bit programs take a huge performance hit. Also no Steam or gaming either. Not many use Boot Camp but your average Mac user is a person who surfs the web and does homework... the 2% who use Boot Camp are mostly programmers or developers.
The real problem is not so much Windows for ARM, but any program you want to run must also be written for Windows for ARM, which is not that popular at the moment and hence few Apps support it.