If Microsoft thinks they can expand the popularity of Windows for ARM by releasing a Mac version, they’ll probably do it. The current version isn’t ready for prime time, but they may be close.
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 used to pay for Parallels until now every year, but I don’t
Know if I will renew. I don’t even know if I started a VM 3 times this year... I can probably live without it. Docker on the other end is crucial. But I can understand if x86 images cannot run. Maybe we will find a way to run this eventually without too much performance drop. Engineers are good for solving problems.
Know if I will renew. I don’t even know if I started a VM 3 times this year... I can probably live without it. Docker on the other end is crucial. But I can understand if x86 images cannot run. Maybe we will find a way to run this eventually without too much performance drop. Engineers are good for solving problems.
I'm not suggesting the old x86 binary translation mode would be used in a new native ARM-based VMWare Fusion. Just that it might allow a version of the Intel-based VMWare Fusion achieve Rosetta 2 compatibility to provide basic support for x86 guest OS as a stop-gap until a native ARM-based VMWare Fusion with a new emulation technique can be developed.
MS is held back in making major forced changes and removing certain compatibilities by its market share especially with enterprise market which can be slow to change. But yeah I agree when they do put their foot through the door to try something new, they do it half hazardly...
I am guessing Parallels applied to the Quick Start Program and once they receive the DTK Mac Mini, they will be hard at work trying to get that Mac Mini to successfully boot a virtual copy of Windows 10 x64.I'm guessing the issue is that Rosetta 2 doesn't support the Intel VT instructions currently used by Parallels and VMWare for hardware accelerated virtualization.
Configuring Virtual Machine Processor Settings
You can configure processor settings for a virtual machine, including the number of processors, the number of cores per processor, and the preferred execution mode for the virtualization engine.docs.vmware.com
VMWare at least used to have an option to disable Intel VT and used binary translation for virtualization, but I believe it only worked for x86 guest OS which is probably why it was removed from recent versions of VMWare Fusion and Workstation. They could presumably restore the binary translation option to provide x86 guest OS compatibility for Apple silicon Macs through Rosetta as an interim solution until a native Apple silicon solution is developed.
I run a Windows VM in VMware for work, so I'll have to find another solution. I've moved a lot of my tasks though over to a VM running in Azure that I start up whenever I need Windows, and have it shut down automatically at midnight to save (my employer) money. I hope I'll be able to run Windows on a MBP in a VM, but otherwise I'll just shift my workloads to a VM in Azure or AWS. Or get my employer to buy me a Windows laptop.
For my home Windows VM, well it's a "good" thing my late-2012 quad core Mac Mini can't upgrade, so I can continue to run VMware on there for the time being. Actually no that's not a good thing, but it's been months since I turned that VM on and I can live without it.
Point is, for most people, although losing VMs on the computer sucks, there are options, including repurposing an old computer, running a VM in the cloud, or just buying a cheap computer for Windows.
For my home Windows VM, well it's a "good" thing my late-2012 quad core Mac Mini can't upgrade, so I can continue to run VMware on there for the time being. Actually no that's not a good thing, but it's been months since I turned that VM on and I can live without it.
Point is, for most people, although losing VMs on the computer sucks, there are options, including repurposing an old computer, running a VM in the cloud, or just buying a cheap computer for Windows.
Epic fail.
But what would you expect from a bean counter who'd cut off a hand to save a finger?
Did anyone really expect Tim Cook to wow anyone? UGH! Goodbye to that 10% marketshare!
It will be back down to 5% again like with John Scully! Just create an iPhone computer and kill the SOB!
But what would you expect from a bean counter who'd cut off a hand to save a finger?
Did anyone really expect Tim Cook to wow anyone? UGH! Goodbye to that 10% marketshare!
It will be back down to 5% again like with John Scully! Just create an iPhone computer and kill the SOB!
Parallels, VMware, Virtual Box, and others emulate some hardware (eg, common network cards, display adapters, etc.) but pass the CPU instructions to the Mac's processor. As others have stated, in the "old days" before Apple went Intel, apps like this had to emulate the CPU as well. This came at a cost of speed, but it can be done. Depending on how fast the new Apple-branded processors are, it may or may not be negligible (but will definitely be slower than giving Parallels et. al. direct access).
That was an ARM version of Linux running in Parallels in the demo.
If it has VLC with good codecs and proper download manager I’m good.
I wonder how well it will support older non-Apple codecs. Videos on my first Mac in 2008 didn’t look as good on the same monitor as my pc because the codecs sucked.
I wonder how well it will support older non-Apple codecs. Videos on my first Mac in 2008 didn’t look as good on the same monitor as my pc because the codecs sucked.
but why??????
I personally think it’s the best thing the Mac could ever have.
Software engineers will find ways to adapt and transform workflows and compatibility for this new platform without a doubt. Why being so reluctant to change????
Especially when it’s a small number of people that *might* be affected at launch *if* solutions are not ready.
The vast majority of end users don’t run Boot Camp or virtualization. Macs come with incredibly good built-in software that serves the needs of many of its buyers. And now there is every incentive for iOS/iPadOS developers to convert their apps to MacOS. They are no longer constrained by iOS’s limitations. They get to use all the power of the Apple Silicon to its full potential.
I use one Windows app (Quicken) since the current Mac version is a joke. My choices are to keep an older Mac after I upgrade to the Mac with Apple Silicon, buy a cheap Windows PC, or finally move on to another software solution, if an emulation or WINE-type solution is no longer available. I fully intend to stick with the Mac.
Yes for sure. There is no reason why it wouldn’t be supported.
One thing’s sure, this will stimulate development of solutions around ARM platform, also on the windows side.
It’s not just an arm version of the existing app. It’s a completely different kind of app - an emulator is necessary, and that’s not how parallels currently works.
It will probably run the ARM Windows version, but problem is, software support on ARM Windows is terrible. So Windows on ARM is barely useless.
On the same boat. Me neither, worst case I’ll keep cheap Windows system if needed, maybe put an eGPU to some swapping use IF needed (since they are now mostly hot plug).
What we are missing here is that maybe this is the time Apple can finally propel itself at rocket speeds... we don’t know what’s gonna happen, but if history up until now is any worthy metric, an active cooled ARM custom chip in the hands of Apple has the potential to blow everything we know out of the water. I repeat this often, iPad Pro 2018 11” already had benchmark numbers close to MBP2020 13” highest end, except a few less digits on multi core... single core was equal or more, Compute score was equal or more.
And if this is the case, then I don’t see why the vast majority of devs would decide to miss that train. Not to mention, it would make it instantly compatible with iOS.
Good thing my next Mac I plan to buy once I get one of the jobs I've been applying for is a 13" Touch Bar MacBook Pro with the Intel Core i5 processor. I still tend to use a Windows XP virtual machine for running old computer games from my childhood for producing "Let's Play" commentary videos.
I don't plan to get an ARM Mac once they are out for at least a couple of years, once a decent Mac Mini with said processor comes out and I am ready to replace my 2012 quad-core Mac Mini. But once I do, I'll still hold onto the 2012 Mini as a backup machine.
I don't plan to get an ARM Mac once they are out for at least a couple of years, once a decent Mac Mini with said processor comes out and I am ready to replace my 2012 quad-core Mac Mini. But once I do, I'll still hold onto the 2012 Mini as a backup machine.