It violates the terms of the contract between MS and the enterprise; and MS could take action against them per the contract terms. As for the buyer, MS could disable the key.
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.
There's No Windows for Arm Macs Yet Because Microsoft Has Secret Exclusivity Deal With Qualcomm
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
All it means is just that -- and it wont nag you to activate it. Licensing and activation aren't related. Activation proves you have a valid key that can be used.
It's not licensing, but legal sense, I have no idea.
Your Windows install will eventually expire and you wont be able to use it. You can't buy a license for Windows on Arm, Microsoft doesn't sell them.
Those keys eventually get blacklisted by the activation servers -- that's why they can't be used after a time. It takes awhile to be blacklisted though...From what I gather from this mess LOL, is that with any Win 10 or 11 key you can activate the OS, which is just getting rid of some nag type limitations.
It's not a purchase which requires a license, which isn't available because it's a pre-release, and won't be available unit this thing with Qualcomm is over.
You are not breaking the law. Don't let these people scare you.
Happy thanksgiving!
Btw, you always can get Win 10 activation keys on Ebay for about $5. They show up daily, and then are taken down by Ebay because they are volume keys used by large organizations, and aren't meant for this type of sale. Are they legal?
Well if it works it's legal. Easy as that. It's not a keygen, it's a legit volume key. But after a while they expire for activation. You still get updates, and all, but you can't use they key again after a while. I'm not sure if it's a time thing of volume thing. Most likely it's used up. When I recently tired to activate this Arm build, I tried all sorts of volume keys. You can find them even on a lot of MS sites. They are all over the place. One of them usually works, but not this time. So frustrating LOL.
Right. People post these keys all over the place with impunity. It's just the way it is I guess.
There's No Windows for Arm Macs Yet Because Microsoft Has Secret Exclusivity Deal With the Dark Lord Sauron
No it doesn't expire but after a year they dangle the next year's version as fully compatible with the latest macOS, which means to stay current you will be paying every year. In practice the previous one or two versions of Parallels work with the current macOS, but Parallels 17 did bring in some important things for M1 Macs. Before M1 many people upgraded every couple of years.
Your formally right - but in practical terms for any enduser I would like to see the court (at least in Europe) that would take action if the enduser would be sued (which also would never happen).
If a company like Corel would systematically abuse that, that is another story.
Assuming MS would win, what would their damages be? The cost of a retail copy? Assuming it was already a legitimate copy and not already in use they have been paid so at best it would, IMHO, be to require the user to delete the VM copy. I doubt they really care about end users violating the license in such a scenario.
The downside risk is a court declares that part of the license invalid for some reason. Given the cost of going to court, even if under EU law they can recover it from the losing party, plus the downside risk and bad PR, make me agree with you they would not do it.
A company OTOH, that is bundling Windows without a proper license would be a legitimate target. Since Corel isn't shipping Parallels with Windows ARM then I would think MS would have a hard time winning a case since Parallels has legitimate uses that would not violate MS' license terms. IMHO, and IANAL, in the latter it's no different than a hardware manufacturer building a box or components and selling them without an OS. They have no control over what the end user installs, and their products have legitimate uses beyond violating an end user agreement.
They already have. In DE, Microsoft can’t disallow vendors from selling OEM copies without a computer.
Different issue. The ARM license, IIRC, does not allow you to use it on an M1 Mac in a VM.
Winbloze may be a terrible OS by a garbage company but I welcome this because it brings some level of competition and diversity to the currently monocultural CPU market, even if ARM is barely any better than amd64. At least it isn't more Intel, which left in a debug backdoor to their non-debug backdoor and threatened to sue anyone who brought it up. Now, if only they'd revive Windows NT for PowerPC...
The mind boggles at this kind of reasoning.
The entire point of the M1 was to make Apple even MORE closed, while MS is at least wanting to move into ARM for tablets, etc. How many platforms does Apple INTEND for their OS to work on in their future plans? ONE and ONLY.
MS makes software for both and will more than likely come out with a version of the OS that will work with Parallels, because of the implications of an ARM-based 2 day charge for low power devices on ARM.
How many platforms will MacOS run on when Apple decides the Intel machines will no longer be supported? Again, even FEWER than Windows.
BTW, Apple will STILL be counting on MS Office and Windows emulation to run REAL BUSINESS applications, so who is still relying on whom to stay relevant?
I will probably be buying a MacBook to replace an aging SurfaceBook because of longevity, but I won't until there is a reasonable way to run Windows, which is what MS will have to provide, thus making it at least twice as 'open' as Apple OS, not counting Windows programs on Linux.
...can we also recognise that, with the rise of mobile and web-based technology, the demise of Internet Explorer & its attempts to make the web Windows-only, and the rise of fast broadband (making virtual Windows in the cloud a practical thing) this doesn't matter nearly as much as it did 15 years ago?
One of the important ways in which the Mac differs from Windows is that MacOs doesn't live or die on its ability to run 20 year old software, and is more free to change and evolve. The switch to Apple Silicon has many potential advantages - especially for the thin, light portable and small-form-factor devices that are Apple's bread and butter. The price of that is losing x86 compatibility - even if we do get a "supported" way of running Windows on Arm, the jury is still out on whether that is ever going to become a viable alternative for people who need x86 Windows - because, currently, it still looks like Microsoft's little hobby intended to keep Intel and AMD on their toes.
If you use PC software heavily and need it to perform well - you'll get better bangs-per-buck with PC hardware. If you've got a few odd bits of PC software and don't care about performance, then you can get a cheap, small PC laptop or tablet as a second machine. Or, you can run x86 Windows under QEMU or something and re-live those SoftWindows98 days... although emulation software today is a lot better than in the noulghties... and if WoA licenses never happen, someone will probably come up with an emulator package. Going forward, I expect that a virtual PC in the cloud will be the go-to solution - the tech is there, someone just needs to sell a home/personal subscription without the corporate pricing... and as for "work-from-home" I suspect that remote-desktop into an outsourced virtual machine will become the new normal before long, even if you have a PC, because it makes data protection compliance so much simpler.
Last I looked, while courts have occasionally thrown out specific license clauses because they violated statutory rights, I don't think the principle that you need a valid license to install and run proprietary software has ever been successfully challenged. "Finders keepers, losers weepers" is not a statutory right (maritime salvage, maybe?) and "I was able to obtain and run a copy without it telling me I couldn't" won't cut it. But, as you say, in practical terms MS are pretty unlikely to start going after individual users in court.
...all of which is beside the point. The more significant risks of using an unlicensed copy of Windows are:
1. If you us it for, or at, work, or on work-supplied gear you could get hit by a software audit and get hauled over the coals for it. That could be a career-limiting move regardless of how little Microsoft would care if they new.
2. Unlicensed = totally unsupported. I'm not talking about MS's "wonderful" bug-fixing and technical help here, but supported as in "still likely to be there tomorrow". MS could "fix" product activation at any time, withdraw the insider preview scheme, push an update that breaks it on M1, not supply critical security fixes etc. It could just stop working, or you could find yourself jumping through endless hoops to stop it de-activating itself.
3. If MS were feeling mean, they could decide to cancel your Microsoft account and any services/subscriptions/whatever connected to it - but, hey, spending the next year arguing with MS or hiring lawyers to get it restored will give you something to do while you're locked out of of Minecraft...
If people want to take those risks, that's their decision, but it's not responsible to pretend there's no problem. If you just want to mess around, play some games, run some benchmarks then - probably - cool, but if you're contemplating buying a $3000 Mac on the basis of being able to run Windows, or will be relying on running Windows software in order to eat hot meals and sleep indoors, you might want to think carefully.
That seems to be MS' long term plans Window 365 Cloud PC allows employees to work from wherever as long as they have a fast enough connection and a compatible device. If the costs are right it is a very compelling alternative to buying PCs and managing them. I see a number of benefits to this approach:
- A hybrid work model means any desk can be anyone's PC in the office and employees have the same "machine" when not in the office as well.
- If they use a personal machine the data is still not on that machine, so as you point out data security is enhanced.
- You don't need a powerful machine to run Windows. In theory a RaspberryPI could act as the frontend to Windows in a Cloud and we're back to the days of big iron and dumb terminals.
- System management costs should be less as well; and no more needing employees to plug in to get updates pushed as well or make backups.
- There may even be hardware costs savings since you can tailor how much power ypu need on a per user basis and not worry about getting the right physical hardware.
- When an employee leaves you can instantly end their access; no need to recover a PC.
- You can adjust licensing based on head count to control costs.
I could see MS making a Home/Family version before trying to make WoA work in a VM; or make a stripped down desktop OS that is merely a front end for the cloud. I suspect Windows on AS future will be of the cloud variety rather than VMs.
I suspect it will impact PC sales if it takes off as older machines will no longer need to be upgraded to continue to run newer software with higher processing / memory demands.
Oddly enough, I could see this actually helping Apple in the enterprise if they can make the argument that an iPad or MBA is more durable and easier to manage than a PC so the TOC is lower since you will keep them longer and durability matters.
Last edited:
It means just as much if not more for me and my work, but I agree it would be less important for some people. The problem with virtual cloud windows is latency/connection speed and I just don't see a way around that right now. A gigabit connection for those lucky enough to have that available doesn't buy you anything if the latency between where you have your windows subscription and you is slow, and that's just TCP/IP and the way it was designed -- it's for routing and connection, not response times like it was local. Somewhere close and well supported by the infrastructure is the only way around it. And like you say later, cost is a problem right now. That said, it will eventually be fixed, just not soon.
And that's why it's not a player in the non video, image, business world and Windows is the main player. And why I only use a Mac at home. And to tell the truth, I'm getting really tired of Apple breaking things, so maybe I'll drift off eventually as there is no advantage for me running a Mac at home -- if a Mac can't run modern Windows in a VM, it's a problem. And I *wont* break the EULA like some are willing to do. Maybe when I retire I can just use a Mac at home, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Well said.
I agree, but I see no reason why the won't; even if they don't now such as Windows 365 not accessing a webcam in Teams. Also, outbound data restrictions means if you transfer large files you may hit the data caps for Windows 365. They may require browser extensions but as they mature they should mimic the local OS.
...which has been true since the 1980s and will continue to be true until Apple make a clunky $500 system that boots Windows by default (so the corporate IT department doesn't even need to lift a finger to learn about Macs). Anyway - Apple is now a player in both business and gaming - with the iPhone. Anyway, the growth platforms today are Android, iOS and chromium-based browser environments (with Safari being the only other browser on the radar), and the Mac has two of those covered. Windows isn't going away any day soon - but it has peaked and is now being eaten away by the growth of mobile, web apps and server-side Linux.
Meanwhile, in an age where every Tom, Dick and Sally can probably manage their day job via Office Web Apps, but has a YouTube channel, a FaceBook page selling lumpy pottery, carries a 4k video camera in their pocket and self-publishes their home-produced songs (or aspires to, when they get a round tuit) - going for the "prosumer" media production market is probably a good thing - and something like the M1 MacBook Air nails that market.
Ultimately - unfortunately - it's a binary decision with no middle ground: keep making Intel-based PC clones with nicer trackpads & asking a premium for the license to run MacOS, or switch to a better CPU architecture and offer compelling new machines that seriously outperform the competition when running optimised software, at the expense of x86 Windows capability.
...as opposed to multiple points of failure if your local hard drive fails, your server room floods, someone installs a virus... It's 2021 and if the internet goes down, everything grinds to a halt anyway. Unless an enterprise has a very professionally-run and properly funded infrastructure where everybody follows backup and security protocols and everything is set up with multiple redundancy and proper server-grade hardware, a good cloud service (with quality-of-service guarantees in the contract) will probably be more reliable. Your cheap personal home version may be a bit more wonky.
On the other hand, the companies running the service will get a nice steady subscription income, and the hardware makers can sell them nice profitable maintenance contracts... and, anyway, as we've seen with the latest iPhones, as the technology matures it's getting harder to come up with compelling upgrades every year.
I think that the iPhone/iPad have already taken Apple further in "the enterprise" than the Mac ever did.
Of course I'd take x86 compatibility! What it can run is king, and switching architectures breaking things, will never be compelling for me. I'm in charge of business computers that need to keep doing what they need to do.
I agree, even where I work with my full support, but they don't take the place of a desktop/laptop.