This fact is one of the hardest parts about owning an M1, as Windows in a VM is very helpful to me.
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.
VMware Fusion for M1 Macs Now Available as Private Tech Preview
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh dang,
I though a picture was worth a thousand words... apparently the power of Photoshop has duped me.I guess I should have looked closer and noticed that Windows 7 "is not genuine" too! Aye, they certainly seemed to be insinuating x86
Run Windows on Mac with a virtual machine | Parallels Desktop
Download Parallels Desktop virtual machine to run Windows on Mac without rebooting or slowing down your Mac, plus get over 200,000 Windows apps.
www.parallels.com
Hah, there is so much going wrong in that screenshot...Oh dang,
I guess I should have looked closer and noticed that Windows 7 "is not genuine" too! Aye, they certainly seemed to be insinuating x86
[..]
Not to nitpick, but:
The clocks are different (obvious photoshopping unless they decided to change all the clocks... for some reason?)
Win7 obviously doesn't work on an M1 iMac
macOS doesn't have the blue button, can't change the resolution or go fullscreen.
macOS VMs are Monterey and newer only (as per Apple's API)...
macOS VMs can't be suspended or paused, the 'gear' thing isn't there...
The dock has a bunch of Windows apps launched that are nowhere to be seen.
I can't explain why they'd put all that stuff in a "screenshot" when it's not reality.
Agree. VMs would only make sense if you want to run Windows on Mac. But containers for everything else. With M1, Crossover (WINE) may be the only legal way to run Windows applications.
Well, sure, if you want some random machine that came out five years after the Apple II.
and did 5x as much for 1/5 of the price. sure.
no. Boot Camp is the way on the Mac.
I would get a high end windows gaming machine and run macOS in all it needs, a vm
I’m waiting to see what direction the Mac Pro takes but I’ll probably have to migrate back to a Windows PC so I can run engineering software.
Captain Kirk convinced me to buy a VIC-20.you must be young... a lot of us have the Commodore 64 for this.
You want ahead of it’s time….. Amiga, that is all.Haha! Those things sure were ahead of their time. I started on TRSDOS and a cassette "tape drive", baby.
Agreed but I think that it’s inevitable that Microsoft will release OEM, retail and/or SAS licenses of Windows on ARM. They are not going to do it while it’s in beta but once it’s ready for prime time it doesn’t make a lot of financial sense for Microsoft to keep it for in-house hardware only unless Intel is so scared of ARM they are willing to pay Microsoft billions to shut it down. ARM is the processor of the future since the vast majority of devices going forward will be mobile. I doubt Microsoft will want to miss out on that market just to keep Intel happy and I doubt they are spending all of this R&D money on an x64 to ARM translation layer only to limit it to their Surface hardware line. That’s an awful lot of money to leave on the table and you better believe their hardware OEM’s won’t be happy either since they would being put at a distinct competitive disadvantage being forced to use x64 chips in mobile devices that need to be able to compete with ARM devices on low power consumption.
I use VMware Fusion on a Mac to run.... macOS VMs.
VMware Fusion is now available as a private tech preview for M1 Macs, with users able to request access through an online form. A public tech preview will follow in around two weeks, according to a tweet from VMware Fusion manager Michael Roy.
VMware Fusion for M1 Macs will be quite limited in scope, with a focus on virtualizing Arm-based Linux distributions. VMware Fusion will not officially support Windows 10 on M1 Macs at launch, as Microsoft has yet to offer licensing for the Arm version of Windows 10. In a tweet, Roy said Windows 10 should still run when selecting the "other" operating system type, but VMware will not be shipping drivers or VMware Tools.
VMware Fusion will also not be able to virtualize Intel-based Windows or Linux distributions, while support for virtualizing macOS is not ready yet. In a blog post last April, Roy said "there isn't exactly much business value relative to the engineering effort that is required" to support Intel-based operating systems on M1 Macs, adding that VMware is "laser focused on making Arm Linux VMs on Apple silicon a delight to use."
Microsoft does not yet offer a retail version of Arm-based Windows, but a preview version is available to Windows Insider program members. Earlier this year, VMware competitor Parallels boasted about the ability to run the Arm-based Windows preview on an M1 Mac with Parallels Desktop 16.5, but fine print notes that customers are responsible for making sure they are compliant with an operating system's licensing agreement.
No timeframe has been provided for the public release of VMware Fusion for M1 Macs, and pricing and upgrade options remain to be seen.
Article Link: VMware Fusion for M1 Macs Now Available as Private Tech Preview
VMware makes this so easy - create macOS VM from the macOS recovery partition and test whatever new app you want without corrupting your current data or OS. You can also easily test the latest macOS betas this way or run older version of macOS. It's all legal - no hacks, and fully supported.
I can run Windows or Linux on cheap hardware, really high end hardware, or connect to a cloud VM running Windows or Linux so easily, it's not worth using my mac for this.
The fact the m1 edition of VMware Fusion does not support the m1 version of macOS is what's really missing imo.
You don’t have to use subscription. You can buy it outright. I’ve been doing virtualization in the Mac for over 10 years. Parallels was there first, and VMware never caught up. I use VMware ESXi for work, so I understand what VMware does. Mac is an afterthought. They don’t even give it as much attention as they do to the virtualization on Linux desktop, and virtualization on any desktop (including Windows) is already an afterthought for VMWare. That’s not where most of their revenue comes from, not even by a long shot. The current version of VMware Fusion that runs on the x86 architecture is completely free. They can’t compete with Parallels, so they give it away for free just to hurt Parallels.
For Parallels, Mac virtualization is their prime revenue source.
VMware should spend their Mac development resources for making their administration utilities for ESXi run on the Mac instead of blowing their resources on the sub-par product that no one needs anymore because most people need virtualization on the Mac to run Windows. VMware lost virtualization on desktop on Mac to Parallels. Sometimes it takes courage to admit defeat and go do something else.
They already laid off their Mac developers once - about 5 years ago or so. Then, they re-hired them and tried to chase Parallels again. This time around, it’s time to kill Fusion.
Last edited:
Same here. MacBook Air for all of it. Sometimes people give me odd looks when I pull that out, but then I do everything I need and put it away. Hours of work, with VBox too, all on the one battery charge! There are the days when #ItJustWorks is a thing. There are also the days when #ItAintWorking, tho. Thankfully, I get more of the former!Yup. That was me.
Yep. VMware dude is smoking his own wacky weed. As an earlier poster wrote: this is nearly useless (for what most folks need/use VMs in the first place).
What about RHL, FedoraCore, Ubuntu, Suse Linux distros?
Like yourself I’d pay for this as well, including Windows. Just when I was seriously considering buying an HP Firefly G8 (I like the design not sure the GPU I’d need) or HP EliteBook 845 running AMD 5600H series cpu with APU, but I’d loose thunderbolt on the latter.
Apple please release a power MBP 14” SOON.
What about Visio? Is that cloud-y now, too? Does it support adding extra stencils? I sometimes I need that for my customers, but I've been able to piggy back off their own Visio most of the time. I've often had to resort to something like Draw.io or Google's Drawing thingy. Draw.io seems to be a little better than G's, but nothing as swanky as Visio.
I'm pretty sure he means Windows x64 like the rest of us. What the heck is the use for Windows Arm, when the big apps you'd need don't run on it anyway? Oh not that little nitpicky crap, like Notepad, but big apps someone need like a WebEx, or vendor-specific management apps, etc.; the I Do Real Work at my DayJob stuff. Windows Arm is useless there.
Nope, looks like custom/3rd party Stencils are "Visio plan 2" items. Dang. Visio plan 1 still looks interesting and cheap. Not bad. But it certainly adds up! 5 USD/month... 60/year (unless you do the annual discount). I wonder if I could just use it one month, then cancel, then repeat...heh. I bet they don't find that very funny.
Every X86 Windows application runs in Windows for ARM and has been since the beginning of 2021. They use Microsoft’s 32-bit and 64-bit built-in emulation in Windows for ARM.
I’ve been using all sorts of third-party X86 apps in Windows for ARM running as a VM on my M1 MacBook Air since January of this year. They run better on M1 Mac in the Windows for ARM VM than they do on the Intel-based Mac in the Windows 10 for X86 VM.
The only thing you can’t do on the M1 Mac is to run Windows on bare metal (in Boot Camp).
I have to ask, as I have no idea, does anyone actually use Windows on ARM normally? How prolific is it? I'm presuming ARM software availability will be fairly in tandem with the general usage.
I do. You don’t need ARM software. Everything x86 runs perfectly on it.
Or, why would they invest in development when they can milk the current users perpetually? This is exactly the case with Office, and for many "standard" softwares across many professional domains. I'm fine with the idea of subscription-based models in a dynamic, competitive market, but most of the biggest software sectors are not. Adobe has ruled creative forever, MS Office productivity, etc. The cost to develop a competitive product to the leading software simply isn't justified by the business potential.