does the new macbook air with a M1 has a bootcamp?
MacBook
Virtualization engines that have been ported to the M1 will support Windows. This is not the same as native booting of Windows via Bootcamp.
WWDC showed Linux using Parallels on a Mini using an ARM/M1 processor.
Virtualization engines that have been ported to the M1 will support Windows. This is not the same as native booting of Windows via Bootcamp.
WWDC showed Linux using Parallels on a Mini using an ARM/M1 processor.
As of Nov 24, 2020 there is no possible way to run windows on an M1/Silicon Mac. However, Parallels should have a version available soon. You can sign up for the beta at their website
Lol, I spoke with Apple this morning and was told I could partition the drive and install Windows but that was their general support team for existing Macs.
So I asked again just now to the technical team and was told Bootcamp is not available on MacBooks running M1 and it is recommended not to partition the drive.
The solution they offered was to use a Virtual machine such as Parallels (but I don't think they have a version for MacBooks running M1).
So I asked 1 question and got 2 different answers! Thats 2020 for you!
Loner T wrote:
Unless Intel can address it's fabrication issues, the pursuit of non-Intel CPUs/GPUs will continue.
There will always be room for non-Intel processors on devices. Mobile phones are a prime example of such use.
I wasnt disputing this, I was challenging your assertion that Bootcamp and software for x86 architecture would run on a virtualised platform.
This is a bit confusing. macOS Big Sur is U*ix. Parallels/Fusion/VirtualBox support U*ix. WiNE emulates Windows. ESXi
and Xen both allow U*ix. Can you clarify your statement.
I accept that there are Unix like systems that have been written for or ported to x86 but the point is that they have had to be re-written, you can't take AIX and run it on a virtual platform because it is specifically for IBM pSeries, similarly with Sun Microsystems, they ported their OS to x86 but the original doesn't run natively so wont run on a virtual platform.
It could all change and become fairly academic if Microsoft decide to follow Apple wholesale to ARM and port Windows to that architecture (which it seems is already done for the Surface). It's not a great leap and there is more of a call for light portable devices with longer battery life - it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
As things stand - Bootcamp won't work and no current virtualisation will work and allow x86 programs on ARM Architecture.
Boot camp is not supported on Apple Silicon. Parallels and VMware have confirmed they are working on this.
pretty sure thats what I said in my original reply
As things stand - Bootcamp won't work and no current virtualisation will work and allow x86 programs on ARM Architecture.
Halliday wrote:
Well, Loner T. I can’t seem to find where you stated that the Linux version, running on an Apple-Silicon based Mac, was an ARM version. 🤷🏻♂️
Loner T wrote:
Virtualization engines that have been ported to the M1 will support Windows. This is not the same as native booting of Windows via Bootcamp.
WWDC showed Linux using Parallels on a Mini using an ARM/M1 processor.
...on page 1.
LMAO WOOOOOOW !
Why even include bootcamp in M1 if we can't even use it ?!
Parrallels is expecting to release a test software later this year for m1 testing. They'll gradually reach out to users.
Even though M1 loses Bootcamp, keep in mind however that it gains iPhone and iPad apps compatibility, opening up a pretty huge app ecosystem.
No, I was replying to the guy who said the Apple representative told him that Boot Camp was included with the M1 Mac's :)
this is absolutely incorrect. The new M1 machines do NOT Support Boot Camp.
This is the one and only thing that keeps me from punching the buy button. I can't punch it until this problem is fixed.
sievebrain wrote:
Then I will no longer be purchasing Apple products. I'm a developer and the combination of Apple hardware with the ability to boot natively in Windows is the sole reason I purchased my Mac Pro Desktop (Yes, $4,000.00+). It allowed me to develop software for ANY platform. Parallels, as good as it is, is still painfully slow to develop with. I'm sure one of the main reasons sales sky rocketed in 2006 (when you switched to Intel) was exactly this reason.
'You' is not Apple here in this discussion. 😉.
The choice is a buyer's choice.
You've made a huge mistake, basically taking a step backward to the days of the PowerPC and all the issues that came along with that.
Product Feedback - Apple is the best resource for such feedback, not the ASC.
You've now basically lost both the development and gaming population. I can run all my Steam games very nicely when I boot to Windows on my Mac Pro Desktop. Now I won't be able to do that as well.
Gaming is not the only vertical industry that uses Macs. The Corporate world uses Macs, too. Other software development utilizes the U*nix features of Macs.
No matter how fast this environment is, nobody will be developing games for it just like nobody develops games for it now. You'll only have the same, frankly lame games you currently have.
Microsoft Surface Pro X uses an ARM 64 SoC.
HUGE MISTAKE.
Time will tell. 😜
Will they though? Virtualisation and Emulation are two different things. Running x86 architecture on an ARM processor requires some emulation as well as virtualisation. It's the same reason you cant run AIX/Unix type operating systems on Intel Processor based virtual platforms.
I think you'll find this assumption is not correct and even if they do manage to emulate the command set it'll be resource intensive and potentially very slow.
sailingbikeruk wrote:
This is a bit confusing. macOS Big Sur is U*ix. Parallels/Fusion/VirtualBox support U*ix. WiNE emulates Windows. ESXi
and Xen both allow U*ix. Can you clarify your statement.
I accept that there are Unix like systems that have been written for or ported to x86 but the point is that they have had to be re-written, you can't take AIX and run it on a virtual platform because it is specifically for IBM pSeries, similarly with Sun Microsystems, they ported their OS to x86 but the original doesn't run natively so wont run on a virtual platform.
Ah! If the OS source is written using Ritchie/Kernighan standard C, with some ASM directives specific to each piece of hardware or a HAL layer is used, it is possible to run the same OS on many hardware platforms, using the native instruction set of the hardware.
Linux does this very well. If an OS is installed using binaries (Solaris SPARC or IBM AIX p-series) then, by definition, it cannot be installed on any other hardware. For example, HP-UX was ported from PA-RISC after HP acquired Tandem Himalayas. There have been proprietary OSes (many to name) which have tried to support multiple CPU architectures.
It could all change and become fairly academic if Microsoft decide to follow Apple wholesale to ARM and port Windows to that architecture (which it seems is already done for the Surface). It's not a great leap and there is more of a call for light portable devices with longer battery life - it's not beyond the realms of possibility.
Such requirements are becoming important to allow revenue growth.
As things stand - Bootcamp won't work and no current virtualisation will work and allow x86 programs on ARM Architecture.
Unless Parallels and VMware Fusion follow the HAL route.
sude13 wrote:
so we can’t use microsoft on new macbook,right?
If there is a Windows version for ARM/M1, then you can. Get started with Boot Camp on Mac - Apple Support will be updated when macOS Big Sur is available. M1 can only run macOS Big Sur.
bootcamp and M1
