BootCamp and M1 Mac Computers

To be clear: Parallels (latest version) provides a path to run the ARM version of Windows 10 successfully. That’s a compromise as the ARM version cannot natively run x86 apps. There is an emulator built in that runs some, but not all, x86 apps. When it comes to high end games, forget it.

There is an ARM version of WINE, but it is not much of a solution, having been stalled for some time and having all the limitations of WINE in general.

Derek Currie wrote:

To be clear: Parallels (latest version) provides a path to run the ARM version of Windows 10 successfully. That’s a compromise as the ARM version cannot natively run x86 apps. There is an emulator built in that runs some, but not all, x86 apps. When it comes to high end games, forget it.

There is an ARM version of WINE, but it is not much of a solution, having been stalled for some time and having all the limitations of WINE in general.

That is great but it does not answer the subject of this thread. The ARM version of Windows 10 is not available publicly so it is a mute point whether or not Parallels can run the ARM version of Windows. Users may be confused into thinking they can run Windows 10 in a production environment on a M1 Mac. They can't. Tinkering and testing environments may work, but for the average user wanting to run Windows 10, they want it to work without tinkering, potential loss of data, or possible errors.

Bob: Read and respond to what i wrote, plus please be nice as well as accurate. Your attitude is neither appreciated nor helpful IMHO. What I posted is entirely helpful and on target. Apparently, you’d rather the thread ended with “You can’t do that, goodbye.”

I have used Parallels with both Desktops and Macbooks for decades. (Most recently iMac Pro & 2013 Macbook pro) with excellent results. I am able to use Windows applications for business, browsing, documents, etc. perfectly. However, though I have often used Parallels to run Windows games on my mac, I have discovered only moderate to poor graphics capability in the VM. I first discovered this in "Surviving Mars". There became many graphic errors making the game unplayable in the late game. I have run into the same problems with "Humankind". When I encountered these problems I contacted Parallels, no resolution was offered or forthcoming. They admitted Parallels were only able to use some of the graphics resources available in some Windows games. I switched to using BootCamp for the first time in decades. All the Windows games I have attempted to run on Bootcamp, and all ran flawlessly. My solution will be to continue Bootcamp on my 2017 iMac Pro. I am due for a new Macbook pro and will be happy to upgrade to an M1 Macbook pro and to continue to run Windows as needed with Parallels.

microsoft never sold windows arm based for end users its has only sold it oem for preInstall for companies who build arm based windows laptops

the official stance seems to suggest this will continue with windows 11

microsofts arm version test suggest it takes an even bigger toll running x86 based apps then apples rosetta stone 2, so anybody wanting windows to game would likely weigh it and find it wanting.

And there are thousands of x86 processors. Minus the difference between 32 bit and 64 bit. They all run the same instruction set architecture. My point main point in bring it up is that while it wouldn't be trivial, it would probably be easier for Apple to make a boot camp for the ARM version of windows. x86 is a convoluted mess the intel has to decode into a RISK instruction set in hardware. ARM is much simpler.

No one buys a Mac for gaming. Have always seen boot camp as a tool for people that needed to run a trivial windows only program. Was responding primarily to Mr Hoffman, but see that I didn't mark that clearly. Main point for bringing it up was if Apple can make bootcamp for x86 it would be an easier processes for ARM since its a RISK architecture. It's about their willingness to. Not the change in the silicon.

it would only be possible with the arm version of windows,

bootcamp is a collection of 3 things

a bootloader which choose what partition to launch

a configuration tool for the partitions

a zip file of windows drivers for the hardware

windows in bootcamp at not running on top of apple software really it's running directly on the hardware

so if apple where to make a bootcamp which supported x86 cpus they would have to make an emulation layer in between

which would be slow.

I used bootcamp back in the day to game on my old imac 2011 it ran ok.

for bootcamp to work it would require microsoft to sell the arm windows version to end users which they don't

Craig Federighi says Windows can run natively on M1 Macs but is 'really up to Microsoft' - 9to5Mac

with x86 windows people build computers and needs to purchase a windows version to install, with arm devices people buy a usually laptop with arm windows preinstalled the manufacturer purchase the arm windows version oem which is something users can not normally do.

Null0000 wrote:

And there are thousands of x86 processors. Minus the difference between 32 bit and 64 bit. They all run the same instruction set architecture.

This does not need be true between each ARM implementation. In general, they can have the same minimal instruction set, and any extensions that a specific implementation chooses. Also, UMA has been done before, for example, by SGI under the ccNUMA architecture. The integrated GPU/Memory model has also been around for a while.

My point main point in bring it up is that while it wouldn't be trivial, it would probably be easier for Apple to make a boot camp for the ARM version of windows.

Yes, Apple can supply Bootcamp Assistant, but Bootcamp Drivers will become very messy. From my perspective, BC Assistant can be replaced with a manual set of steps. If Microsoft wants Windows on Apple M1, it can Retail the ARM version as a first step. It has been done before with Windows NT and a HAL (for MIPS/Itanium/Alpha/Intel).

x86 is a convoluted mess the intel has to decode into a RISK instruction set in hardware. ARM is much simpler.

Completely agree. The most attractive aspect of ARM is power consumption in the current mobile-everything world. Also, Intel is very familiar with ARM and RISC. The choice of CISC is based on Revenue streams, not on technology demand. Intel has offered to fabricate the M1 for Apple, as TSMC is doing now. However, Intel still rules the Cloud and Data Center world.

Also, based on https://www.statista.com/statistics/269703/global-market-share-held-by-pc-vendors-since-the-1st-quarter-2009/, Apple is about 8.5% of the total hardware sales now. Perhaps Microsoft, which tracks activations of licenses is the only potential source for Bootcamp vs PC numbers. My guess is that <=98% is PC and <=2% for Windows.

You can find download for the ARM version of Windows, but I can see how if there is no official support it would be unlikely. Would like to see how many copies of Windows on Mac were actually paid for.

As for gaming, Apple's pretty much given up on the discrete GPU market share, which you need for modern games. The M1 has slightly better graphics performance than a 1050ti which is a 5 year old low performance graphics card. The game console get away will a APU since their OS is design for games and the games are designed around them, squeezing as much performance as they can out of them. Retro and low resource games are pretty much all you'd be able to play.

Chavez0321 wrote:

One of the main reason buy Mac's is Boot Camp Assistance were it allows me to switch from Mac OS to Windows OS. I bought a MacBook 13 Pro M1 maxed out, I went out and bought a new Windows 10 the most expensive one and as I attempt to install it on the Book 13 Pro M1 and click on the Icon that is already installed that says Boot Camp Assistance thinking I'm good to go because it was per-installed but it quickly let me know Boot Camp Assistance was not available for M1 Macs when i clicked on the Icon for Boot Camp assistance, so I'm Stuck with Windows 10 and no where to install it, what a Bummer.

Will Boot Camp Assistance ever become available for M1 Mac Computers?

When Microsoft makes a version of Windows on ARM that isn't a Dev Insider Build, Apple could be able to make a version of Bootcamp for M1.

I have a different vet related question. If I have the Mojave installer downloaded on my current MacBook which initially came with and is still using Mojave, if I get the latest MacBook with the new chips, can I create a partition weather with boot camp or not, to install Mojave so I can use a particular 32-bit recording app that I need? I just realized, even so, using it for scheduled recordings may not work if the Mojave version is not normally in use until selected.

Red and Blue wrote:

I have a different vet related question. If I have the Mojave installer downloaded on my current MacBook which initially came with and is still using Mojave, if I get the latest MacBook with the new chips, can I create a partition weather with boot camp or not, to install Mojave so I can use a particular 32-bit recording app that I need? I just realized, even so, using it for scheduled recordings may not work if the Mojave version is not normally in use until selected.

Not without effort. You can’t boot Mojave on M1 natively, nor can you boot an operating system for Intel x86-64 as a guest under Parallels Desktop or VMware Fusion.

What you’re looking for here is usually called emulation, and Mac emulates Intel x86-64 apps but not a full operating system for x86-64, and Parallels Desktop doesn’t implement an Intel x86-64 emulator.

While the two can be combined, hardware emulation is distinct from hardware virtualization.

Only option I’m aware of that might work here is UTM, which is a hypervisor based on QEMU. UTM includes both virtualization and emulation, and you might be able to get Mojave loaded with that, as a hypervisor guest, and might be able to then get the app to work. Maybe. I would not expect this configuration to perform all that well, assuming it works.

But… Realistically… You’re probably going to need to replace that older 32-bit app either on macOS or else-platform, and will probably then need keep an Intel Mac around until you do.

I see there were a few dictation typos in my question, but you got the idea. Yes, it sounds unworkable that way. I was planning on getting a new MacBook and keeping my current mid-2018 maxed out MacBook which I have kept in Mojave, even though it's only two and a half years old, to keep as long as I can for the main purpose of using the app to record. I actually have a working mid-2012 MacBook with a slightly earlier version of the obsolete recording software which I never updated past Mavericks because I thought it would not be compatible. When I got the 2018 MacBook it turned out that a slightly newer, but still obsolete version of the software worked with it, but then I ran into the same issue in a definitive way I'm a current MacBook, not being unable to upgrade past Mojave because of the 32-bit app issue. There may be an alternative, because the Elgato EyeTV software I'm using, which was discontinued in the United States by the company and then the rights sold to a Chinese company named Geniatech, apparently, finally has a version that works with 64-bit, and retains the same software, that requires their tuners, which is okay, but I have to check out the details. And that new version of EyeTV doesn't works with the Silicon Dust Homerun Wi-Fi tuner that I have started using in the last year, which is more convenient than a USB tuner.