BootCamp and M1 Mac Computers

The older version of EyeTV is 32-bit, and obviously headed for replacement.

Newer versions of EyeTV did get to 64-bit, but dropped various tuners from the supported hardware list.

SiliconDust has an app, if you use their HDHomeRun tuners.

HDHomeRun was—when last i checked—one of the tuners dropped from newer EyeTV versions, too.

MythTV can be a potential option.

I wouldn’t prefer to run EyeTV via emulation.

I gather EyeTV wouldn't work too well with simulation or a virtual machine (I'm not sure what the difference is between simulation and virtual).

HD HomeRun was dropped from the newer versions of EyeTV, as was the Pinnacle PCTV tuner which is what I use also. Supposedly the new Eye TV tuners come with EyeTV software, but it is unclear if the 64 bit version 4 is actually available, and if it works in the United States, and how well it works.

Virtualization: a few instructions and operations used by the app or operating system are intercepted and processed by the hypervisor, while the rest of the hardware instructions within the program or the operating system run at full hardware speed.

Virtualization works for x86-64 apps and operating systems on x86-64 processors, and for Arm apps and operating systems on Arm processors. Virtualization does not work for x86-64 apps and operating systems on Arm processors, nor Arm on x86-64.

Emulation: absolutely every instruction and every hardware request are intercepted and processed by the emulator, which adds overhead and means the app runs more slowly.

Most hardware architectures can be emulated on most other architectures, with varying performance. Hardware from thirty years ago and older, and other relatively old computer hardware, can be emulated more quickly on newer computer hardware than the app or operating system might have run natively on old hardware, as newer hardware is more than sufficiently fast enough and can also mask the emulator overhead. But for newer hardware and emulation, not so much.

Isn't some sort of emulation what Windows was doing the first part of its lifespan? And eventually the hardware became fast enough that it wasn't obvious, until they changed the architecture completely so it was more inherent?

Red and Blue wrote:

Isn't some sort of emulation what Windows was doing the first part of its lifespan? And eventually the hardware became fast enough that it wasn't obvious, until they changed the architecture completely so it was more inherent?

Windows 95 and related descended from MS-DOS, and Windows 95, 98, and ME were rebuilt atop Windows NT and the NT kernel, NT being a project which was descended from another project known as PRISM, but this work did not involve hardware emulation. Windows porting sojourns to Alpha, Itanium, and some other platforms aside, Windows has been based on x86 and more recently on x86-64 for most users.

Windows has implemented hardware emulation on various of its platforms, including FX!32 support on Alpha allowing that architecture to run x86 executables, and the current x86-64 emulation available allowing x86-64 apps to run on Arm.

Various Windows distributions also include virtualization with Hyper-V.

macOS has been ported from PPC to Intel to Arm, (currently) provides hardware emulation with Rosetta 2, and has an integrated hypervisor framework. Rosetta 2 provides emulation support for apps, and not for an entire operating system. UTM (and its QEMU underpinnings) use the macOS hypervisor framework, and also provide emulation support sufficient for an entire operating system.

It already exists. uupdump

Go here and have it build you an ISO. Granted, you'll need a PC to do this, but it will make an actual ISO for ARM Windows.

From there, start up Parallels and when it asks for a VHDX or ISO of the OS, put in this ISO. It will install just like any regular Windows OS does on x64 and you will have the release version of Windows 11.

Now, you still have to license it though. That's not hard to do either. I'd recommend installing Pro edition for 11 and then you just buy a license for x64 Windows and put that in the key under Activation. It will then activate.

No VHDX needed.

As far as M1 support, I think Microsoft has exclusivity agreement with Qualcomm for the moment so they can't support M1 officially but they haven't stopped it from getting updates or installing with Parallels. Just add the virtual TPM to the setup when you install to avoid dealing with that

daelin73 wrote:

It already exists. uupdump

Go here and have it build you an ISO. Granted, you'll need a PC to do this, but it will make an actual ISO for ARM Windows.

There’s no available Windows Arm production distribution for Mac M1 (yet?).

There’s no product that can be purchased.

There is an Arm beta that some folks have gotten to work on M1-based Macs, and maybe Microsoft turns their beta into a purchasable product?

But that hasn’t happened yet.

If you want to run a non-product insider beta for Arm on an unsupported platform, sure, have at.

1)

Yes, there is for ARM 64. It runs on M1, yes not a native Silicon build, but ARM 64? Yes

2)

Explains why I purchased a license and have it fully activated, I guess

3)

No, it's the release build. Not beta. I *was* running the Beta before and then I did a full install and got the full production RTM version. It does run just fine.

You talk like you know what you're talking about and maybe you did once. But if you follow what I said, you will have the build you need and will have WIndows on M1. How about you try it and report back before shooting it down without doing so?

daelin73 wrote:

1) Yes, there is for ARM 64. It runs on M1, yes not a native Silicon build, but ARM 64? Yes

Please show me where I can buy Microsoft Windows Arm for M1, and how much will it cost? Not an insider beta. Not a released version on an unsupported platform, but rather where can I buy a fully-supported product that I can call Microsoft for support help. Because that’s not (yet?) available. For now, only the Qualcomm configurations have official support.

I explained it in my post. Just buy the regular license for Windows and put it in. It does activate.

How much does it cost? Hmmm.... let me see.... the same license as x64 Windows... how much is that? Seriously. That's all you need to do.

If you need fully supported product you can call Microsoft for, you're SOL. But judging by your response, you probably call them a lot, so maybe you just are better off not buying it since you need so much help.

I've never called technical support in Microsoft even going back to DOS 6, Windows 3.1, WIndows 95, 98, ME, 2000, NT 4, XP, Vista, Win7, Win8, WIn 10, or 11. So it's not really important to me.

But clearly that's important to you so don't buy it then. I'm betting the customer service people are happy you're not calling them.

daelin73 wrote:

I explained it in my post. Just buy the regular license for Windows and put it in. It does activate.

I well understand what you wrote: that you have a released version on an unsupported platform.

Check with Microsoft support, and see if they’ll help with any hardware issues.

For now, only Qualcomm hardware configurations have official Microsoft support.

Yeah.... I've never called Microsoft support for anything except to do phone activations and that was only when I had to change too much hardware and needed activation... and probably when I used to have Zune and needed them to clear all my registered devices....... of which I have yet to do many since at least Windows 8.

There are far more helpful people in forums all over the web if you can find them.

But as I said, if you need MS support, then don't buy it as you won't get it. Many people don't need that.

Ms sells most licenses for new computers, but sell license to consumers who build their own intel based computers and intel based Mac computers, with their arm version there really is no market for home build arm computers currently, so apple bootcamp would be just about the only market for a non oem arm windows, is ms interested in putting in the effort? Are apple interested into making it a thing in their end.

tharindu273 wrote:

not workin bootcam assisten

Correct. Boot Camp Assistant does not work on M1 Macs. And in spite of what you may read, there is no production version of Windows available to the public that runs on M1 Chip Macs.

tharindu273 wrote:

not workin bootcam assisten

Boot Camp is not expected to work on Apple silicon, and M1 Arm processors, and is not compatible.

There is no Apple Boot Camp available for M1; for the M1 Arm processors.

Apple Boot Camp is restricted to Macs with x86-64 Intel processors.

There is no version of Windows for Arm that can be purchased for use with Apple M1 and Arm.

Should Microsoft decide to make Windows for Arm available for purchase, then some or all this answer will change.

But should that availability of Windows arise, that will be Windows on Arm and not Windows on x86-64.

Window on Arm runs Arm applications for Windows on Arm.

Windows on Arm may or may not sufficiently emulate Windows x86-64 apps for your needs.

There are ~seven pages of discussions of this topic in this thread too, so please feel free to skim those.