Virtualbox Mac m1

Source of information below

Currently, Oracle VM VirtualBox runs on the following host OSes:

• Windows hosts (64-bit):
  • Windows 8.1
  • Windows 10 RTM (1507 / 2015 LTSB) build 10240
  • Windows 10 Anniversary Update (1607 / 2016 LTSB) build 14393
  • Windows 10 Fall Creators Update (1709) build 16299
  • Windows 10 April 2018 Update (1803) build 17134
  • Windows 10 October 2018 Update (1809 / 2019 LTSC) build 17763
  • Windows 10 May 2019 Update (19H1 / 1903) build 18362
  • Windows 10 November 2019 Update (19H2 / 1909) build 18363
  • Windows Server 2012
  • Windows Server 2012 R2
  • Windows Server 2016
  • Windows Server 2019
• Mac OS X hosts (64-bit):
  • 10.13 (High Sierra)
  • 10.14 (Mojave)
  • 10.15 (Catalina)

Plus >> VirtualBox is a general-purpose full virtualizer for x86 hardware, which the M1 or M1X are not part of this

So tired of being "upgraded" out of a functioning machine.

Apple won't provide OS upgrades for our older x86 iMacs (which still run great) and the replacement iMacs won't run several key applications for development like VirtualBox and Vagrant. I thought "Rosetta" was supposed provide x86 emulation to bridge the gap between x86 apps and Apple Silicon but apparently not. Also they got rid of bootcamp and you can't boot from a USB stick either. So I can't boot into an ARM based Linux Distro either.

We have Parallels on a couple of Macs, but it's soooo bloated that you can't get decent performance while it's running so I don't see it as a viable option.

These new Macs also won't talk to our Apple Server to do network user authentication when Filevault is turned on. So lovely.

Sorry for the rant. Maybe I'm alone in my thinking that when you stop supporting product X and replace it with an improved product Y, one would expect that the new version will still do all the things the previous version did AND MORE.

And it would have been nice for the folks at Apple to have told me about these issues when I asked them BEFORE we decided to purchase 15 of these not-quite-ready-for-prime-time M1 iMacs. But all they could say is "we don't know". So I did a demo and VirtualBox installed on the new M1 and it ran just fine, no grayed out icon with a slash through it, so I thought it would work. I just didn't have a virtual machine to start at the time. It wasn't until we got the first shipment of iMacs that I actually tried to start a VM and got a kernel error that I realized I was hosed.

My bad for not specifically Googling "SoftwareX won't run on Apple Silicon" for each piece of software we use.

Won't happen again.

You have 14 days to return Apple purchases for a full refund, though:

Items purchased at the Apple Online Store that are received between November 1, 2021 and December 25, 2021, may be returned through January 8, 2022.

dangoulet1 wrote:

How can actual developers use MacOS with the newest Apple MacBook Pro’s? Short answer, many can’t.

Want to run Virtualbox? Parallels? VMWare? No, you can’t do any x86 based OS’s virtualized.

You will have no issues developing for macOS for both architectures, and just because you are a developer does not mean you need to run VirtualBox, Parallels or any other x86 virtualization solution.

Sorry you feel scammed, Apple is scamming us by lying!!!!

Where's the lie?

If you are a developer, certainly you've looked at Apple's About the Rosetta Translation Environment article, which explicitly states (bullet point emboldening mine):

What Can’t Be Translated?

Rosetta can translate most Intel-based apps, including apps that contain just-in-time (JIT) compilers. However, Rosetta doesn’t translate the following executables:

• Kernel extensions

• Virtual Machine apps that virtualize x86_64 computer platforms

Rosetta translates all x86_64 instructions, but it doesn’t support the execution of some newer instruction sets and processor features, such as AVX, AVX2, and AVX512 vector instructions. If you include these newer instructions in your code, execute them only after verifying that they are available. For example, to determine if AVX512 vector instructions are available, use the sysctlbyname function to check the hw.optional.avx512f attribute.

That text is included in that article as of its first posting on March 10, 2021.

Apple didn’t “go back” to Intel.

The very first Macs were based upon the Motorola 68000 CPU.

That was later replaced with processors based upon the Motorola/IBM PowerPC architecture but the processor transition was somewhat painful as you needed to procure new applications that would work on the new processors.

When Apple decided to switch from PowerPC to Intel, the first version of Rosetta was introduced to allow execution of PowerPC binaries on x86 to ease the transition to Intel, as it would allow most PowerPC binaries to run on x86 Macs.

With the transition to Apple M, Rosetta v2 will ease the transition to that architecture.

You keep thinking the primary audience for Macs is developers of any type, and that’s not necessarily true, it’s anyone who needs to get work done without having to put up with Windows.

The vast majority of Mac users are not developers in any way.

Again, how was Apple less than straightforward about the shortcomings you describe when the article I linked to was first posted in March, 2021?

Of course Apple continues to make a variety of Intel Macs - the 27” iMac 5K and the tower Mac Pro are two notable examples - but both of those will someday transition to Apple silicon as well.

dangoulet1 wrote:

…How can any serious developer use an M1?

…These new M1’s aren’t even close to capable of supporting most developers needs.

…Apple is famous for creating amazing hardware and software combos, no vendor has come close to this.

…I feel like the lack of x64 architecture is a step too far too quick.

…I realize I’ve been ranting about this for a while now. Sorry. I just haven’t seen a single person agree, unless they purchased one and found all of these shortcomings themselves.

Short answer:

M1 works for me (as a developer)

Apple M1 works just fine for app development for many of us. App development is a diverse and varied market.

Long answer, and longer history (attached):

TL;DR:

Apple is well aware of what transitioning from x86-64 means, and Apple is migrating to Apple silicon and AArch64 SoCs.

Either your dependencies also migrate, or you develop hosted, or you migrate to a different and x86-64 client for your development work. Rock.

dangoulet1 wrote:

Apple has been selling MacBook Pro’s for a long time now and created a product that I believed beat the competition by a landslide.

It does, massively. Look at the specs for video editing and image editing all while generating far less heat and using less power.

You need a maxed out Mac Pro tower to beat a MacBook Pro on Final Cut benchmarks. That's ridiculous.

Win-win all around.

I can hardly wait for an Apple Silicon Mac Pro to finally replace my old Mac Pro 5,1.

I almost bought a maxed out one for like $6000. After doing more research I decided not to buy one. My current 3 year old MacBook Pro with 32GB memory can do everything I need and have been doing for years. I’ll probably buy a refurbished mbp 16 with 32GB of memory.

If that's the case, you never should have been shopping for a replacement in the first place; why replace what works for you if you don't need to?

I upgraded to an M1 Max MBP because I wanted the increased speed and capabilities.

The newest one I almost purchased would not be capable.

For your extremely narrow defintion of "capable."

This is very misleading and so many people have struggled and Apple does not post any disclaimers or anything.

A very strange definition of "misleading."

Because you depend upon an application that was never promised to do what you do?

Because you wanted a capability that was never promised, implied or even hinted at?

I don't see where anything could even remotely be considered "misleading," but I do see where your assumptions may have been wrong.

• For many developers, it's an amazing machine.
• For those who do video editing, it's an amazing machine.
• For those who do photo editing, it's an amazing machine.
• For those who do office tasks, it's an amazing machine.

I traded in my 2.4 GHz i9 16" MBP for a 16" M1 Max MBP and don't regret doing so for a millisecond (and as a plus, am thrilled to be rid of the Touch Bar.)

download utm at mac.getutm.app, install brew by this cmd in terminal.

/bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)"

Once brew is installed, use this cmd:

brew install aria2 wimlib chntpw

go to uupdump.net and type "Windows 11 arm"

Click on the first.

Complete that to download uup dump

unzip it when downloaded.

type this cmd in terminal:

cd Users/<yourusername>/Download/<thefolderyouhaveunzipped>/

ls

reset



chmod +x uup_download_macos.sh

/Users/<yourusername>/Download/<yourfileyouhaveunzipped>/uup_download_macos.sh

Then it will start download and create arm iso installer file.

If your download fail, restart and type cmd above

Open "UTM.dmg"

Drag UTM.app to Application folder "it may request password"

Launch UTM

Click on +

Click Virtualize

Click on windows

Uncheck Import VHDX image, click on browse, click on the iso file that brew has created on the folder that you have unzipped and click on next.

Choose your memory and CPU Cores and click next

choose 100GB and click next

Skip that step by click next

Name the virtual machine and click save.

Start the vm

complete the installation .

“This PC can’t run Windows 11”

If you get this message trying to install Windows 11, you can bypass it with the following steps:

1. Press Shift+F10 to open Command Prompt and type in regedit.exe to launch Registry Editor.
2. Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\Setup
3. Right click on the Setup key on the left size and choose New -> Key.
4. Create a key named LabConfig
5. Select the LabConfig key.
6. Create two new values: Choose New -> DWORD (32-bit) and create BypassTPMCheck and BypassSecureBootCheck. Set both values to 1.
7. Close out of Registry Editor and Command Prompt.
8. In setup, press the back button and then Next to continue installation.

Oracle has not released a version of VirtualBox compatible with M1 devices. Parallels Desktop 17 (subscription) is compatible with Big Sur on M1 devices, but the guest operating system must be compiled for Apple Silicon ARM, as X86_64 operating systems are not supported.

That Question is best asked to the Developer of this software.

After all it is their Software.

Use wrote " I have searched about it and m1 was not compatible with virtualbox " . It really should be mentioned - virtualbox is not compatible with M1 or M1X CPU equipped Apple Computer.

It is the Developers responsibility to make their Software adhere to Apple Computers , CPU and Operating Systems

It’s because you fail to understand how bootcamp works, windows have binaries that use the instructions set of the intel compatible x86 cpu line, M1 is arm cpu based so the M1 cpu can natively run x86 binary code, Rosetta Stone wrap macs x apps so the code is emulated but calls to external libs will be using the arm M1 macOS libs.

bootcamp is not an emulation it’s windows x86 binaries running directly on the hardware without any apple layer, this would never with with x86 binaries on arm cpu.

if Microsoft released their arm win10 or win11 to the public for purchase it could make apple make it work with bootcamp

but ms only make windows non oem a thing because people could build their own computer which is not a thing with arm hardware so far.

tl;dr

if you want to run x86 intel binaries get a computer with an intel cpu

I realize I may have not been clear, I do understand what BootCamp does and how microprocessor architectures and instruction sets differ.

Why I mentioned it is because of my frustration with the current zeitgeist of forced obsolescence without backward compatibility.

Having a "BootCamp-like feature" (the ability to boot into another ARM64 OS, via a separate partition) or booting from USB Drive would provide some alternatives for working around the Apple limitations. There are other ARM64 based Linux distros that I imagine might play nicely with Apple Silicon.

I don't need to run x86 binaries, specifically. I can do a lot of dev work on a Raspberry Pi running Ubuntu.

The reason we went with iMacs with the M1 is to try and get ahead of the x86 obsolescence that is right around the corner for Apple so we can at least go a couple of years before replacing another 15 to 20 macs.

Honestly, it sounds like you didn't do your due diligence before making such an expensive purchase. If you had a response of "I don't know" about whether an apparently critical piece of software would work, that sounds like further research is necessary. During your demo would have been the appropriate time to actually *try installing windows* (or linux or whatever you're depending on).

Meanwhile Macs back to 2012 are still receiving security updates on Catalina, and some models from 2013 can even run Big Sur. So those "old systems which work fine" are, in fact, still safe to use. There was no need to upgrade right away.

I agree, it was my mistake. Our original iMacs are 2011 models and won't accept an OS X version newer than El Capitan, unfortunately.

The software vendor for our ERP system (which was only compatible with El Capitan or older OS X) gave us a 4 month notice that they were sunsetting the software with no feasible upgrade path (and disabling the ability for it to run past the deadline).

The ERP was integrated with our website and other record keeping systems. So it has been like solving a jigsaw puzzle to find compatible hardware and software that will work together and meet our regulatory and PCI Compliance requirements. Sooo many moving parts to our upgrade. The short time frame and zero support from our previous vendor has had me a bit frustrated and the virtualization issue just got to me the other day.

These new Macs are still the best choice because they do everything else so well.

I've decided to be patient and wait till Virtual Box has an ARM64 virtual environment or perhaps we can transition to Docker. Until then, the old Macs can run VirtualBox in the IT Lab and we can remote into them to control the virtual machines.

I’m wondering when Apple will address this. They state that Rosetta will resolve these issues when in fact they do not. M1 based laptops cost a lot of money yet they do not provide the features we require.

How are developers not just doing iOS / MacOS dev using MacBook Pro’s supposed to work with these M1’s?

No Virtualbox? No versions of python < 3.10?

No Parallels? No Bootcamp to Windows?

What other things will be found missing when we need them?

Does anyone have any advice on what to move to next? 64GB of memory laptop without Windows?

Cheers

oliver_berger wrote:

Valid questions. If they do not resolve this fast a lot of people (me included) will choose a different hardware setup in the future and just run a Hackintosh for their MacOS needs.

Which, if found out by Apple may lead to a very costly Court appearance and whatever the Lawyers fees involved. That is before any Court decisions of guild or innocence on the charges,

Considerably more that the cost of a new Apple M1 computer