Wanna run Windows on an M-series Mac? Fine, buy a license, but no baremetal You can now officially run Windows 11 on an M-series Mac. Well, at least as a virtual machine anyway since Microsoft hasn't seen fit to allow Mac users to run the OS on baremetal just yet. In a support document, Microsoft details two options for running Windows 11 on M1, M2, or M3-equipped Macintosh computers. The first is …
I forget - which other architectures than x86 has Windows been historically successful on?
Oh, that's right. None.
Despite trying Alpha, ARM, Itanium (IA-64), MIPS, PowerPC etc.
Windows is Windows because it runs "Windows" (i.e. x86) programs. Anything else is either not successful or just emulation of x86 (and hence doesn't need any special considerations made for it by Microsoft).
Hence, they're never really going to bother.
As it is, they can't even get the web versions of their largest money-making application software consistent and with the feature set of the offline versions.
I'd gladly see Windows consigned to the bin for precisely this reason, but the only reason that Windows still exists is that people want to run their x86 programs (even if they don't understand that's what they mean) unchanged. Until that assumption - which was also the argument that regularly killed Linux desktops - changes, nothing will change.
Hell, even Office for Mac was a completely different beast with completely different capabilities and even numbering.
The rise of Chromebooks etc. tells you that none of this matter nowadays, of course, but that involves a complete shift to the cloud and MS haven't proven themselves reliable in that respect (i.e. if I pay them money, and lock everything into their cloud, will my Office / Windows still look/work the same with the same file formats in 10 year's time?).
Sorry, but you won't see Windows on another architecture until the whole concept of "needing Windows" is dead and buried.
It depends what you mean by success. Commercially for Microsoft, it's successful. As a very occasional user - really only to try something out to advise others - it's a crock which succeeds at nothing, not even in its persistent attempts at running its own updates. In terms of reliability the crossover point between Windows and Linux happened nearly 20 years ago.
I disagree.
For me, Windows is Windows because it is Windows - and not Mac OS or Linux.
When I bought a Mac laptop it was because at the time Apple made the only nice & relatively affordable laptops.
And I installed Windows on Bootcamp - not because I need to run any 30 year old legacy software, or any applications that weren't available on MacOS, but because I like Windows better and am used to using it.
" but the only reason that Windows still exists is that people want to run their x86 programs (even if they don't understand that's what they mean) unchanged. Until that assumption - which was also the argument that regularly killed Linux desktops - changes, nothing will change."
Damn straight.
Have you seen some of the garbage application software being produced recently? Loaded with bloat & unwanted advertising. Built in tracking via 'telemetry'. Monetizing the user after the sale. Dare I mention a convenient subscription license permanently attached to your credit card? All while simultaneously offering absolutely zero new value over the previous version.
Really, I can do 99% of my job with the feature set of OfficeXP. Yeah, it was buggy as a swamp which is why people were forced to upgrade. But there really hasn't been anything revolutionary or innovative added since then.
I don't blame people for wanting to stay with what works and is already paid for.
"The base tier will run you $31/mo and gets you access to 2 vCPUs, 4GB of RAM, and 128GB of storage"
Cloud PCs are ok if you only need them for a short term usage, but after a couple of months worth of cloud PC subscription fees you could have just bought a refurbished ex business PC such as a Dell Optiplex or Lenovo Thinkcentre which would have much better, CPU, RAM, GPU and storage.
And if you need the ability to it access it remotely then install something like Teamviewer or Chrome remote desktop on it.
true, but if you travel around the world and can't be asked to carry a 1.5 kg laptop (plus power brick plus dongles), and prefer to spend time chasing a stable internet connection, plus a monitor, plus a decent keyboard, plus a fee, plus the cloud pc fee, there's simply no better solution, is there :)
It is that neither they nor Apple has any intention of writing Windows drivers for Apple's hardware. The potential audience is so small it would never be worth the expense. Maybe if Windows on ARM really takes off someday that equation changes.
A fair number of people dual booted, because they had to run Windows stuff for work or school. I agree buying a Mac to exclusively run Windows is dumb, but back when Macbook Air was pretty much the only game in town for thin and light laptops people were doing that.
oh and don't forget about apple declaring "obsolete" perfectly good and working machines. So no more software updates, and worse, browser updates. I couldn't care less about the macos version by itself, but when mainstream browsers stop getting update it's a seciurity issue, so bootcamp and windows it is. Hell, my mom is still rocking a 2007 mac mini (with maxed out ram and SSD), and with windows 10 it perfectly trottles along - tried linux but we're talking about the stereotypical mom that doesn't wanna be bothered with linux "quirks" so windows it is.
The same reason that people try to run Linux on them: they want to do some Mac OS stuff and some stuff in a different OS, and they don't see why they should need two computers to accomplish it. It works for my laptop which runs Linux, multiple versions thereof, and Windows and I can pick whichever I want at the time.
Unfortunately, this is not true. Not for most business users anyway. Believe me, I would love to live to see Windows rot and die, but there are too many proprietary Windows applications out there for this to happen for a while.
I have several CAD/CAM applications that aren't easily replaceable on Linux or the MAC. I wish they were (and, yes before suggesting "xyz woks on linux...", I have done extensive research looking for a suitable replacement).
In scientific fields, they use proprietary software for running various instruments, the same with medical fields. Engineering also uses tons of specialized Windows applications.
I'm the last person that wants to run Windows, but I can't make the switch yet, much to my complete disgust! Many others are in the same boat.
That on its own isn’t going to keep Windows alive, though. What happens is, your vendors find it too expensive to either port their code to ARM Windows, or to non-Windows platforms. So they insist you keep running on Windows-x86, even as that becomes less and less viable.
However, emulation of X86 Windows is a bit easier on ARM Windows that has all the same calls as X86 Windows, rather than running through Wine which has some gaps. If the emulation continues to exist, a lot of things can be used if X86 dies. Of course, given the performance differences between current X86 and ARM chips, I wouldn't expect X86 to be dying any time soon.
True, but only for a certain value of true. As an engineer, I find that I can entirely dispose of Windows - but only if I find alternative software, which usually exists. My mantra is that the destination is important, not the route that you take to get there.
Of course, these niche applications are not tools that 99% of computer users actually require. So I contend that the point about a web browser being all most people require is actually correct.
Elsewhere I said it’s a *nix world. I may have been wrong. For better or worse, it may be a web world. But the point remains that for the vast majority of people it’s no longer a windows world. Unless you want it to be.
You obviously have no idea how many people I've come across that refuses to ditch Windows because Adobe Premiere/Photoshop/Illustrator, AutoCAD or Solidworks or Microsoft Office aren't available for Linux.
Or that Valorant won't run due to Vanguard wanting Ring 0 access.
And yes, arguing with them is like bashing your head against the wall, they'd say that Cinelerra's UI looks like crap, GIMP lacks features, FreeCAD is confusing and they will claim that they will lose friends if they stop playing Valorant.
"...refuses to ditch Windows because Adobe Premiere/Photoshop/Illustrator, AutoCAD or Solidworks or Microsoft Office aren't available for Linux."
Oh come on. Not this old chestnut.
Premier/Photoshop/Illustrator/AutoCAD/Solidworks are industry-standard applications, and aren't going to be replaced in the workplace by an open source clone....for reasons of training, usability, compatibility and support. If I'm hiring a draughtsperson for my architecture company, I don't want to hear from people with FreeCAD experience. Can you understand why employers might think like that?
MS Office is probably the one exception as 99% of users just run Word and Excel, and don't scratch the surface in terms of features. Hell I use Sublime Text for most of the day but I'm not preaching about it.
And yet GIMP couldn't handle CYMK until recently. Let's face it, it's an interesting FOSS project but it's not ready for even semi-professional use.
While GIMP developers may be proficient from a technical standpoint, I don't believe they understand what people want or need.
It's like they woke up one day and decided to build an application without talking to anybody who actually uses Photoshop in their job. I've noticed time and time again that there are FOSS developers out there who think they know best, and that they can't (or shouldn't) take direction from non-developers i.e. the end users of their software.
If GIMP works for your use-case, congratulations! But that doesn't mean it's going to work for everyone else's.
Nobody, not even Adobe, knows how to handle CMYK. Only the operators of offset presses know how to do it. This is because there is no standard “colour profile” for CMYK; even the same brand of inks will vary from one batch to the next, so the the press needs to be set up all over again for each run.
There is no way your Adobe software knows how to cope with this. So this idea that you can just send a “CMYK” Photoshop or Illustrator file to the printer is really complete nonsense.
Consider this: I can work entirely in RGB in the software on my computer, and take RGB files down to a local colour laser print/copy shop, and get good results from them, without ever having to worry about CMYK. Creating my own CMYK files isn’t going to help the quality one bit.
UTM has a few little bugs around network interfaces (which might be fixed now, it’s actively been developed) and the support forum really needs changing (Discord wasn’t a good choice imho) but on the whole it’s damn fast. I can reboot an Ubuntu on Arm VM, spin once on my swivel chair and it’s back and ready for login again. Not the extended coffee break of a Xeon box reboot.
No, they want you to buy their hardware where they make the real profit and where they lock you in. Then they want you to pay them a 30% fee on all your software/music/avocado-toast/black pullovers.
Imagine if you could try the OS or the Logic Pro free trial, find out it's not as good as it's made out to be, and leave whenever you wanted. No good at all (for Apple).
"They sell the hardware but make the profit on the Apple store. Charging you a 30% fee on all your software/music/avocado-toast buys on non-Apple hardware might be appealing"
According to AppRadar, Apple charges 30% only after you do $1million in sales. It's 15% up to $1million or if you're a new developer on the App Store.
Google will charge you 30% for apps and in-app products across the board. What do Play Store users put on their toast? :D
Try again. First, you know Apple reduced to 15% relatively recently to try to counter accusations of monopoly behavior, right? And you know that Google followed suit very quickly. From 2021:
Google is lowering commissions on all subscription-based businesses on the Google Play Store, the company announced today. Previously, the company had followed Apple’s move by reducing commissions from 30% to 15% on the first $1 million of developer earnings. Now, it will lower the fees specifically for app makers who generate revenue through recurring subscriptions. Instead of charging them 30% in the first year, which lowers to 15% in year two and beyond, Google says developers will only be charged 15% from day one.
The company says 99% of developers will qualify for a service fee of 15% or less, as Google is also further reducing fees for specific vertical apps in the Play Media Experience Program. These will be adjusted to as low as 10%, it says.
lol so you're saying that Google was happy to take a 30% cut of revenue until they were forced by Apple's actions to lower their cut to 15%? Well it took them seven months to follow Apple's lead, but better late than never eh?
That's not the winning argument you think it is.
But the commentards would have us believe Apple's the bad guy here.
No, wrong again. I was saying that your statement, this one:
"Google will charge you 30% for apps and in-app products across the board. What do Play Store users put on their toast? :D"
Is factually incorrect. I then posted the evidence indicating that it has been wrong for over two years.
Nowhere in that did I say Google was good in all of this. I think Apple and Google are intentionally charging the same amounts and tacitly supporting one another's App Store monopolies (monopoly for Apple, near monopoly for Google). I would like to see both lose cases about this and be required to change their ways, and since Apple has more ways to change than Google does, for example offering third-party app installation at all, that's the one I think deserves it more.
"It's not free at all - it's included in the price of the hardware."
Nope. You're being disingenuous again.
You can download every version of macos since LIon 10.7 (which was released in 2010) from the Apple support site, or newer versions through the app store.
For free. No purchase of Apple hardware required.
The legal agreements on that software are not at all ambiguous about you needing a legally purchased Apple computer to be allowed to run it. You may be able to break those agreements with sufficient effort, but it is not what you're supposed to do any more than I'm supposed to break the Windows license check system. So no, it is not free as in beer or in speech.
They allow the use of macOS on "unapproved" hardware by not telling you that you can't do it. You can very easily get your hands on the macOS installer files. However it's on you to figure out how to get it working on your Arm devices. So long as it's for personal use they won't go after you.
Really?
In the Intel CPU days I'd do a fresh install on a physical machine, take the disk out and run a P2V tool on it. Import to VMWare and job's a good 'un.
Or you can go down the Inception route and use Carbon Copy Cloner to image the disk to an external disk, then create a new VM in Vmware Fusion using the external disk as the source.
In years past, some kind of DOS or Windows PC compatibility was highly desirable and bordering on essential. Too many key programs were Microsoft OS first or only. When I first got a Mac, I kept my (486) PC for this vital software. Later, I used SoftWindows or VirtualPC, and then later still I used VMWare Fusion.
Nowadays, we live in a more enlightened world. It’s a *nix first world, and those key programs may not even run on Windows (and yes, I know that there are exceptions that prove the rule). I still have a PC (somewhere), but it hasn’t been turned on for years. Nor do I have any virtualisation solutions installed anymore. Windows is no longer necessary…
…which is not to say that Windows is pointless. There is still a use-case where it arguably reigns supreme (gaming) although I find I prefer the user experience that SteamOS provides, even for Windows games. But, for those of us who aren’t gamers, I’d argue that we now have the happy situation where we can choose Windows because we prefer it or ignore it if (like me) we don’t like the user experience it provides very much. No longer is it a necessity imposed upon us.
Back in the day there was a really cool game I wanted to play. I saw it once at my buddy’s house on his PC, but they never made a Mac version - no fun for me!
Last year I saw it had been re-released. For approximately $10 they sold me the classic DOS version packaged as a Mac app with DOSBox. It runs perfectly on my M1 Mac.
If you want windows, why are you buying a Mac?
I used to have a Mac at work. Needed a faster machine, and my boss was going to buy me a new Mac. I said I would find a windows system more useful and made a joke about being able to get a decent windows machine for the price of a Mac. My apple fanboi boss responded with a "whatever, just spec something up and send me the details". What I specced up was so overboard I was literally joking when I sent him the link, but it was still cheaper than the mid range Mac he was going to buy me so he said yes...
I now have a 14900H with 64GB RAM 2TB disk. Cheaper than the 36GB MacBook pro he wanted to buy me which doesn't even have a touch screen, let alone a 4k one...
If you want windows, why are you buying a Mac?
Your company made the hardware decision for you?
You're a software developer?
You're in customer support?
You're a hobbyist who likes messing around with things?
You prefer Apple hardware? Or the resale value?
All valid reasons which don't make you a "fanboi". What do you call a reverse-"fanboi" by the way?
Why not just list the Windows APPLICATIONS that you need, then:
(1) See if they are supported on WINE?
(2) If yes, Linux is your friend.....just run the application.....no Windows OS licence needed.
This has worked for me....but of course, your mileage will vary!
Nor would they understand the concept of Wine in many cases. Sure, Wine can be very useful for those who know what they are doing with IT, but it's well beyond the average user, especially with the tweaking which is sometimes needed to get it to run things
There’s another article on here about Solaris still enduring. Trying to install AMD graphics drivers on Ubuntu and making a dog’s breakfast and necessitating a rebuild reminds me why vendors of workstation class software used to develop for Sun platforms. Simple, apart from stability and performance the graphics drivers worked. Then Windows came along and once the graphics drivers worked and performance was adequate that was the end of Sun in that market, because price was so much less. Such vendors don’t want to develop for multiple hardware platforms. Until the Windows PC market goes majorly Arm, developers will always target Intel, despite Apple’s universal binary format.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
