Do we really have to deal with this software compatibility crap again?

[VivienM]

I hate to pass the blame, but from where I'm standing the problems seem mostly related to Microsoft's lack of a comprehensive compatibility layer for x86 software on ARM Windows. While it doesn't help Mac users in the short term that Microsoft is the main barrier to a better Windows-on-Mac experience, the good news is that the current issues will likely be addressed by Microsoft in the future as the PC industry (and Microsoft in particular) further embrace ARM, even if Microsoft spurns Macs.

So...the present situation is a bummer, but I think most of the current constraints to running Windows software on MacOS will be resolved in the longterm.

The PC industry will never embrace ARM.

Apple manages to transition architectures in large part because there is an aura of inevitability. Apple decrees 68K/PPC/Intel is dead, everybody knows every Mac user/developer/etc is going to have to migrate along, and so the migration happens.

PC land, however, has a whole number of players with different agendas. You have Microsoft who wants to sell licences for Windows. You have different processor vendors - AMD/Intel selling x64 processors, others selling ARM processors. You have HP/Dell/Lenovo/etc who just want to sell cheap junk at Worst Buy with a low return rate. You have the Taiwanese motherboard makers who sell to enthusiasts who want to reuse many of their parts with a new motherboard/processor. Etc. Generally speaking, whichever player has the simplest, least-compatibility-breaking solution to the particular problem the industry is facing will win, regardless of the long-term consequences.

Look at three attempts at transitions in Windowsland:
- Itanium, where Intel thought they would clean up the whole architecture, provide Apple-style x86 compatibility, and move forward in a brave new world. And then AMD came along with an ugly-but-far-more-compatible 64-bit extension of x86, and... well, there's a reason that the main architecture for Windows today is called 'amd64'.
- Intel wanted to replace its ATX case standard with BTX to better cool the hotburst Pentium 4s. A few Dells and other large OEM systems were sold with BTX cases, but the enthusiast market and the rest of the PC sector kept using ATX and BTX probably mostly houses Itanium systems in the big e-waste dump in the sky.
- Windows 8 and touch screens. Microsoft wanted to smother the iPad by turning all Windows machines into a tablet, but HP/Lenovo/Dell basically said they weren't adding touchscreens to their systems because no one wanted them. Net result - Windows 8 was a flop, and 10 started to go back to a keyboard/mouse paradigm, a trend that has continued with 11.

PC world has occasionally managed some transitions, e.g. VLB -> PCI -> AGP -> PCI-E for graphics, 16->32->64-bit, parallel ATA to SATA to NVMe, etc, but they've all happened fairly slowly and with both things co-existing for years.

 

[mrmister]

You got the third party cord that burned

He used a third party power cord, but he’s upset with Apple that it burned?

 

[VivienM]

He used a third party power cord, but he’s upset with Apple that it burned?

I remember following that thread way back; I think he got a "refurbished" (i.e. used) iMac Pro from some sketchy seller on Amazon and that seller included the sketchy power cord.

 

[TurboCoder2022]

He used a third party power cord, but he’s upset with Apple that it burned?

The power cord came with my computer from the refurbisher. I didn't have the choice in using it, and didn't know it was a crap power cord until I came to this board with my issue.

 

[TurboCoder2022]

It’s not immediately obvious what happened. You got the third party cord that burned, didn’t want to use the iMac in that state (understandable), and didn’t want to return the Mac or pay for a repair, then bought an Apple silicon Mac.
the AC inlet on the iMac Pro is modular. Have it replaced, wipe it, then sell it.

I did not purchase the third party cord. The cord was an inferior choice by the refurbisher who sold me the computer, and I had to use it. I did not know it was an inferior third party cord at the time.

Thank you for the updated information!! I may have a solution based on that with a local Apple repair place. The refurbisher refused to allow me to use the local repair place on the grounds that opening the computer would void the limited warranty through them. The issue wasn't returning the Mac. The issue was that they refused to have me wipe it using a local repair company because the repair company would have to open it to either wipe it or repair the AC power inlet. The only way for me to wipe it would be to send it to them, and I don't trust another company with my personal data on the computer in a free-for-all. Especially after all that I had been through with that awful refurbisher company at that point.

Basically, unless I went through the refurbisher, I was SOL.

It's an expensive lesson I had to learn the hard way.

 

[TurboCoder2022]

I remember following that thread way back; I think he got a "refurbished" (i.e. used) iMac Pro from some sketchy seller on Amazon and that seller included the sketchy power cord.

Yep. You got it!

 

[bobcomer]

C land is very, very, very paranoid about returns. (Look at what happened to Linux netbooks before MS revived XP for netbooks) And this leads to some interesting design choices, e.g. I was at Worst Buy a few weeks ago and noticed that some pre-built gaming desktops (HP or Asus or Acer?) had DVI ports on the video card. DVI stopped being a serious thing for monitors 10+ years ago. Low-end laptops continued to have optical drives until very recently, but no USB-C. Lenovo/Dell/HP are in no hurry to add something they don't think people care about (e.g. touchscreens, which is what killed Windows 8), but they are terrified of people buying a new system, it not connecting to their existing peripherals, and returning the system.

Pretty much true.

I can't imagine a world where Lenovo/Dell/HP/etc are comfortable selling ARM Windows machines at retail, especially when I believe drivers for, say, printers are architecture-specific in Windows (and not in macOS, I don't think).

That's certainly part of it, but in Windows land ARM has been synonymous with slow and not running everything, so there's really no reason to buy one. They actually sell more than I would think they would, but they're still a minor part of the market. As the person that buys things where I work, there's 0 incentive for me to even think of buying one. They're going to have to get a LOT faster to raise that 0 to anything.

I could see ARM for Windows gaining a small niche as a kind of Chromebook competitor running Windows 11 S or some other differently-branded version of Windows that tries to prevent people from assuming compatibility that won't be there, but even that, I'm not sure Lenovo/Dell/HP would want to gamble on.

Making it competitive with x86 is really the only way to sell it in numbers. Microsoft could make a Windows on Arm that would run everything but drivers (and maybe even them using emulation), and someone could make a competitive arm laptop for the windows market -- but why, what's the incentive? I can get power efficient laptops, fast laptops, and perfect compatible PC's of all kinds and form factors at the drop of a hat in x86 land. Like I said, no ROI.

Arm isn't magic, it's just another CPU type.

 

[VivienM]

That's certainly part of it, but in Windows land ARM has been synonymous with slow and not running everything, so there's really no reason to buy one. They actually sell more than I would think they would, but they're still a minor part of the market. As the person that buys things where I work, there's 0 incentive for me to even think of buying one. They're going to have to get a LOT faster to raise that 0 to anything.

I haven't paid attention to Windows on ARM, but there are a lot of slow x64 Windows systems being sold. Took me 5 minutes of browsing around on Worst Buy's web site this morning to find a brand new laptop with a 17-year-old Core 2 Duo's level of performance on Geekbench. (And, of course, Microsoft considers it meets their "performance and reliability expectations" for Windows 11 which my i7-7700 desktop (or my 15-year-old C2Q) doesn't meet, but that is a separate story)

Is Windows on ARM going to be worse than that? Somehow HP & friends manage to unload that junk and not have an insanely high return rate, though at least those "run" (more like crawl) everything.

Overall, though, I think we are saying the same thing - Windows on ARM doesn't really solve any problem that any actual Windows users are having and are willing to pay Dell/HP/Lenovo/etc to solve.

 

[ArkSingularity]

That's certainly part of it, but in Windows land ARM has been synonymous with slow and not running everything, so there's really no reason to buy one. They actually sell more than I would think they would, but they're still a minor part of the market. As the person that buys things where I work, there's 0 incentive for me to even think of buying one. They're going to have to get a LOT faster to raise that 0 to anything.

That's been part of the problem for the Windows world. Apple's ARM chips have been leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, even in the world of other ARM chips. ARM has gotten closer to matching x86, but even still, they aren't outperforming them and they offer worse software compatibility to go with them.

Yes, the battery life is better, but I'm just not sure it's worth the tradeoff for Windows. x86 can already offer me several hours, and they give me better performance to go with it.

I think that given three more years, they will have compelling things to offer, but right now, just matching x86 isn't enough (and they haven't even gotten to the point of truly matching x86 yet either, although they can outperform skylake era chips, and that's still noteworthy IMO).

 

[VivienM]

That's been part of the problem for the Windows world. Apple's ARM chips have been leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, even in the world of other ARM chips. ARM has gotten closer to matching x86, but even still, they aren't outperforming them and they offer worse software compatibility to go with them.

Yes, the battery life is better, but I'm just not sure it's worth the tradeoff for Windows. x86 can already offer me several hours, and they give me better performance to go with it.

The other question is, would the battery life really be better on ARM Windows the way it is on ARM macOS? ARM macOS draws upon 15 years of power optimizations from iOS land, whereas Windows NT has never really been designed for low, low, low power use, low power sleep states, etc.

 

[ArkSingularity]

The other question is, would the battery life really be better on ARM Windows the way it is on ARM macOS? ARM macOS draws upon 15 years of power optimizations from iOS land, whereas Windows NT has never really been designed for low, low, low power use, low power sleep states, etc.

To an extent, yes I do think it would be better. These ARM chips quite simply just use less power to do similar workloads, but they have lower peak performance. Windows has a tendency to aggressively increase clock speeds in higher power plans, and on the ARM chips, they could cut the power usage in half with similar scheduler behavior.

The problem is that the performance just isn't cutting it compared to Intel and AMD's latest offerings. ARM is outperforming Skylake (great progress really), but they need a couple more generations to catch up. And quite frankly, I think you're right. Even if the Windows were installed bare metal onto the M1, the power efficiency for real world workloads would be worse. Even in the Intel days, MacOS had significantly better life than Windows when installed on the same hardware.

 

[bobcomer]

I haven't paid attention to Windows on ARM, but there are a lot of slow x64 Windows systems being sold.

Probably, but I don't buy those anymore than I buy Arm PC's. They do have something for them over an arm laptop though, compatibility.

I think that given three more years, they will have compelling things to offer, but right now, just matching x86 isn't enough (and they haven't even gotten to the point of truly matching x86 yet either, although they can outperform skylake era chips, and that's still noteworthy IMO).

Maybe, who knows. I wont be holding my breath though. Like you said, just matching x86 wont be enough. I'd say more years than 3, 13th gen+ x86 are extremely impressive these days...

 

[Phil A.]

I could see ARM for Windows gaining a small niche as a kind of Chromebook competitor running Windows 11 S or some other differently-branded version of Windows that tries to prevent people from assuming compatibility that won't be there, but even that, I'm not sure Lenovo/Dell/HP would want to gamble on.

HP have been selling Arm based windows machines since 2021, Lenovo since 2022 and Dell released one this year.

They might not be going “All-in” but they are definitely dipping their toes in the water and Microsoft do appear to be serious about Windows on Arm

 

[VivienM]

Maybe, who knows. I wont be holding my breath though. Like you said, just matching x86 wont be enough. I'd say more years than 3, 13th gen+ x86 are extremely impressive these days...

More importantly, Pat Gelsinger seems to have a crazy plan with a number of new manufacturing processes in the next 5 years... and the 13th gen are not showing the results of that yet. Still on 10nm "Intel 7". Should be interesting to see what happens in x86 land in the next five years.

 

[ArkSingularity]

More importantly, Pat Gelsinger seems to have a crazy plan with a number of new manufacturing processes in the next 5 years... and the 13th gen are not showing the results of that yet. Still on 10nm "Intel 7". Should be interesting to see what happens in x86 land in the next five years.

He's also a well-seasoned engineer and not just another corporate manager. He's been at Intel (on and off) for decades, so he knows what he's doing.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

I guess I didn't realize how much of a compatibility issue using an ARM M1 MAC would really be. When my Intel refurb Mac burned up 60 days in, I figured I should grab the most updated model of the Mac Studio. And that was a mistake, it appears.

So I ran into a couple of issues lately with some past Windows software that I wanted to use again. To be fair, I didn't think I'd want to use the software back when I bought this computer back earlier in the year. But, now I do. Anyway.

Is there any possible way to force these programs to run on Windows 11 in the Parallels software?

Or am I screwed?

It was a really great thing to have Intel Macs that could run any software imaginable. Sigh.

This is why, other than the price, and the fans/heat, i am interested in the i9 2019 16" MBPs. They can be found with 32b of RAM for 600 euros! Everybody says to get the m1 air for this price, but you only get 8gb of ram and 256gb dad and way too small screen for 600 in the m1 air! In that case, the 2019 looks pretty good. And besides, the heat is not as a bad as people like to say. You can use turbo boost switcher, and other things to reduce heat and fan noise.

 

[Ethosik]

While I largely agree, one has to be careful when looking at the low-end of the Windows/PC market. You can get a good deal on a perfectly respectable 11th-gen Core i5 machine (sure, the 11th gen is two generations old now, but it was a real, serious CPU) and next to it, for $30 less, there's something with a low-end CPU that is barely faster than a high-end C2Q from the late 2000s. Also avoid anything with eMMC storage, small amounts of soldered RAM without a SODIMM slot for expansion, etc.

Agreed. I got burned with the Surface products, even though I spent a good $2,000 it was not worth the price with the components it had.

 

[dmccloud]

HP have been selling Arm based windows machines since 2021, Lenovo since 2022 and Dell released one this year.

They might not be going “All-in” but they are definitely dipping their toes in the water and Microsoft do appear to be serious about Windows on Arm

I think all of the major manufacturers will start focusing on ARM more, but it will be in the datacenter segment rather than the consumer segment. Amazon is already running ARM-based datacenters for some of their cloud computing initiatives, and the power savings alone (less wattage used by the machines leads to lower power consumption, and since there's less heat generated by those machines, the costs of cooling the datacenters also is lowered) can easily add up over time when you're looking at hundreds, if not thousands of machines in use at one time.

 

[tubuliferous]

The PC industry will never embrace ARM.

Are we sure about this? Some analysts are predicting a major shift towards ARM over the next few years:

​

- Digital Trends Article​

- Counterpoint Research Article​

​

Even Nvidia is producing ARM CPUs. Nvidia's current ARM CPU offerings are targeted to HPC and AI, but Nvidia's forays into ARM-based gaming hardware imply consumer-grade ARM products are being considered:

​

- Tom's Hardware Article​

- Digital Trends Article​

 

[ArkSingularity]

Are we sure about this? Some analysts are predicting a major shift towards ARM over the next few years:

​

- Digital Trends Article​

- Counterpoint Research Article​

​

Even Nvidia is producing ARM CPUs. Nvidia's current ARM CPU offerings are targeted to HPC and AI, but Nvidia's forays into ARM-based gaming hardware imply consumer-grade ARM products are being considered:

​

- Tom's Hardware Article​

- Digital Trends Article​

I think it's largely from a consumer demand standpoint. What does an ARM Windows PC offer me that an Intel PC doesn't? Performance is worse and software compatibility is worse. Battery life is better, but not enough of a game changer compared to your typical ultrabooks with U-series chips (which aren't terrible), and for most users it doesn't really justify the disadvantages.

ARM has seen a lot of success in Chromebooks (frankly, it really makes much more sense than Intel for these kinds of computers, battery life matters here and performance doesn't need to be top-of-the-line, mid-tier is perfectly sufficient). But for full-class laptops, I think a lot of folks would still rather avoid the trouble of having to deal with software compatibility woes, even if they have to sacrifice a little bit of battery life.

ARM on the PC side of things isn't quite ready for prime time for workstation class computers, demand still hasn't really ramped up from the consumer standpoint. ARM is making progress rapidly (and I do think they will catch up well before the end of this decade), but it's not really quite there yet.

 

[VivienM]

Are we sure about this? Some analysts are predicting a major shift towards ARM over the next few years:

​

- Digital Trends Article​

- Counterpoint Research Article​

​

Even Nvidia is producing ARM CPUs. Nvidia's current ARM CPU offerings are targeted to HPC and AI, but Nvidia's forays into ARM-based gaming hardware imply consumer-grade ARM products are being considered:

​

- Tom's Hardware Article​

- Digital Trends Article​

Are these the same analysts who thought "CISC" was dead in the early 1990s?

Nvidia has been designing (they're not really 'producing') ARM CPUs for a long time. Weren't they in the original Surface RT? I'm pretty sure their Tegra chips have been in car infotainment systems and other things for a long time too.

ARM server chips are definitely coming, especially for Big Cloud. But... for desktops/laptops? What OS do these analysts think that these 30% ARM laptops will run? macOS is the best positioned, but does anyone see Apple tripling their market share in the next few years? Chrome stuff? Windows on ARM makes the least sense - the main reason anybody runs Windows is access to the huge ecosystem of now-half-legacy Windows software, all of which is 32-bit x86 and a modest part of which has finally migrated to native 64-bit amd64 (Microsoft, even, was recommending 32-bit Office on 64-bit Windows until a few years ago). Does anyone think Microsoft is going to have a Rosetta-quality emulator in the next little while?

More fundamentally - what problem does ARM solve for Windows laptops/desktops? For Apple, it was an opportunity - leverage your giant ARM/iOS ecosystem to make more power-efficient Macs and consolidate all of your products on TSMC-made custom ARM chips. The fact that Intel had been stagnating for a couple of years was probably the final motivation for taking the leap. But... no one in Windows land is in that position.

I hate to disagree with so-called professionals, but maybe these analysts need to go back to Vista. Vista was a largely-lovely product with a few annoying quirks, some hardware compatibility issues in the first year or two and steep hardware requirements. People largely said "that's nice, Vista doesn't solve any actual problems I'm having, it introduces a few new problems that I don't want to work out, so I'm not going out and buying new hardware for an OS that doesn't solve any existing problems, let me keep my XP." How is ARM Windows any different?

 

[amancalledsun]

The biggest problem with the move to ARM is with third party plugins for audio recording. Focusrite’s Red suite, for instance, is still only supported in Rosetta mode, which is a huge hit for performance and latency.

 

[ArkSingularity]

The biggest problem with the move to ARM is with third party plugins for audio recording. Focusrite’s Red suite is still only supported in Rosetta mode, which is a huge hit for performance and latency.

I've run into this with certain plugins also. I could understand it for freebies or for inexpensive plugins, but for things that charge top dollar, it's a bit inconvenient to have to run the entire project in Rosetta just to get them to work.

 

[MallardDuck]

I guess I didn't realize how much of a compatibility issue using an ARM M1 MAC would really be. When my Intel refurb Mac burned up 60 days in, I figured I should grab the most updated model of the Mac Studio. And that was a mistake, it appears.

So I ran into a couple of issues lately with some past Windows software that I wanted to use again. To be fair, I didn't think I'd want to use the software back when I bought this computer back earlier in the year. But, now I do. Anyway.

Is there any possible way to force these programs to run on Windows 11 in the Parallels software?

Or am I screwed?

It was a really great thing to have Intel Macs that could run any software imaginable. Sigh.

Fusion and Parallels can install Windows 11 ARM. Inside that there's a rosetta-like subsystem that will run most, but not all, x86 software. It works pretty good as long as it's not graphics intensive.

FWIW, Fusion just came out with a tech preview that has much better windows support, and it's free (even after it's GA) for non-commercial use.

Don't bother with QEMU or anything like it - the performance is unusable.

 

[MallardDuck]

The biggest problem with the move to ARM is with third party plugins for audio recording. Focusrite’s Red suite, for instance, is still only supported in Rosetta mode, which is a huge hit for performance and latency.

There is zero excuse for software vendors to not have ARM native software at this point. It's been three years.