I just got a M3 Max and I can’t use it

[canadianreader]

No, the drivers for the dongle and the hardware instrument they need to run.

I understand. There was no mention in the original post of hardware dongle to run his software it's just an outdated database app and most likely a 32bits. I think Crossover or just plain Wine with some tweaking would would be ok. There's even hardware acceleration for some 32bits apps on Wine https://github.com/Gcenx/DXVK-macOS and could be integrated into CrossOver.

 

[JustAnExpat]

Someone prob suggested this but you could pay for a Windows VM hosted in the cloud somewhere. Micrsoft have some offerings but are towards the more expensive options

Do these cloud based solutions allow a person to install their own drivers, and is there a passthrough option to connect equipment?

 

[sleeptodream]

edit: Nevermind I see that your work is mobile :/

Does your computer need to be mobile? Could you get a previous gen Mac Pro to do the heavy lifting & keep your 2019 MBP for mobile work? If you want something that can dual boot or use x86 Windows in VM that’s as good as it would get. Would be a bit more expensive than the M3 Max MBP plus a Windows desktop, but it sounds like you need to move data from the macOS side to this Windows program constantly, so probably want both in one machine?

That is, assuming the software can use multiple cores. I’m sure someone with more Windows knowledge can tell you how to find that out, idk if you could see this in Task Manager or something?

 

[Mactech20]

Use Crossover. It allows PC apps to run in a bottle on your mac. Works great for my windows apps.

 

[JustAnExpat]

Use Crossover. It allows PC apps to run in a bottle on your mac. Works great for my windows apps.

Won't work because it's a driver problem for a device he's using.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

You may want to look for a deal on the Intel Mac Pro. Perhaps a higher spaced processor on it will give you the power you need for a good price and also last for a few years.

 

[Donoban]

Won't work because it's a driver problem for a device he's using.

It would have to be tested.

But like other have suggested, a cheap windows laptop and remote to it on your local network when needed would 100% work.

Only if OP went Windows back in 1995. This post would never exist. Lolz.

 

[btrach144]

You work 40 hours inside windows. You need a windows computer.

Lots of nice high end windows machines.

 

[currocj]

In this case it seems you have 3 options:
1. Keep using the 2019 until you can't, and then review again when it fails to be usable for you.
2. Switch entirely to Windows.
3. Get a Windows computer but connect to it using Microsoft Remote Desktop from the Mac. This would still give you clipboard support and let you maintain access to the Mac apps you're currently using.

option3 is my recommendation...but to each his own

 

[jakey rolling]

The problem is the software. Ergo, stop using the software. If you can’t, find a new job. Simple.

Yes, OP should shut down his entire oilfield servicing business because he can't run his crucial hardware on the same laptop that he uses to make home movies. Sounds like a solid plan.

 

[masotime]

Yes, OP should shut down his entire oilfield servicing business because he can't run his crucial hardware on the same laptop that he uses to make home movies. Sounds like a solid plan.

Yeah that’s different. If the OP actually owns the business, then it’s time to look for new software or build better software.

Being tied to software that cannot scale is a time bomb for the business. If the OP actually cares enough about the business they own it’s time to effect change in the way things are run.

 

[jakey rolling]

Yeah that’s different. If the OP actually owns the business, then it’s time to look for new software or build better software.

OP already said that this software was written to run highly specialized equipment that is produced by one supplier (the same supplier that writes the software). There is no "new/better software" that OP can look for.

Being tied to software that cannot scale is a time bomb for the business. If the OP actually cares enough about the business they own it’s time to effect change in the way things are run.

The software actually does scale, but it requires more powerful hardware to do the level of analysis that is now being demanded by OP's clients. The software handles this quite well, based on what OP has said.

The company that manufactures the equipment and writes the software is still in business and still supports the software - but like pretty much all instrumentation software, the software is written for a specific platform and is only fully supported on that platform. The most likely reason why no new versions have come out since 2015 is because the platform on which that software is meant to run is still current and fully supported. This is common in the instrumentation industry, and it is not because instrumentation suppliers are cheap or lazy, it is because this kind of software needs to remain stable and untouched unless there is an absolute need to change it.

The only thing in this situation that is a "time bomb for the business" is using an unsupported platform to run a critical piece of hardware. OP has gotten away with doing so so far, but it is absolutely not something that should ever be recommended. The one and only proper solution for OP is to work with the software vendor to determine the proper hardware and software requirements he needs to put in place to be fully supported by the manufacturer.

 

[masotime]

The software actually does scale, but it requires more powerful hardware to do the level of analysis that is now being demanded by OP's clients. The software handles this quite well, based on what OP has said.

Can you elaborate on this?

For me, scaling, at minimum, is the ability to distribute this through parallel processing loads, preferably on cloud compute. With parallel processing, you’re able to do the analysis without having a single device with “more powerful hardware”. With cloud compute, it’s possible to perform the work asynchronously and have fallbacks in case the analysis fails on one machine.

 

[jakey rolling]

For me, scaling, at minimum, is the ability to distribute this through parallel processing loads, preferably on cloud compute. With parallel processing, you’re able to do the analysis without having a single device with “more powerful hardware”. With cloud compute, it’s possible to perform the work asynchronously and have fallbacks in case the analysis fails on one machine.

In OP's case, the software needs to be able to run without a reliable internet connection. This would limit the ability to offload processing to a cloud computing cluster. According to OP's post, however, the software does make use of whatever computing resources are given to it, so it will scale with hardware.

While I agree that being able to offload onto bigger remote parallel-processing hardware is ideal, there are a lot of workloads for which that is not entirely feasible. I think your idea of "scalability" is a tad narrow.

 

[masotime]

While I agree that being able to offload onto bigger remote parallel-processing hardware is ideal, there are a lot of workloads for which that is not entirely feasible. I think your idea of "scalability" is a tad narrow.

Fair enough. What would be a broader definition of "scalability"? It seems to me that throwing better hardware at a problem isn't particularly scalable because there are limits. It's kind of why parallel processing became more prominent in recent years? Individual processing power wasn't growing as fast as workloads, which seems to me to be the case here.

At the very least, I would consider that the software's algorithm could serve to be improved to better utilize parallelization compute, if an online approach is not possible. Given the vendor's lack of updates to the software, the same red flag applies, and the OP should start looking for new software.

 

[ipaqrat]

Fair enough. What would be a broader definition of "scalability"? It seems to me that throwing better hardware at a problem isn't particularly scalable because there are limits. It's kind of why parallel processing became more prominent in recent years? Individual processing power wasn't growing as fast as workloads, which seems to me to be the case here.

At the very least, I would consider that the software's algorithm could serve to be improved to better utilize parallelization compute, if an online approach is not possible. Given the vendor's lack of updates to the software, the same red flag applies, and the OP should start looking for new software.

There are quite a few workloads that cannot be parallelized due to how data sets must be processed sequentially. When one function on a set must be complete and frozen, because the next stage of calculations need that answer to start with. This is how a lot of process modeling works, it's not just the FINAL answer (42), but how the question was formed over the time range, chronologically.

So yeah, OP owns the company. Furthermore, it's not an off-the-shelf app like Mathmatica. As I understood OP to say, the company's line of business is INSTRUMENTS, and the software is their own home-brew for their own gear. There will be no "looking for new software."

Bit of a pickle. But only one of them little cocktail pickles. Procuring a workable PC even just for this application is an easy, cheap, first world solution.

 

[masotime]

There are quite a few workloads that cannot be parallelized due to how data sets must be processed sequentially. When one function on a set must be complete and frozen, because the next stage of calculations need that answer to start with. This is how a lot of process modeling works, it's not just the FINAL answer (42), but how the question was formed over the time range, chronologically.

Yes I do agree with this. However we don't know this is the case for OP's software though. I've been looking through the posts - what I've seen mentioned is that it uses a lot of RAM - which could be an inefficient utilization of resources.

 

[masotime]

Bit of a pickle. But only one of them little cocktail pickles. Procuring a workable PC even just for this application is an easy, cheap, first world solution.

This does seem like the best option. I read that the OP wants to retire in 5 years? Hopefully they will be able to exit before the workloads scale beyond PC processing capabilities.

 

[masotime]

So the OP's posts were very meandering without giving all the information up front. I have it summarized here:

• User's Background: Using a 2019 MacBook Pro (MBP) for work, heavily reliant on niche Windows-only software for data processing related to engineering instruments.
• Software Compatibility Issues: New M3 Max MacBook doesn't support this critical software, even with attempts using Parallels and Fusion.
• Software Specifics:
  • Unique and Proprietary: Less than 500 users worldwide, no alternatives, no updates since 2015.
  • Intensive Processing Needs: Performs finite element analysis on large data sets, very processor and RAM intensive. Recent data processing took about 3 hours.
• Operational Challenges:
  • Data Growth: Increasing data size over time, demanding more computing power.
  • High Usage: Software used 30-40 hours a week, integral to daily work processes.
  • Workflow Integration: Constant data transfer between the software and other Mac-based activities.
• Hardware and OS Constraints:
  • Compatibility with Windows 11 ARM: Current setup incompatible.
  • MBP Limitations: Concerns about future support for Intel-based Macs by Apple.
• Parallelization Potential:
  • The data processing tasks, especially those involving large data sets and finite element analysis, are potentially parallelizable, which could significantly reduce computing time if run on a more capable system.
• Work Environment and Mobility:
  • Remote and Mobile Work: Often works in remote locations with no cell or internet service.
  • Integration with Other Devices: Heavy reliance on Apple ecosystem for personal and professional work.
• Company Ownership and Software Dependency:
  • Sole Responsibility: Owns the company and is solely responsible for decision-making.
  • Hardware Recommendations: Software requires high-powered hardware, recommended 64 GB RAM.
  • Vendor Relationship: Challenging relationship with the software vendor, compared to dynamics in "The Founder" movie.
• Long-Term Considerations:
  • Data and Requirements Growth: Clients demanding more detailed information, leading to exponential data and computing time increase.
  • Retirement Plans: Needs a solution to last for approximately 5 more years until retirement.

 

[masotime]

Looking through it - my stand remains unchanged. Online or Offline, it's clear to me the software does not scale. It has to be updated to meet the new requirements that clients are demanding of OP. It could be algorithmic streamlining, or it could be more efficient use of memory, but without an improvement to the software - the key problem isn't really being solved.

Throwing new hardware at the problem is a band aid, it will eventually fail. It really just seems like a matter of whether it can be managed within the OP's retirement timeframe if new software solutions aren't found.

 

[RigSatMe]

I am not sure if this is the right place for this or not but I am really bummed out. I have been using a 2019 MBP that I bought new and it has been great. There is some really niche proprietary software that I use daily for my work that only runs on windows. There are no alternatives to this software and probably less than 500 people in the world use it and the developers will not update it. They haven’t made any changes since 2015.

Anyway I have used this software on my 2019 MBP with windows running on fusion and it works great and has for years. I got my new M3 Max and this software will not run on it. I tried parallels and fusion and it will not work.

I am so disappointed and am at a loss on what to do. I have been using Mac since 2012 for everything except for a couple windows only programs. The data that this one program uses is getting bigger and bigger with time and I really need a newer faster computer but I think I already have the fastest intel MBP.

It seems my options are either stick with my old 2019 MBP or switch over to a windows laptop. I am not all excited about that. I use this one program 30-40 hours a week and am constantly copying and pasting info to and from it. I do everything aside from this program on the Mac side.

The world is changing! Find an alternative!

 

[zach-coleman]

I don't understand why some users do not research enough before complaining that what they purchased is useless or not up to their use case...

A software designed for x86 will not work on ARM architecture unless the software developer created multiple versions for multiple platforms... In the case of this software that you won't ever namedrop, if it is already the latest version but only designed for x86 Windows, you don't have much of a choice but to buy a more powerful Wintel computer...

Windows for ARM supports emulation in some situations. It’s a software with 500 users. How would he be able to know unless he tried?

 

[zach-coleman]

Looking through it - my stand remains unchanged. Online or Offline, it's clear to me the software does not scale. It has to be updated to meet the new requirements that clients are demanding of OP. It could be algorithmic streamlining, or it could be more efficient use of memory, but without an improvement to the software - the key problem isn't really being solved.

Throwing new hardware at the problem is a band aid, it will eventually fail. It really just seems like a matter of whether it can be managed within the OP's retirement timeframe if new software solutions aren't found.

Some equipment is just like this. Either you buy a new multi thousand dollar piece of hardware or they tell you to pound sand. There are still some windows 95 computers in circulation for this exact reason.

 

[masotime]

I wasn’t really interested in the platform problem. Some people might be Apple fans, others might suggest using dedicated windows hardware.

My point (and original intent is to help OP) is that all this is missing the forest for the trees.

The software does not scale.

Until that is solved, any proposed hardware based solution here is just a stopgap. The growing requirements for OP’s business are exceeding the limits of the software’s abilities.

It wouldn’t matter if it _did_ run on macOS. It’s still a time bomb if the vendor doesn’t provide better software.

Some equipment is just like this. Either you buy a new multi thousand dollar piece of hardware or they tell you to pound sand. There are still some windows 95 computers in circulation for this exact reason.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Astounding amount of bad advice in this thread:

"no x86 software can ever work on Mac"

"Get a new job even though you're retiring in a few years"

"Name and shame the vendor even though there are already two people in this thread wondering if they are indeed the vendor you're talking about"

"Build a desktop PC even though you're doing this work remotely out in the field"

"Use a low powered windows laptop even though you said it's very heavy computing tasks that you're trying to speed up"

"Use different software even though there literally isn't an alternative"

"Remote into a windows computer even though a) you're out where there's no internet and b) the computer has to plug directly into a licence dongle and an instrument"

My advice to the OP is to stop paying the vendor and use the money to build a time machine so you can go back and not make this thread.