I think your post is mixing/confusing bootcamp with the emulator. Apple said clearly they are ready to support Bootcamp of Windows on Arm. And to be honest I don't think that would require more resources than Intel Bootcamp. The bulk of the work is on Microsoft to adapt Windows on Arm to Apple Silicon, not Apple.
Errr, no. As the CPU and GPU component vendor Apple would be required to submit to Microsoft firmware/boot/driver support to the Windows team for those components. Apple isn't doing that. Apple would have to all the work that Intel/AMD/Nvidia commonly do for Windows. That was almost a 'punt' for the transition to x86. Intel did effectively all the work for iGPU support and the CPU work. AMD/NVidia add-in GPU cards had some EFI and Apple BIOS quirks to them that Apple (and GPU vendors) had to work out with Microsoft but post boot phase it is laregly the Windows work those 3rd party component vendors had already done for Windows that largely matter.
All Apple had to do for Windows bootcamp work is do drivers for Apple specific hardware ; which as a much smaller scope ( trackpads, monitors , etc. ) with much smaller driver stacks.
It is a lot of work that requires lots more open communication about underlying components that Apple is communicating. ( so more work in software (driver/firmware) , communcation ( documentation ) , and relationships ( more roadmap synching , joint support system communications channels , etc. )
Apple is largely punting. There is no technical support at the boot level. There are no CPU/GPU driver/firmware support for non macOS provided. ( VM's are all leveraging emulated GPUs). No kernel extensions for virtualizations ( in macOS required to use Apple's hypervisor/virtualization framework. )
So there is tons more work required for robust support. Apple just isn't sighing up for robust support. So yeah there is "same" work if 'punt' on all the additional responsibilities. Apple has scoped the work down to "as much or less".
P.S. Bootcamp had three major components to that general name umbrella
a. managing the partitioning for Windows ( MBR support (mirroring,etc.) , NTFS/FAT partitions , etc. )
b. boot support ( BIOS and relatively late in progression UEFI )
c. Windows Drivers ( drivers to support the Apple specific hardware (and semi-custom boot environment),
Apple is doing nothing on b. There is a technically unsupported system to optionaly drop in a 3rd party 'stub' that can do that, but Apple is doing nothing directly. c. As i pointed out above... there is more to cover now and Apple is doing less. As for partition mangement... conceptually you could wipe out the mac partitioons on a early intel mac and still have a working system . Now core boot system has mac elements to it (UEFI is effectively replaced by a stripped down 'recovery' macOS. )
What Apple is definitely never going to do is the Windows emulator suggested by the OP. This would require far more resources and might even fail to provide acceptable results.
Apple is going to punt the work to others. It is cheaper for apple to have other folks do this work.
But emulated GPUs... that is already being done (even back in the Intel VM era it is still a emulated GPU).
Apple did "take over" a subset of the VM machine work. All the VM vendors ( VMWare , Parallels , etc.) have to use Apple's hypervisor/virtualation framework. At least on macOS. And there is no technical support on "build your own from scratch".
As for Apple Silicon market share, they only moved from 8.1% to 8.9%, much less that what I was expecting.... I had predicted Apple Silicon to bring Macs solidly in the double digit market share in a couple of years, possibly doubling the market share to over 15%, or even get to 20%, and that doesn't seem to be happening at all.
Not going to happen. Generally Apple has used the shift to Apple Silicon to drive prices (or minimally at least margins ) on Macs higher. Higher prices aren't going to lead to massive market share gains. Apple doesn't want "Market share", they only want a subset of the profitable systems that don't require 'high touch' support overhead (and/or massive BTO SKUs ).
As Apple passes on inflation cost increases that will only get even more locked in.
Apple's share in relatively high disposable income USA is higher than their worldwide market. The problem will also be that the high income markets are highly saturated. Apple is getting a pretty decent uptick in churning their 100M mac base into upgrades, but once most of those folks have upgraded ... then what? What is happening is that are capturing folks that are moving at this time. But that isn't necessarily the same as vastly growing the user base. (especially if crank up recycling efforts. So fewer "hand me down" systems driven by new system sales. ).
I guess most M1 buyers were previous Mac owners, not so much Windows users....
AMD, Intel , Nvidia, etc aren't sitting still. IF look at those Gartner/IDC numbers Dell has gains. Lenovo and HP lost quareter over quarter 'share' . But if look at the unit numbers. Dell sold more new systems quarter over quarter than Apple did. Their percentage share increase is smaller than Apples only because they sell lots more than Apple in the first place.
Intel and AMD are in middle of transitioning to new line ups of mobile offerings. Once that is solid things should get incrementally better for Windows side. [ but inflation and economic uncertainity in many places in the worlds is drag a though. Plus folks have binged over last couple of years. boom-bust cycle. ]
. I’m guessing Docker is like Crossover but for a more business focus.
