Parallels and Windows 10 for ARM

[gank41]

I’ve been using a Win10 ARM VM (4 cores & 4GB RAM allocated) and an Ubuntu ARM VM (2 Cores & 4 GB RAM Allocated) on my M1 MBP (16GB/2TB) since the initial Parallels Tech Preview was released, and am very happy. I was able to install ACID Pro v8 and CD Architect v5(!) both from disk in an attached Apple SuperDrive, and both apps work just as I was using them prior on my Intel based Windows 10 VM (that I won’t be able to use anymore). I’ve updated the Win10 VM to Win11 and everything‘s still working well. Haven’t had any issues to report. I’m also using both the Win11 & Ubuntu VM’s for various “Work Apps” and VPN & Citrix stuff, and everything again continues to work as I’d expect.

As for the Activation v Licensing arguments, I think Microsoft is just not saying ANYTHING at all to any vendors about how to proceed, leaving VMWare to interpret “the law” one way and Parallels another.. Check out the details for the Supported Guest Operating Systems that can be created as Parallels Desktop Machines on M1 Macs, it shows “Windows 11 (when released)***”

The *** meaning:
Running VMs on Apple M1 Mac computers in Parallels Desktop 17 requires ARM-based operating systems (OSs). Customers who install guest operating systems in Parallels Desktop virtual machines are responsible for making sure that they are compliant with each OSs’ end-user licensing agreement (EULA).

So, we’re back to the Activation v Licensing argument again… FWIW I was able to Activate my Win10 ARM VM using an older Activation Key purchased in like 2018 or something, and everything is continuing to reflect that it’s activated, now on Windows 11. Once Win11 is officially released, I might end up just buying a “Windows 11 Pro” Digital License & activation key from Microsoft directly, just to be “safe”, but it’s my understanding that they allow 2 activations on VM as opposed to one on hardware? I could be wrong with that.

As for Parallels 17 itself, I’ve only used it sparingly yesterday as it was just released, but v16.5 has been great for me after initially needing some more Linux support. Now everything I need to do’s been running a o k

 

[satcomer]

Looks like Parreles marking made a mistake and they could have released it at the next new Mac OS update presentation or sessions!

 

[4743913]

Looks like Parreles marking made a mistake and they could have released it at the next new Mac OS update presentation or sessions!

they are probably smart enough to know not to attach themselves to another rollout of a buggy barely beta version of macOS. It's easier to solve your own bugs when you release for a 9 month old macOS instead of being blamed for what is actually apple developer incompetence.

 

[Internaut]

The only concern I have with Windows is occasionally have to trash it and start again. Otherwise, I don't think any of us who are in the Windows Insider programme are doing anything that would lie outside of the T&Cs.

 

[4743913]

The only concern I have with Windows is occasionally have to trash it and start again. Otherwise, I don't think any of us who are in the Windows Insider programme are doing anything that would lie outside of the T&Cs.

back up the vm

 

[dmccloud]

Looks like Parallels just released Version 17 today, with better M1 support and Windows 11 support...

Upgrade to the latest version of Parallels Desktop for Mac

Just released! The latest version of Parallels Desktop for Mac. Optimized for the latest macOS. See all the new features.

www.parallels.com

 

[jlc1978]

That's all I want too. For now I'm not even going to pay for the upgrade of parallels.

Same here. I cancelled my sub as I can use Fusion fine on my Intel Mac and live without Parallels on my M1 Air. If and when a legal path to WinARM exists I'll reconsider.

 

[theluggage]

I want Microsoft to say that they are going to allow purchase of Windows on Arm licenses but so far I've seen nothing from them.

Even if MS don't do a U-turn and start selling consumer licenses, they do license it to computer makers, so someone could presumably strike a license deal with them to sell an official hypervisor/Windows bundle (which was how SoftWindows was sold in the past).

I don't know what is stopping Parallels and/or VMWare from doing this (and I literally mean don't know - I'm not being rhetorical - I assume there's a reason). Perhaps MS refused, wanted too much money, perhaps VMWare/Parallels don't anticipate selling enough to be viable?

Also MS might not want to endorse Windows on M1 while there's still 32-bit ARM code in there that will just crash on an M1 or, worse, because it will never support third-party 32-bit apps. Maybe there's some hope with Win11 - you'd have thought that, long term, they'd want to drop 32 bit from the ARM, and Win11 seems a bit more prepared to sacrifice backward compatibility (...they've dropped the 32-bit version but not, AFAIK, 32-bit support).

In any case, with Win11 now in preview I can't imagine anything happening on this front until the full release.

 

[jdb8167]

Even if MS don't do a U-turn and start selling consumer licenses, they do license it to computer makers, so someone could presumably strike a license deal with them to sell an official hypervisor/Windows bundle (which was how SoftWindows was sold in the past).

I don't know what is stopping Parallels and/or VMWare from doing this (and I literally mean don't know - I'm not being rhetorical - I assume there's a reason). Perhaps MS refused, wanted too much money, perhaps VMWare/Parallels don't anticipate selling enough to be viable?

Also MS might not want to endorse Windows on M1 while there's still 32-bit ARM code in there that will just crash on an M1 or, worse, because it will never support third-party 32-bit apps. Maybe there's some hope with Win11 - you'd have thought that, long term, they'd want to drop 32 bit from the ARM, and Win11 seems a bit more prepared to sacrifice backward compatibility (...they've dropped the 32-bit version but not, AFAIK, 32-bit support).

In any case, with Win11 now in preview I can't imagine anything happening on this front until the full release.

I find Microsoft's silence on the issue of selling Windows on Arm licenses a bit odd for the company. Microsoft isn't usually a very secretive company and that makes me worry that they really don't want to license Win11 on Arm to anyone not bundling it with their own hardware. Perhaps they are trying to see if they can prompt Apple to license it to provide for bootcamp. If so, I think they have very little chance of that given Apple's public comments on the subject.

 

[theluggage]

Microsoft isn't usually a very secretive company and that makes me worry that they really don't want to license Win11 on Arm to anyone not bundling it with their own hardware.

The question is - apart from Mac users - who would buy it? There's not many ARM motherboards around that would let a DIY-er, or even a smaller system builder, build a "regular" ARM PC - maybe not zero, but negligible alongside the x86 market. Outside the mobile market (which Windows has totally lost to iOS and Android) the only things out there in quantity are the Raspberry Pi and its clones. Last I looked, you could run the "insider preview" edition of W10 on the Pi which is probably enough to satisfy any curiosity (and there's been a limited IoT version of Windows for years) - the tinkerers that use Pis will be drawn to Linux and open source stuff (which is way ahead in terms of ARM support - Linux has been running on ARM since the 1990s). Prior to the M1, most of the industry interest in ARM was directed towards servers running Linux.

Also, at this stage in the game, I guess MS are a bit dependent on ARM hardware makers to fully test installers, drivers, bootloaders etc. on their hardware - at least up to the level of stability for a consumer release - the "insider preview" route gives them a figleaf for any problems: as noted, Windows-for-ARM flat out won't install on M1 "bare metal" - Parallels etc. have a hypervisor to present Windows with the virtual hardware it wants (also: I repeat the previous note about ARM32 stuff not running on M1).

Plus, as far as I know we haven't yet seen how Windows 11 licenses are going to be sold even on x86 - just that it's going to be a free upgrade from Win10. It would be a bit of a shocker if they weren't available but there could be a shake-up in pricing, distribution - or Windows licensing could get tied to Office 365 subscriptions. I don't think we'll hear anything about WoA licensing until that cat is out of the bag.

I think we're also moving into a post-peak-Windows world. Not that Windows is going away anytime soon, but its days of heady growth could be over. MS are bundling a Linux subsystem/VM with Windows, have released SQL Server for Linux, Windows 11 will now run Android apps and MS have dropped their proprietary Web Browser engine for Chromium (time to book that skiing holiday in Hades folks!) MS aren't trying to make Windows the One True OS any more. Lots of applications are being fully or partly replaced by web apps or even iOS/mobile Apps. You may still need Windows today but maybe not a few years down the line - and if you need it for work, I bet you an internet that, in a few years time, you'll be required to do it via a Windows-in-the-cloud service to comply with data protection regs.

 

[jdb8167]

The question is - apart from Mac users - who would buy it?

Well the number of M1+ Mac users are going to keep increasing. While windows is less important than it was a few years ago, it still is needed in a lot of corporate and enterprise environments. But because it is needed for mostly legacy software, performance isn’t a big requirement. A Windows VM running on Arm and Win11 emulating x86 and x86-64 is probably fine for most uses.

Anyone hoping for games on DirectX are probably going to be disappointed though.

 

[Digitalguy]

Well the number of M1+ Mac users are going to keep increasing. While windows is less important than it was a few years ago, it still is needed in a lot of corporate and enterprise environments. But because it is needed for mostly legacy software, performance isn’t a big requirement. A Windows VM running on Arm and Win11 emulating x86 and x86-64 is probably fine for most uses.

Anyone hoping for games on DirectX are probably going to be disappointed though.

Great point. I constantly see criticism of Windows on Arm virtualized on Mac.
Let me quote a comment from a Windows site I am subscribed to:
"This means you are now running Windows ARM version as as VM on a M1 Mac....so performance hit right there.....then in Windows on ARM you are emulating the Win32/64 bit app. I can't imagine the performance would anywhere close to even OK. What a train wreck."

This person doesn't realize that for a lot of software this works extremely well. I have several Win32 apps running on my Parallels VM and they run great. They don't require much power, just like MS Office can run on anything fine as long as it has an SSD. So Parallels on M1 shouldn't work in theory but it works great in practice for a lot of software.
Because again, if you need demanding software (gaming, video editing etc.) you are either running it on the Mac itself or if not available you don't get a M1 Mac to run it....

 

[Internaut]

Great point. I constantly see criticism of Windows on Arm virtualized on Mac.
Let me quote a comment from a Windows site I am subscribed to:
"This means you are now running Windows ARM version as as VM on a M1 Mac....so performance hit right there.....then in Windows on ARM you are emulating the Win32/64 bit app. I can't imagine the performance would anywhere close to even OK. What a train wreck."

This person doesn't realize that for a lot of software this works extremely well. I have several Win32 apps running on my Parallels VM and they run great. They don't require much power, just like MS Office can run on anything fine as long as it has an SSD. So Parallels on M1 shouldn't work in theory but it works great in practice for a lot of software.
Because again, if you need demanding software (gaming, video editing etc.) you are either running it on the Mac itself or if not available you don't get a M1 Mac to run it....

For the Intel software I've run so far, inside an ARM Windows VM on my lowly, base Air, I get the impression that Microsoft's Intel emulation is on par with Rosetta. For ARM Windows running on bare metal (i.e. a Surface Pro X), it's the hardware that is letting Microsoft's software down at the moment!

 

[Digitalguy]

For the Intel software I've run so far, inside an ARM Windows VM on my lowly, base Air, I get the impression that Microsoft's Intel emulation is on par with Rosetta. For ARM Windows running on bare metal (i.e. a Surface Pro X), it's the hardware that is letting Microsoft's software down at the moment!

Absolutely right! The real issue with Windows on Arm is that 8CX / SQ1/2 are just a variant of the SD855 (the one running on my Galaxy S10...). It's not only far behind M1, it's not even close to A12X.... (not even to A12 to be honest). So that's the big bottleneck of Windows on Arm... An (old) phone chip....
Because while Apple has been working on AX chips since the A6X and has been decoupling from iPhone A chips with A9X, A10X, A12X and M1, Qualcomm has remained focused on phone chips, so no wonder they are way behind...
They are trying to catch up with the acquisition of Nuvia, let's see how it ends up next year....

 

[jlc1978]

This person doesn't realize that for a lot of software this works extremely well. I have several Win32 apps running on my Parallels VM and they run great. They don't require much power, just like MS Office can run on anything fine as long as it has an SSD. So Parallels on M1 shouldn't work in theory but it works great in practice for a lot of software.

I have the same experience - I just need to run Office/Visio occasionally to check compatiblity and run PowerBI as well. A seperate machine would sit idle most of the time and the there is the issue of file transfers and ensuring you are working on the latest version.

Because again, if you need demanding software (gaming, video editing etc.) you are either running it on the Mac itself or if not available you don't get a M1 Mac to run it....

Yea, if you hav a specific use case get a machine designed for it.

For the Intel software I've run so far, inside an ARM Windows VM on my lowly, base Air, I get the impression that Microsoft's Intel emulation is on par with Rosetta. For ARM Windows running on bare metal (i.e. a Surface Pro X), it's the hardware that is letting Microsoft's software down at the moment!

I think part of the issue is MS is not a hardware company; historically they've built software and let the hardware company sort out performance issues.

Absolutely right! The real issue with Windows on Arm is that 8CX / SQ1/2 are just a variant of the SD855 (the one running on my Galaxy S10...). It's not only far behind M1, it's not even close to A12X.... (not even to A12 to be honest). So that's the big bottleneck of Windows on Arm... An (old) phone chip....
Because while Apple has been working on AX chips since the A6X and has been decoupling from iPhone A chips with A9X, A10X, A12X and M1, Qualcomm has remained focused on phone chips, so no wonder they are way behind...
They are trying to catch up with the acquisition of Nuvia, let's see how it ends up next year....

The phone customer base is no doubt the biggest and so I suspect any development of chips for other devices will take a back seat until the ARM market gets big enough. It's a bit of the chicken and the egg since a small market means less interest for MS to push it which means less demand to develop chips for it.

 

[Digitalguy]

I have the same experience - I just need to run Office/Visio occasionally to check compatiblity and run PowerBI as well. A seperate machine would sit idle most of the time and the there is the issue of file transfers and ensuring you are working on the latest version.



Yea, if you hav a specific use case get a machine designed for it.



I think part of the issue is MS is not a hardware company; historically they've built software and let the hardware company sort out performance issues.



The phone customer base is no doubt the biggest and so I suspect any development of chips for other devices will take a back seat until the ARM market gets big enough. It's a bit of the chicken and the egg since a small market means less interest for MS to push it which means less demand to develop chips for it.

Microsoft has never developed an ARM chip for Surface. For those who don't know SQ1 and SQ2 are just rebranded 8CX gen 1 and 2 with some AI from MS. So Qualcomm chips.
Qualcomm never prioritized laptops and sold their flagship phone chips for laptops at Intel i7 prices.
Until last year....
M1 was a big wake up moment for Qualcomm, that's why they bought Nuvia in January for 1.4 billions and said they will make a chip competitive with Apple Silicon next year....
My guess is that it will barely compete with M1 at a time where M1X, M2 and M2X are out, but it might still be a game changer for Windows on Arm...

 

[theluggage]

Well the number of M1+ Mac users are going to keep increasing. While windows is less important than it was a few years ago, it still is needed in a lot of corporate and enterprise environments.

...but will that translate into an increasing demand for running Windows over the next, say, 3-5 years, that would justify MS/Parallels/Apple/whoever investing in development today? As you say, x86 emulation takes a big bite out of users needing to run legacy software - as does "remote desktop" access to your work PC or a cloud service. Performance-critical applications will increasingly demand "real" PCs with conventional GPUS for DirectX/OpenGL/CUDA-optimised software, and as "bespoke" business software is replaced, it's increasingly going to be with web-based or mobile Apps - at least for low-level users.

I think it comes down to what MS's plans are for Windows on ARM and their own Surface X hardware and their business in general: I don't think revenue for selling Windows licenses to consumers (rather than deals with hardware makers) is a big deal for them any more. They can make good money selling Office 365 subscriptions, other services (and Minecraft) to PC, Mac, iOS and Android users without them needing Windows. Potentially the M1 Macs could be the flagships that show the world how good WoA can be (since by all accounts, even in a VM, they leave the Surface X choking on fumes) which is good news for Windows on ARM, bad news for Surface X and may not go down well with MS's hardware partners, since the M1 has a huge head start over laptop/desktop-class ARM chips.

(However, there's always been something a bit half-hearted about the Surface range - as if MS don't want to compete too hard with Dell, HP, Lenovo et. al. rather than maybe nudge them into making their own machines more imaginative. There was a bit of a fuss from PC manufacturers when MS first announced that they'd be making PCs in competition with them, but in reality the Surface range is pretty laser-focussed on taking on Apple at Apple-like premium prices rather than bothering Dell.)

There's also the question on what priority Apple will put on maintaining compatibility with generic ARM devices (and, hence, with third party OSs under hardware virtualisation). With x86 Macs, at least up until the T1, a decent Mac was, almost by definition, also a decent PC. Now they control the OS and the hardware platform, they're free to diverge. Not having to worry about backward-compatibility with 20 year-old code and knowing that most of their software base is written to use flexible OS frameworks and can be easily re-compiled for new/improved processors gives them a huge potential advantage over Windows.

 

[Digitalguy]

...but will that translate into an increasing demand for running Windows over the next, say, 3-5 years, that would justify MS/Parallels/Apple/whoever investing in development today? As you say, x86 emulation takes a big bite out of users needing to run legacy software - as does "remote desktop" access to your work PC or a cloud service. Performance-critical applications will increasingly demand "real" PCs with conventional GPUS for DirectX/OpenGL/CUDA-optimised software, and as "bespoke" business software is replaced, it's increasingly going to be with web-based or mobile Apps - at least for low-level users.

I think it comes down to what MS's plans are for Windows on ARM and their own Surface X hardware and their business in general: I don't think revenue for selling Windows licenses to consumers (rather than deals with hardware makers) is a big deal for them any more. They can make good money selling Office 365 subscriptions, other services (and Minecraft) to PC, Mac, iOS and Android users without them needing Windows. Potentially the M1 Macs could be the flagships that show the world how good WoA can be (since by all accounts, even in a VM, they leave the Surface X choking on fumes) which is good news for Windows on ARM, bad news for Surface X and may not go down well with MS's hardware partners, since the M1 has a huge head start over laptop/desktop-class ARM chips.

(However, there's always been something a bit half-hearted about the Surface range - as if MS don't want to compete too hard with Dell, HP, Lenovo et. al. rather than maybe nudge them into making their own machines more imaginative. There was a bit of a fuss from PC manufacturers when MS first announced that they'd be making PCs in competition with them, but in reality the Surface range is pretty laser-focussed on taking on Apple at Apple-like premium prices rather than bothering Dell.)

There's also the question on what priority Apple will put on maintaining compatibility with generic ARM devices (and, hence, with third party OSs under hardware virtualisation). With x86 Macs, at least up until the T1, a decent Mac was, almost by definition, also a decent PC. Now they control the OS and the hardware platform, they're free to diverge. Not having to worry about backward-compatibility with 20 year-old code and knowing that most of their software base is written to use flexible OS frameworks and can be easily re-compiled for new/improved processors gives them a huge potential advantage over Windows.

Personally I have never used bootcamp and never understood why people make so much fuss about it... If I buy a Mac I want to run MacOS, not Window as the main OS....So virtualization is a better solution for most people. If Windows is important for my work or I need maximum performance, I buy a Windows computer (and I do have many more Windows computers than Macs)
And I don't agree on Remote Desktop being a hit on performance. Remote desktop needs great connection to work at its best. I use it everyday with all kind of software.
As for Microsoft, yes, they have little interest in bootcamp, since probably most users buy low price Windows OEM keys or use it non activated or even pirated. They prefer bundling a Windows licence with hardware and any Windows on Mac is potentially a Windows device that is not bought... I doubt many would spend hundreds of dollar on a Windows on Arm licence for Mac...

 

[gank41]

I doubt many would spend hundreds of dollar on a Windows on Arm licence for Mac...

I absolutely would. I'm currently using one of my two Win10 Pro licenses I purchased some years ago on a Win11 VM in Parallels. Even though I still have another license to use, I'd gladly purchase a License for Win11 if there was a BootCamp option.

Personally I have never used bootcamp and never understood why people make so much fuss about it... If I buy a Mac I want to run MacOS, not Window as the main OS....So virtualization is a better solution for most people.

Well, my older 2015 MBP with 16GB of RAM & 2TB of storage was Great! And having 200GB set aside to boot into Windows directly and utilize those 16GB of RAM with apps like ACID Pro, Cubase, Fruity Loops, Nuendo, WaveLab, SoundForge... I mean, I LOVE using Logic Pro on my M1 MBP, Works perfectly. And being able to utilize a VM, even if it's ARM based, I'm at least still able to go back to some older projects from my Windows days. If needed. If I could just boot directly into Windows, though? Boom. That'd be amazing.. Still being able to work on 10+ year old projects on this great new machine? I'm sold. Yup, I'd buy a license as soon as it's available.

 

[Digitalguy]

I absolutely would. I'm currently using one of my two Win10 Pro licenses I purchased some years ago on a Win11 VM in Parallels. Even though I still have another license to use, I'd gladly purchase a License for Win11 if there was a BootCamp option.


Well, my older 2015 MBP with 16GB of RAM & 2TB of storage was Great! And having 200GB set aside to boot into Windows directly and utilize those 16GB of RAM with apps like ACID Pro, Cubase, Fruity Loops, Nuendo, WaveLab, SoundForge... I mean, I LOVE using Logic Pro on my M1 MBP, Works perfectly. And being able to utilize a VM, even if it's ARM based, I'm at least still able to go back to some older projects from my Windows days. If needed. If I could just boot directly into Windows, though? Boom. That'd be amazing.. Still being able to work on 10+ year old projects on this great new machine? I'm sold. Yup, I'd buy a license as soon as it's available.

I don't know, I have the impression that bootcamp fans are a loud minority. Most people have a Windows laptop or desktop for that and/or prefer the convenience of using Mac and Windows at the same time. Personally I have bought a $8 Windows pro key for my Parallel VM in order to stop that non activated message from appearing all the time... And it works with Windows on Arm, my guess is that regular keys will work with Windows 11 on Arm too...

 

[jlc1978]

Microsoft has never developed an ARM chip for Surface. For those who don't know SQ1 and SQ2 are just rebranded 8CX gen 1 and 2 with some AI from MS. So Qualcomm chips.

My point exactly. MS isn't really in the hardware business other than to have a device assembled using other's chips.

M1 was a big wake up moment for Qualcomm, that's why they bought Nuvia in January for 1.4 billions and said they will make a chip competitive with Apple Silicon next year....
My guess is that it will barely compete with M1 at a time where M1X, M2 and M2X are out, but it might still be a game changer for Windows on Arm...

The big question is will it be for laptops or tablets/phones. My guess the latter at least at first.

I think it comes down to what MS's plans are for Windows on ARM and their own Surface X hardware and their business in general: I don't think revenue for selling Windows licenses to consumers (rather than deals with hardware makers) is a big deal for them any more. They can make good money selling Office 365 subscriptions, other services (and Minecraft) to PC, Mac, iOS and Android users without them needing Windows.

My guess is they want to sell all Windows in the Cloud as the solution and not a desktop OS other than as an OEM item.

Personally I have never used bootcamp and never understood why people make so much fuss about it... If I buy a Mac I want to run MacOS, not Window as the main OS....So virtualization is a better solution for most people. If Windows is important for my work or I need maximum performance, I buy a Windows computer (and I do have many more Windows computers than Macs)

I agree though in some case a specific app won't run well within a virtualized environment; or running native is a way to get an old machine to have a second life.

And I don't agree on Remote Desktop being a hit on performance. Remote desktop needs great connection to work at its best. I use it everyday with all kind of software.

The key is Remote desktop needs great connection to work; it is great if you are always in a place with a great connection, such as woking from home but remote desktopping into a work desktop; however if you are mobile it can be a frustrating experience.

As for Microsoft, yes, they have little interest in bootcamp, since probably most users buy low price Windows OEM keys or use it non activated or even pirated. They prefer bundling a Windows licence with hardware and any Windows on Mac is potentially a Windows device that is not bought... I doubt many would spend hundreds of dollar on a Windows on Arm licence for Mac...

My guess is they are more interested in selling virtualized cloud instances of Windows on a subscription basis. You can put Windows on an iPad/Mac/Linus box and have it work even on a lower spec or non-Intel machine.

Big iron and dumb terminals ride once again!

 

[Digitalguy]

My point exactly. MS isn't really in the hardware business other than to have a device assembled using other's chips.



The big question is will it be for laptops or tablets/phones. My guess the latter at least at first.



My guess is they want to sell all Windows in the Cloud as the solution and not a desktop OS other than as an OEM item.



I agree though in some case a specific app won't run well within a virtualized environment; or running native is a way to get an old machine to have a second life.



The key is Remote desktop needs great connection to work; it is great if you are always in a place with a great connection, such as woking from home but remote desktopping into a work desktop; however if you are mobile it can be a frustrating experience.



My guess is they are more interested in selling virtualized cloud instances of Windows on a subscription basis. You can put Windows on an iPad/Mac/Linus box and have it work even on a lower spec or non-Intel machine.

Big iron and dumb terminals ride once again!

Agree with everything. Concerning Qualcomm and Nuvia, no, this time they are really focusing on laptops, not tablets or phones (the TDP of what they are developing wouldn't fit a phone anyway, just as M1 wouldn't fit a phone in terms of TDP and even less a potential M1X)
The big difference this time is that while 8CX was just a SD855 with 3X the TDP (like a A10/12/14 with 3X the TDP, bu still the same cores etc.), which does not scale very well, the new chip, let's call it N1, will have more cores and would have a higher TDP to begin with (more similar to an M1 or M1X), with no possiblity to scale down to a phone....

 

[haralds]

I don't know, I have the impression that bootcamp fans are a loud minority. Most people have a Windows laptop or desktop for that and/or prefer the convenience of using Mac and Windows at the same time. Personally I have bought a $8 Windows pro key for my Parallel VM in order to stop that non activated message from appearing all the time... And it works with Windows on Arm, my guess is that regular keys will work with Windows 11 on Arm too...

I have had BootCamp on all my Intel Macs since the beginning. I occasionally use them for work accessory debugging and very occasionally, games. But I mostly boot them via VMware or Parallels. For regular use, VMs with virtual disks are more flexible. With Parallels' performance on M1, I will not really miss BootCamp.
Simpler is better.

 

[4743913]

Fallout New Vegas on sale right now for your M1 Parallels setup. $2.99 @ Steam.

 

[Thomas Davie]

Fallout New Vegas on sale right now for your M1 Parallels setup. $2.99 @ Steam.

Thanks for the heads up. Going to take advantage of this.

Tom