What actually needs to happen before we can run windows on an M1 mac?

[asr113]

Simple question but i'm a bit confused by the topic. I used to use parallels back in the day to run windows on my 2012 macbook pro. What needs to happen before the same can be done on M1 Macs? I see parallels seem to be making progress but some people say the function of parallels can already me done using native M1 mac functions?

Is it purely that we are waiting for an ARM version of windows?

 

[leman]

You can run Windows for ARM Insider builds using Parallels technical preview on M1 Macs today. Whatever needs to happen has kind of already happened

One big issue with all this is that Windows for ARM is still an OEM only product. Microsoft does not give the end user an option to purchase a license. However, since Parallels are working on this, I would assume that some sort of agreement is being negotiated. I think we'll see official, 100% legit Windows on ARM virtualization on Apple Silicon by the end of the year. Of course, x86 compatibility will probably remain hit and miss.

If you are talking about native booting of Windows, that's a more complicated matter. Someone would need to write and maintain the drivers and I doubt that either Apple or Microsoft would be interested in doing it.

 

[asr113]

Ok so if i wanted to run windows apps (not for business reasons) then the option is potentially there with the current parallel technical preview? The caveat presumably being that some windows programs may not be compatible with x86?

Thanks for the answer btw, nice and succinct!

 

[SecuritySteve]

You can run x86 apps on the ARM technical preview version of Windows via a translation layer - however performance is not that great. This shouldn't hold you up unless you're trying to do graphics intensive work, which has always sucked in a VM.

 

[dmccloud]

Virtualization is the only path going forward, so the ball is in Microsoft's court regarding this. While you can run the Technical Preview of Windows on ARM (WoA), the performance is sluggish (although still better than Microsoft's own Surface Pro X, which also runs an ARM-based processor). Until Microsoft opens up WoA licensing (currently only system builders can get licenses), people wanting to use Windows on an M1 Mac have limited options and even less actual support.

 

[Toutou]

Ok so if i wanted to run windows apps (not for business reasons) then the option is potentially there with the current parallel technical preview? The caveat presumably being that some windows programs may not be compatible with x86?

x86 is the architecture of Intel and AMD CPUs, ARM is Apple Silicon.

You can run ARM Mac software on M1 Macs natively and x86 (Intel) Mac software via Rosetta 2.

You can run an ARM version of Windows in Parallels (please note that both Windows on ARM and Apple Silicon Parallels are currently basically beta software), but that's a virtual machine (VM), so there is a performance hit.

And inside the ARM version on Windows you can run ARM Windows software (of which there is very little) or x86 Windows software (the usual stuff, most PC programs ever written, most games etc), but that one goes through the Windows equivalent of Rosetta 2, a piece of software that makes the OS see x86 code as ARM code.

So running your old normal x86 Windows software on a M1 Mac is unfortunately the most complicated thing -- the x86 code is consumed by the Windows emulation/translation thingy in order to run on your ARM Windows installation, and the ARM Windows computer itself a virtual machine running inside macOS. The performance hit of this configuration is currently quite noticeable for use cases like gaming (only old or simple games are playable) or multimedia work, but very manageable for use cases like running your favorite tax preparation software.

 

[robco74]

Running anything other than older Windows games likely won't be possible on Apple Silicon running via VM.

BootCamp is much more complicated. If you check out the Asahi Linux blog, one of the issues they've faced is, unlike x86 systems from AMD and Intel, there aren't standard processes for ARM for booting and loading the OS. For BootCamp to work, Apple and MS would need to agree on a standard boot process. Apple would also need to provide WoA drivers for all the critical hardware, including DirectX drivers for the GPU.

I would guess that Apple looked at the data and found that the number of users dual booting their systems was too low to bother at all, or at least it wasn't enough to make it a critical launch feature. Ditto with eGPU support.

For MS, it's a mixed bag. Apple has a rather commanding performance lead. Even with the performance penalty of running in a VM, M1 can run WoA faster just by brute force compared to MS's own Surface Pro X. It's a double-edged sword. Mac users are a potential new market, and would boost WoA adoption, but potentially at a cost of MS's own hardware sales.

 

[asr113]

Helpful answers, thanks everyone!

 

[ADGrant]

Running anything other than older Windows games likely won't be possible on Apple Silicon running via VM.

BootCamp is much more complicated. If you check out the Asahi Linux blog, one of the issues they've faced is, unlike x86 systems from AMD and Intel, there aren't standard processes for ARM for booting and loading the OS. For BootCamp to work, Apple and MS would need to agree on a standard boot process. Apple would also need to provide WoA drivers for all the critical hardware, including DirectX drivers for the GPU.

I would guess that Apple looked at the data and found that the number of users dual booting their systems was too low to bother at all, or at least it wasn't enough to make it a critical launch feature. Ditto with eGPU support.

For MS, it's a mixed bag. Apple has a rather commanding performance lead. Even with the performance penalty of running in a VM, M1 can run WoA faster just by brute force compared to MS's own Surface Pro X. It's a double-edged sword. Mac users are a potential new market, and would boost WoA adoption, but potentially at a cost of MS's own hardware sales.

Most current Intel Macs have the T2 ARM co-processor. This makes it harder to boot non Apple operating systems from the system drive. You can boot Windows via Bootcamp but booting other operating systems from requires an external storage device and changing the default security policy, From the Apple website :

"When an Intel-based Mac computer with the Apple T2 Security Chip is turned on, the chip performs a secure boot from its Boot ROM in the same fashion as iPhone, iPad, and a Mac with Apple silicon"

Boot process for an Intel-based Mac

Learn about boot process security for an Intel-based Mac.

support.apple.com

 

[leman]

Running anything other than older Windows games likely won't be possible on Apple Silicon running via VM.

Depends on the quality of the Windows x86 transpiler and the Parallels driver stack. DirectX 12 might be a challenge to implement fully. Vulkan is less of a problem since high quality, high-performance Vulkan to Metal layer is available under Apache license.

BootCamp is much more complicated. If you check out the Asahi Linux blog, one of the issues they've faced is, unlike x86 systems from AMD and Intel, there aren't standard processes for ARM for booting and loading the OS. For BootCamp to work, Apple and MS would need to agree on a standard boot process. Apple would also need to provide WoA drivers for all the critical hardware, including DirectX drivers for the GPU.

And of course let’s not forget that Apple is using custom low-latency interrupts, custom CPU synchronization and custom storage controllers. All this needs changes to the kernel.