Rosetta 2 lacks support for x86 virtualization, Boot Camp not an Apple Silicon option [u]

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 110
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    mjtomlin said:
    So we’ll be back to WIntel emulation. Will be interesting to see what types of performance these types of applications can pull off.
    tjwolf said:
    Ok, I don’t get it.  I watched the keynote and could have sworn that I saw Parallels Desktop being run on their ARM Mac to show Linux running...or did I imagine that?

    That was a beta version of Parallels recompiled for Apple Silicon, runnning an ARM-based version of Linux.
    Microsoft was smart to embrace the Linux community and is adding the base run-time to Windows allowing for a more seamless communication and leveraging the benefits of Linux inside Windows.
    RoyTyrell said:
    Disappointing but predictable. Given the ubiquity of “cloud” or platform agnostic apps - maybe not a big deal.

    Still, I see a big impact on development for Microsoft Office AddIns that were previously cross-platform. Not to mention the AI accelerators just now being natively integrated in Excel. I don’t see how that gets ported to Apples hardware.

    Native apps are still a huge and important market. Some things just cannot be ported to a web interface economically or with appropriate security (see: Autodesk and every other engineering design platform)

    As massive and powerful as Apple is - it simply cannot compete with the wintel software world and that has always been its achilles heal. The only exception being Adobe.
    Name me these industry standard applications that are platform agnostic. I'm looking forward to these Digital Audio Workstation platforms that just run on any OS and perform at the same level as native applications for the consumer.

    Hell, even when we had hundreds of networked systems at NeXT or Apple running globally and all NeXT or Cocoa apps at Apple custom made for internal use only stored in some /LocalApps, /SharedApps, as one copy it was because the dynamic runtime was the same used across all these applications for NeXTSTEP/OS X and we launched them locally into RAM to run that x86, m68, HP-PA RISC, SPARC native executable which had the full accompanied set of frameworks and runtimes necessary to do so on every copy of NeXTSTEP.

    Later we created bundles for people to use separate that required all customized frameworks separate from that ubiquitous set [or so we called them as it was the same on NeXTSTEP] as the app wrapper was a series of folders with all custom frameworks and their versioning dynamically messaging against the same base frameworks all OS X systems received, out of the box.

    The amount of good stuff that got ripped out of unreleased copies of OpenStep/NeXTSTEP to appease the old Mac devs that later because OS X like all the advanced network featured applications, to system-wide custom tools, never mind the hundreds of in-house apps we used daily that not one became a third party application still has me wonder why people never questioned Steve's vision but don't shut up about Tim's vision.

    I'll never forget the day he returned as iCEO and begged everyone at NeXT to stay and talked about how Apple was going to become an Enterprise Player with 32 core server systems, blah, blah, blah. One month later it was all iMac.

    Tim has a longer term vision strategy approach because he can now that the company has maximized Steve's visions. If people think this new vision is going to change the computer industry they don't realize that Apple has no plans for it to do just that. They won't be the Intel and Microsoft of Computing in One. They will do what they've always done and that is maximize profit potentials in a few select markets while slowly investing in several others until about year five it becomes clear it's not longer a small market but a big market and keep adding to their overall stock pile of cash, slowly talking about Medical will be the biggest legacy, yet so far in the past five Apple Watches it appears they have a long way to go before anything new will arrive.

    And it won't be because of Apple Silicon. It will have to come from redesigning the entire US Health Care Industry for that to happen. And that won't happen without Congress, thus the heavy federal lobbying on both sides of the aisle to get little victories from time to time.

    Everything that Apple adds to these Processors will also be in AMD and Intel based products within the next three to five years, and at levels that impact HPC, Data Centers, etc backends on a global scale. Apple Silicon isn't promoting ARM, it's just leveraging ARM to promote vector based processing from in-house designs. They aren't doing anything that AMD and Intel, not to mention Nvidia and others are currently all developing.

    That's not what will grow Apple's footprint. Useful and ubiquitous service Original Content productions will raise them above their competition. That means News+ AppleTV+, Music, HomeKit and its future vision(s), Electric Vehicle technologies and/or actual vehicles, etc. 

    Developing a future Solar Cell panel that more closely mimics Photosynthesis thanks to the many areas of chemistry Apple has investments in would be a big future growth play. Developing Power Distribution systems would be an even bigger play. Your corporation can be all renewable but being able to develop affordable and scalable renewable solutions would be monstrous.

    Killing your platform for a few years while expecting Intel based systems to address Professional Market demands is something they should be straight up front about.
    edited June 2020 dewmeelijahgGG1
  • Reply 22 of 110
    riverkoriverko Posts: 161member
    Well, what i read, and maybe i read it wrong, is that Rosetta will not be able to translate virtualization software. It doesn’t tell that native virtualization app for Apple silicone cannot run windows. They only not announced it maybe because it is not supported yet... time will tell... and only because Apple is getting rid of Bootcamp doesn’t say exactly that there won’t be Windows possibility. Don’t forget there was Windows emulation on PowerPC Macs... not the fastest one, but it was still possible...
    edited June 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 110
    netroxnetrox Posts: 1,266member
    godrifle said:
    Disappointing. Mac on intel was the greatest dev machine ever invented. I have recommended Macs based primarily on this feature itself in my software development classes, for years. Looks like those days are over. ☹️
    ARM is literally now in billions of devices already. We have Raspberry Pi with AMD which costs ONLY $100. A lot of operating systems are being ported to ARM. Even Ubuntu is now ported to ARM. Windows is already ported to ARM.  x86 has literally run out of all its juice while ARM has plenty of room for decades to come. In just a decade, x86 will be "dead" because it just won't be able to compete against ARM anymore. 

    We need to stop clinging to legacy hardware and move forward to the future. 
    tmaymikeincamwhitelamboaudi4watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 110
    djames4242djames4242 Posts: 639member
    riverko said:
    Well, what i read, and maybe i read it wrong, is that Rosetta will not be able to translate virtualization software. It doesn’t tell that native virtualization app for Apple silicone cannot run windows. They only not announced it maybe because it is not supported yet... time will tell... and only because Apple is getting rid of Bootcamp doesn’t say exactly that there won’t be Windows possibility. Don’t forget there was Windows emulation on PowerPC Macs... not the fastest one, but it was still possible...
    Again, virtualization vs emulation. A native virtualization app for Apple Silicon may be capable of running ARM-based operating systems (such as Linux) and software via virtualization, but running Intel-based operating systems and software will now require some sort of translation/emulation. Virtual PC was one such product during the PowerPC days. It ran reasonably well for lightweight use cases, but was far too slow for most people. I ran it on a G4 Mac Mini to run the occasional work application that required Windows and I found the performance moderately acceptable for my needs. If Apple's claims of 50-100% increase in performance over Intel proves true, then emulation software may be just fine.

    I suspect we may lose things like DirectX support though which will nullify gaming.
  • Reply 25 of 110
    swat671swat671 Posts: 131member
    Intel implemented hardware assisted x86 virtualization in 2005 (VT-X). I wonder if Apple is able and willing to do something similar...

    AMD and Intel also license x86-64 ISA. It's used in other chips as well, like Via. Another thing I wonder if Apple would be able or willing to do is license the technology, or some subset of it, to make it easier to port over things like kexts and VM tech, as well as the ability to run something like Boot Camp. If Apple's not willing or able to do that, I wonder if they're willing to work with Microsoft to port over Windows 10 for ARM which already exists for Surface Pro's with Qualcomm Snapdragon SoC's.

    (Interesting. Apparently, MS just released an update that allows Windows 10 ARM to run virtual versions of Windows 10 ARM. So it is possible to run a virtual WIN10 ARM. Right now, it's only available on newer  Surface Pro X's with Qualcomm Snapdragon SoC's, but I'm sure that if Apple and MS REALLY wanted to, they could make it possible to run it on Apple chips...) 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization#Intel_virtualization_(VT-x)

    https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/235181/microsoft-makes-windows-10-on-arm-available-virtually
    dewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 110
    netrox said:
    ARM is literally now in billions of devices already. We have Raspberry Pi with AMD which costs ONLY $100. A lot of operating systems are being ported to ARM. Even Ubuntu is now ported to ARM. Windows is already ported to ARM.  x86 has literally run out of all its juice while ARM has plenty of room for decades to come. In just a decade, x86 will be "dead" because it just won't be able to compete against ARM anymore. 

    We need to stop clinging to legacy hardware and move forward to the future. 
    There is a huge need to continue virtualizing Windows-based server applications, as well as server applications running in x86_64 Linux distros, so I think it’s a little early to write off x86 hardware as legacy, and time to move on.  Heck, most banking applications still run on mainframes!
    elijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 110
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 1,487member
    Apple doesn’t need to have Rosetta do this. 

    And boot camp camp isn’t a virtual machine. It simply sets up the Mac to load windows natively and event hunts down the windows drivers for the hardware in the Mac. 

    Its RS not a virtual machine. 

    If if you need that, parallels and VMware both will be up to the task. 

    Parllels was even even doing this when Apple was using RISC PowerPC chips. 

    ‘’Apple is distancing itself from everyone else. They are leveraging what made the iPhone and iPad the best and most popular high end products in their fields and applying it to the Mac. The Mac will be faster, more efficient, and tie into the largest and most secure ecosystem there is. 

    Basically, Apple Silicon Macs are obsoleting the competition. So no need to support them directly. Third parties can tackle that. And they are already working on it with their A12Z dev kits. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 110
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,603member
    mjtomlin said:
    So we’ll be back to WIntel emulation. Will be interesting to see what types of performance these types of applications can pull off.


    tjwolf said:
    Ok, I don’t get it.  I watched the keynote and could have sworn that I saw Parallels Desktop being run on their ARM Mac to show Linux running...or did I imagine that?

    That was a beta version of Parallels recompiled for Apple Silicon, runnning an ARM-based version of Linux.



    Microsoft was smart to embrace the Linux community and is adding the base run-time to Windows allowing for a more seamless communication and leveraging the benefits of Linux inside Windows.
    RoyTyrell said:
    Disappointing but predictable. Given the ubiquity of “cloud” or platform agnostic apps - maybe not a big deal.

    Still, I see a big impact on development for Microsoft Office AddIns that were previously cross-platform. Not to mention the AI accelerators just now being natively integrated in Excel. I don’t see how that gets ported to Apples hardware.

    Native apps are still a huge and important market. Some things just cannot be ported to a web interface economically or with appropriate security (see: Autodesk and every other engineering design platform)

    As massive and powerful as Apple is - it simply cannot compete with the wintel software world and that has always been its achilles heal. The only exception being Adobe.
    Name me these industry standard applications that are platform agnostic. I'm looking forward to these Digital Audio Workstation platforms that just run on any OS and perform at the same level as native applications for the consumer.

    Hell, even when we had hundreds of networked systems at NeXT or Apple running globally and all NeXT or Cocoa apps at Apple custom made for internal use only stored in some /LocalApps, /SharedApps, as one copy it was because the dynamic runtime was the same used across all these applications for NeXTSTEP/OS X and we launched them locally into RAM to run that x86, m68, HP-PA RISC, SPARC native executable which had the full accompanied set of frameworks and runtimes necessary to do so on every copy of NeXTSTEP.

    Later we created bundles for people to use separate that required all customized frameworks separate from that ubiquitous set [or so we called them as it was the same on NeXTSTEP] as the app wrapper was a series of folders with all custom frameworks and their versioning dynamically messaging against the same base frameworks all OS X systems received, out of the box.

    The amount of good stuff that got ripped out of unreleased copies of OpenStep/NeXTSTEP to appease the old Mac devs that later because OS X like all the advanced network featured applications, to system-wide custom tools, never mind the hundreds of in-house apps we used daily that not one became a third party application still has me wonder why people never questioned Steve's vision but don't shut up about Tim's vision.

    I'll never forget the day he returned as iCEO and begged everyone at NeXT to stay and talked about how Apple was going to become an Enterprise Player with 32 core server systems, blah, blah, blah. One month later it was all iMac.

    Tim has a longer term vision strategy approach because he can now that the company has maximized Steve's visions. If people think this new vision is going to change the computer industry they don't realize that Apple has no plans for it to do just that. They won't be the Intel and Microsoft of Computing in One. They will do what they've always done and that is maximize profit potentials in a few select markets while slowly investing in several others until about year five it becomes clear it's not longer a small market but a big market and keep adding to their overall stock pile of cash, slowly talking about Medical will be the biggest legacy, yet so far in the past five Apple Watches it appears they have a long way to go before anything new will arrive.

    And it won't be because of Apple Silicon. It will have to come from redesigning the entire US Health Care Industry for that to happen. And that won't happen without Congress, thus the heavy federal lobbying on both sides of the aisle to get little victories from time to time.

    Everything that Apple adds to these Processors will also be in AMD and Intel based products within the next three to five years, and at levels that impact HPC, Data Centers, etc backends on a global scale. Apple Silicon isn't promoting ARM, it's just leveraging ARM to promote vector based processing from in-house designs. They aren't doing anything that AMD and Intel, not to mention Nvidia and others are currently all developing.

    That's not what will grow Apple's footprint. Useful and ubiquitous service Original Content productions will raise them above their competition. That means News+ AppleTV+, Music, HomeKit and its future vision(s), Electric Vehicle technologies and/or actual vehicles, etc. 

    Developing a future Solar Cell panel that more closely mimics Photosynthesis thanks to the many areas of chemistry Apple has investments in would be a big future growth play. Developing Power Distribution systems would be an even bigger play. Your corporation can be all renewable but being able to develop affordable and scalable renewable solutions would be monstrous.

    Killing your platform for a few years while expecting Intel based systems to address Professional Market demands is something they should be straight up front about.
    Since you have a deep institutional knowledge of Apple, what type of customer do you think these Apple Silicon Macs are aimed at?
    edited June 2020
  • Reply 29 of 110
    mikeincamikeinca Posts: 18member
    I so don’t care about this. Maybe this is an issue for what... 1% of users?

    im not a developer.  I’m in education.  At most we need MS Office.   Most apps are web apps. 

    Wtf you guys complaining about?   You, all of you whom so boldly proclaim you are the hardcore and future users, don’t know squat!   All the apps I need are web-based.  

    All the apps I need are web-based!!!!

    read that over and over again!!! 

    You hardcore users are so out of touch it’s actually amusing.  

    Get over yourselves.  
    edited June 2020
  • Reply 30 of 110
    michelb76michelb76 Posts: 431member
    And everyone is depressed again based on what little data there is. We're talking 4-5 years down the road before this transition is really completed. In the next two years you'll see many many improvements, and in four years time you may look back at this thread laughing. The next 2-3 years are still all about Intel Macs for most people. If you're the kind of person that buys an ARM Mac right away, you are just asking for pain. I bought a new mac last year, and it will probably last me about 6-7 years as most of my Macs have lasted 10 years. So I'll worry about the ARM situation in 6 years and not now. That's a truckload of time for stuff to happen.
    aderutterwatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 110
    croprcropr Posts: 1,080member
    For the software company I own, the main question is: can the new Macs run Docker images at (almost) native speed.  The documents are not 100% clear, but point in the wrong direction.  Which basically means that  2020 will be the year we stop buying Macs,  (With the exception of the single developer who develops an iOS front end for our cloud services)

  • Reply 32 of 110
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    cropr said:
    For the software company I own, the main question is: can the new Macs run Docker images at (almost) native speed.  The documents are not 100% clear, but point in the wrong direction.  Which basically means that  2020 will be the year we stop buying Macs,  (With the exception of the single developer who develops an iOS front end for our cloud services)

    So you keep saying. Just get on with it and stop buying Macs already. 
    aderutterfastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 110
    kimberlykimberly Posts: 410member
    Rayz2016 said:
    I suppose you could run Windows in the Cloud

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-desktop/overview

    Yeah, good point.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 110
    kimberlykimberly Posts: 410member

    anome said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    I suppose you could run Windows in the Cloud

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-desktop/overview

    That can get pricy, to the point where it's probably cheaper to just buy a Windows box and be done with it.

    There is an opportunity to start a business selling cloud computing to consumers. Anyone got a few million and an empty warehouse with good internet?
    Yes, but Public cloud can bring a lot of stuff to the table for your $$$: hardware doesn't depreciate, doesn't get obsolete, provider can look after OS patches, security, etc. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 110
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    kimberly said:

    anome said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    I suppose you could run Windows in the Cloud

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-desktop/overview

    That can get pricy, to the point where it's probably cheaper to just buy a Windows box and be done with it.

    There is an opportunity to start a business selling cloud computing to consumers. Anyone got a few million and an empty warehouse with good internet?
    Yes, but Public cloud can bring a lot of stuff to the table for your $$$: hardware doesn't depreciate, doesn't get obsolete, provider can look after OS patches, security, etc. 
    That is also a good point. I imagine for a larger company it’s cheaper than buying/selling hardware at a loss, dealing with patches, backups …

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 110
    Rayz2016 said:
    I suppose you could run Windows in the Cloud

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-desktop/overview

    I think we will probably see an ARM version of Windows. It is in Microsofts interests to see higher uptake of ARM too. If not, I guess RAS solutions will get a boost.
    edited June 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 110
    There is already Windows 10 for ARM64. For example, it's available on Microsoft Surface Pro X. Getting it running on Mac should be no problem as long as the drivers are available.
    cy_starkmanaderutterfastasleep
  • Reply 38 of 110
    I think this will be the best thing for Mac and iPads and was necessary (it may take a year or so after the first Apple silicon Macs) . Developers for iOS can make one game/app that works on the 1 billion plus iPhones and iPads and then Macs get those games (and less importantly the apps) . In reverse iPads will start running Mac software and will get much more powerful and way more Pro. It will be one platform. I think that's why they added trackpad support to iPad recently. It is another step towards that universal Apple product. I got the first taste of that using Apple Arcade which is really slick. Now it will be the convergence of all the devices and not just for games. I only use bootcamp for 1 program so I will just hold on to my Intel Mac and slide it over next to my new Apple Silicon Mac :) Bootcamp was horrible for Macs because it let developers be lazy and force the users to hack their Macs. Now if a developer can reach a billion + devices including Macs it may be way more tempting (no brainer) to make a MacApple port of their game/app. The shareholders will insist! After all iPad Pros are way more powerful than a Switch. Maybe not a PS5 but they can just tune the game from iPad Pro to the new Mac. 
    edited June 2020 aderutterwatto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 110
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Ditching Bootcamp?
    So why would someone dump a 4 digit investment and lock themselves into something with 10% market share -- and no recourse to the dominant OS with a 90% share -- particularly when equivalent hardware can be had far cheaper in the WIndows World.?

    At this point, Windows and MacOS, from a functional point of view, have reached parity.   The main advantage of MacOS is its increasingly seamless integration with iOS, iPadOS and WatchOS.   But, is that enough of a reason to sink 4 digits into something so limited?  Has iOS reached a point of market dominance that MacOS can piggy back on it?

    In other words:
    Can MacOS isolate Mac hardware and be successful?  A person buying a Mac will be locked into a limited edition system -- unless they buy a 2nd PC.
    Or, can integration with iOS carry it?

    For myself, I just lost interest in owning a new Mac
    I am wondering -- has the resale value of my grandson's MacBook Air running both MacOS and Windows 10 via BootCamp just increased?
    elijahg
  • Reply 40 of 110
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    From a marketing perspective, this just keeps getting more intriguing:
    -- With an A series processor a MacBook will essentially be an IPad without a touchscreen but an arguably better OS.
    -- But, it has isolated itself from 90% of the market -- Windows World.

    That leaves the question of:   What can it do that either an iPad or a Windows machine can't do equally well (for less money) or better?

    This is kind of a ballsy move for a minor player....
    elijahg
Sign In or Register to comment.