Microsoft on New Mac
February 2, 2023 4:41 PM Subscribe
I have a Macbook Air. New out of the box yesterday. Come to find out I can't install Windows on it because it hasn't got an Intel chip. But I need this for some propitiatory software. Is there any work around besides buying a Windows machine?
Yeah, you can't run Windows natively, (i.e., Boot Camp) as you could on Intel Macs, but as wenestvedt suggested, Wine is one option .
You can also do a full-blown Virtual Machine (VM) installation of Windows, using software like Parallels or VMWare Fusion 13 (my preference; I've been using Fusion for a very long time) to run Windows, and install your proprietary application.
It's not perfect; some Intel x86 / x64 apps will run in this way on M1/M2 CPUs, and some will not. If it works, great; if not, it may or may not in the future as development continues.
posted by xedrik at 5:00 PM on February 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
You can also do a full-blown Virtual Machine (VM) installation of Windows, using software like Parallels or VMWare Fusion 13 (my preference; I've been using Fusion for a very long time) to run Windows, and install your proprietary application.
It's not perfect; some Intel x86 / x64 apps will run in this way on M1/M2 CPUs, and some will not. If it works, great; if not, it may or may not in the future as development continues.
posted by xedrik at 5:00 PM on February 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
You can use a virtual machine, I know that Parallels is wel-reguarded. I used to use VMWare Fusion, which is a similar though competing product.
posted by Alensin at 5:00 PM on February 2, 2023
posted by Alensin at 5:00 PM on February 2, 2023
I really think you need to get a Windows machine.
Windows is built for x86/x64 architecture (Intel/AMD).
So, when Mac machines used Intel architecture, you could either run Windows natively (using Boot Camp) or you could virtualize Windows on Mac OS using Parallels or VMWare Fusion. Windows performance was actually pretty OK, because the base hardware was x64 and the virtualized OS was also x64 so it was virtualizing the same architecture.
Now Mac silicon is M1/2 which is ARM based.
Windows will not run natively.
Virtualizing x86/x64 software on ARM architecture is possible, but in my experience the performance is so pathetic that you'll want to break your new machine in half.
There is a "preview" build from Microsoft of Windows built for ARM. You can't use this natively with Boot Camp, because Apple killed Boot Camp, but it will give you decent performance with Parallels or VMWare Fusion on a M1/2 Mac, because the base architecture and the virtualized environment are now the same - but in all likelihood the software you want to run on Windows isn't built for ARM-Windows and it won't run on ARM-Windows.
You are opening yourself up to a path of disappointment and pain. If you want to truly run Windows, get something with an Intel or AMD chip in it so you can run Windows.
posted by kbanas at 5:17 PM on February 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
Windows is built for x86/x64 architecture (Intel/AMD).
So, when Mac machines used Intel architecture, you could either run Windows natively (using Boot Camp) or you could virtualize Windows on Mac OS using Parallels or VMWare Fusion. Windows performance was actually pretty OK, because the base hardware was x64 and the virtualized OS was also x64 so it was virtualizing the same architecture.
Now Mac silicon is M1/2 which is ARM based.
Windows will not run natively.
Virtualizing x86/x64 software on ARM architecture is possible, but in my experience the performance is so pathetic that you'll want to break your new machine in half.
There is a "preview" build from Microsoft of Windows built for ARM. You can't use this natively with Boot Camp, because Apple killed Boot Camp, but it will give you decent performance with Parallels or VMWare Fusion on a M1/2 Mac, because the base architecture and the virtualized environment are now the same - but in all likelihood the software you want to run on Windows isn't built for ARM-Windows and it won't run on ARM-Windows.
You are opening yourself up to a path of disappointment and pain. If you want to truly run Windows, get something with an Intel or AMD chip in it so you can run Windows.
posted by kbanas at 5:17 PM on February 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
As dearly as I love my M1 Mac, I must urge you to get a Windows (Intel) machine if you intend to run Windows software. Anything else is what we used to call a kludge -- a sad attempt to make a machine do what it's not intended to do.
posted by lhauser at 5:32 PM on February 2, 2023
posted by lhauser at 5:32 PM on February 2, 2023
A few Intel Macs are still available. I use a 2017 MB Air - WIN10 runs well under BootCamp. You can’t install WIN11 on this machine. The 2019 MB Pro is Intel-based and will afaik run WIN11.
posted by sudogeek at 5:52 PM on February 2, 2023
posted by sudogeek at 5:52 PM on February 2, 2023
>The 2019 MB Pro is Intel-based and will afaik run WIN11.
There's kludge ways to install Win11 but no Intel-based Apple has the security chip (called Trusted Platform Module 2.0) that Windows insists is required for Win11.
posted by k3ninho at 4:30 AM on February 3, 2023 [1 favorite]
There's kludge ways to install Win11 but no Intel-based Apple has the security chip (called Trusted Platform Module 2.0) that Windows insists is required for Win11.
posted by k3ninho at 4:30 AM on February 3, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't know if the Parallels install is any more turnkey, but the VMWare Fusion Windows-for-ARM install is still fairly technical, and (annoyingly) seems to involve building using a Windows-only building tool? I might have gone down the wrong path, to be sure, but it was definitely not as easy as it used to be.
That said, the handful of x86 native apps I tested ran fine? I mean, I wouldn't want to run any heavy statistical computing app or graphical gaming powerhouses, but if it's just a standard office or engineering app, it's probably OK?
(I mean, it's unsupported as hell and could just stop working tomorrow and is only just barely out of beta, so y'know, keep that in mind.)
posted by Kyol at 6:57 AM on February 3, 2023
That said, the handful of x86 native apps I tested ran fine? I mean, I wouldn't want to run any heavy statistical computing app or graphical gaming powerhouses, but if it's just a standard office or engineering app, it's probably OK?
(I mean, it's unsupported as hell and could just stop working tomorrow and is only just barely out of beta, so y'know, keep that in mind.)
posted by Kyol at 6:57 AM on February 3, 2023
And all that whining aside: it's free, compared to Parallels' $99 license.
posted by Kyol at 7:28 AM on February 3, 2023
posted by Kyol at 7:28 AM on February 3, 2023
Parallels through the app store is fine - I use it to run Visio on my 2021 16 inch MacBook Pro with M1 Pro
posted by oceanjesse at 7:44 PM on February 3, 2023
posted by oceanjesse at 7:44 PM on February 3, 2023
Parallels is pretty easy to set up with windows, the Installation Assistant will download the Windows ARM build automagically. I used to be a big fan of Fusion but have now switched to Parallels. Crossover tends to be a bit of a crapshoot, if the thing you want is popular it'll probably work, but some things can be buggy.
So far I haven't had any problems with running anything on Parallels.
posted by Runes at 7:18 AM on February 4, 2023
So far I haven't had any problems with running anything on Parallels.
posted by Runes at 7:18 AM on February 4, 2023
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by wenestvedt at 4:44 PM on February 2, 2023