By now, you should be familiar with the M1 chip, Apple’s new SoC that’s replacing Intel as the processor for all future Macs. You can even buy a few Macs now that already have the M1 chip installed.
If you’ve already gotten your M1 Mac or are considering ordering one, you might have a few questions on your mind. For many users, especially developers, an important use case for a Mac involves running Windows (or Windows apps) on your macOS machine.
For those who need to run Windows on their Mac, you may want to read this post before making your purchase.
Why the new M1 chip is a problem for Windows on Mac
Unfortunately, the M1 chip does cause complications if you want to run Windows on your Mac. This is because the M1 chip uses a different architecture from Intel chips, which are the chips that Windows is designed for.
Specifically, the M1 chip is built on the ARM architecture, while is Intel is built on x86 architecture. This means that, on a fundamental level, M1 Macs and x86 PCs are incompatible with one another.
The architecture of the processor doesn’t just change how a computer runs, but what can run on that computer. Apps have to be built for one or the other. It’s such a challenge to compensate for this difference that even apps that were built for Mac in the past have to be rebuilt or translated using Rosetta 2.
So when it comes to running Windows on an M1 Mac – yeah, there are a few problems, to say the least.
x86 vs ARM: Why Apple switched
Before we get into the extent of this problem, let’s take a moment to understand why Apple would switch from x86 in the first place.
First, the obvious answer: Intel owns the x86 architecture. It’s the company that invented it! So for Apple to break away and make a competing chip, it only makes sense to go with an alternate architecture.
Read here to learn why Apple wanted to stop using Intel chips.
Second, Apple has been developing ARM chips for some time now in its mobile devices (iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, AirPods, Apple TV – everything). Apple’s engineers are experienced, comfortable, and effective with this architecture. It’s in their wheelhouse.
Third, because Apple has been building all of its mobile devices with ARM chips, that means that an ARM Mac can run iPad and iPhone apps. This is a big step towards closing the gap between these devices and increasing the compatibility between them, which is a very Apple move to make.
Does Boot Camp still work on M1 Macs?
Now that we know why Windows might not run on Mac and why Apple chose to make this decision, it’s time to answer the question that’s on most of your minds. Drumroll….No, Boot Camp does not work on the new M1 Macs.
I don’t think I need to go into too much more detail here, as we just got done explaining why this is the case. But it’s true. Windows used to be installable on Mac through the Boot Camp feature. Since the Mac processor can no longer interpret the Windows operating system, this is more or less impossible at the moment.
Does this mean that Apple will stop supporting Boot Camp entirely?
This question is a bit tougher to answer. I have no idea what is on Apple’s agenda; maybe Boot Camp is coming back next week. If I were to guess, I’d say Boot Camp’s return is at the absolute very least a year away, and more likely, isn’t coming back for a much longer time, if ever.
That’s because there are only two ways to solve the discrepancy between the ARM and x86 architectures. Either Apple creates a Rosetta-esque service that translates Windows 10 in real-time, or Windows offers a robust ARM version of its OS.
I don’t see the first of these things happening anytime soon. The second, however, already kind of exists. You can download and install an ARM version of Windows 10 onto ARM SoCs. At the time of writing, though, this version of Windows isn’t the most reliable. It’s slow, buggy, and because it’s ARM-based, it doesn’t run any 64-bit Windows apps (you can run 32-bit, however).
Microsoft is working to improve this, so hopefully, the ARM edition of Windows 10 becomes more practical in the future. However, even if Microsoft announced tomorrow that the ARM Windows 10 is just as robust as x86 Windows 10, that doesn’t mean you would be able to install it on your Mac. Apple would then need to revive the Boot Camp feature, which of course, remains to be seen.
In short, Boot Camp on Mac is dead for the foreseeable future, and I would not count on it coming back anytime soon.
What about Windows virtual machines on the M1 chip?
This brings us to the second way that you would run Windows on a Mac, and that’s through a virtual machine.
For those who don’t know, a virtual machine is an emulator for a computer. It creates a little window on your desktop with a second desktop inside it for whatever platform you like. Typically, this is used by developers, though you could also use it for running Windows apps on Mac (such as games).
The prognosis here is a little brighter. There isn’t anything stopping Windows VMs from being run on M1 Macs – eventually. The challenge here is that most VM applications were built for x86 Macs. So all of the existing VMs that you know and love now have to be rebuilt for the new Macs.
Apple did show Parallels (a popular VM) running on an M1 Mac during WWDC20. However, this was a prototype version of Parallels, and it was running Linux, not Windows 10.
In short, it looks like VMs are coming to M1 Macs. They just need a bit more time.
Should you skip the M1 Macs if you need to run Windows?
Sadly, the hope of VMs coming to Mac might not be enough for some users. With Boot Camp gone and VMs DOA, the M1 chip might not be an option for professionals.
If you work in Windows VMs daily, I would wait to pick up an M1 Mac. I wouldn’t tell you to never get one, just to wait until next spring-ish and upgrade then. I doubt it’ll take much longer than that for popular VMs to return to macOS.
If you work in Boot Camp on Mac frequently, I would skip the M1 Macs for the foreseeable future. I’m not sure if or how Apple prioritizes Boot Camp, which makes it tough to say whether or not it will come back. Unless you have a Windows 10 machine at home that you don’t mind switching between, I wouldn’t trade an Intel Mac for an M1 Mac for some time.
In the meantime…
It’s not all bad news. There are a few workarounds you can use on an M1 Mac to run Windows VMs and apps. Below are two reasons you might be able to go ahead and buy the M1 Mac today.
Parallels VM: Coming soon(?)
Parallels VM and other popular VM services (like VMFusion) are in the process of developing Windows VMs for the M1 Macs. However, it doesn’t seem like any VM provider is quite ready yet. Parallels has announced that they’re working on it and that things look promising.
Beyond that, we don’t know much. Though I know nothing about developing a VM for a new architecture, I would say it’s a safe assumption that the first VMs will at least be ready by next spring. So if you can wait, I would wait.
CrossOver: Run (some) Windows apps
While you wait, I’d 110% recommend you check out CrossOver. CrossOver is a VM alternative that allows you to run Windows apps on a Mac. Rather than emulating a Windows environment (like a VM) it instead translates the Windows commands into Mac commands – even on M1 Macs.
This allows you to run all of your Windows apps (including ones that you’re developing) on your Mac. While it doesn’t offer the same level of depth as a VM, it gets the job done and saves you from purchasing a Windows license. And if you use VMs or Boot Camp for gaming on Mac, then CrossOver has you covered.
Conclusion: Wait, or move on
For most users, I imagine that the prospect of VMs and alternatives like CrossOver will be enough to satiate you until Windows support on M1 Macs improves. For those who need Boot Camp, however, I would grab an Intel Mac while they’re still around and cross your fingers. Or, maybe it’s time to buy a Windows?
I went ahead and bought an M1 and it is fine but need Windows for certain programs, i.e Development work, PowerBI Desktop, Microsoft Project and some old development (Windows XP) – it doesn’t work and doesn’t see to be coming out anytime soon, it is the biggest flaw in my oppinion and I would have held out until resolved and have advised many of my colleagues to hold off or get windows machines, shame because I am very positive about the M1 Mac, the conversation is like this “It does this and it does that and its great and its fast and it just works”….. “Don’t buy one though you won’t be able to do your work on it”
I totally agree JM, and am sorry you bought one before realizing it didn’t work with your Windows applications! I agree that it’s a bit of a flaw on the M1 Macs, though I feel confident support will be added eventually. It’s just not clear how long it will be before Windows is supported on M1. Apple should have been more upfront about this at launch!
In the meantime, consider reaching out to an Apple representative about your problem! If you’re regretting your purchase, you can return it with no questions asked during the first 14 days of purchasing the device, and if it’s past that point, you might still be able to get a solution from a representative.
I hope that, aside from this inconvenience, you’re enjoying your new machine!
Well, actually, it DOESN’T make sense to abandon the x86 architecture (just because you don’t want to buy chips from Intel)…
AMD has built a compatible (competitive) chip for YEARS…
Apple COULD have done the same…
That being said, there is no reason they HAD to remain tied to the x86 architecture…
It just seems more than a bit annoying that we moved OFF of their first generation chip architecture in favor of Intel’s x86 architecture (requiring re-compilation of apps)… NOW we’re going through it all over again…
Don’t get me wrong… I don’t object to moving off Intel (hey, if I want WINDOWS, I’ll get a PC), but don’t suggest that “it only makes sense” to abandon the Intel x86 architecture…
Thanks for the info Mark, I didn’t realize AMD had a compatible and competitive chip available. That’s very interesting! I wonder why Apple ended up choosing ARM over AMD then?
Either way, transitions are never fun! Hopefully this represents the last one for a while, considering that Apple probably won’t stop making its own chips any time soon.
Thanks for your feedback and insight! I learned something new today 🙂
Why would Apple move from x86 to an AMD (effectively x86 architecture)? Apple have their own ARM processors in their iPhones and iPads. The obvious move would be to make and use an ARM architecture on their computers. This was obvious (to me) when Launchpad became available on my Macbook pro, that Apple were moving towards a similar thing to their other offerings. The problem with x86 and AMD is that to increase speeds they need more cores and more energy to run them. Just look at fast Windows gaming machines, they produce so much heat that they are water cooled! or have massive cooling fan arrangements. You can’t do that on a Macbook pro, mini or the big screen macs (at least not easily).
So if you’re developing an ARM processor that can run numerous cores and not require huge amounts of energy (and heat dissipation), Like the M1 then surely that is the way forward? As I understand it the M1 is more efficient because it uses micro code rather than machine code/assembler (x86/AMD).
For all these to multi process they have to pre load instructions and pass on to a core to process. The M1 AI part decides if a set of processes can run on different cores, and if any have to wait for a core to finish. It can decide to throw the instruction away till later, if another instruction can take it’s place. The M1 ARM also has a fixed instruction length of 4 bytes, so at most if it rejects an instruction it’s only 4 bytes.
The x86 and AMD processors with multi cores have to do a similar thing with pre loading, however, x86 instructions can be up to 11 bytes long. So it is very wasteful in time if the pre loader has load up to 11 bytes and then has to drop them to keep the processors flowing. Hence the need to run x86 and AMD faster and waste more energy.
The Macbook pro is claimed to be able to run for 20 hours on one battery charge because it is more efficient. Also we all know Apple like to tie you down to Apple products, at one point you could upgrade a Macbook pro but since around 2013 Memory has been soldered to the mother board making it almost impossible for a DIY upgrade. An Apple only processor must be great for Apple. I’m sure if you search you can find a better more detailed explanation than mine, this is just my understanding of why the M1 is so good at what it does.
-Pete
I went ahead and bought an M1 and it is fine but need Windows for certain programs, i.e Development work, PowerBI Desktop, Microsoft Project and some old development (Windows XP) – it doesn’t work and doesn’t see to be coming out anytime soon, it is the biggest flaw in my oppinion and I would have held out until resolved and have advised many of my colleagues to hold off or get windows machines, shame because I am very positive about the M1 Mac, the conversation is like this “It does this and it does that and its great and its fast and it just works”….. “Don’t buy one though you won’t be able to do your work on it”
I totally agree JM, and am sorry you bought one before realizing it didn’t work with your Windows applications! I agree that it’s a bit of a flaw on the M1 Macs, though I feel confident support will be added eventually. It’s just not clear how long it will be before Windows is supported on M1. Apple should have been more upfront about this at launch!
In the meantime, consider reaching out to an Apple representative about your problem! If you’re regretting your purchase, you can return it with no questions asked during the first 14 days of purchasing the device, and if it’s past that point, you might still be able to get a solution from a representative.
I hope that, aside from this inconvenience, you’re enjoying your new machine!
All the best,
– Justin.
Well, actually, it DOESN’T make sense to abandon the x86 architecture (just because you don’t want to buy chips from Intel)…
AMD has built a compatible (competitive) chip for YEARS…
Apple COULD have done the same…
That being said, there is no reason they HAD to remain tied to the x86 architecture…
It just seems more than a bit annoying that we moved OFF of their first generation chip architecture in favor of Intel’s x86 architecture (requiring re-compilation of apps)… NOW we’re going through it all over again…
Don’t get me wrong… I don’t object to moving off Intel (hey, if I want WINDOWS, I’ll get a PC), but don’t suggest that “it only makes sense” to abandon the Intel x86 architecture…
Thanks for the info Mark, I didn’t realize AMD had a compatible and competitive chip available. That’s very interesting! I wonder why Apple ended up choosing ARM over AMD then?
Either way, transitions are never fun! Hopefully this represents the last one for a while, considering that Apple probably won’t stop making its own chips any time soon.
Thanks for your feedback and insight! I learned something new today 🙂
All the best,
– Justin.
Why would Apple move from x86 to an AMD (effectively x86 architecture)? Apple have their own ARM processors in their iPhones and iPads. The obvious move would be to make and use an ARM architecture on their computers. This was obvious (to me) when Launchpad became available on my Macbook pro, that Apple were moving towards a similar thing to their other offerings. The problem with x86 and AMD is that to increase speeds they need more cores and more energy to run them. Just look at fast Windows gaming machines, they produce so much heat that they are water cooled! or have massive cooling fan arrangements. You can’t do that on a Macbook pro, mini or the big screen macs (at least not easily).
So if you’re developing an ARM processor that can run numerous cores and not require huge amounts of energy (and heat dissipation), Like the M1 then surely that is the way forward? As I understand it the M1 is more efficient because it uses micro code rather than machine code/assembler (x86/AMD).
For all these to multi process they have to pre load instructions and pass on to a core to process. The M1 AI part decides if a set of processes can run on different cores, and if any have to wait for a core to finish. It can decide to throw the instruction away till later, if another instruction can take it’s place. The M1 ARM also has a fixed instruction length of 4 bytes, so at most if it rejects an instruction it’s only 4 bytes.
The x86 and AMD processors with multi cores have to do a similar thing with pre loading, however, x86 instructions can be up to 11 bytes long. So it is very wasteful in time if the pre loader has load up to 11 bytes and then has to drop them to keep the processors flowing. Hence the need to run x86 and AMD faster and waste more energy.
The Macbook pro is claimed to be able to run for 20 hours on one battery charge because it is more efficient. Also we all know Apple like to tie you down to Apple products, at one point you could upgrade a Macbook pro but since around 2013 Memory has been soldered to the mother board making it almost impossible for a DIY upgrade. An Apple only processor must be great for Apple. I’m sure if you search you can find a better more detailed explanation than mine, this is just my understanding of why the M1 is so good at what it does.
-Pete