Path: ...!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: nospam Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.computer.workshop Subject: Re: Microsoft end of support dates Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 10:05:48 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 68 Message-ID: <040820201005482295%nospam@nospam.invalid> References: <030820201448206491%nospam@nospam.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="06f3a40c2a14a7fdcc48cd527c808a74"; logging-data="15296"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18zqcmU6zg7oYnpYBL0O9gj" User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X) Cancel-Lock: sha1:/wtiUU0MuMrRqdkbUf0jMFH18k8= Bytes: 4110 In article , Snit wrote: > >>> > >>> Funny how Apple users love virtual machines. > >> > >> From what I have seen few use them. And Apple does not care about them > >> enough to stick with Intel. > > > > given that apple provides direct hardware support for virtual machines > > in apple silicon and have touted that as the road forward, it's clear > > that they *do* care about them, and by quite a bit. > > > https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/06/23/rosetta-lacks-support-for-x86-machi > ne-virtualization-apps-boot-camp-not-an-option-on-apple-silicon > ----- > Mac users who rely on Windows virtualization software might be left in the > lurch when Apple transitions to its own custom ARM processors later this year, > as the company's Rosetta Intel-to-ARM translator does not support virtual > machine apps. > > Apple outlined Rosetta's ‹ technically Rosetta 2's ‹ limitations in a > developer document posted to its website this week, noting that while it can > translate "most" Intel-based apps, it is unable to do the same for virtual > machine apps that handle x86_64 computer platforms. Popular x86_64 > virtualization apps include products from Parallels and VMWare that virtualize > Windows environments. > ----- that's about rosetta, not hardware support for virtualization. you are once again moving the goalposts as well as being very confused about the difference between virtualization and emulation. intel, amd and future apple silicon cpus have virtualization support in hardware. full stop. > If you have newer information, or anything directly from Apple which says > otherwise, I would love to hear it. no you wouldn't, since not only is it not new, but it's already been explained to you several times and every time you fail to understand it. > And so far Boot Camp (native booting of Windows, the only way to run Windows > on a Mac that Apple directly supports) also seems to be a non-starter. nope. for intel macs, *both* boot camp *and* running windows in a virtual machine are both fully supported by apple, which has been the case for roughly the past fifteen years. that obviously will change with apple silicon, where x86 versions of windows would need to be emulated, something which is up to third party developers. windows on arm could run natively on apple silicon, either boot camp or virtualized, but only if microsoft chooses to port it and change their licensing agreements, and in particular, improve their x86 emulation for running existing x86 windows apps, which is currently rather poor. otherwise, there is no reason to bother. > There > might be ways to run Windows on ARM but that is not clear. it's very clear to anyone who has even a slight understanding of the underlying technologies and who has paid even casual attention to public statements from the relevant companies.