5 ms·

This makes Windows on Apple M1 devices more attractive. I wonder when Microsoft will take up Apple on their offer to create a bootable OS for their hardware.

by Tepix 6y ago

londons_explore 6y ago
If I was Microsoft, I would be very reluctant to support Windows on M1 Macs. The obvious disadvantage is the consumer will get Mac OSX for free with the hardware, and won't be too keen to pay much more to Microsoft. Apple will end up earning most of the revenue. The strategic disadvantage is that as windows users move to M1 based macs, sales of PC hardware will drop, since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D, etc. If volumes of sales drop too, it could trigger a cascade effect (fewer sales causes less R&D causes less desirable products causes fewer sales). That could kill consumer PC's entirely, which would be very bad for the future of Windows.
- jborean93 6y ago
  While I can't say it would outweigh the disadvantages here the plus side would be more incentives for developers to create native ARM builds of their application for Windows making the user experience better for everyone. Having emulation is nice but having native applications is even better.
- oblio 6y ago
  > The strategic disadvantage is that as windows users move to M1 based macs, sales of PC hardware will drop, since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D, etc. If volumes of sales drop too, it could trigger a cascade effect (fewer sales causes less R&D causes less desirable products causes fewer sales). That could kill consumer PC's entirely, which would be very bad for the future of Windows. For this to happen Apple would have to fill in MANY, MANY niches, especially cheaper ones. Apple does not and will not fill those. Well, "never say never", but I don't expect them to sell a $400 laptop, all accessories included (so no sneaky $400 laptop with semi-mandatory accessories which bring the price to $700).
  - beagle3 6y ago
    I expect them to have an iPad that can fill this niche for $400 when you include a keyboard. Perhaps they already do.
    - oblio 6y ago
      iPads are very limited, functionality wise. You barely have multiple windows. You can't really plug peripherals in. RAM is really limited. Etc. _______________________________________ Also, HA HA. I've checked and I was right. As far as I can see the cheapest one is $329, BUT with 32GB of storage, which is absolutely ridiculous in 2020. 128GB costs $449, and even that's barely enough storage. The keyboard is $159 (!). So the minimum usable laptop replacement from them costs $610, and I'm probably missing some accesories you need and which probably increase the price even further. Let alone the fact that for the rest of the world Apple products are 10-20-30% more expensive. So this combo probably costs €700 ($800+) in Europe. Bait and switch.
      - beagle3 6y ago
        I haven't seen an $400 laptop you can upgrade the memory for. Perhaps they exist, but I've never seen one. The $250-300 chromebooks are much weaker than an iPad. I don't know if you've noticed, but Apple did release iPhone SE2 which is an almost-flagship at medium price. An iPad with a slightly different iOS and a cheaper than $129 keyboard (there are $50 bluetooh keyboards that work with the iPad, not by apple, that are comparable to the keyboards that come with $300-$400 laptops), perhaps they'll call it "iMac SE" or "iPad SE". The processor inside last years iPad is a slower, more limited version of the M1. Apple could, and I believe would, release a cheaper Mac-compatible machine, just like they did with the iPhone SE. It made no sense to do so before the real Mac switched to apple silicon (Intel's offering are both expensive and inefficient for this use). Now it makes perfect sense. It make take a year or two, but it's the logical progression. Apple are playing the very long game. Saying "you barely have multiple windows" is indication you are not looking farther than the end of 2021.
        6y ago
- FpUser 6y ago
  >"since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D" 1) Deep integration with what? I do not feel that I am missing anything. So far can do anything I want. 2) What low performance? Depending on money spent desktops and laptops perform just fine. M1 is a good chip but new AMD is faster on single core and on multiple cores it will wipe the floor with M1. So far M1 is more power efficient. I am pretty sure given time AMD/Intel will catch up to that if there is good ROI on that particular quality.
- _ph_ 6y ago
  I see it completely differently: if Microsoft wants Windows on Arm to have a big future, they should push for Windows on the M1 Macs. This would be a showcase, how well Windows can run on ARM, and as Apple machines gain market share push Windows developers to provide ARM-native versions of their software. Windows on ARM so far faced two obstacles, the lack of native software and the lack of great machines. Having Windows running on ARM Macs could deliver a helpful push here and also keep Windows relevant for Mac users. On the other side, there is no greater risk, as Apple isn't taking over the PC market any time soon. Apple will likely increase their market share, but even then it is just a fraction of the total market.
- Hamuko 6y ago
  They don't need to "support" Windows on ARM Macs. They just need to open up the licensing model so that users can buy Windows for ARM from Microsoft and install it via Bootcamp. Apple has already stated that they "have the core technologies for them to do that, to run their ARM version of Windows, which in turn of course supports x86 user mode applications".
- apetrovic 6y ago
  I don't think that Microsoft care that much about the one-digit percentage of their user base who will use M1 Mac. MS force is in the office (as in the place and as in the software package), and a) it's hard to fathom majority of companies all around the world ditching their PCs and buying Mac Minis and b) there is the Office package on the mac already, and Mac users are already paying for it.
qz2 6y ago
If it does happen no one will use it. What will happen is Microsoft will introduce a shiny new Surface in a barrage of marketing which rips off most characteristics of the M1 Macbook. It will contain an SoC which is a vaguely rebranded off the shelf one. It'll be entirely held together with glue and tape and receive a 0 rating on iFixit. There will be no support network in most countries other than North America where the support will just be terrible anyway. The software situation will be a shit show universally with bugs, slowdowns and problems galore. All the app vendors will refuse to poke it with a 6 foot long shitty stick. Eventually CTOs will buy a few, they will die within 6 months and be left in a corner in the office until their spicy pillows inflate enough to cause alarm and go in the WEEE bin for recycling. Microsoft will puff up its chest like a pigeon and strut around declaring victory. The outcome of this will be all OEM vendors finding an even cheaper way to shift no brand OEM ARM laptops to the lowest bidders via the retail channel now they don't have to pay Intel any money. They will be stuffed to the brim with crappy user experiences and barely working software while microsoft takes their cut from the windows license as it always has done.
PeterisP 6y ago
As a user, I don't need Windows on M1 directly, but I need Windows to work in a VM under OSX just as I'm running it now on pre-M1 Macbooks.
tonyedgecombe 6y ago
I think it's more likely that Microsoft will offer a cloud version of Windows for Mac users. A nicely packaged app that connects to an instance on Azure.
ogre_codes 6y ago
Apple pivoted a bit on the M1. With Intel based CPUs, Windows support was an important feature and selling point so Apple created Bootcamp. Windows ARM is far less appealing that its x86 counterpart was 15 years ago, so Apple didn't add Bootcamp. With their hypervisor it seems like Windows will run just fine in a VM instead. I'm not sure Microsoft is interested in selling a version of Windows that runs atop MacOS as a child OS. As things currently stand, Windows running on the Mac embarrasses the heck out of the Surface Pro X. That's without decent driver support. How would Microsoft look if the fastest way to run Windows on ARM was as a child OS on a Mac?

This makes Windows on Apple M1 devices more attractive. I wonder when Microsoft will take up Apple on their offer to create a bootable OS for their hardware.

by Tepix 6y ago

This makes Windows on Apple M1 devices more attractive. I wonder when Microsoft will take up Apple on their offer to create a bootable OS for their hardware.

londons_explore 6y ago

If I was Microsoft, I would be very reluctant to support Windows on M1 Macs. The obvious disadvantage is the consumer will get Mac OSX for free with the hardware, and won't be too keen to pay much more to Microsoft. Apple will end up earning most of the revenue. The strategic disadvantage is that as windows users move to M1 based macs, sales of PC hardware will drop, since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D, etc. If volumes of sales drop too, it could trigger a cascade effect (fewer sales causes less R&D causes less desirable products causes fewer sales). That could kill consumer PC's entirely, which would be very bad for the future of Windows.

jborean93 6y ago
While I can't say it would outweigh the disadvantages here the plus side would be more incentives for developers to create native ARM builds of their application for Windows making the user experience better for everyone. Having emulation is nice but having native applications is even better.
oblio 6y ago
> The strategic disadvantage is that as windows users move to M1 based macs, sales of PC hardware will drop, since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D, etc. If volumes of sales drop too, it could trigger a cascade effect (fewer sales causes less R&D causes less desirable products causes fewer sales). That could kill consumer PC's entirely, which would be very bad for the future of Windows. For this to happen Apple would have to fill in MANY, MANY niches, especially cheaper ones. Apple does not and will not fill those. Well, "never say never", but I don't expect them to sell a $400 laptop, all accessories included (so no sneaky $400 laptop with semi-mandatory accessories which bring the price to $700).
- beagle3 6y ago
  I expect them to have an iPad that can fill this niche for $400 when you include a keyboard. Perhaps they already do.
  - oblio 6y ago
    iPads are very limited, functionality wise. You barely have multiple windows. You can't really plug peripherals in. RAM is really limited. Etc. _______________________________________ Also, HA HA. I've checked and I was right. As far as I can see the cheapest one is $329, BUT with 32GB of storage, which is absolutely ridiculous in 2020. 128GB costs $449, and even that's barely enough storage. The keyboard is $159 (!). So the minimum usable laptop replacement from them costs $610, and I'm probably missing some accesories you need and which probably increase the price even further. Let alone the fact that for the rest of the world Apple products are 10-20-30% more expensive. So this combo probably costs €700 ($800+) in Europe. Bait and switch.
    - beagle3 6y ago
      I haven't seen an $400 laptop you can upgrade the memory for. Perhaps they exist, but I've never seen one. The $250-300 chromebooks are much weaker than an iPad. I don't know if you've noticed, but Apple did release iPhone SE2 which is an almost-flagship at medium price. An iPad with a slightly different iOS and a cheaper than $129 keyboard (there are $50 bluetooh keyboards that work with the iPad, not by apple, that are comparable to the keyboards that come with $300-$400 laptops), perhaps they'll call it "iMac SE" or "iPad SE". The processor inside last years iPad is a slower, more limited version of the M1. Apple could, and I believe would, release a cheaper Mac-compatible machine, just like they did with the iPhone SE. It made no sense to do so before the real Mac switched to apple silicon (Intel's offering are both expensive and inefficient for this use). Now it makes perfect sense. It make take a year or two, but it's the logical progression. Apple are playing the very long game. Saying "you barely have multiple windows" is indication you are not looking farther than the end of 2021.
      - 6y ago
FpUser 6y ago
>"since the PC ecosystem is hobbled by a lack of deep integration, lower performance CPU's, lower profit margins, less R&D" 1) Deep integration with what? I do not feel that I am missing anything. So far can do anything I want. 2) What low performance? Depending on money spent desktops and laptops perform just fine. M1 is a good chip but new AMD is faster on single core and on multiple cores it will wipe the floor with M1. So far M1 is more power efficient. I am pretty sure given time AMD/Intel will catch up to that if there is good ROI on that particular quality.
_ph_ 6y ago
I see it completely differently: if Microsoft wants Windows on Arm to have a big future, they should push for Windows on the M1 Macs. This would be a showcase, how well Windows can run on ARM, and as Apple machines gain market share push Windows developers to provide ARM-native versions of their software. Windows on ARM so far faced two obstacles, the lack of native software and the lack of great machines. Having Windows running on ARM Macs could deliver a helpful push here and also keep Windows relevant for Mac users. On the other side, there is no greater risk, as Apple isn't taking over the PC market any time soon. Apple will likely increase their market share, but even then it is just a fraction of the total market.
Hamuko 6y ago
They don't need to "support" Windows on ARM Macs. They just need to open up the licensing model so that users can buy Windows for ARM from Microsoft and install it via Bootcamp. Apple has already stated that they "have the core technologies for them to do that, to run their ARM version of Windows, which in turn of course supports x86 user mode applications".
apetrovic 6y ago
I don't think that Microsoft care that much about the one-digit percentage of their user base who will use M1 Mac. MS force is in the office (as in the place and as in the software package), and a) it's hard to fathom majority of companies all around the world ditching their PCs and buying Mac Minis and b) there is the Office package on the mac already, and Mac users are already paying for it.

qz2 6y ago

If it does happen no one will use it. What will happen is Microsoft will introduce a shiny new Surface in a barrage of marketing which rips off most characteristics of the M1 Macbook. It will contain an SoC which is a vaguely rebranded off the shelf one. It'll be entirely held together with glue and tape and receive a 0 rating on iFixit. There will be no support network in most countries other than North America where the support will just be terrible anyway. The software situation will be a shit show universally with bugs, slowdowns and problems galore. All the app vendors will refuse to poke it with a 6 foot long shitty stick. Eventually CTOs will buy a few, they will die within 6 months and be left in a corner in the office until their spicy pillows inflate enough to cause alarm and go in the WEEE bin for recycling. Microsoft will puff up its chest like a pigeon and strut around declaring victory. The outcome of this will be all OEM vendors finding an even cheaper way to shift no brand OEM ARM laptops to the lowest bidders via the retail channel now they don't have to pay Intel any money. They will be stuffed to the brim with crappy user experiences and barely working software while microsoft takes their cut from the windows license as it always has done.

PeterisP 6y ago

As a user, I don't need Windows on M1 directly, but I need Windows to work in a VM under OSX just as I'm running it now on pre-M1 Macbooks.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

I think it's more likely that Microsoft will offer a cloud version of Windows for Mac users. A nicely packaged app that connects to an instance on Azure.

ogre_codes 6y ago

Apple pivoted a bit on the M1. With Intel based CPUs, Windows support was an important feature and selling point so Apple created Bootcamp. Windows ARM is far less appealing that its x86 counterpart was 15 years ago, so Apple didn't add Bootcamp. With their hypervisor it seems like Windows will run just fine in a VM instead. I'm not sure Microsoft is interested in selling a version of Windows that runs atop MacOS as a child OS. As things currently stand, Windows running on the Mac embarrasses the heck out of the Surface Pro X. That's without decent driver support. How would Microsoft look if the fastest way to run Windows on ARM was as a child OS on a Mac?