Does VMware fusion pro run on Mac M1 chip?

[Benjaminbatwing]

I recently purchased VMware fusion 12 pro and when I got the download link it was for intel based Macs. I have the new MacBook Pro M1, so do I need to return the software and purchase something else or will it run on my M1? Thanks

[jweisbin]

@Technogeezer-  if I remember correctly, previously VMware had said that they could not support Windows on ARM due to the EULA. Perhaps, once they can clarify that, they will support it? Or will they continue to not support it due to the fact that it's not supported by MS? I guess we will have to wait and see. But seems like it would be a pretty big lost opportunity for VMWare, since in the future there may be no intel Macs to run on.  BTW I'm running VMWare fusion "tech preview" on my M1X laptop, solely for connectivity to our esxi servers. It's great for that, but maybe overpriced if only for that.

[Technogeezer]

@jweisbin I have the same hope.

Running unsupported is not the same as running "unlicensed and unsupported".

[Technogeezer]

@telecastle I will give you the ease of use argument, especially for non-technical users. 

I'll give you another one. I'm not enamored with the brittleness of latest Fusion releases. I don't know if it's the switch to the Apple hypervisor framework, but there seems to be a lot of weird issues with the product lately (upgrades/networking/graphics, and the dreaded "can't connect to client").That's not endearing to non-technical users either.  I would hope that VMware would be working to clean it up, but they do tend to work close to the vest on things.

I'm not as concerned about Parallels being a Russian company. There's a lot of software we're using that's been developed by staff outside the US. My concern is strictly from a security standpoint of not knowing what's been done to the distribution by the packager. As I said, it's a personal phobia (CISSP training really got me paranoid).

[telecastle]

The good thing is that you are not forced to use the “easy button”’ You can download the OS yourself, manually provision all the virtual hardware you want to allocate to the VM, and then manually install the VM.

In the case of Ubuntu 20.04 for ARM, you can manually download Ubuntu Server for ARM, manually allocate the virtual hardware to it, manually install it as a VM, manually mount Parallels Tools and manually run the installation script in the Linux shell, and then you can download a Desktop Environment via apt-get install. It will take 30 minutes instead of 3 minutes (that is if the person has a fairly good knowledge of Linux and knows what he is doing), but one can certainly do it all manually.

I prefer the 3-minute deployment method to the 30 minute deployment method even though I have a good grasp of virtualization and Linux and I have never used the easy button before I bought a license for Parallels Desktop 17.

Thank you for the discussion. 

[Technogeezer]

@telecastle thanks for the discussion as well, and I apologize to you for some of my tone.

I do wonder, though what Ubuntu is thinking with their releases.  I mean, why go through the effort of posting compatible pre-release builds and not following through by making a released version of that same configuration? 

[lensv]

Just an observation!

A college of mine installed Parallels Desktop and Windows 11 Home (which seems to be offered and downloaded within the installation process). After that a licence key for Windows 10 Education was inserted/accepted and finally, after an update/reboot a full version of Windows 11 Education is running as a guest VM on that M1 Pro.

I guess that this might be kind of legally doubtful, but should it even be possible to do this?

[gringley]

"I guess that this might be kind of legally doubtful, but should it even be possible to do this?"

It is clear that Microsoft is not preventing this, and is profiting from it as there are also reports that people activated by buying licenses from the Microsoft Store inside the ARM instance.  Note that the Windows ARM Insider Preview does not include the Microsoft Store.  Parallels adds it to the image when Parallels tools is installed in the image. 

Microsoft and Apple have both stated that Windows will not be supported on M1 Macs.  For me a Windows ARM instance on an M1 Mac is a toy as it could quit working after any update by either Microsoft or Apple.  

[lensv]

---

@gringley wrote:

"Microsoft and Apple have both stated that Windows will not be supported on M1 Macs."   

---

I'm a little curious here. I haven't actually seen the proclamations, so can you/anyone post a link to any of those statements?

[telecastle]

Are you also a toy, since you may cease to live at any moment? 

[gringley]

Here is a good summary link that will allow you to branch out for further reading - https://www.macrumors.com/2021/09/14/arm-windows-m1-macs-not-supported/ 

It also highlights the "toy" aspect in noting how the ARM previews quit working after an update, but that time Parallels was able to resolve it.

[gringley]

"Are you also a toy, since you may cease to live at any moment?"  

If I had the toy I would play with it too, but many people who come to this forum are non-technical people who are running their businesses and/or livelihoods from Fusion virtual machines.  I would be negligent to tell people that an unsupported solution is the one they should bank one like it is normal. 

[lensv]

What worries me is that there still don't seem to exist any explicit disclaimers from Microsoft. If they actually let you install volume licenses (handled by a KMS server) I think indeed that it would be fair with some kind of warnings, espessially if the installations really might stop working because of a simple update.

I have earlier called for Windows 11's EULA (for ARM), but these limitations don't seem to be mentioned there either. 🤔

[telecastle]

If your goal is to tell people to keep buying Intel-based Macs, just say so. Because they should hurry up and buy them up, since they are about to be completely discontinued by Apple. 

I really don’t understand this thread. There is a solution to Windows on M1 Macs, which works beautifully. May it not work in the future? Sure, it may. Is it possible we may not have a future? Are we at the brink of a nuclear war?

How can you claim that this is not a viable solution today by doubting the future? What if the future.doesn’t come? What if we are living out last day today? 

The question is, Does it work today? The answer is, “It does and it does so very well”. 

[gringley]

"What worries me is that there still don't seem to exist any explicit disclaimers from Microsoft. If they actually let you install volume licenses (handled by a KMS server)..."  I am glad you touched on volume licenses. - https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/terms/productoffering/WindowsDesktopOperatingSystem/OL 

Realistically we have been discussing this the wrong way for a long time.  We are not trying to license Windows on M1 Macs, we are trying to license Windows running in a VM which happens to run on an M1 Mac.  This is the key language -

"Customer may run Windows software acquired through a volume licensing agreement on up to four Virtual OSEs locally on Licensed Devices. This local use right applies to VDA Per Device licenses only if the Licensed Device is also licensed with a Qualifying Operating System. Licensed Users may run Windows software acquired through a volume licensing agreement on up to four Virtual OSEslocally on devices licensed with a Qualifying Operating System. If all permitted Virtual OSEs are used Customer may use the Physical OSEonly to host and manage the Virtual OSEs."

You cannot license an M1 Mac for Windows - this is the whole discussion around the fact that Microsoft only licenses and sells Windows ARM to OEMs - so you thus cannot volume license a virtual machine on an M1 Mac.  The worries about support are a moot point because the combination is not licensable per the terms even if it activates.  

This takes us back to the recent blog post where a Microsoft employee says Retail licenses will activate on anything.  Also you have noticed there is no unique EULA in the Windows ARM.  You thus can activate a retail license on the Windows ARM virtual machine.  In terms of warnings Microsoft will warn you that the Windows instance is unsupported if you run their checking tool in the ARM virtual machine.  Agreed they do not warn you about that when they collect your money for the retail license key.

[lensv]

Got it! This  License Checking Tool, is it something that's included in Windows 11 or must it be downloaded from somewhere?

[gringley]

The "PC Health Check app" is not a license checking tool, it is a compatibility checking tool.  If you go all the way to the bottom of the Windows 11 page you can download it from there - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-11

[ColoradoMarmot]

Exactly!  

That's the important nuance: activated does not necessarily mean properly licensed.  Nothing prevents someone from putting unleaded in a diesel engine, but that doesn't mean that it's a valid fuel.  I'm unable to find a retail license for Windows 11 anywhere for purchase, let alone a standalone retail license for Windows 11 on ARM, so I strongly suspect that agent was using boilerplate language and didn't actually understand the question.

I'm sure that if there were an intended path to legally run Windows on Mac both Apple and VMWare would have shared it (both have high level relationships with Microsoft - far higher than a front-line license person quoted in that blog).  Craig flat out said 'it's up to microsoft' in an interview after the M1 was released, and VMWare is keenly aware of the interest.  

The simple fact is that Microsoft has told VMWare they can't do it, and until they tell VMWare that it's cool, VMWare won't build support for it.   That's the only thing that really matters.

I still have hope that the Qualcomm exclusive rumor is right and we're just waiting out the clock.  The fact that we haven't had a second drop of the preview makes me wonder (and hope) if that's exactly what's happening.

[lensv]

LOL - So, the only way to find out if the installation is actually unsupported (in clear text) is to run this tool on a machine where Windows 11 is already installed. 😅

Check for compatibility

Use the PC Health Check app9 to see if your PC can run Windows 11.

[Technogeezer]

I don’t think there’s any question on if or how well Windows works on M1 Macs. It does. It works better under Parallels because Parallels has a released product and has tools/drivers that makes the experience “as expected”.

To many of us, a solution not only has to work but has to have an avenue for help if needed. The lingering question about Windows on M1 is “if something goes wrong, who will fix it”. Indications are (through Microsoft public statements and the lack of Apple Silicon on the Windows compatible chipset list) that it isn’t Microsoft. Microsoft might help you out if something breaks on Apple Silicon, but it’s at their discretion.

Because of this, the follow on question becomes “how much risk are you willing to take” and that answer is not the same for everyone.  That’s why in real life we have insurance policies. If you need Windows on M1 Macs and if you’re comfortable with Parallels being your “insurance policy” then Parallels is probably the product/solution for you at this time.  

Just consider that some are not comfortable with that position. Which does not mean that they don’t understand the situation or believe that Windows doesn’t work. 

[lensv]

I completely agree that no unlicensed or unsupported version (of any OS) should be installed on a production machine, but I still question why Microsoft can't be clear about this? Of course, their "strategy" is not up to anyone here to defend... I'm just saying 😲