VMware Communities
JoelMussman
Contributor
Contributor

Bloomberg: Apple looking at moving to ARM chips for Mac

What will be the VMware response to the Bloomberg report that Apple is seriously looking at a move to ARM for the Mac product line? Where will that leave VMware Fusion? Will Fusion be revamped to pretend to be an Intel chip so intel-compiled software can run? Or will Fusion just go away and we will be back to the Mac of the 1980's?

I realize that some folks may think this question a bit premature, but I would like to know the direction that VMware would plan on going if/when it happens.

25 Replies
UserOfVirtualMa
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I need to know the answer to this question as well.

I am aware that VMware is virtualization, not emulation.

However, I adopted Mac the day it became possible to run the other OSes and software I need, and I will have to un-adopt Mac the day it is no longer possible to do so.

I don't trust Apple to provide some Rosetta emulation layer because they have a history of only supporting things for a short time and then cancelling it.

So, VMware, what will it be?

Reply
0 Kudos
JWPyle3
Contributor
Contributor

Just watched the Keynote.  Apple will be including Rosetta 2 for compatibility for x86 compatibility.  They also mentioned that the new MacOS 11.0 Big Sur supports virtualization for running other OS, Linux was mentioned.  In the demo of this they were using Parallels running on an A12 or A12X.  I'm really hoping Fusion works with it.

Jim

Reply
0 Kudos
ColoradoMarmot
Champion
Champion

So there's a reason they showed linux and not windows - because linux runs on ARM processors.    There's a big difference from emulating a CPU for an application, and emulating it for a virtualization platform .  The latter could use Rosetta, but it's unclear how complete Rosetta is.

To be fair,  Rosetta 2 performance was impressive, but note they said it was running the game at 1080p (with no mention of fps)...which isn't bad, but isn't great.

Apple declares hardware vintage 5 years after they were last sold - that's for hardware maintenance, but it's a decent benchmark for the long end.    The original Rosetta lasted from 2006-2011, so that fits with the 5 year timeframe too, though they only did biannual releases back then.  They said a 2 year transition period, so figure that the last intel macs will be sold in late 2022.  Even though they don't use Rosetta, that's still all intel support, so figure 2027 is the drop-dead date barring magic from Fusion.

Those include high-end applications that have a large windows, and small mac user base which are unlikely to port to ARM, so those will be lost.  I think it's the death-knell of mac gaming (which was on life support anyway) - we'll get iPad games, but that's hardly the same as what we can do now.  There's a lot of niche application I use that are only on windows - everything from processing lithophanes to tagging media, and most surprising, TurboTax for Business, which is windows only.  Cloud's not an option for those kinds of things.

We'll just have to wait for the Fusion team to post their thoughts (if they can).  I'm sure this wasn't a surprise, so they probably have some skeleton of a strategy, and I have hope that they'll yet again pull a rabbit out of their hat.

Reply
0 Kudos
UserOfVirtualMa
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Like I said before, I don't trust Apple and their Rosetta 2 because based on their history it will only exist for a limited time. I require several software packages from early 2000s which are irreplaceable. That is because my company provides support for infrastructure equipment that needs to continue functioning for decades. Longevity is crucial. I cannot rely on Apple to provide "Rosetta 2" for 5 years and then cancel it because it's not important to them anymore. This is why I am a VMware customer. Of course, if VMware doesn't care, then I will need to find another solution.

Reply
0 Kudos
MrIon
Contributor
Contributor

Forget using VMWare for Windows - what about those of us who need to virtualize older versions of OS X as Apple dropped support for 32-bit applications?

This sucked when we went from PPC to Intel, it will probably suck this time too...  Hope the VMWare guys have something good to say soon!

Reply
0 Kudos
john_ahrends
Contributor
Contributor

Has anyone tried Fusion on Mac OS 11.0????

None of my VMs start... it claims there is not enough Physical RAM.  No matter how much RAM I try...

Reply
0 Kudos
audenmahk
Contributor
Contributor

I'm having the same issue.

Reply
0 Kudos
daphnissov
Immortal
Immortal

For others rushing to this thread, please don't expect support from a literally brand new OS until the next release of Fusion. If you're surprised and disappointed the existing version doesn't work, don't be.

Leica
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Why don't you try the new Fusion Preview? I assume that will be Version 12 of Fusion when released.

Reply
0 Kudos
jahrends
Contributor
Contributor

hahaha.... That is hilarious.

Considering Parallels supports it.

It has been the same old song and dance since 1998...

It's not a hard question.  It is VMware that is saying that it does not have enough physical ram... but when you look at the logs it sees there is sufficient ram.  Just looking for a fix... I miss the VMware workstation days with linux... The community would have had a fix already.

VMware is bigger than Parallels and should have been on the ball ahead of them.

Reply
0 Kudos
RDPetruska
Leadership
Leadership

Like I said before, I don't trust Apple and their Rosetta 2 because based on their history it will only exist for a limited time. I require several software packages from early 2000s which are irreplaceable. That is because my company provides support for infrastructure equipment that needs to continue functioning for decades. Longevity is crucial. I cannot rely on Apple to provide "Rosetta 2" for 5 years and then cancel it because it's not important to them anymore.

I see this as proof yet again of Apple's disdain for their customers and for actually gaining market share.  Since their inception, they have been against clones and third party hardware/software.  They have always charged far more than what their product is worth.  And they change strategies constantly.  When they moved from Motorola to Intel chips several years back, it opened up the market to users, albeit with the Hackintosh community - but it widened their user base.  And in theory, made production cheaper for Apple.  Of course, they didn't pass those savings along to their customers - still charge a premium price for an average product.  But nevertheless, again just proof of their arrogance and their lack of care for any long term customers.  THIS is why a majority of folks out there HATE Apple!

This is why I am a VMware customer. Of course, if VMware doesn't care, then I will need to find another solution.

I don't think it will be a matter of "VMware doesn't care".  If Apple changes their CPU chips again, there's not much anyone can do - VMware has always been about *virtualization*, NOT *emulation*.

Reply
0 Kudos
wila
Immortal
Immortal

Hey Rob,

Let's keep it technical OK?

The good news on "Apple on Arm" is that VMware actually has a Proof of concept (vSphere on Arm) running.

Of course that's not on macOS, but they have already proven that they _can_ do it.

--

Wil

| Author of Vimalin. The virtual machine Backup app for VMware Fusion, VMware Workstation and Player |
| More info at vimalin.com | Twitter @wilva
UserOfVirtualMa
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Because of all the reasons discussed so far, it is very important that VMware make a statement as to what their plans are moving forward.

I recognize that VMware has historically been virtualization, not emulation. However, there is a shifting landscape in terms of computer architectures, yet those of us who rely on legacy x86 software, each of us for our own reasons, need to know that there is a long term plan to continue supporting us.

So, VMware, what will it be?

Will it be: VMware will provide a rock-solid, long-term, viable solution to continue running our x86 operating systems moving forward?

Or will it be: So long and nice knowing you?

Reply
0 Kudos
ColoradoMarmot
Champion
Champion

Yup, I have zero doubt that Fusion will run on ARM.  The question will be, can it run Windows (intel version) on ARM leveraging Rosetta or some other emulation technology.

To some of the other comments above:  We likely have 5 years (at least) before this becomes a critical problem.  None of the machines or software we have today have magically stopped working, nor will they stop working for the foreseeable future.  There's time to figure this out.

And a reminder - VMWare is a publicly traded company, so they have restrictions on what they are able to share.  We will know in due course, and certainly by when Big Sur is released.  That still gives us years before it becomes a serious issue.

Reply
0 Kudos
TECH198
Hot Shot
Hot Shot

Not for 5 years, just enough time for all developers to get over, or most

That's the thing though.. Apple's  clarification is often different to what others reckon it should be However, I can't remember, never used a PowerPC, but that a rocky finish or a smooth transition ? If a smooth one, then i would expect the  same here..

We've done this transition before, so i'm basing it on what happened in 2005 when Apple went to Intel, and using that to see if whether we will have the same here as well. Howe-er based on thefacts that ARM uses less power, less coding helps performance boost (hopefully). and better better battery life. perhaps to ease all this maybe Apple may develop them own Apple VT VMWare could use?

That's what i'm hoping, some sort, as it cannot be software Rosetta based, it would be far too slow with the overhead. It must have hardware support to be as fast.

Reply
0 Kudos
ColoradoMarmot
Champion
Champion

It was mostly smooth, and they kept PPC support in the OS for about 5 years.  That's what I'd expect here too.  But a lot of software and developers simply never made the change and abandoned their products - and I definitely expect that with this one, especially things like games and enterprise software that's now much harder to port.

There's already a hypervisor in Big Sur, but the issue is that it (and Fusion and Parallels) are virtualization platforms, not emulation platforms.  That means that they simply expose the host CPU to the guest.  There is no way that anyone will be able to run intel software without Rosetta or something similar.  The question is: does apple improve rosetta so that Fusion can leverage it, or does Fusion build something on their own.  We won't know until we know, but again, there's plenty of time to figure that out, and I expect we'll have pretty clear direction by the end of the year.

Reply
0 Kudos
MrIon
Contributor
Contributor

Where the migration fell apart hard from PPC -> Intel was on drivers, which is where this one will get ugly as well. Applications run in user space of the operating system and usually are emulated with things like Rosetta, but drivers run in the kernel or rely on specific hardware access that is otherwise not available in user space... Apple has been trying to discourage kernel drivers (KEXTs) in recent versions of MacOS, but they're still out there and still very important. My iSCSI driver that lets me use a Drobo, for example...

For "current" or "generic" hardware, there'll be new drivers and it won't be an issue. But for older stuff, or stuff like my iSCSI driver that will require an investment to upgrade, it can be a real deal breaker.

Like I said, for me, I use VMWare to virtualize older MacOS so I can keep using my 32-bit software that the developer has abandoned...

Reply
0 Kudos
ColoradoMarmot
Champion
Champion

Very good point.  Apple's depreciating kext's in a future release, so that'll be an issue regardless of the intel shift.  If the vendor doesn't move to the new system extension framework, you'll be out of luck.  I have a similar problem with my really good amplifiers not having HDMI connections - I was able to use TOSLink with the apple TV's to output the sound, but that's no longer an option.  I ended up having to upgrade the amplifier.  Sucks, but that's the march of progress.  Fortunately for computers, most devices these days just use some flavor of USB or Thunderbolt, so should last a lot longer.

And you bring up a separate issue.  We may see some kind of option to virtualize windows and x86/64 on ARM, but is there enough need/reason/business to justify all the work needed to virtualize old OSX versions? 

We'll just have to wait and see....I expect we'll have a lot more clarity for the future by the end of the year.  Ultimately I'll have two options: to buy the last Intel MBP apple makes and run it for as long as I can, or, if something changes on the virtualization end, plus most of my apps migrate quickly to ARM, a new one might be an option.  We'll just have to wait and see.

Reply
0 Kudos
wila
Immortal
Immortal

At least now when you run the new Tech Preview on Big Sur it is using the apple hypervisor and utilizes no kext's.

That's a pretty big change and I do wonder how well that VMware will be able to offer all their normal features while leveraging the native apple hypervisor.

It will -for sure- make the transition to apple silicon easier for getting the basics to work.

I have no idea how well that will work beyond the basics and I certainly do wonder what that means for my old x86/x64 workloads that will never move to arm.

--

Wil

| Author of Vimalin. The virtual machine Backup app for VMware Fusion, VMware Workstation and Player |
| More info at vimalin.com | Twitter @wilva
Reply
0 Kudos