This just struck me.
If you don’t have an Intel-based Mac, it might be a good idea to get one. The reason: They’ll run basically everything (MacOS, Windows, Linux) thanks to such things as Parallels.
The new Macs with the Apple Silicon will likely be faster and run longer on battery but are unlikely to be able to run Intel Windows.
Probably the optimal time to get one is when the new MacBook Pros are release (likely later this year).
I was actually reading an article the other day that said Parallels and VMWare are both hoping to have their own means of X86-64 virtualization working on Apple Silicon at some point to allow for running Linux and old versions of Windows. I can’t find the article now, but it definitely stuck with me as I had assumed the VM companies would just shrug and say “Oh well, can’t be done!”.
They’ll probably go the Crossover route …
You mean Wine? I doubt that.
Actually, current beta version of Parallels is already very impressive on my M1 Mac Mini.
Agreed. As I’ve posted about many times here on the forums, I’ve been using it to run ARM Windows Insider Previews since the day I received my M1 Mini. Love it. But we’re talking about running X86 OSes on Apple Silicon. Not quite the same thing.
I bought the latest 20.0.4 version of Crossover, which I use to run FontLab Studio, which exists only for Windows. Works perfectly on M1.
I use Crossover, because it loads much faster, and does not need several cores.
That’s why I suspect Parallels might try something similar 
They might incorporate it into their software so it isn’t that obvious, but currently I don’t see another way of doing it. But maybe they surprise me …
I’ve tried it a few times over the years. It just Wine with some more bells and whistles.
But comparing the emulation that Wine uses to the virtualization of an entire OS. Like apples and oranges.
WINE isn’t emulation - they are translating the API calls to native ones, they don’t emulate a complete PC.
Parallels has two options as far as I can see: emulation a la VirtualPC (horribly inefficient but the new Macs might be fast enough), or translating many more API calls than WINE / CrossOver (after all, Windows is just another app).
They are emulating the system calls of the Windows APIs using their own functions written for Linux. It’s a compatibility layer that emulates the Windows subsystems, regardless of “Wine Is Not an Emulator”.
I can’t speculate as to how they might accomplish creating such a virtualization layer, but it certainly wouldn’t be efficient to rebuild the entire system using Wine-esque methods when users need a full OS virtualization. You’d end up with the exact reason developers rarely rely on Wine for testing their applications as-is. You would rarely end up with the same exact experience as you would on the original OS you were targeting. Granted, we don’t get 100% of the way there with virtualization currently (we all know you should have a physical box in order to test against any OS you deploy software for), but I certainly wouldn’t call Wine dependable for verifying UI or other functionality for a Windows app I plan to distribute.
Either way, straying far from the topic. Have a good day, gentlemen.
I acquired an M1 Mac Mini to make sure my apps run fine on it, and I can post to the MAS in confidence. It is always a good idea to have the hardware and system that customers use. Before you know it, M1 machines will be everywhere, and after all, the main purpose of a Mac is not to run Windows and Linux.
While I agree that Parallels, VMWare or VirtualBox do run fine on an Intel Mac, nothing beats a true, physical PC, to make sure your Windows and Linux apps will run fine on it. Besides, they come dirt cheap these days.
Not the main purpose, of course.
But it used to be a great advantage.
100% true.
But, some people may wrongly assume this is enough. And then may comes trouble (to them / and their customers).
There are 10 kinds of users: those who knows and those who believe they know.