My understanding is that drivers aren't part of the kernel in Windows like they are in Linux. And I believe an ARM build of some kind or another already exists out there for Windows
It does. Officially there is an ARM build of Windows that Microsoft licenses to OEMs, and there is (or maybe was?) Windows IoT Core which has a build for ARM.
If I recall (grain of salt then) a while after the first M1 Mac came out one of Apple’s VPs had said something on the record about Apple having tried to get Microsoft to sell retail licenses of a Windows 10 for ARM build, because they didn’t want to deprecate Boot Camp for Windows. But Microsoft said no.
>a while after the first M1 Mac came out one of Apple’s VPs had said something on the record about Apple having tried to get Microsoft to sell retail licenses of a Windows 10 for ARM build
Not quite. The Craig Federighi quote is:
>As for Windows running natively on the machine, “that’s really up to Microsoft,” he said. “We 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. But that’s a decision Microsoft has to make, to bring to license that technology for users to run on these Macs. But the Macs are certainly very capable of it.”
The scuttlebutt says that Microsoft is locked into a requirement to only run Windows ARM on Qualcomm chips for an unknown period of time, although I've never seen anything from Microsoft to confirm that.
My own pet theory, based on absolutely no inside knowledge, is that MS doesn’t want to have Windows on M1+ until other CPU makers have caught up to Apple. It would be a huge embarrassment to have Apple hardware running Windows that much better than all the native PCs. All the PC OEMs would slash Nadella’s tires.
I like the theory, but I’ll counter with my own theory that MacBook Pros were the best Windows laptop for many years, and they ended up pushing PC quality to catch up which was good for the Windows install base and Office. :)
Pretty surprising that MSFT would end up with a deal like that, I'd feel like they would be in a position of strength. Unless all the ARM vendors were pretty supicious of whether Microsoft would succeed/invest properly in the ecosystem?
We learned last November that Qualcomm had an exclusivity agreement for Windows on ARM that lasted a (speculated) 5 years... which they then did almost absolutely nothing worthwhile with. As of November it was "expiring soon" but what "soon" means is still not clear. Perhaps it was renewed.
However, just two weeks ago Microsoft announced their "Project Volterra" Mac mini clone for Windows on ARM development, which makes it seem mighty certain that Windows on ARM for Mac is not coming anytime soon because otherwise why on earth would anyone buy that thing...
On the other hand, if Project Volterra doesn't sell very well and Windows on ARM continues to flounder, maybe Microsoft will finally make Windows on ARM for Mac a real option in the hopes of capturing mindshare and gathering interest from all the people with Macs.
However, just two weeks ago Microsoft announced their "Project Volterra" Mac mini clone for Windows on ARM development, which makes it seem mighty certain that Windows on ARM for Mac is not coming anytime soon because otherwise why on earth would anyone buy that thing…
Reading the tea leaves, if Windows were to come to Apple silicon Macs in an Apple-Microsoft mutually supported form, it would almost certainly be as a guest VM under the macOS hypervisor rather than as Boot Camp 2.0.
I don't remember that, but Apple have actively made changes to support Asahi Linux (I wouldn't go so far as to say they support Asahi Linux) and not backtracked on not-blocking other OSs.
It seem a bit disingenuous for Apple to shift blames to Microsoft.
Microsoft does not sell retail licenses of Windows for ARM devices and what Apple proposed isn't the way Microsoft currently does business for ARM hardware.
Yes, Microsoft could change how they do business to accommodate, but so too could Apple.
If Microsoft turn around and ask Apple to license Windows and provide the OS as an option to buyers, or ask Apple to supply Macbook hardware so Microsoft could sell Macbooks with Windows on it, Apple likely would have said no too.
Yes, there is a public stable API for Windows drivers. Even the built-in drivers are dynamically loaded.
Windows on ARM isn't new. The oldest Windows on ARM was Windows 8 RT (ARM32 only, I believe). Right now it seems Windows 10 and Windows 11 have ARM64 versions, but there was also Windows IoT Core from the Windows IoT OS branch a few years ago.
Windows CE on ARM and Windows PocketPC on ARM is older than that. But all of it has the same issue: you nearly always need a specific rebuild for a different ARM-machine because there isn't a single "ARM PC". Just like x86 pre-ACPI where you need different HALs and bringups for different systems. The problem here is twofold: firstly windows is closed so you can't actually add/modify components and rebuild it, only binary hacks and additive installation (like driver packages). Second issue: licensing. ARM isn't available unless you are an OEM. So there is no legal way to run Windows on M1 unless you are Apple and Microsoft signs you a contract (and that hasn't happened either).
If I recall (grain of salt then) a while after the first M1 Mac came out one of Apple’s VPs had said something on the record about Apple having tried to get Microsoft to sell retail licenses of a Windows 10 for ARM build, because they didn’t want to deprecate Boot Camp for Windows. But Microsoft said no.