Apple Silicon Broke the Old Way of Running Windows on a Mac
There is almost always one app.
The practice management software the whole office runs on. The CAD package with no Mac build. The tax program, the payroll system, the machine tool that ships with a Windows-only configuration utility. Everything else in the working day moved to the browser years ago, and then there is the one thing that did not.
For about fifteen years the answer to this was straightforward. Macs ran on Intel chips, Boot Camp came free with macOS, and you could partition the drive and start the machine as a genuine Windows PC. It was inelegant and it required a reboot, but it worked completely, because the hardware underneath was the same hardware Windows expected.
That option is gone, and a lot of the advice still circulating online has not caught up.
What actually changed
Apple silicon Macs use ARM processors rather than Intel’s x86 architecture. Boot Camp was discontinued for them, and the reason is not that Apple lost interest. It is that the standard desktop version of Windows is built for x86 chips, and an ARM Mac cannot simply boot it.
So the route changed shape. Instead of dual-booting a normal copy of Windows, you now run the ARM version of Windows 11 inside a virtual machine on macOS. Both halves of that sentence matter. It is virtualization rather than dual boot, which is generally more convenient. And it is ARM Windows rather than the version most people have used, which is where the caveats live.
Microsoft names two supported routes
This is worth knowing because it is Microsoft’s own guidance rather than a vendor’s marketing. For Macs with Apple silicon, Microsoft points to two options.
The first is Windows 365 Cloud PC, where Windows runs on Microsoft’s servers and streams to the Mac. Nothing is installed locally. It needs a decent connection and it carries its own subscription, but it sidesteps the architecture question entirely.
The second is Parallels Desktop, which Microsoft describes as an authorized solution for running Arm versions of Windows 11 Pro and Windows 11 Enterprise on Apple silicon. That authorization is the practical difference between Parallels and the alternatives. It means the arrangement is sanctioned rather than tolerated, which matters more in a workplace than it does at home.
One detail people consistently miss: the Windows licence is separate and additional. Microsoft is explicit that you need a licence for Windows 11 Pro and that each instance needs its own. The virtualization software is one purchase, Windows is another. Anyone budgeting for this should count both.
💻 See which edition matches how you would actually use it
What Parallels gives you
The core appeal is that Windows runs alongside macOS instead of instead of it. No reboot, files shared between the two, Windows applications sitting in the Mac dock. For the one-app problem, that is the whole point: you open the thing, use it, and close it without leaving your Mac session.
The editions differ mainly in resources and management rather than in what Windows can do.
- Standard allocates up to 8 GB of vRAM and 4 virtual CPUs to a machine. Aimed at home and personal use.
- Pro raises that to 128 GB vRAM and 32 vCPUs, and adds a command-line interface, a Parallels AI package, and support for graphics-intensive work. Built for developers and power users.
- Business matches Pro’s resources and adds centralised administration, licence management, CI/CD workflow automation and volume licensing. Parallels requires this edition at ten or more users.
- Enterprise exists above that and is quoted directly.
There is also a choice between a one-time purchase and a subscription, and it is not only about cost. A one-time purchase comes with 30 days of support; the subscription includes unlimited support and free major updates. If you intend to keep this working across future macOS and Windows releases, that distinction is the one to think about.
Parallels says its users run more than 200,000 Windows applications on Apple silicon Macs. That is the company’s own figure rather than an audited one, but the direction is fair: for ordinary business software the compatibility story is now good.
What will not work, specifically
This is the section that should decide your purchase, and both Microsoft and Parallels publish the limits plainly.
Games and DirectX 12. Applications that depend on DirectX 12 will not run properly. Parallels states its 3D acceleration is supported at the level of DirectX 11.1 and OpenGL 4.3, and that advanced AAA titles may fail to launch. If gaming is the reason you want Windows, this is not the answer.
Nested virtualization. It is unavailable, which takes out more than it sounds. Hyper-V does not work, and nor do the things built on it: Windows Subsystem for Linux 2, Windows Subsystem for Android, Windows Sandbox, and virtualization-based security. Parallels offers WSL1 as a partial substitute. Developers who rely on WSL2 containers should treat this as a hard stop.
Some x86 software. ARM Windows translates x86 applications, and Parallels is honest that some of them may not work today. Thousands do. Older or unusual software, particularly anything with custom drivers or hardware dongles, is the category to test before committing.
32-bit Arm apps from the Microsoft Store are not supported either.
None of this is a criticism of Parallels. These are constraints of ARM Windows itself, and any virtualization product on Apple silicon inherits them. The mistake is buying without knowing them and discovering the gap after the fact.
🖥️ Check your one app against the compatibility notes first
The free options, honestly
An article that only mentioned the paid route would be leaving something out.
Broadcom made VMware Fusion free to download, and it runs ARM Windows on Apple silicon. UTM is free and open source and does the same. Both are genuinely capable, and for a hobbyist or someone testing an idea they are a reasonable first stop.
What you are paying Parallels for is smoothness and support: the macOS integration, the setup that handles Windows installation and licensing for you, the performance tuning, and someone to call when a macOS update breaks something. Whether that is worth money depends entirely on whether the Windows app in question is a hobby or your job.
And if the answer is that you need Windows rarely and mostly for one browser-based system, Microsoft’s cloud option or a remote desktop into an existing office PC may be cheaper than either.
Deciding in about ten minutes
Four questions settle this faster than any review will.
What is the app, exactly? Not “Windows software” but the specific product and version. Everything else follows from that one answer.
Does it need DirectX 12, WSL2 or Hyper-V? If yes, stop. No virtualization product on Apple silicon will give you those, and a cheap Windows laptop is the honest answer.
Is it x86-only and unusual? Bespoke industry software, anything with a hardware dongle, anything last updated a decade ago. Test before you buy, and use a trial to do it.
How often will you actually open it? Daily justifies a local virtual machine and a paid product. Twice a month probably justifies a cloud PC or a remote connection to a machine that already exists.
The old answer to running Windows on a Mac was free, complete, and required rebooting. The new answer is more convenient, costs money in two places, and comes with a list of things it cannot do. Read the list before you buy, not after.
