Running Windows on Apple Silicon Macs in 2025: Solutions, Challenges, and Future Trends

Apple’s transition from Intel’s x86 processors to its proprietary Apple Silicon chips marked a seismic shift in the computing world, redefining performance, battery life, and system design. However, for dedicated Windows users, enthusiasts, and professionals who rely on Windows-exclusive applications or crave access to the expansive library of PC games, this evolution came with a considerable cost: diminished Windows compatibility on macOS devices. Nearly five years since Apple first unleashed its ARM-based Macs, the ecosystem for running Windows software on these machines remains fractured and frustrating. Practical, seamless solutions—once attainable through Boot Camp or traditional x86 virtualization—have been largely replaced by a patchwork of compatibility layers, virtual machines, and emulation solutions, each with distinct shortcomings.

The Challenge of Windows Software Compatibility on Apple Silicon​

Apple Silicon Macs, powered by the M1, M2, and now M3 chips, deliver stunning performance benchmarks. Multithreaded scores, energy efficiency, and graphical prowess regularly outclass both their Intel Mac predecessors and similarly-priced ultrabooks or even desktops running Windows. Yet this hardware leap comes at the expense of what was briefly a golden era of cross-platform flexibility; Intel-based Macs from 2006 to 2020 famously allowed users to dual-boot macOS and Windows natively thanks to Apple’s Boot Camp utility.
That era is gone. Apple Silicon machines do not support Boot Camp, and thus cannot boot Windows natively. Microsoft does not sell a consumer version of Windows for ARM to end users. Even if you procure a Windows ARM image, you're restricted to running it in a virtualized environment, with all the compatibility and performance caveats that entails.
For professionals, gamers, and those clinging to legacy Windows-only software—a significant cohort, as evidenced by continued demand across Mac forums and support channels—this is not a trivial issue. Solutions exist, but each feels like a compromise, requiring nuanced understanding, experimentation, and often, substantial monetary outlay. What does the landscape look like in 2025, and what’s next for cross-platform compatibility?

CrossOver: The Compatibility Layer With Caveats​

Among the leading options is CodeWeavers’ CrossOver, a commercial compatibility layer that leverages the open-source Wine project. Wine—originally “Wine Is Not an Emulator”—translates Windows API calls into POSIX-compliant calls, enabling many Windows applications to run on Unix-based systems like macOS and Linux. In the gaming world, Wine has found prominence in Valve’s Proton, a crucial technology driving compatibility on the Steam Deck and Linux gaming platforms.
CrossOver’s biggest advantages are its polished user experience and “native-like” integration. When it works, the results are impressive: Windows applications reside in the macOS Dock, access Mac files seamlessly, and open alongside native apps with minimal overhead.

Strengths of CrossOver​

• Simplicity and Integration: CrossOver provides a relatively painless interface for installing and managing Windows software. Unlike raw Wine installations or other wrappers, it abstracts much of the technical complexity.
• Lower Resource Use: Since CrossOver does not run a full Windows OS in a VM, it uses less memory and CPU than a typical virtual machine approach.
• Ongoing Development and Support: CodeWeavers offers regular updates, technical support, and compatibility tweaks, which means improved reliability compared to DIY Wine setups.
• Access to Many Apps and Games: Office utilities, productivity software, and an array of games (especially older or less demanding titles) may run acceptably—or even well—when using CrossOver.

Where CrossOver Stumbles​

Despite its achievements, CrossOver is not a panacea. The nature of API translation means inevitable compatibility gaps. Some major applications and games either do not run or offer a subpar experience.

• Poor Support for Modern PC Games: Many contemporary titles—especially those with anti-cheat mechanisms, complex launchers, or heavy graphics requirements—simply refuse to run. Notably, Overwatch 2, despite being playable on modest Windows hardware, is out of reach.
• Limited Microsoft Office Support: While Microsoft offers native macOS versions of Office, some Windows-specific features are missing. Unfortunately, the latest Office for Windows does not consistently work under CrossOver.
• No PC Game Pass and Launcher Bugs: CrossOver can handle Steam, but services like Xbox PC Game Pass remain inaccessible, and certain launchers are glitchy or unpredictable.
• Graphics Limitations: Modern gaming on Linux owes much of its advances to Valve’s Proton and the Vulkan graphics API, both of which use Wine under the hood. macOS, however, lacks native Vulkan support; solutions like MoltenVK translate Vulkan calls to Apple’s Metal API, adding yet another abstraction layer that can reduce performance and break compatibility.
• Rosetta 2 Dependency: CrossOver’s magic also relies on Apple’s Rosetta 2, a dynamic recompiler for translating x86 instructions to ARM. Rosetta itself is a bridging technology, and Apple has hinted it won’t be around forever. The fate of CrossOver and other translation-dependent tools becomes uncertain if or when Apple drops Rosetta support.

Cost Analysis​

CrossOver is not free. A subscription runs $74 annually—with perpetual use of the last version you purchased if you opt out of renewal. While discounts and free trials ease the pain, this begins to add up, especially if you require frequent updates for optimal compatibility. For non-commercial users, this pricing is generally lower than full virtualization solutions, but price-conscious users may balk at the recurring fees for what remains, ultimately, a workaround.

Parallels Desktop: Premium Virtualization—At a Price​

For those seeking full Windows environments and maximum software compatibility, virtual machines (VMs) are the next logical step. Parallels Desktop is the de facto gold standard for running VMs on Apple Silicon. Its crown jewels are a slick interface, the ability to run Windows in windowed, full-screen, or its signature “Coherence” mode (integrating Windows apps into the Mac desktop), and deep host-guest integration—from shared clipboards to file drag-and-drop between OSes.
If your workflow absolutely requires applications that simply don’t run through Wine/CrossOver—CAD software, proprietary office utilities, custom Windows business apps—Parallels often delivers a reliable, if imperfect, Windows experience.

Technical and Licensing Challenges​

However, Parallels is not immune to the woes introduced by Apple’s CPU architecture shift:

• Windows 11 ARM Edition Requirement: Parallels can only run the ARM version of Windows 11. Microsoft still does not provide retail ARM licenses, though evaluation copies are freely downloadable. ARM Windows could gain better ecosystem support as time goes on, but it’s still a moving target.
• x86 Emulation in Windows on ARM: Most Windows software today is compiled for x86/x64. Windows 11 on ARM does have an x86-to-ARM64 emulation layer—an impressive technical feat, but one that brings with it performance drawbacks, additional incompatibilities, and a tendency to break game anti-cheats and copy protection systems.
• DirectX 12 Not Supported: Parallels currently supports up to DirectX 11. Games and creative applications requiring DirectX 12 will not run, period.
• Spotty Gaming Compatibility: Fallout 4 and Civilization 6 reportedly work well, but Fallout 76 crashes on launch, likely due to complications with anti-cheat and x86 emulation. Overwatch 2, a recurring test case, remains unplayable.

Licensing and Cost: A Steep Toll​

Parallels’ business model is notably aggressive by 2020s standards. The basic edition runs $100 per year, or $220 for a so-called “perpetual” license which only guarantees updates for that major release—future compatibility and features may require repurchasing. The license is also per-machine; have a Mac and a MacBook? Double your expense. Additionally, you are on the hook for a genuine Windows 11 license, which Microsoft discourages for ARM virtualization use on consumer Macs, adding a legal gray area.
Compared to Adobe Creative Cloud’s two-device allowance, Parallels’ approach is strict, with no cross-device flexibility. This can be off-putting for hobbyists, small businesses, or students working across multiple personal or professional machines.

When Parallels Shines​

For users with budget flexibility and non-gaming workflows, Parallels remains the best “full Windows” solution for Apple Silicon Macs. Its stability, support, and ease of use are unmatched, and it handles many non-gaming, productivity-focused tasks beautifully. Developers testing on Windows ARM, or professionals managing cross-platform workflows, will appreciate its robust feature set, though they’ll pay handsomely for the privilege.

The “Free” Alternatives: VMWare Fusion and UTM​

If CrossOver’s hit-or-miss approach and Parallels’ pricing leave you cold, open-source and free solutions do exist, though they bring their own baggage.

VMWare Fusion​

As of recent years, VMWare Fusion offers a free personal-use license, making it a cost-effective way to run virtual machines on Apple Silicon Macs. Its performance is broadly similar to Parallels for many tasks. However, it shares the same basic limitation—all Windows VMs must run Windows 11 ARM, with its associated x86 emulation.
Fusion’s interface and integration are somewhat less refined than Parallels. For those comfortable wrestling with more traditional VM setups, though, the savings are considerable. Just be aware that the Windows license issue remains, and installation/setup is more involved than Parallels’ highly polished onboarding.

UTM​

A passion project that’s gained ground among macOS tinkerers, UTM leverages QEMU to run VMs that emulate various processor architectures. In native ARM mode, it offers the best performance for Windows on ARM, but you face the same software compatibility issues seen in commercial solutions.
More intriguing is UTM’s ability to emulate x86 hardware on ARM systems. This allows you to install old Windows or Linux distributions designed for classic PCs. However, performance takes a dramatic hit. Graphics and sound support are spotty, and forget about running modern games or demanding applications. UTM also lacks the deep desktop integration found in Parallels or CrossOver.
For retro computing enthusiasts or those with very specific, non-intensive needs, UTM is invaluable. As a general-purpose solution for running Windows software, it remains a last resort.

The Mix-and-Match Reality​

The glory days of native x86 Windows VMs, or dual-booting macOS and Windows via Boot Camp, are firmly behind us. Apple Silicon Macs force users into a compromise: either use virtualized Windows ARM, compatibility layers like CrossOver (with their own quirks and limitations), or hope software providers add native macOS support.
Most power-users reporting on their current workflows describe a hybrid approach: using CrossOver for certain games or legacy applications, and Parallels (or VMWare Fusion) for a fuller Windows work environment. This two-pronged approach is the closest Apple Silicon users can get to the flexibility of Intel-era Macs, but it’s far from ideal:

• App-by-App Testing Required: You’ll need to trial your core applications across both solutions to see what runs, how well, and at what cost.
• No Universal Solution: One program may work on CrossOver but not Parallels, or vice versa. Some software, especially Windows games relying on anti-cheat or advanced graphics APIs, won’t work at all.
• Ecosystem Fragmentation: For IT administrators and professionals, supporting end-users through this patchwork is challenging—documentation, troubleshooting, and licensing are non-trivial concerns.
• Future Uncertainty: The looming sunset of Rosetta 2 could break entire classes of solutions nearly overnight, and there’s no guarantee Microsoft or Apple will ease restrictions around retail ARM Windows or Boot Camp.

The Case of Boot Camp: Longing for Simplicity​

Boot Camp allowed Mac hardware to function as a fully native Windows PC, making it invaluable for students, business travelers, and gamers alike. The ability to run Windows with full hardware acceleration, and swap back to macOS at will, was a major selling point for “prosumer” Macs from the late 2000s through to 2020.
On Apple Silicon, there are technical and strategic reasons why Boot Camp may never return:

• Platform Divergence: Apple’s chips use the ARM architecture, requiring an ARM version of Windows. Microsoft currently restricts licensing of Windows for ARM to select OEMs; Apple is not among them.
• Resource Commitment: Supporting native, full-featured Windows on Apple hardware would require ongoing engineering investment and, likely, Apple and Microsoft’s cooperation. Neither company shows interest in rekindling this partnership.
• Apple’s Vision: Apple pushes for macOS-centric workflows, banking on developers to port or rewrite applications for macOS, or leverage web and cross-platform toolkits. Dual-booting with a competing OS does not fit into this vision.

For Mac users who only occasionally need a Windows application, the loss of Boot Camp is a sore point. Apple’s alternatives—web apps, cloud streaming, or porting tools—have not fully closed the gap.

Strengths and Risks: A Critical Assessment​

Examining the collective state of Windows compatibility on Apple Silicon exposes a few notable strengths and significant ongoing risks.

Notable Strengths​

• Unmatched Hardware Performance: Apple Silicon delivers extraordinary battery life and heat efficiency, making even VM and emulation approaches viable for light productivity or legacy software.
• Polished User Experience: Solutions like Parallels and CrossOver, despite their limitations, have reached high levels of usability.
• Ongoing Community and Commercial Investment: Strong demand for Windows compatibility on Macs continues to drive innovation and support within both open-source and commercial ecosystems.
• Incremental Progress: Each year brings new compatibility workarounds; for example, CodeWeavers and the Wine community are actively working to close graphics gaps and extend application support.

Persistent Risks​

• Unreliable Software Compatibility: Any app or game you need to run must be individually tested. Business-critical or niche applications may never work acceptably.
• Cost Accumulation: Licensing fees for Parallels or CrossOver, compounded by commercial Windows licenses and app subscriptions, can quickly add up.
• Licensing and Legal Ambiguity: The status of installing Windows ARM images as a private consumer remains unofficial at best.
• Potential for Sudden Breakage: Apple controls the platform and could change or remove Rosetta, or tighten macOS security policies, undermining entire workarounds.
• No Native Gaming Solution: Despite Apple’s own investments in gaming APIs—they’ve introduced tools like the Game Porting Toolkit—it is not realistic to expect the breadth or depth of the Windows gaming library to run well, if at all, on Mac.

What Does the Future Hold?​

Absent a sea-change in cross-company collaboration, or miraculous advances in Wine-based translation and ARM emulation, the next few years are likely to see incremental, not revolutionary, improvements in Windows app support on Apple Silicon.
There are a few possible inflection points:

• Better Windows ARM App Support: If developers begin compiling Windows software natively for ARM, either out of necessity or in response to the broader ARM ecosystem (including Qualcomm’s Windows PCs), compatibility on Macs might improve organically.
• Valve and the Gaming Angle: If Valve or the broader Proton/Wine community can solve macOS graphics support—for example, by accelerating Vulkan-over-Metal toolchains—gaming compatibility could expand, though still behind Linux.
• Cloud Solutions: Services like Xbox Cloud Gaming or Windows 365 present new ways to stream Windows apps and games, sidestepping local emulation and virtualization altogether. For certain use cases, this transition may be the real solution, though it brings its own set of drawbacks (latency, internet dependence, subscription fees).
• Apple or Microsoft Policy Change: This is the “hail Mary”—if Microsoft decides to license Windows ARM officially to consumers, or Apple makes a surprise about-face on Boot Camp for ARM, the landscape could shift dramatically. But as of now, this seems unlikely.

Final Verdict: A Landscape of Workarounds​

If you’re determined to run Windows software on an Apple Silicon Mac, your best options are a blend of commercial and open-source compatibility solutions. CrossOver is affordable, efficient, and “just works” for some apps and games, but can’t be counted on as a universal fix. Parallels Desktop offers the closest approximation to native Windows, but the price is high and frustrating limitations—especially for gamers—remain. Free tools like VMWare Fusion and UTM enable experimentation but require patience and technical know-how.
There is no single magic bullet; instead, each user must survey their software needs and choose from a menu of imperfect options, testing and retesting as both Apple and Microsoft evolve their ecosystems.
For businesses, power-users, and IT departments, the risks and costs should be weighed carefully before adopting Apple Silicon as a “Windows fallback.” For enthusiasts, hobbyists, or writers who require just a handful of legacy applications, the solutions available may be “good enough”—so long as you go in with eyes wide open about the limitations.
Ultimately, until Apple and Microsoft address the underlying fractures—through deeper collaboration, more open licensing, or unprecedented technology advances—running Windows software on a modern Mac will remain a messy, expensive compromise. As Apple continues forward with its own vision, the divide between “Mac user” and “Windows user” may only grow wider, leaving cross-platform devotees wishing for the simplicity of yesterday’s Boot Camp era. The dream of one computer to rule them all is not dead, but for now, it requires a willingness to tinker, spend, and accept imperfection as the new normal.

---

Source: How-To Geek Windows Software on a Modern Mac Still Sucks