I don't want to use MacOS on an iPad screen, I would want to use MacOS on an iPad when plugged into an external screen though. Same with the iPhone. No reason iPhones and iPads of the last few men's to now could not run MacOS on an external screen... well the reason is it would kill low end MacBook sales. Microsoft did this years ago when they had the Windows phone out. Not a great phone but such a fantastic idea, especially for office jockeys who just need a browser and Office. Go to work, computer in your pocket, plug into a dock for power and the screen. Bluetooth keyboard and mouse, work your day out. Ready to leave just pull the phone out of the dock and slide back into your pocket and head out. Small and simple and versatile.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I do not want macOS on iPad. Ever.
- Thread starter SanderEvers
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I call ********.
The only thing I can find is the opposite. The developer states that the app was rejected and that they’ve done all they can to get Apple to reverse that decision, without success.
Feature Request: Publish UTM SE on the App Store · utmapp UTM · Discussion #4577
Hi there! Is there actually anything stopping UTM SE to be released on the iPhone App Store? It does not do JIT, and there are Virtual Machines allowed on the iOS App Store already (iSH), so I thin...
github.com
You can call whatever you want, but there were several articles about it at the time. I think the “developer” (assuming that person is really the developer) lied, and I call **** on what he claimed. And you still haven’t addressed that there are two other similar apps on the iPad App Store currently. If this wasn’t allowed, or wasn’t possible, then they wouldn’t be on the App Store right now. iSH is an entire emulated Linux system. It’s been on the App Store for years and years, doesn’t use JIT or hypervisor, and runs well. And why do we keep getting stuck on this point? I’ve already repeatedly said I think iPadOS could improve by adding entitlements for thoroughly vetted and trusted developers to use for apps like Parallels Desktop. This would improve things regarding VMs either way, even though it’s currently possible to do this without JIT and Hypervisor. So what’s wrong with this solution of improving iPadOS rather than dual booting extra bloatware OSes onto our devices? You don’t see macOS dual booting iPadOS, in fact, M-Series Macs don’t dual-boot at all. They run VMs and emulators. The iPad could do the same, no need for dual-booting which vast majority of people won’t benefit from, and would be more difficult to manage, add extra confusion for customers when they have to choose which OS they want to run on their iPad, and likely hurt iPadOS due to lack of third party motivation to improve apps (can see the feedback forums right now: “just run the Mac version of our app on your iPad, we can’t be bothered with improving the iPad version”). Dual-booting just doesn’t make any sense. Why would macOS be called MAC OS if it’s running on other platforms? At that rate, why not just remove all the optimizations the separate OSes provide for their platforms and slap “AppleOS” on everything? That’s just Microsoft thinking, and I think it’s lazy. Apple’s other platforms prove that separate but unified OSes can offer a nearly identical feature and software ecosystem. We could just improve iPadOS to share more in common with macOS, while retaining all the optimizations iPadOS offers for the iPad.I call ********.
The only thing I can find is the opposite. The developer states that the app was rejected and that they’ve done all they can to get Apple to reverse that decision, without success.
Feature Request: Publish UTM SE on the App Store · utmapp UTM · Discussion #4577
Hi there! Is there actually anything stopping UTM SE to be released on the iPhone App Store? It does not do JIT, and there are Virtual Machines allowed on the iOS App Store already (iSH), so I thin...
You are either misremembering or trolling.
The documentation hosted at getutm.app going back more than four years mentions jailbreaking, sideloading, tethering and AltStore, but not a word about Apple's App Store:
Wayback Machine
web.archive.org
There are posts on different forums dating back to late 2020 asking about installation using different methods, none linking to Apple's App Store.
As I mentioned earlier Merge isn't available here, and as far as I can tell it doesn't actually work anywhere.
I use i$H every day. Different situation:
https://ish.app/blog/app-store-removal
https://ish.app/blog/default-repository-update
Not sure what you are smoking now. I have never been a proponent of iPad dual-boot.
I have been arguing for macOS virtualized. Which is not possible.
A. I’m pretty sure I’m not misremembering, but I think it was back in like 2019 or something (I think iOS 13 was the current OS at the time if I remember correctly), so I could be. And UTM has always had a version that did require jailbreaking and sideloading for JIT. But they also concurrently had (and I’m pretty sure still have) a version that didn’t require JIT or Hypervisor that was App Store compliant. I think it’s called the SE version.You are either misremembering or trolling.
The documentation hosted at getutm.app going back more than four years mentions jailbreaking, sideloading, tethering and AltStore, but not a word about Apple's App Store:
Wayback Machine
There are posts on different forums dating back to late 2020 asking about installation using different methods, none linking to Apple's App Store.
As I mentioned earlier Merge isn't available here, and as far as I can tell it doesn't actually work anywhere.
I use i$H every day. Different situation:
https://ish.app/blog/app-store-removal
https://ish.app/blog/default-repository-update
Not sure what you are smoking now. I have never been a proponent of iPad dual-boot.
I have been arguing for macOS virtualized. Which is not possible.
B. I don’t know whether Merge works or not, I have never used it or UTM for that matter. But since it’s in the App Store, that does demonstrate that VM apps in any form aren’t banned in the App Store, only ones that require JIT and Hypervisor access. Both do pose security threats, so I think it would make sense to provide entitlements that trusted developers could request access to. And iSH also demonstrates that as well, and I’ve considering trying it.
C. I’m not smoking anything. Someone here was talking about dual-booting, I thought it was you, but perhaps not. All that I and the OP (I believe if I understand his position correctly) are arguing against is a native macOS install on iPads. I don’t mind if more VM apps come to the iPad, I actually think it would be very useful for some professionals who rely on them. I think that counts as an improvement to iPadOS, rather than as a replacement or substitution of iPadOS with macOS. I believe that VM apps being available on iPadOS have very different ramifications than native macOS installs which essentially replace iPadOS. Even with a dual-boot scenario, it would essentially signal that Apple had given up on giving iPadOS more macOS features. I would interpret that move as “here, now you have macOS, and we can’t be bothered anymore with adding those features to iPadOS.” I’ve never had an issue with more VM apps on iPadOS, so I honestly don’t understand how we’re in disagreement on this.
The project website in March 2020:
Quotes:
- This project is in early development and there is no public release planned anytime soon. We need help from both frontend and backend developers!
- Where can I download UTM? - This project is still under development and there is no plan for a release anytime soon. Check out the Github for development and build information.
- And because of the use of private APIs and the fact that Apple explicitly prohibits JIT code, it is unlikely that UTM will ever be in the App Store and will only be able to run through sideloading (restrictions are discussed below).
I have already posted evidence that UTM SE was rejected.
You may be thinking of the Mac App Store version.
Pretty useless as a counter-example, no?
But it doesn't actually appear to be available in the App Store. Can you download and install it?
Did you read the blog posts I linked to, explaining how they managed the threat of App Store removal?
Yet the arguments about iPad apps never improving if macOS apps are made available keep being brought up. Mac apps are available regardless if this is achieved through dual-boot or virtualization. I would argue that Mac apps available through virtualization are even more accessible, and thus supposedly an even greater threat to the wellbeing of the iPad ecosystem.
Last edited:
A. I must have misremembered, or been remembering the Mac version then. Thanks for pointing that out. Apparently I had misunderstood something.The project website in March 2020:
Quotes:
- This project is in early development and there is no public release planned anytime soon. We need help from both frontend and backend developers!
- Where can I download UTM? - This project is still under development and there is no plan for a release anytime soon. Check out the Github for development and build information.
- And because of the use of private APIs and the fact that Apple explicitly prohibits JIT code, it is unlikely that UTM will ever be in the App Store and will only be able to run through sideloading (restrictions are discussed below).
I have already posted evidence that UTM SE was rejected.
You may be thinking of the Mac App Store version.
Pretty useless as a counter-example, no?
But it doesn't actually appear to be available in the App Store. Can you download and install it?
Did you read the blog posts I linked to, explaining how they managed the threat of App Store removal?
Yet the arguments about iPad apps never improving if macOS apps are made available keep being brought up. Mac apps are available regardless if this is achieved through dual-boot or virtualization. I would argue that Mac apps available through virtualization are even more accessible, and thus supposedly an even greater threat to the wellbeing of the iPad ecosystem.
B. I could install it, if I was willing to pay $100 for it, which I’m not. It showed up in the App Store on my iPad like a couple weeks ago when I looked at it.
C. And things have changed since the posts from iSH. Apple has officially allowed emulators and apps that distribute mini apps. They’ve revised relevant guidelines. And even then, iSH was found to comply with the App Store guidelines, and so was allowed. iSH has been up on the App Store for years now. Presumably other developers could do similar for other OSes.
D. I’m actually not even opposed to Mac apps being ported to iPadOS. I would prefer if it was done by some automatic tool similar to Catalyst that could automatically optimize the app better for touch interactions and iPadOS. And even unmodified, it wouldn’t be too bad, after all, iPhone apps aren’t really optimized for the iPad either, but they currently run on iPadOS. My main issue with macOS on the iPad would be that it would likely mean giving up on improving iPadOS to be more Mac-like, which would harm those of us who prefer using iPadOS on our iPads. Again, I think we mostly agree here. I just don’t want native macOS loaded on iPad because I don’t think it would be good for future improvements to iPadOS, and I don’t think it makes much sense, considering even Mac’s aren’t dual booting or configuring with other OS options like iPadOS. Running macOS in a VM, or running Mac apps (like the Mac can currently run iPad apps) in iPadOS is fine by me.
👍
Please accept my apologies for accusing you of trolling and smoking. I was obviously agitated about something yesterday, and needed somewhere to vent. Time to check out from the Internet for a while.
Sounds like it to me.
Thank you, I forgive you. 👍🏻. I totally understand, there have been times I have been agitated as well. 🙂 I’m glad we were able to come to a better understanding of each other’s positions. 👍🏻
VM apps are pointless on an iPad and would make the device too warm for touch, drain the battery, etc. Using a VM in the cloud is more beneficial in every way for a tablet (except privacy if there is a privacy issue).
It seems this misinformed vocal minority who want macOS on iPad (I can bet they will backtrack if they experienced it) don't understand the thermal issues of running a desktop OS and desktop apps on a tablet that is held in the hands. They also appear to be ignorant of what happens to thin displays that become too hot.
There's a reason why the Studio Display and the Pro Display XDR have a fan inside them. The heat generated inside them needs to be blown out otherwise the display becomes damaged. That's not an issue on MacBooks because there's no processor behind the display. That is an issue on iPads because the processor and battery are directly sandwiched behind the display.
1. UTM when side-loaded has proven that it does NOT cause the iPad to get even warm or even drain the battery by that much. Hypervisor helps.
2. Via UTM, it is already possible to experience how a regular "desktop" OS runs locally on an iPad. It runs fine.
3. Cloud VM is NOT an option for coders because we obviously DO NOT want some of our code not ready for public use or not meant to be open-source to be on any system we do not control. The whole point of a VM is to provide an environment to do coding, IT work that the current iPad is NOT equipped to handle.
4. MacBook Pro with Mini LED display when running at 1000 nits sustained (this can be hacked) actually heats up the display panel quite a lot. A much bigger panel attempting the same thing does the same so the fan actually is justified for the Pro Display XDR. It is not at all needed for Studio Display, but Apple likes to overengineer these displays to make their customers pay extra.
P.S.: but all of the above points about VMs are moot because Apple actively BLOCKED us by simply taking away hypervisor support in iOS/iPad OS even if the previous version of the same OS supported it. So it's not that the hardware is not capable of the feat. Apple themselves just don't want you, me or anyone else to use the iPad any way other than the exact way they want us to: via the App Store.
And I don't see this situation changing any time soon. Especially not when App Store revenue is roughly 20% of their yearly income. Read: all iPad hardware sales altogether earn LESS than the App Store for Apple. Both Mac and iPad sales combined actually don't even earn as much as the App Store alone.
Last edited:
The problem when trying to debate hardware/software issues with people online is they will only give a narrow example, often without evidence, without thinking about all the various other users who will treat a machine differently. The world doesn't revolve around one or two people. Product design has to take in many variables and many use cases.
So here's the challenge.
Load the newest macOS in UTM on your iPad, load up big projects into After Effects, Blender or load up an 8GB language model in Ollama (if your iPad has enough RAM). Use them regularly, film the usage for evidence and show us the system temperatures. Then show us what your iPad's display looks like after a two months because with excessive and regular heat under a display LEDs, LCDs and OLEDs always get damaged, warped or discoloured.
There's a reason why Apple's current external displays need a cooling fan, even those processors in the displays can damage the screen. No offence but it is weird that all this needs explaining. Even an LLM, which is just a chatbot with no real world experience, understands the issues.
Last edited:
I don’t know about the heat thing being as bad as you are saying (maybe depending on use), but I definitely agree with you on the troubles of trying to navigate macOS on an iPad. And I believe that battery life would definitely take a hit. That’s why I’m in favor of just improving iPadOS and adding more macOS features.
It seems there is an even smaller and even more vocal minority that feels very strongly and cares very deeply that others should not be able to do what they want with their devices.
I ran my 2010 MacBook Pro with its hot and noisy 2.66 GHz Core i7 almost exclusively in clamshell for years and years, with fans blasting, often too hot to touch.
Guess what? The display is still just fine, 14 years later.
Also for the many, many situations where an Internet connection is either too expensive or not available at all.
So what? All Apple products, from the watch and the phone to the MacBook Pro Max and the Mac Pro Ultra, throttle performance as required based on the thermal situation.
You wouldn't do that on a one-port MacBook either, didn't stop Apple from releasing it.
Besides, I can easily make my iPad consume more power for an extended period of time than my Mac running Windows in a VM, so I really don't see what your point is.
Yeah, I guess your chatbot of choice has spent too much time training on MacRumors, and is regurgitating the nonsense.
Google AI search tells users to glue pizza and eat rocks
Google has defended the answers given by AI Overview, describing them as "isolated examples".
www.bbc.com
It seems there is an even smaller and even more vocal minority that feels very strongly and cares very deeply that others should not be able to do what they want with their devices.
I ran my 2010 MacBook Pro with its hot and noisy 2.66 GHz Core i7 almost exclusively in clamshell for years and years, with fans blasting, often too hot to touch.
Guess what? The display is still just fine, 14 years later.
Also for the many, many situations where an Internet connection is either too expensive or not available at all.
So what? All Apple products, from the watch and the phone to the MacBook Pro Max and the Mac Pro Ultra, throttle performance as required based on the thermal situation.
You wouldn't do that on a one-port MacBook either, didn't stop Apple from releasing it.
Besides, I can easily make my iPad consume more power for an extended period of time than my Mac running Windows in a VM, so I really don't see what your point is.
Yeah, I guess your chatbot of choice has spent too much time training on MacRumors, and is regurgitating the nonsense it found.
Google AI search tells users to glue pizza and eat rocks
Google has defended the answers given by AI Overview, describing them as "isolated examples".
Yeah, some of the apps I use on my iPad Pro are more resource heavy and run through battery faster. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t exist. And if battery runtime is a concern, portable power banks can help with that. I think VM software would be very useful for some. I understand why iPadOS currently restricts access to JIT and Hypervisor access, because both do pose a significant security threat if misused. But I think they could add an entitlement that developers could request access to, and Apple could thoroughly vet and ensure it’s being used in a secure way. 👍🏻
The key words you used are 'fans blasting' which the iPad cannot do.
Because the heat was mostly blasted out the back. But if you gander around these forums and other sites you'll see issues such as heat causing swollen batteries and damaging screens.
Displays are specced so that they should not be exposed to high heat. That's why your iPhone will display a warning when the device gets warm and then the screen will automatically dim and CPU throttle a lot.
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems there is an even smaller and even more vocal minority that feels very strongly and cares very deeply that others should not be able to do what they want with their devices.
I ran my 2010 MacBook Pro with its hot and noisy 2.66 GHz Core i7 almost exclusively in clamshell for years and years, with fans blasting, often too hot to touch.
Guess what? The display is still just fine, 14 years later.
Also for the many, many situations where an Internet connection is either too expensive or not available at all.
So what? All Apple products, from the watch and the phone to the MacBook Pro Max and the Mac Pro Ultra, throttle performance as required based on the thermal situation.
You wouldn't do that on a one-port MacBook either, didn't stop Apple from releasing it.
Besides, I can easily make my iPad consume more power for an extended period of time than my Mac running Windows in a VM, so I really don't see what your point is.
Yeah, I guess your chatbot of choice has spent too much time training on MacRumors, and is regurgitating the nonsense.
Google AI search tells users to glue pizza and eat rocks
Google has defended the answers given by AI Overview, describing them as "isolated examples".
I think I should also mention, VM software is not like the most tasking software ever conceived. Octane X pushes my graphics hardware harder than a VM would be likely to. While VM softwares aren’t the lightest and most efficient software ever created, they’re hardly something that would cause most modern computers to overheat and kick the fans into overdrive. And we’ve already seen how VMs will run on iPadOS (and even tiny iPhones, btw) with UTM, and, I should mention, that’s without JIT or Hypervisor (at least the SE version doesn’t need it). I’ve not seen a bunch of reports of destroyed iPads from running UTM. And it should also be noted, that UTM is less efficient with QEMU than most VM software is. A native port of Parallels Desktop or the like could potentially run more efficiently provided it had access to JIT and Hypervisor.
Because there's probably 5 people doing it and they don't run any intensive software on it. Things change when you scale that up to thousands of people doing a range of things.
Aside from thermal and display and UI issues, Apple always ensures that an operating system shouldn't be installed on hardware unless absolutely everything is optimal for the user and the device itself.
A 15 year old Mac could technically run macOS Sonoma, but Apple doesn't want you to have an experience that isn't optimal otherwise you'll be complaining. Likewise Microsoft started shutting out quite new systems from installing Windows 11. They wanted you to have a CoffeeLake or newer processor and a TPM by default. People hacked their way around it but MS didn't change their minds.
It’s definitely more than 5 people doing it. And I don’t know what you’re thinking we’re talking about, but I for one am not advocating for this being a default reinstalled feature in iPadOS. I’m advocating for people having the option to install a certain kind of app (VM app) from the App Store.
Cool, yeah six people. Tell them to post videos of using it with power software. Tell them to post detailed information including temperatures from the sensor and the display and the case.
There's the challenge. If it can be done with UTM as you claim then show me an iPad Pro with a macOS VM running a big After Effects project on real hardware and show us an unedited video with the thermal readings.
Last edited:
It seems there is an even smaller and even more vocal minority that feels very strongly and cares very deeply that others should not be able to do what they want with their devices.
I ran my 2010 MacBook Pro with its hot and noisy 2.66 GHz Core i7 almost exclusively in clamshell for years and years, with fans blasting, often too hot to touch.
Guess what? The display is still just fine, 14 years later.
Also for the many, many situations where an Internet connection is either too expensive or not available at all.
So what? All Apple products, from the watch and the phone to the MacBook Pro Max and the Mac Pro Ultra, throttle performance as required based on the thermal situation.
You wouldn't do that on a one-port MacBook either, didn't stop Apple from releasing it.
Besides, I can easily make my iPad consume more power for an extended period of time than my Mac running Windows in a VM, so I really don't see what your point is.
Yeah, I guess your chatbot of choice has spent too much time training on MacRumors, and is regurgitating the nonsense.
Google AI search tells users to glue pizza and eat rocks
Google has defended the answers given by AI Overview, describing them as "isolated examples".
Also, I think that officially supported VM apps would be very useful for just iPad users who don’t want macOS on their iPads. Some people need to be able to access Windows VMs for their jobs, and being able to run a Windows VM on their iPad for work stuff would allow them to use their iPad for that work more effectively. And Linux VMs would also be very useful. Being able to run VMs is a very useful feature, and would make a significant difference for some who currently can’t use an iPad Pro for their work. 👍🏻
Use a VM in the cloud. It's cheap and harmless to your device. You can set it up to use high power GPUs too. You could do that already ever since the first iPad.
Only if you have a stable internet connection. There are many times when people don’t have a good internet connection, but need access to a VM.