I thought it would be cool to have MacOs running on an iPad, I still do out of curiosity, but really what I wanted was more capability. The files app especially needed to be more fully featured, I haven't tried the new OS yet, but if they get it right then maybe that will be enough. Or maybe I'll try it and there'll be some other problem keeping me from using it as a laptop replacement, but files was the main one I noticed.
Full MacOS would make the iPad too complicated, and yeah dual boot would be ok but that's not Apple's style. Plus then developing the OS's they'd need to account for the iPadOS and the "people running MacOS on iPad" crowd, and that's probably some extra work or it'd be buggy. Consumers might be confused if they went to use an iPad and then sometimes it acts like an iPad at their house but other times it acts like a macbook at their nerdy friend's house. Also some people are just plain bad at using computers and these simplified devices really work for them. I can see them not wanting to complicate it. As long as they keep adding features and making it usable as a laptop replacement then I don't know if I see greed as the underlying cause for not doing it, as much as product lineup differentiation.
The irony of this headline is that iPadOS 26 is, in fact, ruining what makes iPadOS special by replacing its innovative touch based multitasking with shitty warmed over ideas from macOS.
GONE: slideover, and with it the ability to do anything with a second app when in full screen mode GONE: the ability to run multiple 'spaces' of split-viewed apps (with slideover acting as a go-between among them) GONE: the ability to quickly swap out a split screened app with drag and drop GONE: predefined size classes that ensure buttons, controls and other UI elements are in a predictable place in every Split View configuration
Remains to be reported on but I would not be surprised if Picture-in-picture and Quick Notes were gone too. Has anyone checked to see if app folders are still supported in the dock? Either way, iPadOS 26 is a disaster for touch-based productivity. I did NOT intend to buy a small Mac, I bought a damned tablet and I want it so work like one.
The notion of putting macOS on the iPad has been a recurring point of discussion for pretty much as long as the iPad Pro hit the streets with prices that started approaching MacBook Air prices. It heated up more when the iPad Pro started using M-series chips and iPad Pro prices even approached MacBook Pro prices.
There seems to be a fair number of people on both sides of the debate. However there is one group of iPad and iPad Pro users who are omitted from the discussion: the sizable number of iPad/Pro buyers who don’t have a computer running macOS. Across my group of friends and colleagues there are far more of them that own iPads that are firmly planted on Windows. The iPad stands on its own in a lot of cases.
Windows users who own one or more iPads probably wouldn’t care one way or the other if macOS became available on iPads as long as they aren’t paying more for what it would cost Apple to add that option. Hey, it may be zero added cost. I don’t know.
The only thing I know is that the only cards that Apple has placed on the table since 2010 are the one for Mac and the one for iPad. No matter what I desire my only choices are none, one, or both. It’s my decision to make. If at some point a new card appears on the table I may repeat the decision process again. Until then, I’ll happily keep playing the cards I have in my hand.
The only thing I’ve wanted from Apple is to make the iPhone, iPad, Vision Pro and the Mac to work seamlessly together as only a vertical computer company can do despite the crying, none of the competition can do what Apple is doing today with their OS and Apple Silicon combination.
I do not want the OS on both the iPad and the Mac to be the same they are not the same device and at 2025 WWDC Apple took a nice step towards making that happen.
I agree with your 'seamless' comment and think it's a goal that Apple must share but just does not seem to have the foundations in place right now.
I was hoping that WWDC might give some more information on that side of things but it seems it didn't (no one has mentioned much in that vein AFAIK).
Where I totally disagree is with the notion that only Apple can do vertical integration with OS + silicon. That is demonstrably false.
I say this because everything I pointed to previously already exists elsewhere and goes far beyond what Apple is currently doing.
The competition isn't standing still either.
Those foundations have already been laid for the future and are being built upon.
The 'siloes' have been eliminated (by design and from the ground up) and the whole system (OS + silicon + formally verified kernel) is tied together tightly (from tiny IoT devices with less than 128K of memory up to PC level compute).
If you take into account only compute, then there is literally no limit (up to cloud based supercomputing with virtually unlimited scaling: CM384).
Currently, the PC side of the equation (OS) does need some time to mature (lack of apps especially) as it was only released this month but it was the last foundational piece of the puzzle to be put into place and is now shipping to customers on two consumer devices. Obviously more will follow.
One is a traditional 'PC laptop' but the other (Matebook Fold) is a tablet/PC hybrid which ties in perfectly with the debate here on macOS/iPadOS.
It will be the ideal point of observation/comparison going forward and Apple will be paying close attention as it could well be a major disruptor (especially in China).
Both devices use the same system and, with all the core foundational elements now in place, the advances in maturity will be fast.
That means you only write one app and then decide where to deploy it and the development environment handles a lot of the 'dirty work' in terms of GUI.
One of the core features from the outset (official launch 2019) was how to deploy on screens with totally different layouts (horizontal, vertical, strips...) without needing a lot of work. A longstanding design bottleneck.
As for verticality itself , Apple has nothing similar to what others are doing because it isn't operating in certain fields.
No EDA tools.
No Foundries.
Two major areas which themselves include massive sub branches into dozens of other specialised fields.
Apple doesn't design its own camera sensors.
It has not brought anything like Nearlink to market.
Obviously no car (with all the sub branches related to that, too - including charging).
No PV/Energy division.
No robotics division.
No super computing division.
No ICT networking division. Fibre is a key element to reducing compute bottlenecks when compared to copper (especially is AI training/inference scenarios).
No cloud fabric/industrial storage solutions (for example, autonomous cars need to run mini data centers and virtualised failsafe systems).
No market presence with AI, LLM's etc.
The list goes on but the main point is not so much 'verticality' but the foundational technologies to lead Apple into the future.
The lack of any mention of that anywhere, tells me that those 'siloes' could very well still be present and eliminating them might still be far off into the future.
So, I assume every year we will continue to see ideas from the competition implemented on the different Apple OSes but without the underlying architectural elements in place.
That can't go on indefinitely without running into issues somewhere along the line so my thinking (just an opinion based on current shipping ideas and implementations) is that at some point we will actually see a kind of unified OS for all Apple devices (maybe even called 'Apple OS') and it will be truly seamless (which is a very valid, if technologically challenging, goal) for the user.
However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.
I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
Well, yeah, and a MacBook Air 13" with the "same config" costs $1799, while the equivalent iPad Pro 13" w/M4 + Magic Keyboard would be $2648. Does that even make sense if you want a "damn fine portable Mac"?
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
I suppose you have two separate sets of airpods for listening to your podcasts versus your music. You probably also have two cars, one to go to work and another to get groceries. Naturally you must own two houses, one for summer and one for winter. And I applaud your efforts to force everybody out there to do exactly the same.
I have no wish to force anyone (not that I have such power). The Mac annd iPad are similar but different. Apple has stated repeatedly that the iPad will not run macOS. Technically the iPad is powerful enough to run macOS and has been for years, yet still it doesn’t. However, because of that there is a faction of Apple customers which endlessly insist that the iPad really really should run macOS. Why? You want something Apple doesn’t make and has said many times that they will never make. So, the most sensible thing to do is buy a MacBook if you want a portable device running macOS and an iPad if you want a portable device running ipadOS. What the hell is so hard to understand about that?
If you want a tablet running a desktop OS then I believe Microsoft make such a thing.
FYI: I have one set of AirPods, one car and not really one house.
Apple is already inching (but agonisingly slowly) towards convergence in certain areas and my guess is that that is the real goal at some point (including touchscreen Macs of course).
…
IMO, that is probably the real reason Apple wants to temper the desire for 'macOS tablet' at the moment. They don't have the foundations ready.
It’s not their goal, or secret plan. You’re just not listening to what they clearly explain as their position, because you don’t want it to be. You’re using magical thinking. The notion that they don’t have the “foundations” ready despite years of answering this question over and over is simply absurd.
Reality: touch-enable laptops exist today and nobody cares because it sucks. EOS. It’s out there. I had one 10 years ago, it sucked, never used it, don’t miss it.
Giving a touch device optional shortcuts for mouse & pointer use is inherently different (and better for it) than giving a pointer device optional touch.
That you keep insisting its their secret plan just reaffirms that you still don’t understand Apple and its product lines very well. Sounds like you’re more happy with the chinese knockoffs and that’s fine.
Anyway. Once more, years later:
I remember when Apple said about touch screen notebooks "We've done tons of user testing on this and it turns out it doesn't work. Touch surfaces don't want to be vertical. It gives great demo, but after a short period of time you start to fatigue, and after an extended period of time, your arm wants to fall off." Now we have iPads with Magic Keyboards being used with vertical touch screens. Why 'Gorilla Arm Syndrome' Rules Out Multitouch Notebook Displays | WIRED
I also remember when Apple said ""Our competition is confused. They are turning tablets into PCs and PCs into tablets. Who knows what they're going to do next?" And now we have Apple making iPads as PC's. Looks like Apple is confused too.
Maybe Apple will not make macOS optimized for touchscreens, but it seems that iPadOS is making the move to make it similar to a PC / Surface Pro device. In every update they are making iPadOS the toaster / fridge device they criticize many years ago.
However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.
I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
I have both and use both. But I would prefer to have one device that does both. Ideally a choice of which OS to boot, but also on more capable iPads, have both OS running simultaneously. Plenty of use cases for having MacOS running on the left on the screen and iPadOS running on the right for example.
I wonder how many of the people here saying "just get a Mac", use BOTH devices REGULARLY. Having to carry around TWO devices, when I could carry just one for both types of uses, would be bar more useful.
As to the comment about Microsoft trying the tablet thing, MS has never had a decent tablet style OS, so of course it didn't work when they tried it.
However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.
I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
I have both and use both. But I would prefer to have one device that does both. Ideally a choice of which OS to boot, but also on more capable iPads, have both OS running simultaneously. Plenty of use cases for having MacOS running on the left on the screen and iPadOS running on the right for example.
I wonder how many of the people here saying "just get a Mac", use BOTH devices REGULARLY. Having to carry around TWO devices, when I could carry just one for both types of uses, would be bar more useful.
As to the comment about Microsoft trying the tablet thing, MS has never had a decent tablet style OS, so of course it didn't work when they tried it.
Frankly, the idea of running both simultaneously is simply bonkers. Face it, your use case scenario is so niche that it's simply not worth the development costs for Apple to cater to it. For the overwhelmingly vast majority of customers, and potential customers, their strategy is imminently sensible.
However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.
I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
Well, yeah, and a MacBook Air 13" with the "same config" costs $1799, while the equivalent iPad Pro 13" w/M4 + Magic Keyboard would be $2648. Does that even make sense if you want a "damn fine portable Mac"?
Who cares?
The OP's request was for the ability to run macOS on an iPad in addition to iPadOS, per the user's choice. Realistically it's never going to happen, but it's totally weird to have a bunch of random internet commenters telling them "no, you shouldn't have that choice because I don't personally need it, and by the way it would be way too expensive anyway so obviously you don't actually know what you want".
Apple made its intentions clear years ago - at this point, they are simply slow-rolling things because sales and revenues are satisfactory.
And we talked about running macOS on an iPad - why don't we look at running iPadOS on a MacBook Air? If you use an iPad Pro with the Magic Keyboard full-time, the weight remains the same.
iPad Pro 13 inch:, 1TB plus Magic Keyboard: $1,899 + $349 =$2,248.00 Mb Air 13 inch, 1TB, 16GB RAM = $1,399
Apple made its intentions clear years ago - at this point, they are simply slow-rolling things because sales and revenues are satisfactory.
And we talked about running macOS on an iPad - why don't we look at running iPadOS on a MacBook Air? If you use an iPad Pro with the Magic Keyboard full-time, the weight remains the same.
iPad Pro 13 inch:, 1TB plus Magic Keyboard: $1,899 + $349 =$2,248.00 Mb Air 13 inch, 1TB, 16GB RAM = $1,399
I think the subject is a more robust and capable iPad. Not a dumbed-down Mac.
I own a Mini, a MacBook, and an iPad Pro with a Magic Keyboard. When there is serious work to be done, I will take my notebook with me, but when I go on vacation or a weekend trip, I want to travel light, and carrying both a notebook and an iPad Pro is more than I want to carry. The same goes on some day trips. The thing is that I live in a world where I often don’t know what will happen until I am hundreds of miles away from home base.
There are some apps I use that there is no iPad equivalent for. I wind up jumping into a desktop. Microsoft Office has an iOS version, but it is not the same as the version on a Mac. You can’t open multiple windows at the same time, you lack granular control of your apps, many functions don’t exist, and plugins don’t function. While my iPad is 5G, a remote connection is not perfect.
If you let me virtualize an instance of the Mac, I would wind up buying an even more powerful version of my iPad and not ditching my MacBook. If the version was virtualized, you would emphasize that on my own just as I know that when I run a virtualized version of Windows on an Apple Silicon Mac, there is a chance that the app may not run or that some function might not work.
In general I agree with Federighi. The iPad generally works well at what it does but not so well when you push to do things outside of what it (or the OS) is designed to do. What people really want is a device with the strengths and ease if the iPad touch interface with the power and flexibility of a Mac. That's far easier said than done.
The iPad is absolutely capable of running MacOS but Apple clearly doesn't want a Microsoft Surface cluster where you have something that doesn't work well in either capacity. That was part of the problem with many early touch devices - they tried to take the desktop interface and use it as a touch interface and it didn't work. Apple rethought things with the iPhone and iPad and make something that works well and has slowly evolved the interface.
The problem with 'writing one program for both devices' is that the interface is different between the two devices so you'd either having a poorly designed program that works on both or effectively writing two programs anyway. It would be far easier to have an iPad program work on a Mac but then people would complain that its functionality was crippled.
Finally, for the people who say 'Apple should let us install MacOS on the iPad,' that would require some significant rewriting of the OS and if Apple were to do that then they would also be endorsing MacOS on the iPad with all the limitations, which is exactly what this entire thread is about.
However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.
I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.
Comments like this convince me that reading comprehension has become a lost skill in America. Pretty aggressive response considering he didn't say that you--or any iPad user--HAD to have their iPad running MacOS. What he said was: "The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX." See? Not only do you not have to run MacOS on your iPad, you don't even have to install it! He would simply like that option for people who do want to install it. And your problem with this request, which would not affect you in the least, is WHAT exactly? I have suggested this as a possibility myself, since Apple Silicon can boot into either OS, and this kind of separate solution doesn't involve ANY compromise in either OS--no need to try and kludge a touchscreen into MacOS or complicate iPadOS--both OSes work exactly as they do now, which is why he specifies the need for a Magic Keyboard folio, because you'll need a keyboard and trackpad for MacOS. Of course, we all know why this will never happen: Apple wants to continue to sell us two devices, not one. It's also why they've resisted ease-of-use functionality in iPadOS (the files system, multitasking, etc) that would make it more of an easy laptop replacement for more people. It's really as simple as that.
Comments
Full MacOS would make the iPad too complicated, and yeah dual boot would be ok but that's not Apple's style. Plus then developing the OS's they'd need to account for the iPadOS and the "people running MacOS on iPad" crowd, and that's probably some extra work or it'd be buggy. Consumers might be confused if they went to use an iPad and then sometimes it acts like an iPad at their house but other times it acts like a macbook at their nerdy friend's house. Also some people are just plain bad at using computers and these simplified devices really work for them. I can see them not wanting to complicate it. As long as they keep adding features and making it usable as a laptop replacement then I don't know if I see greed as the underlying cause for not doing it, as much as product lineup differentiation.
GONE: slideover, and with it the ability to do anything with a second app when in full screen mode
GONE: the ability to run multiple 'spaces' of split-viewed apps (with slideover acting as a go-between among them)
GONE: the ability to quickly swap out a split screened app with drag and drop
GONE: predefined size classes that ensure buttons, controls and other UI elements are in a predictable place in every Split View configuration
Remains to be reported on but I would not be surprised if Picture-in-picture and Quick Notes were gone too. Has anyone checked to see if app folders are still supported in the dock? Either way, iPadOS 26 is a disaster for touch-based productivity. I did NOT intend to buy a small Mac, I bought a damned tablet and I want it so work like one.
I was hoping that WWDC might give some more information on that side of things but it seems it didn't (no one has mentioned much in that vein AFAIK).
Where I totally disagree is with the notion that only Apple can do vertical integration with OS + silicon. That is demonstrably false.
I say this because everything I pointed to previously already exists elsewhere and goes far beyond what Apple is currently doing.
The competition isn't standing still either.
Those foundations have already been laid for the future and are being built upon.
The 'siloes' have been eliminated (by design and from the ground up) and the whole system (OS + silicon + formally verified kernel) is tied together tightly (from tiny IoT devices with less than 128K of memory up to PC level compute).
If you take into account only compute, then there is literally no limit (up to cloud based supercomputing with virtually unlimited scaling: CM384).
Currently, the PC side of the equation (OS) does need some time to mature (lack of apps especially) as it was only released this month but it was the last foundational piece of the puzzle to be put into place and is now shipping to customers on two consumer devices. Obviously more will follow.
One is a traditional 'PC laptop' but the other (Matebook Fold) is a tablet/PC hybrid which ties in perfectly with the debate here on macOS/iPadOS.
It will be the ideal point of observation/comparison going forward and Apple will be paying close attention as it could well be a major disruptor (especially in China).
Both devices use the same system and, with all the core foundational elements now in place, the advances in maturity will be fast.
That means you only write one app and then decide where to deploy it and the development environment handles a lot of the 'dirty work' in terms of GUI.
One of the core features from the outset (official launch 2019) was how to deploy on screens with totally different layouts (horizontal, vertical, strips...) without needing a lot of work. A longstanding design bottleneck.
As for verticality itself , Apple has nothing similar to what others are doing because it isn't operating in certain fields.
No EDA tools.
No Foundries.
Two major areas which themselves include massive sub branches into dozens of other specialised fields.
Apple doesn't design its own camera sensors.
It has not brought anything like Nearlink to market.
Obviously no car (with all the sub branches related to that, too - including charging).
No PV/Energy division.
No robotics division.
No super computing division.
No ICT networking division. Fibre is a key element to reducing compute bottlenecks when compared to copper (especially is AI training/inference scenarios).
No cloud fabric/industrial storage solutions (for example, autonomous cars need to run mini data centers and virtualised failsafe systems).
No market presence with AI, LLM's etc.
The list goes on but the main point is not so much 'verticality' but the foundational technologies to lead Apple into the future.
The lack of any mention of that anywhere, tells me that those 'siloes' could very well still be present and eliminating them might still be far off into the future.
So, I assume every year we will continue to see ideas from the competition implemented on the different Apple OSes but without the underlying architectural elements in place.
That can't go on indefinitely without running into issues somewhere along the line so my thinking (just an opinion based on current shipping ideas and implementations) is that at some point we will actually see a kind of unified OS for all Apple devices (maybe even called 'Apple OS') and it will be truly seamless (which is a very valid, if technologically challenging, goal) for the user.
I have no wish to force anyone (not that I have such power). The Mac annd iPad are similar but different. Apple has stated repeatedly that the iPad will not run macOS. Technically the iPad is powerful enough to run macOS and has been for years, yet still it doesn’t. However, because of that there is a faction of Apple customers which endlessly insist that the iPad really really should run macOS. Why? You want something Apple doesn’t make and has said many times that they will never make. So, the most sensible thing to do is buy a MacBook if you want a portable device running macOS and an iPad if you want a portable device running ipadOS. What the hell is so hard to understand about that?
If you want a tablet running a desktop OS then I believe Microsoft make such a thing.
Why 'Gorilla Arm Syndrome' Rules Out Multitouch Notebook Displays | WIRED
I also remember when Apple said ""Our competition is confused. They are turning tablets into PCs and PCs into tablets. Who knows what they're going to do next?" And now we have Apple making iPads as PC's. Looks like Apple is confused too.
Maybe Apple will not make macOS optimized for touchscreens, but it seems that iPadOS is making the move to make it similar to a PC / Surface Pro device. In every update they are making iPadOS the toaster / fridge device they criticize many years ago.
The OP's request was for the ability to run macOS on an iPad in addition to iPadOS, per the user's choice. Realistically it's never going to happen, but it's totally weird to have a bunch of random internet commenters telling them "no, you shouldn't have that choice because I don't personally need it, and by the way it would be way too expensive anyway so obviously you don't actually know what you want".
And we talked about running macOS on an iPad - why don't we look at running iPadOS on a MacBook Air? If you use an iPad Pro with the Magic Keyboard full-time, the weight remains the same.
iPad Pro 13 inch:, 1TB plus Magic Keyboard: $1,899 + $349 =$2,248.00
Mb Air 13 inch, 1TB, 16GB RAM = $1,399
The iPad is absolutely capable of running MacOS but Apple clearly doesn't want a Microsoft Surface cluster where you have something that doesn't work well in either capacity. That was part of the problem with many early touch devices - they tried to take the desktop interface and use it as a touch interface and it didn't work. Apple rethought things with the iPhone and iPad and make something that works well and has slowly evolved the interface.
The problem with 'writing one program for both devices' is that the interface is different between the two devices so you'd either having a poorly designed program that works on both or effectively writing two programs anyway. It would be far easier to have an iPad program work on a Mac but then people would complain that its functionality was crippled.
Finally, for the people who say 'Apple should let us install MacOS on the iPad,' that would require some significant rewriting of the OS and if Apple were to do that then they would also be endorsing MacOS on the iPad with all the limitations, which is exactly what this entire thread is about.