I do not want macOS on iPad. Ever.

[bill-p]

This is also a good point. Even if we were to assume that no optimizations were made to these apps, there would still be competition from actual native iPadOS apps, unlike if you just replace iPadOS with macOS, which would just leave a ton of Mac apps which aren’t optimized for touch.

Here’s a simple use case actually:

Given the exact same company: Adobe. And the exact same app: Photoshop.

Given that users can run either the iPad version or the “desktop Mac version” of the app on the same device, most professionals will simply just use the Mac version because it has more features and is more powerful. The iPad one is very basic and limited. And fundamentally there’s not much difference since the Mac version also does support pen input and touch input.

This will basically happen to every other “pro” app as they are right now.

 

[bill-p]

A. It doesn’t. MacOS is a free-for-all with multiple security threats like App Sideloading and higher system access for apps that make it a less secure platform than iPadOS. And Apps are not sandboxed in the same way they are on iPadOS.

B. It does make changes to apps. It adds things to the app like File Edit Menu options, reduced button sizes, etc. I actually read material about Catalyst, and have seen apps run through Catalyst.

A. This is where you are making assumptions. MacOS does in fact have all of the security features of iPadOS. Being able to sideload doesn’t make it easy to access the system. You need to restart, get into recovery, go to terminal and specifically disable system integrity protection. It is not possible at all to break through the lock without those extra steps.

B. The size you are talking about is due to MacOS identifying itself to Catalyst as basically a massive iPad. The menu is just standard to all Mac apps. You may have read about it but I use and test Catalyst daily.

P.S.: since you don't seem to understand, here's an iPhone app running in Catalyst. As is:

No size optimizations.

And here's an iPad app:

 

[Kal Madda]

A. This is where you are making assumptions. MacOS does in fact have all of the security features of iPadOS. Being able to sideload doesn’t make it easy to access the system. You need to restart, get into recovery, go to terminal and specifically disable system integrity protection. It is not possible at all to break through the lock without those extra steps.

B. The size you are talking about is due to MacOS identifying itself to Catalyst as basically a massive iPad. The menu is just standard to all Mac apps. You may have read about it but I use and test Catalyst daily.

A. No. Sideloading itself is a threat to user security. And macOS allows it, so not the same on that front. Also, apps are not sandboxed in the same way. This is a point I’ve heard from many developers who work with both and know what they’re talking about. They are not exactly the same in security, that is a major oversimplification.

B. The Menu is standard to all Mac apps, but not to iOS apps. Catalyst adds this menu for iOS apps to make it behave more like a Mac app. Same with the traffic light buttons for windowing control. Catalyst makes changes to the app to make it feel more native.

 

[bill-p]

A. No. Sideloading itself is a threat to user security. And macOS allows it, so not the same on that front. Also, apps are not sandboxed in the same way. This is a point I’ve heard from many developers who work with both and know what they’re talking about. They are not exactly the same in security, that is a major oversimplification.

B. The Menu is standard to all Mac apps, but not to iOS apps. Catalyst adds this menu for iOS apps to make it behave more like a Mac app. Same with the traffic light buttons for windowing control. Catalyst makes changes to the app to make it feel more native.

A. Again, MacOS allowing users to load apps from third-party doesn't mean it allows all of those apps to run. I can tell you're not a Mac user since you are mentioning this. If you were, you would know there are a lot of hoops that some users will have to jump through to get some system-level apps to even just launch.

P.S.: here's a simple thing I think Windows users may understand: when you try to launch an app that requires Admin rights, it pops up a UAC prompt. After user agrees, basically anything goes. On Mac, not all apps do that because the Admin prompt on MacOS does not allow full system access. It basically just grants "some permissions" and these permissions are very granular, plus MacOS does ask the user to allow each one, just like iPadOS does. Full system access requires even more hoops to jump through and pretty much only power users would know how to jump through those hoops. You want access to filesystem? Sorry, it's not even on the same partition. This is very different from the system32 approach on Windows.

B. The menu is nothing special. Again, pretty much anything running on MacOS will have at least some items there to bring the window to the front, etc. And the menu is not even specific to the iPhone or iPad apps. It's basically the same for all of the apps running through Catalyst, so we can even say it's just a Catalyst menu rather than an app menu. The traffic light buttons are just standard MacOS window features. We can also say that the windows are just Catalyst containers.

 

[Kal Madda]

A. Again, MacOS allowing users to load apps from third-party doesn't mean it allows all of those apps to run. I can tell you're not a Mac user since you are mentioning this. If you were, you would know there are a lot of hoops that some users will have to jump through to get some system-level apps to even just launch.

B. The menu is nothing special. Again, pretty much anything running on MacOS will have at least some items there to bring the window to the front, etc. And the menu is not even specific to the iPhone or iPad apps. It's basically the same for all of the apps running through Catalyst, so we can even say it's just a Catalyst menu rather than an app menu. The traffic light buttons are just standard MacOS window features. We can also say that the windows are just Catalyst containers.

A. You can side load apps that potentially carry malware on the Mac, you can’t on the iPad. How is that hard to understand that’s a difference? And I am a Mac user, more assumptions…

B. And the Menu is not on the iPhone, but is on the Mac, so yes, Catalyst modifies the app to show a menu on macOS. And apps on iOS don’t have traffic light buttons for window adjustments, but apps ported to Mac with Catalyst do. Again, Catalyst modifies iOS apps to make them act more like macOS system apps…

 

[bill-p]

A. You can side load apps that potentially carry malware on the Mac, you can’t on the iPad. How is that hard to understand that’s a difference? And I am a Mac user, more assumptions…

B. And the Menu is not on the iPhone, but is on the Mac, so yes, Catalyst modifies the app to show a menu on macOS. And apps on iOS don’t have traffic light buttons for window adjustments, but apps ported to Mac with Catalyst do. Again, Catalyst modifies iOS apps to make them act more like macOS system apps…

A. Actually you can't. Those apps won't launch. Again, see above for why. You don't have full system access even as an Admin on Mac. And even if you insist on launching said malware, it will prompt you for all of the possible permissions.

Are you a Mac user now? Did you know you have to explicitly grant a launching app access to your Documents folder and there's no way to circumvent that?

Edit: since you insist...

Configuring the macOS App Sandbox | Apple Developer Documentation

Protect system resources and user data from compromised apps by restricting access to the file system, network connections, and more.

developer.apple.com

I'm not just saying this as a theory. MacOS does in fact sandbox all apps by default now.

And before you proceed to say "that's not the same on iPadOS", well...

Security of runtime process in iOS and iPadOS

iOS and iPadOS help ensure runtime security by using a “sandbox,” declared entitlements, and Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR).

support.apple.com

It is.

B. That's not a modification. iPhone apps simply don't show these features because iPhone and iPad lack something called a "window manager" per se. Otherwise the menu and traffic light buttons are just standard for everything that runs on MacOS. MacOS itself adds those by default. Write a simple app that does nothing but displays a blank screen and just launch it. You'll see the same thing. There's nothing special apps have to do to enable these features.

 

[Kal Madda]

A. Actually you can't. Those apps won't launch. Again, see above for why. You don't have full system access even as an Admin on Mac. And even if you insist on launching said malware, it will prompt you for all of the possible permissions.

Are you a Mac user now? Did you know you have to explicitly grant a launching app access to your Documents folder and there's no way to circumvent that?

B. That's not a modification. iPhone apps simply don't show these features because iPhone and iPad lack something called a "window manager" per se. Otherwise the menu and traffic light buttons are just standard for everything that runs on MacOS. MacOS itself adds those by default. Write a simple app that does nothing but displays a blank screen and just launch it. You'll see the same thing. There's nothing special apps have to do to enable these features.

A. You can side load apps and grant them permission to launch, even from unverified developers. Yeah, gives you a pop up that says “x app was downloaded from the internet, do you want to allow x app to run” or whatever, but that doesn’t make it “safe” when you click yes and allow it to open. It could still be carrying malware, or be a scam app that gets you with fraud. You can’t get into this situation with iPadOS, it doesn’t allow you to load potentially seedy apps from the web, only vetted and verified apps from the App Store. This is obviously different.

Yes, I know you have to allow access to the Documents folder, but I also know that doesn’t prevent someone who doesn’t know better from granting this access to a seedy app…

B. That is a modification. It didn’t have it before, and it does have it after, tada, modification…

 

[bill-p]

A. You can side load apps and grant them permission to launch, even from unverified developers. Yeah, gives you a pop up that says “x app was downloaded from the internet, do you want to allow x app to run” or whatever, but that doesn’t make it “safe” when you click yes and allow it to open. It could still be carrying malware, or be a scam app that gets you with fraud. You can’t get into this situation with iPadOS, it doesn’t allow you to load potentially seedy apps from the web, only vetted and verified apps from the App Store. This is obviously different.

Yes, I know you have to allow access to the Documents folder, but I also know that doesn’t prevent someone who doesn’t know better from granting this access to a seedy app…

B. That is a modification. It didn’t have it before, and it does have it after, tada, modification…

A. Let's just agree to disagree. I can see you have not tried to sideload any system-level app on MacOS recently.

B. I don't think you understand the difference between a container and a native app, but I guess this is why we have this disparity. "Power users" do understand the nuance and what's going on. If you insist these added buttons and menu are "modifications", then sure, let's just say they are. How, pray tell, do you think Apple will solve touch interaction on iPadOS when allowing apps to run this way? Note that MacOS doesn't even have a proper "mouse cursor" now.

 

[Kal Madda]

Edit: since you insist...

Configuring the macOS App Sandbox | Apple Developer Documentation

Protect system resources and user data from compromised apps by restricting access to the file system, network connections, and more.

developer.apple.com

View attachment 2382274

I'm not just saying this as a theory. MacOS does in fact sandbox all apps by default now.

And before you proceed to say "that's not the same on iPadOS", well...

Security of runtime process in iOS and iPadOS

iOS and iPadOS help ensure runtime security by using a “sandbox,” declared entitlements, and Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR).

support.apple.com

It is.

I know both use sandboxing, but it is not the same exact system. iPadOS doesn’t allow as much access from apps to other apps or system resources as macOS can. MacOS has a lighter sandboxing that isn’t as strict.

 

[Kal Madda]

A. Let's just agree to disagree. I can see you have not tried to sideload any system-level app on MacOS recently.

B. I don't think you understand the difference between a container and a native app, but I guess this is why we have this disparity. "Power users" do understand the nuance and what's going on. If you insist these added buttons and menu are "modifications", then sure, let's just say they are. How, pray tell, do you think Apple will solve touch interaction on iPadOS when allowing apps to run this way? Note that MacOS doesn't even have a proper "mouse cursor" now.

Swift Code already solves this issue. Apps written with Swift Code can easily be ported to the iPad and the Mac, and the UI can automatically optimize for either of those respective platforms when using Swift UI. And perhaps for non-Swift Code based apps, maybe an AI system could analyze UI elements of Mac apps and automatically adjust them for better touch optimizations. It could possibly adjust button sizes in the UI, or make other such modifications that would improve the experience. It still wouldn’t likely be perfect, but at least it would be better than nothing.

 

[Arctic Moose]

And most people actually agree with me.

No, most people could literally not possibly care less, either way.

 

[SanderEvers]

No, most people could literally not possibly care less, either way.

Most people who care actually agree with me. At least to my own research. It would be helpful if this was polled in some way to a large audience. Because my own research was for 89 people. And the question was "Would you like to run MacOS on iPad? [ Yes / No ]" (they all owned at least one iPad) with a result of 9 / 80.

 

[Arctic Moose]

And the question was "Would you like to run MacOS on iPad? [ Yes / No ]" (they all owned at least one iPad) with a result of 9 / 80.

That’s actually a lot higher than I would have expected. If more than 10% of all iPad users would run macOS given the opportunity Apple certainly has some work to do.

Anyhow, considering the topic of this thread, it’s the wrong question.

A better one would have been “would you care if others could run macOS on their iPads if they wanted to?”

 

[ericwn]

That’s actually a lot higher than I would have expected. If more than 10% of all iPad users would run macOS given the opportunity Apple certainly has some work to do.

Anyhow, considering the topic of this thread, it’s the wrong question.

A better one would have been “would you care if others could run macOS on their iPads if they wanted to?”

Very well said. In addition, finding an area of improvement on a mature product that easily touches and improves the lives of 10% or more of my user base, that’s one killer feature to work on

 

[SanderEvers]

That’s actually a lot higher than I would have expected. If more than 10% of all iPad users would run macOS given the opportunity Apple certainly has some work to do.

Anyhow, considering the topic of this thread, it’s the wrong question.

A better one would have been “would you care if others could run macOS on their iPads if they wanted to?”

No the question should be "would you care if others could run macOS on their iPads, which would lead to degraded app support for iPadOS and lower quality apps on MacOS, if they wanted to?" Because that was exactly the point of this topic. Running macOS (OS) on iPad will always hurt app quality of iPad Apps.

Or the actual question:

"Would you like to run macOS or macOS apps* on iPad?"
1. Yes for Apps, no for OS.
2. Yes for Apps and yes for OS.
3. No for Apps and yes for OS.
4. No for Apps and no for OS (current)
5. I don't care either way.
*) Running macOS apps on iPadOS would be like running iOS/iPadOS apps on M-series Macs.

 

[Kal Madda]

No the question should be "would you care if others could run macOS on their iPads, which would lead to degraded app support for iPadOS and lower quality apps on MacOS, if they wanted to?" Because that was exactly the point of this topic. Running macOS (OS) on iPad will always hurt app quality of iPad Apps.

Or the actual question:

"Would you like to run macOS or macOS apps* on iPad?"
1. Yes for Apps, no for OS.
2. Yes for Apps and yes for OS.
3. No for Apps and yes for OS.
4. No for Apps and no for OS (current)
5. I don't care either way.
*) Running macOS apps on iPadOS would be like running iOS/iPadOS apps on M-series Macs.

Yeah, I think the problem is that some app developers choose to limit their iPad apps, almost intentionally. Case in point, Microsoft Word. There is absolutely no reason they couldn’t provide the vast majority of the desktop features in Microsoft Word on the iPad. People like to blame iPadOS, but iPadOS doesn’t stop Microsoft from adding even basic features to word like custom document templates. That’s Microsoft’s bad choices, and I personally suspect they want the iPadOS and Android versions of Word to suck so that they can sell the Surface Pro as the solution to the problem they’ve artificially created. They only do marginally better with the Mac version, and only because they basically have to since MacBooks are widely used in business as well. When they got the chance to start “fresh” with Word, they basically kneecapped it as best they could and still get away with it. I think the only way we’ll actually see developers like Microsoft improve their apps is if enough iPad customers put pressure on them to improve, rather than blaming these things on Apple or iPadOS, which is obviously not at fault for things like this. I think the only thing Apple can do is put more pressure on developers to improve their iPad versions of their apps, and provide as many tools as possible to make that happen. I think Apple’s been doing a pretty good job of that so far. And Microsoft has far less excuse now to handicap their iPad versions of their apps, when full featured versions are already running fine on ARM on their platform. I’m just so tired of iPadOS being blamed for the deficiencies of third-party apps, even though that argument makes zero sense in most of these cases. If I had a dime for every time I’ve heard a reviewer complain “ApPlE hAsN’t GiVeN uS aN iPaD vErSiOn Of WhAtSaPp!!!” I’d be rich! And every time I hear this as a serious complaint, as if it’s up to Apple to make an iPad version of What’sApp, I want to pull my hair out and scream… 🤦🏼‍♂️. And the iPhone version runs on the iPad…. Ok, my little rant is done, now I feel better. 👍🏻

 

[Arctic Moose]

Running macOS (OS) on iPad will always hurt app quality of iPad Apps.

It’s been 14 years, and iPad apps either suck or still don’t exist. I don’t see how it could be any worse.

If Apple themselves can’t be bothered to add basic features such as smart albums to their own Photos app, why would anyone else take it seriously?

 

[Kal Madda]

It’s been 14 years, and iPad apps either suck or still don’t exist. I don’t see how it could be any worse.

Not all iPad apps suck, most of them are great. It’s just some outliers like Microsoft that make sucky iPad apps.

 

[Arctic Moose]

Not all iPad apps suck, most of them are great. It’s just some outliers like Microsoft that make sucky iPad apps.

And Apple, Adobe, Meta and Google, not to mention all the apps that simply don’t exist at all, or if they do they are ****** Electron apps or ****** web apps. (Hello, Instagram.)

Sure, there are great apps too, but the developers of these apps are hardly going to stop making them, or make them worse, just because a tiny minority choose to utilize the option to run macOS on their iPads.

 

[SkweeBop]

Ok, but can we stop my mac from looking like, and acting like, an iPad, please?

(God, I hate the new System Settings and the presumption that I only want to work in one app or window at the same time in many programs--not going to say "apps")

 

[Kal Madda]

And Apple, Adobe, Meta and Google, not to mention all the apps that simply don’t exist at all, or if they do they are ****** Electron apps or ****** web apps. (Hello, Instagram.)

Sure, there are great apps too, but the developers of these apps are hardly going to stop making them, or make them worse, just because a tiny minority choose to utilize the option to run macOS on their iPads.

Apple’s iPad apps are fantastic, I don’t know why you’re listing them in that list. I don’t really use Adobe, the only Adobe app I use is the free version of Lightroom on my iPad, and it seems good to me. The Facebook app is good. I use Google maps, and it works well. They all make good iPad apps, at least in my opinion. As for Instagram, I don’t think macOS has a native Instagram app either. So that wouldn’t change anything. And I have nothing against a tool that could automatically port Mac apps to the iPad kind of like Catalyst. But I don’t think macOS on the iPad makes any sense, I think it would hurt the Mac by having to make macOS touch optimized in order to run well on the iPad, and it would probably be the end of Apple innovating and driving forward with iPadOS, so iPadOS would likely be left basically stagnant, which would hurt iPad users who like iPadOS.

 

[HiVolt]

I would love it to be able to dual boot, or just launch it into MacOS mode only with the keyboard/mouse or magic keyboard.

Why are people so opposed to it, if you dont want to use it this way, don't!

 

[Kal Madda]

I would love it to be able to dual boot, or just launch it into MacOS mode only with the keyboard/mouse or magic keyboard.

Why are people so opposed to it, if you dont want to use it this way, don't!

For the reasons the OP already sited, for one. And having to remember to keep it attached to a keyboard case when in “Mac mode” sounds like a nightmare. It defeats the whole modular nature of the iPad. Why use an iPad over a MacBook at that point? Improving iPadOS makes much better sense than trying to shoehorn an OS onto the iPad that wasn’t designed for the iPad.

 

[Arctic Moose]

Apple’s iPad apps are fantastic, I don’t know why you’re listing them in that list.

Final Cut doesn’t export in the background, Photos doesn’t even show the contents of smart albums, Music cannot import local files to the library, Mail lacks rules support. I am constantly looking for features in Numbers and Pages that I have used before, and after finally googling it turns out the iPad version doesn’t have them. I could go on and on.

 

[Iwavvns]

For the reasons the OP already sited, for one. And having to remember to keep it attached to a keyboard case when in “Mac mode” sounds like a nightmare. It defeats the whole modular nature of the iPad. Why use an iPad over a MacBook at that point? Improving iPadOS makes much better sense than trying to shoehorn an OS onto the iPad that wasn’t designed for the iPad.

Not to mention that trying to shoehorn macOS into iPadOS would drastically increase the code base. Can you imagine the price of an iPad with the base storage being so large as to accommodate two distinct operating systems?