I gave away all my windows laptops to charity last month. When will Framework support Apple OS?

I recommending having the best of both worlds. Framework for Linux, a base model M1 Air for MacOS. You can get a brand new M1 Air (8GB/256GB) for $829 at MicroCenter. Best Buy also has deals for $100 off.

Apple will only ever let MacOS run on Apple hardware, plus, it’s designed for their hardware anyway (Apple Silicon).


I’m gonna go on a limb and say that this thread is bait


Apple did in the past allow 3rd parties to make non-Apple branded machines. I remember a particularly powerful (for the time) computer made for graphic design that used MacOS, but in the mid-late 90’s Apple yanked that back. I feel like it was about the time Jobs came back to the helm.

Asking a third party hardware manufacturer to pursue getting Apple to allow them to run the Mac/iOS ecosystem is like asking the company to sell out to the second- (or, maybe third-) worst empire in tech today. I do not wish Apple on Framework.

All that said, I think you should get your investment returned and when it’s time to again consider upgrades to your business infrastructure, you can, at that time, consider Framework again. Linux and Unix can coexist in networks with MacOS, with very little real problems, so your path forward after you get the value out of whatever you’ve bought from Apple can be gradual.

1 Like

I’d wager never, unfortunately. It isn’t so much a choice for Framework to support, but rather something that Apple would have to allow for. Apple used to allow for companies to build MacOS compatible computers, but that was in the '90s when they were circling the drain before the second run under Steve Jobs. I don’t ever see that happening again. Apple has always generally positioned itself as a hardware company, and the software is more or less a loss leader to draw people to its hardware.

Unofficially, you can try to get stuff going as a hackintosh, but that would have a limited lifespan for updates, as Apple is moving away from Intel CPUs and onto their own custom designed ARM based CPU, and so as soon as they stop releasing for their Intel Macs, hackintoshes won’t get any more updates as things that target just their CPUs are incompatible with anything else.


Oofta, there’s some serious misinformation and misunderstandings going on here.

I agree with you on Windows being insecure. Lots of old code, sprawling teams at MS that poorly communicate with each other, and wanting to be backwards compatible at the expense of everything else is a big problem.

Apple uses UNIX as a basis now, but it has not done so for 40 years. They only started using UNIX when they switched from Mac Classic to Mac OS X back in 2001. As far as the “Darwin BSD”, that is referring to the specific version of UNIX they use. Being that UNIX is opensource under an extremely permissive license, there is no one version of UNIX under the control of one group. The family tree for MacOS has that it based on Darwin, which was a fork of OpenStep, which was forked from NeXTSTEP, which that was originally based on the Mach variant of 4BSD.

As far as the chipset goes, oh, that is a huge fundamental misunderstanding of architecture and how native binaries work. Yes, there are parts of MacOS that very much does run directly on bare metal. There is no “Apple operating language”. There are various APIs that are in use, which those are native, and applications themselves also do have portions that run natively. So, Apple has long had what they call “universal binaries”, which allows developers to target both old and current Mac architectures. This works by having the compiler generate the machine code for both CPU types. This was what was used during the transition from PPC based CPUs to Intel, and an updated version is in use for the transition to M1 CPUs from Intel. The binaries are not interpreter based, so they do not run in a framework that handles translation to machine code at run time. Yes, the developer writes stuff using the language of their preference, but then everything gets compiled, and it gets locked in to what CPUs are supported then.

I am a systems engineer, who has been programming for decades, and have professional experience working with developing for Macs and also with UNIX and Linux based systems. This is part of my area of expertise.


Customer: “Hey Apple, You did really good bringing USB-C ports to your iPad lines, maybe you could keep going and finally put it on the iPhone? It would let your devices transfer data faster and be more compatible with a bigger ecosystem and…”

Apple: “NO. Magsafe is the answer.”


I think you are using a lot of hyperbole. I don’t have these issues with Microsoft at all and updates take a few minutes. People don’t buy Apple products for a number of reasons, but one of them is their closed ecosystem and the prices they charge for their devices and their lack of support for independent repair.

Apple purposefully keeps their supply chain from selling parts to independent repair shops so they can charge nearly the same price as a replacement device to encourage people to buy new rather than keep their current products from landfills.

I don’t think you know what “chipset” means.

That’s just not true with Win10 for a couple of years now.

You think Apple is more concerned about giving people the best hardware and software they can make and selling them at fair prices than making as much money as they can?

Microsoft is one of the most popular operating systems in the world and more businesses use Linux and Windows than MacOS. For this reason there are more people out there trying to hack Microsoft and Linux products than MacOS, but Apple has not been immune to hacks and vulnerabilities.

It sounds like you are more interested in evangelizing for Apple than right to repair and actually owning the product you bought. Framework supports right to be repair, independent repair and people who want to fix their stuff rather than throwing it away to buy new.


Apple is the problem. They have zero interest in their products being repairable. If they did, I wouldn’t be here on the Framework site. It’s in Apple’s best interest to keep the world thinking that they are kind and caring and have your best interests in mind. They don’t. And I’ve been an Apple user my whole life, until recently. They just want to sell you new hardware.


I think y’all are shattering this guy’s worldview…


I think my favorite example of that is, “License their hardware design [of the Framework Laptop] to Apple and allow Apple to design some of their own laptops using that same idea.”

Apple asking for a license to “borrow a design” is about as likely to happen as pigs suddenly sprouting wings and flying around. Apple does not ask for things that are not their own design, because they do not want things that are not their own design. USB-C, Nvidia graphics, AMD CPU’s (hell, Intel CPU’s now), alternate application downloaders, the list goes on.

Apple makes a nice, clean, simple, ecosystem that integrates well across a range of mediocre devices at best. that’s it. that’s all. good luck getting anyone else to join the pro-Apple-on-Framework bandwagon, OP, but I think you came to the wrong neighborhood.


They would more likely make something similar on their own but different enough so they can’t get sued. Apple has done that a couple times in the past and sell it like their own original idea


Didn’t they just do something with an app on the watch that they essentially took down and then made a feature? That’s a software example, but for the life of me I can’t think of hardware example (I know one exists)

Edit: oh yeah. Airtags.

MacOS is based on a version of Unix. Not sure what you are talking about “DarwinBSD”. MacOS is a Unix OS.

It might be worth hitting up wikipedia again… Yes, MacOS is based on FreeBSD (Unix) where they added their own flava flave which is refered to as Darwin (see also PureDarwin). Yes, MacOS is Unix, Yes Darwin is the codename for the base os that makes OSX. Also, Apple has not used Unix as the base OS for over 40 years. Apple’s latest OS Generation (OSX) was built off of NeXT OS which was started by Steve Jobs not long after he was ousted from Apple in the mid 80s. Initial Mac OS to Mac OS 9 were most definitely not Unix. There are some good books I’ve read that talk about Apple/Jobs’ history like this one and this one.

In reference to the OP, Apple will likely never license again after the clones almost killed them in the '90s (those who learn from history and all that jazz). Sorry, cold hard truth. Even at $2 Trillion, they ain’t letting just anybody put OSX on different hardware legally especially as their OSX walled garden is getting, well, more walled.

As others have referenced Apple killed the clones in the 90s when Steve Jobs returned because the vultures were circling:

And let’s not forget Psystar who tried to sell x86 clones 10 years later and got snuffed by Apple legal:

Moving to an Apple-only Silicone is also a pretty good way to detract clones, and to make sure Apple knows exactly where those procs are being used. Great way to nip hackintosh in the bud wouldn’t you say? In addition, think of all those juicy analytics Apple will get when OSX only runs on Apple Silicone…

Now, I may eat these words, as Tim Cook comes from bean-counting origins (there’s a reason why all new macs/ipads are using basically the same procs – it’s a good way to cut costs despite losing soul in the process, but I digress). Licensing could be an option if it made $$$ sense. Right now, that’s not likely because they don’t need to sell OSX any more, the hardware is doing that. I’d also hate to be the startup starving for chips because Apple is too busy putting them in their machines first. I can’t imagine too many companies lining up for that sort of deal.


This thread… I’m dying. :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Also, if you’re constantly battling malware just to make it through a single day with Windows, maybe stop visiting so many sketchy internet sites? Seriously. Seems like a PEBKAC situation to me.


I don’t think there’s any reason to flame this guy. He’s stating his opinion. While there have been some very useful deep dives into Apple history and architectures (thank you @Hellmark for sharing your expertise) I don’t think this thread is producing much benefit right now. Id recommend closing the thread. @nrp


Or just make it off topic…


Apple OS runs so smooth because it’s custom made solely for their hardware, even if it could run on other systems at all it would probably run like garbage.

1 Like

The OP obviously never tried to hackintosh :rofl:

Seriously, whilst there is a fair and reasoned debate to be had for the comparative merits of MacOS, simply on the basis of access to Apple Pro Apps (I have a soft spot for Logic)…there’s no discussion to be had regarding working with Apple. They oppose right to repair, they oppose end user ownership, and they oppose collaboration.

From a curiosity perspective, I think it would be interesting to see if anyone tried and succeeded to hackintosh a Framework, but that is not a conversation to be had here, and is most definitely a contravention of MacOS’ terms of use. Also, Windows 10 is rather nice to use (print nightmare aside).

1 Like

I believe you’d have a better shot at getting Sosumi working. I’ve tried it before but I question the legality… When I went to login with appleID, there were warnings and errors. Might be why the the name of the product sounds so close to “so sue me”… Just sayin’


If i remember correctly the touch bar that apple introduced has already existed in some form