The new MacBook Neo announcement raises old questions around what rights we have (and don't have) to install software on devices we own.
Your iPhone (or any other smartphone) is a computer capable of running a complete desktop operating system, and has been so for quite some time.
A week ago, Apple asked us to say hello to MacBook Neo. It's a very reasonably priced entrant to the Mac laptop line, just $599. It's perfect for students, priced at just $499 with an education discount.
I have no arguments against this device's existence. But I couldn't help but also notice it comes equipped with an A18 Pro chip, the very same chip that powers the iPhone 16 Pro I carry in my pocket. I'm bothered, as I have been since the original iPad introduction 16 years ago, by the unnecessary restrictions placed by corporate powers to run third-party software and operating systems on devices we own.
"Love at first Mac." Welcome to the family! Don't ever think of putting MacOS on your iPad though!
On the MacBook Neo, I can ostensibly go to a browser, any browser, and click links to download whatever software I'd like.
On my iPhone, there is no such ability. As a US citizen, I must go through the Apple-approved App Store to download / install third-party software. Smells like freedom.
On the MacBook Neo, I can run code and build software with no restrictions.
On my iPhone, this ability is heavily sandboxed and there is no full access to the filesystem through a user accessible shell, as much as I may want one.
On the MacBook Neo, I can even opt to not use MacOS at all and instead install Asahi Linux if I so choose (assuming Apple continues to allow custom kernel booting as it has in M-series Macs).
On my iPhone, the only operating system I can use is iOS – the boot loader for iPhones and iPads is locked down as to restrict "jailbreaking", otherwise known as modifications that allow a device owner to install software outside of Apple-vetted channels.
Both this new MacBook offering and my iPhone use the same system on a chip, down to the number of CPU cores, GPU cores and gigabytes of RAM. Apple would like to have everyone believe these devices are fundamentally different, that the iPhone must be locked in the name of "user safety", because clicking on links is dangerous.
That is an insult to the average person's intelligence. Despite the form factor differences, these devices are basically the exact same thing. The iPhone / iPad have been restricted in their ability to download software straight from the internet, not due to “safety”, but because Apple has a significant profit motive in doing so.
The MacBook is capable of running iOS, iPad OS, MacOS, or any other OS for that matter. The latest iPhones are equally capable of running MacOS, demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt by this latest product announcement.
An iPhone is a MacBook, is an iPad, is an iPhone. But not actually, because Apple has artificially deemed so through strict hardware-level controls.
Ultimately, it's about Our Freedom to Choose
In right to root access, I laid out the case for why the right to choose the software loaded on devices we own must be advocated for in the broader "right to repair" discussion.
Nearly two decades after the iPhone was first announced, the chips Apple developed have grown into computing beasts, so much so that even ones meant for iPhones can run MacOS.
The mechanisms employed over these same two decades to restrict software loading on mobile devices are unacceptable. These restrictions are boons for corporate and sovereign powers that would like to control what you can do with your computing devices.
I want to work towards the precedent that every device you own should have the capacity to load the software of your choice. Mobile devices are not special, they are general computers in a handheld form factor, artificially restricted from loading software to keep corporate profits and government controls intact. The narrative that mobile devices are somehow different enough to warrant restrictions on software loading mainly benefits actors that don’t have the average person’s best interests at heart.
Now that I know my iPhone has the capacity to run MacOS, I would very much like to do so. I’d love to consider the possibility of switching to a less intrusive phone and repurposing this iPhone into a web server. Perhaps that seems silly, but it’s really not. I’ve already paid for the device, it's clearly a full blown computer, and why should I not be able to modify it as I see fit?
A right to root access would make all of this possible. And I really want to run MacOS on my iPhone now, damn it.
Read the original article
Comments
By purplehat_ 2026-03-1319:372 reply I really don't understand the argument here. That the product is locked down by design is a feature, not a limitation.
Yes, this has the side effect of making them more money and allowing a walled garden to form, but given that the vast majority of users wouldn't do anything different with their phones if a shell was present, this is in my opinion not that large of an effect.
The snide around "clicking on links is dangerous" and locking down the bootloader is unwarranted, because for most people a phone is not a toy (or at least, not just a toy) - it has their communications history, their bank information, their passwords, any many more. And it's really easy to steal people's phones on the subway. This isn't about freedom of computing, this is about the fact that an iPhone in BFU is nearly as secure as a GrapheneOS phone.
There are many problems with Apple software. It's buggy, uses proprietary formats that you can't export, and interoperable with open standards. It's bad, and is the primary reason why I won't buy another iPhone, but Macs have that same problem. On the other hand, being cryptographically locked-down is an optional feature. If you don't like it, buy a computer without that feature. It's harmful to us, to tinkerers and people who want to see how things work, but the average person does not care at all and just wants to be able to open LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.vbs without having their 401k get drained.
By d--b 2026-03-1319:48 It’s only about the right to use your device as you see fit.
It is kind of silly that people buy raspberry pis to run their NAS, while they trash ther infinitely more capable iphone every couple of years.
By throwaway27448 2026-03-1319:40 I understood this stance more 10 years ago, but now we have many layers of fairly well documented exploit tactics and none of them rely on the app store. However forcing users to use an app store was supposed to benefit us has clearly failed.
And, somehow, the indignity of being forced into paying apple a 30% tax for a market they wholly own never comes up alongside other paternalistic arguments....
By rcarmo 2026-03-1319:49 The fun thing for me is that we are now having the same argument about iPhones that we've always had about iPads.
For me, the iPad would have died if the Neo had a 12" screen. Only the iPad mini remains a useful form factor.
This is sooo true. I have multiple computing ideas that I want to do just for fun but I am not doing because each requires buying a mini-pc, sometimes with a screen too, and put Linux + my app on it.
At the same time I have multiple old phones laying around, Pixels, iPhones, Galaxy that are out of date, have cracked screens or worn out batteries.
Each one of these old phones have same or more computing power than a $300 mini-pc, but I can't use them because I can't just ssh into them and install an app...
Sad, really.
By federiconafria 2026-03-1319:48 Same, the computing capacity and redundancy you could achieve with your spare devices...
By tomComb 2026-03-1319:42 The pixels all ship with unlocked bootloaders.
