UTM is basically QEMU under the hood, which is well supported by Linux, so it's no surprise that it worked without any issues.
What would be interesting to know however, is what's the performance is like. You should run something like Geekbench on macOS and on UTM and compare the result, to see what the overhead is like.
UTM is basically QEMU under the hood, which is well supported by Linux, so it's no surprise that it worked without any issues.
What would be interesting to know however, is what's the performance is like. You should run something like Geekbench on macOS and on UTM and compare the result, to see what the overhead is like.
I am here to serve.
M1 Max Macbook Pro 16 Geekbench 6
Native MacOS: 2437 single core, 12803 multicore
UTM Fedora 38 using QEMU: 2324 single core, 11829 multicore
Parallels Fedora 38: 2333 single core, 12020 multicore
Damn, that's actually pretty impressive. Assuming you ran the x86-64 version of Fedora in UTM, and the ARM version in Parallels?
I bet he used the arm version, I tried windows x86-64 and couldn't run one month ago, while windows arm worked for a friend.
Yes, I have used the arm version.
I used to have issues when I tried to run fedora and ubuntu, hence the title.
I guess shit just work
UTM?
It is like Virtualbox only, but exclusively for apple silicon https://mac.getutm.app/
It supports intel Mac’s too.
It's QEMU, it'd probably support any urach.
It can run any arch under the hosts it supports, but the apple hypervisor for both is different and would need explicit support,
WiFi works fine?
OP used a virtual machine. No wifi involved with the guest
Ya perfectly, without any issues. Because the distro uses directly MBP's wifi ethernet style.