You could already do this. The problem is not the technical aspect, it's the licensing aspect.
----------
Smart move wha... ? This has changed nothing at all, especially not in the server arena.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
VMWare Fusion Now Allows Virtualization of Mac OS X Leopard and Snow Leopard [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You could already do this. The problem is not the technical aspect, it's the licensing aspect.
----------
Smart move wha... ? This has changed nothing at all, especially not in the server arena.
Over what ? VMware are not the ones breaking the licensing by offering this. It's the user who installs the OS that does.
I never thought about that—I have a handful of Rosetta apps (mostly my own creations) that would be neat to run without booting a separate HD—and the time will come when my Mac can’t boot those older OS’s anyway.
Rosetta lives! (At the expense of a chunk of drive space.) It’s a niche need, but I’m glad to have it filled all the same.
Rosetta lives! (At the expense of a chunk of drive space.) It’s a niche need, but I’m glad to have it filled all the same.
Apple are perpetual bullies, and will probably try to stop this, since they disapprove.
I for one, hope VMWare tells them to sod off and mind their own business. This is great functionality.
You seem to be pretty sure. How about waiting for Apple to actually do something before you lambast them ? Seem to me they are aware and just don't care according to the article. They stand on their licensing and position and that's it.
----------
You must not have read the threads about Rosetta being removed from Lion then, it was mentionned over and over and over again in those.
And it was also mentionned that this was already possible, that Virtual Box images were floating around on the 'net already.
My iMac came with Snow Leopard (10.6.6), but i got Lion from up-to-date program. I think i have the right to use current-1 OS since i legally have current OS. At least for personal use there shouldn't be any legal issues.
If so, fine. That would show them from a better side, and I would love for Apple to take on a more gentle approach to things not adhering completely to their every command.
Why are people so obsessed with the EULA? Just do whatever you want, nobody will sue you. There is no legal issue either way, the only legal issue is within yourself.
I find it more likely that they were actually consulted about this and have at least unofficially lifted the restriction on virtualizing L.&SL.
Additional Advantage.
VMware Fusion is the only solution to control machines via USB using Windows on Mac. For instance, machines that run at labs and require a Windows application to collect data. Parallels Desktop fails on that: unexpected crashes, shut downs, etc.
VMware Fusion is the only solution to control machines via USB using Windows on Mac. For instance, machines that run at labs and require a Windows application to collect data. Parallels Desktop fails on that: unexpected crashes, shut downs, etc.
What you think is irrelevant to the EULA you agreed to. You will be in breach. It's not like Apple is going to sue you or anything over it, so all that's left is your conscience to deal with.
This is definitely a concern. Apples shortsighted ultimate greed may quash this excellent new development. Yet again with Cook at the helm perhaps cooler heads with less fear will prevail. Jobs was terribly insecure, Cook as I understand it is not. Also as one who understands the benefits better, he may leave it stand as it is.
I'm forced to take a wait and see approach based on Apples very unpredictable moves in this early phase of Cooks rein. It's hard to tell what's coming directly from Cook, vs what remnants of Jobs "plans" he's still forced to carry out.
Time will tell.
The EULA is just some worthless bits, nothing to do with law and digital rights. What is important is the local law.
Your position applies good common sense. A resource in woefully short supply amongst some execs at Apple.
I truly hope you're right
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Apple told VMWare they could go ahead and do this.
This is only good for Apple. It gives rosetta users an upgrade path; they can buy a new machine that only runs Lion, and still run their old apps.
EULA violation? Really? Where?
As has been alluded to elsewhere (without reply), where in the Snow Leopard Client EULA does it exclude virtualization? I just reread the thing and found zero instances of the terms "virtual" or "virtualization," nor anything referring to virtualization as a violation of the EULA.
I also read the EULA for Lion and found the only explicit mention of virtualization as follows:
Fine. No problem.
The SL EULA prevents you from installing more than one copy of a given OS (unless you have a server, where multi-use is implicit) or a Family Pack (which I have anyway!).
Also fine. Also no problem. And if you virtualize SL with VMWare running on Lion, you're still in compliance with the EULAs of each OSs, having one installation each per OS.
I don't want to go running an OS that's unsupported, but I just can't find this exclusion that everyone's talking about. Someone please post where Apple Legal prohibits virtualizing SL in Lion. If it's gone (or was never really there) let's put this topic to bed.
-K
As has been alluded to elsewhere (without reply), where in the Snow Leopard Client EULA does it exclude virtualization? I just reread the thing and found zero instances of the terms "virtual" or "virtualization," nor anything referring to virtualization as a violation of the EULA.
I also read the EULA for Lion and found the only explicit mention of virtualization as follows:
[You are allowed] (iii) to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within
virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already
running the Apple Software.
The grant set forth in Section 2B(iii) above does not permit you to use the virtualized copies or instances of
the Apple Software in connection with service bureau, time-sharing, terminal sharing or other similar types of
services.
virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already
running the Apple Software.
The grant set forth in Section 2B(iii) above does not permit you to use the virtualized copies or instances of
the Apple Software in connection with service bureau, time-sharing, terminal sharing or other similar types of
services.
Fine. No problem.
The SL EULA prevents you from installing more than one copy of a given OS (unless you have a server, where multi-use is implicit) or a Family Pack (which I have anyway!).
Also fine. Also no problem. And if you virtualize SL with VMWare running on Lion, you're still in compliance with the EULAs of each OSs, having one installation each per OS.
I don't want to go running an OS that's unsupported, but I just can't find this exclusion that everyone's talking about. Someone please post where Apple Legal prohibits virtualizing SL in Lion. If it's gone (or was never really there) let's put this topic to bed.
-K
i'd be surprised if you couldn't... i've virtualized esxi on esxi and run guests on it.
It doesn't have to explicitly. You have overlooked the clause early in the license that states that all rights are reserved unless otherwise stated. They are not required to exhaustively list everything one of the thousands of things you cannot do.
The license says that you can install and run one copy of the Apple system software on one computer. That pragmatically precludes any usage with Fusion (or Parallels) since they require a host OS.
[putting aside hypervisors for the moment.] The host OS of Fusion pegs you at the maximum limit outlined in the license.
The only "out" you get is that Apple allows the license to be upgraded with an software upgrade. Those who get Lion may loop their usage of the
subset of the "apple software" that is SL may be used with the upgradedd Lion license. Running without a Lion license is likely a problem.
That's what i did in this case, but still DVD disc that came with my iMac won't work, since it works only on that iMac and VMware is not emulating iMac. So only non-server retail discs of Snow Leopard will work. I'm right?