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.
OS X Lion Allows Running Multiple Copies on the Same Machine (Virtualization)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So it seems to me that there is a total of three physical machines and/or virtual machines that you can license to. This is great if you use, say:
1 part of the license for updating your current machine
1 part of the license for running a possible virtual machine like described in posts above
1 part of the license as a reserve, for upgrading. Say you bought a used Mac on eBay, but apparently it came with Snow Leopard and the original buyer never upgraded. Instead of complaining how this was not part of the "unwritten" contract, how it's not what you expected etc... You can now save yourself all the hassle and just upgrade. No big deal now.
Nowhere on the EULA* it says you have to use it on your current Mac, as Macrumors implies.
This last option isn't posted anywhere. Why come no-one thought of this in this thread?
*End user license agreement. Used in EU. For US users, use USLA.
Does this mean i can run two copies of lion on lion, and two copies of lion on each copy of lion running on lion, and two copies of lion running on the two copies of lion running on the two copies of lion running on lion etc ?
i know your thinking, why the hell would anyone want to that,
well
i dont know, but im going to try...
i know your thinking, why the hell would anyone want to that,
well
i dont know, but im going to try...
With all the features of OSX Lion, I fail to see how well it'll do for simplistic things like browsing on current MBP13" and previous MB13" hardware when Apple does NOT follow its own design principles on the home page.
So looking at OSX's site or the OSX Server site
http://www.apple.com/macosx/
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server
The default zoom its just TOO big for the default Safari browser page size, thus looking at the auto-panned feature pics of OSX it doesn't all fit in the window without a) maximizing the Safari window, or b) zooming out of the window. I prefer to still see my desktop files in the background while I browse - I'm unsure how I've developed this habit but i have it. I don't know if full-screen apps will cure me from this though. I think I got it when drag+drop (from desktop into browser) was first implemented almost a decade ago.
So looking at OSX's site or the OSX Server site
http://www.apple.com/macosx/
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server
The default zoom its just TOO big for the default Safari browser page size, thus looking at the auto-panned feature pics of OSX it doesn't all fit in the window without a) maximizing the Safari window, or b) zooming out of the window. I prefer to still see my desktop files in the background while I browse - I'm unsure how I've developed this habit but i have it. I don't know if full-screen apps will cure me from this though. I think I got it when drag+drop (from desktop into browser) was first implemented almost a decade ago.
This is what I need as well !
I used Parallels sometimes ago (a few years back)
I never noticed you could use Parallels with a Mac Os system; I thought it was only to run Windows
Does Parallels allows to install an older Mac OS X as a virtual machine ?
or
Do we need to wait for Parallels to update its software for such ?
(or VMFusion)
The "limit of three" is applicable to each computer (Lion running on the computer, plus two virtual machines also running Lion on the same computer). Even without this new clause relating to virtualization, Apple already said that Lion would use the same general licence as everything else on the App Store: for personal use you can install Lion on every Mac you own or control. (Commercial use is either unlimited computers used by a single person, or a single computer which may be used by multiple people; for multiple people using multiple computers you need a licence for each computer or each person.)
Once you have bought Lion you can install it on any computer you buy for personal use. In your example you can legally install Lion on that used iMac even if it is installed on your existing computer, plus has two VM installations on your existing computer. You could also run another two copies of Lion on the iMac under virtualization. So far, that's up to six installations of Lion from your single $29.99 purchase. Add another real plus two virtual installations for any other compatible Macs you own or control.
You can't run a virtual machine inside a virtual machine unless you edit some config files, which I'm not sure if they're avaiable for the consumer virtualisation products.
Can some one please tell me the point/use of this feature
For typical customer use, it is not that useful. But for developers... it is about time this was allowed. Developers need to test their apps against pre-release Apple software. As a small developer I don't have (or want) a room full of different Macs on which to run such tests. This allows me to test in a "sandbox" virtual environment on one machine.
The same goes for supporting older OS X versions during development. It is much easier to have, for example, a virtual OS X 10.5.8 setup on my Mac rather than a separate partition or separate machine dedicated just for such tests.
This feature should help developers bring products to market faster, and also make it easier for them to maintain backward compatibility where appropriate.
So one has to reboot to run legacy software?
Reboot to test a code change in a current app under development for backward compatibility?
No thanks.
Please do not make that assumption without viewing the license in its entirety.
Please see:
VMs, virtual computers: attention to Apple software license agreements for Mac OS X
and in the VirtualBox area,
Mac OS X Server guests Important notice regarding Mac OS X as Guest
For clarification: wait until after Lion is released, wait until after Apple publishes the license for Lion.
Rather than read between the lines of the limited information that was leaked, please wait for Apple to publish the information.
http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/
http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/
The original article does not make that suggestion. Expect Apple's license to consist of more than one sentence
For Snow Leopard Server (not Snow Leopard) the answer will depend on which software you choose to host the guest VM.
Day one
To download the installer for Lion on the day of its release will require the App Store, which is in the most recent versions of Snow Leopard.
No App Store in Leopard or earlier versions of the OS.
Beyond that, see for example Mac OS X Licensing from Mac App Store; and please wait for Apple to publish additional information.
Last edited by a moderator:
So I'm guessing you'd use a virtual software?
I'm interested in the idea for just a few games I have (I know, nothing important but be nice to have a way to play them still if I upgrade).
Call it an upgrade then
If we are allowed to run our older PPC apps that are still required to run our business or just to have fun with our Macs all without rebooting into an older system we can call this an upgrade.
Without this there would be less of a reason to purchase a new Mac that will only boot using Mac OS 10.7 Lion or later. Developers may be a major use for this, but all the people that said they would not update/upgrade without Rosetta may now be able to have both the new & the old. As some have said that this allows Apple to get rid of Rosetta without getting rid of the use of Rosetta.
If this will allow the use of Rosetta & Mac OS 10.5 or 10.6 then the change to Mac OS 10.7 Lion will happen in a much quicker time frame. I had heard that Apple was working on a way around some of the problems that the lack of Rosetta was causing. This may be the rumored solution.
If we are allowed to run our older PPC apps that are still required to run our business or just to have fun with our Macs all without rebooting into an older system we can call this an upgrade.
Without this there would be less of a reason to purchase a new Mac that will only boot using Mac OS 10.7 Lion or later. Developers may be a major use for this, but all the people that said they would not update/upgrade without Rosetta may now be able to have both the new & the old. As some have said that this allows Apple to get rid of Rosetta without getting rid of the use of Rosetta.
If this will allow the use of Rosetta & Mac OS 10.5 or 10.6 then the change to Mac OS 10.7 Lion will happen in a much quicker time frame. I had heard that Apple was working on a way around some of the problems that the lack of Rosetta was causing. This may be the rumored solution.
Two Questions
- Will Lion Server have all the functionality of Lion, plus the server components? Thus can I use it as my regular user level OS and have the server components when I want, particularly for use with our 3 iPhones and 2 iPads, and two Powerbooks.
- Other than the negligible cost, is there any reason not to use Lion Server as my regular OS?
- Will Lion Server have all the functionality of Lion, plus the server components? Thus can I use it as my regular user level OS and have the server components when I want, particularly for use with our 3 iPhones and 2 iPads, and two Powerbooks.
- Other than the negligible cost, is there any reason not to use Lion Server as my regular OS?
Last edited:
I'd pay a decent sum of money to be able to virtualize under Hyper-V or something like that on a Windows server.
If anything Apple could increase their market penetration into business by allowing osX virtualization. I can think of a bunch of customers would who look at more mixed environments. They do not want to manage 2 separate servers(and neither do I) but running osX server in VM to share data through a NAS to Mac clients would be great.
I'd pay 800-900 for a server license for VM.
If anything Apple could increase their market penetration into business by allowing osX virtualization. I can think of a bunch of customers would who look at more mixed environments. They do not want to manage 2 separate servers(and neither do I) but running osX server in VM to share data through a NAS to Mac clients would be great.
I'd pay 800-900 for a server license for VM.
I might add, simultaneous users would be great. 1 multicore iMac, 2 additional Thunderbolt displays running on 2 virtualized OSes and virtualized GPU. Now you have 3 concurrent users.
...and the Angels sang.
When VirtualBox updates to allow this, any complaint I had about Lion dropping Rosetta is gone.