OSX 10.10.1 - need run parallels 9/10 for virtual OSX 10.6.8

Discussion in 'OS X Yosemite (10.10)' started by joecool99, Jan 24, 2015.

  1. joecool99 Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #1
    i looked at Parallels 10 - seems OS X 10.6 is not supported? need version 9?

    have 2013 27" imac - need to run 10.6 as secondary system with rosetta support for some old special software.

    can you confirm what version will work? any issues - especially with rosetta under virtualization?
     
  2. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #2
    Server version of 10.6 will work in Parallels 10. Client version is not allowed to be installed.
     
  3. BrettApple macrumors 65816

    BrettApple

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Location:
    Heart of the midwest
    #3
    Parallels Desktop 10 System Requirements

    Yes you can, if you have a copy of Snow Leopard server. It's the only version of Snow Leopard that can be virtualized. Lion and up will let you run the standard OS. This is because of Apple’s EULA which states that only OS X Server can be run in a virtual machine before Lion where they changed it.

    You could also find an older mac to run it on, or find an alternative for your old software (not always possible, I know).
     
  4. joecool99 thread starter Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #4
    i don't want to run server version.
    can i just get v9 and run client OS X 10.6 with rosetta working?

    i want to confirm with someone who knows.

    it says server and consumer version:
    http://kb.parallels.com/114381

    * consumer = standard client?
     
  5. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #5
    Not without breaking the EULA as it doesn't state that the client version of Snow Leopard is allowed to be virtualized like the server version's does. The server version of Snow Leopard is only $20. The consumer is the client or standard version of Snow Leopard.
     
  6. joecool99 thread starter Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #6
    can you translate that?
    WILL STANDARD client 10.6.8 WORK with rosetta in parallels 9 in OSX 10.10.1?
     
  7. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #7
    Standard Snow Leopard cannot be installed into Parallels.
     
  8. joecool99 thread starter Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #8
    so what is this then?
     

    Attached Files:

  9. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #9
    That looks to be the chart that shows what versions of Parallels can be installed on what versions of Mac OS X. Not what versions of Mac OS X can be installed in what versions of Parallels.
     
  10. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #10
    I'm sure you meant the client version is only $20. The Server version is a bit more than that.

    I had wanted to run Snow Leopard in Parallels as well. Eventually gave up and installed it on a Mac which is old enough to run it natively.

    There are ways of installing Snow Leopard client in Virtualbox, but if you're freaked out about violating the EULA it's obviously not for you.
     
  11. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #11
    Snow Leopard Server is $20, but it has to be ordered via phone.
     
  12. joecool99 thread starter Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    tell me about virtual box - never used it before. intuitive, easy to use?
    i don't care what it is - i just need to get it working and needs to support rosetta in the virtualization.

    on VB website: Mac OS X Server (Leopard, Snow Leopard) Works without Additions See Manual for more information.
     
  13. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #13
    Let's start over!

    It was a common Urban Myth that the EULA for Snow Leopard prohibited its virtualization in Lion, Mt. Lion and Mavericks on a Mac. The myth was largely propogated due to an incorrect support document posted by Parallels in their support forum. That myth has been debunked in the last three years.

    Apple's drastic 95% reduction of the price of Snow Leopard Server to the same $20 as Snow Leopard client rendered whatever remains of that debate largely moot.

    To the extend that you would rather virtualize Snow Leopard client instead of Snow Leopard Server (and in all of my experience, you would be the first person asking to do so who can easily obtain SLS - Why do you want to virtualize SL client?), you can follow these instructions to install and run Snow Leopard client in Parallels

    These instructions will work in Parallels 7, 8, 9 and 10 with some minor modifications in the instructions for installing Parallel Tools.

    Good luck!
     
  14. VanillaCrackerC macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    #14
    ;)
     

    Attached Files:

  15. joecool99 thread starter Suspended

    joecool99

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #15
    because all i need to run is old special application, so why on earth would i run server edition?

    i looked at the tutorial, seems all it does is actually "faking" client as server.
    i could probably do it, but it's too much fuss.

    what about VM from oracle? will that run client 10.6 natively?
     
  16. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #16
    None of the other virtualization programs will "easily" run Snow Leopard client. The choice is yours...
     
  17. chrfr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #17
    You are the only person I've seen anywhere who claims this is a "myth."
    If Apple permitted non-server OSes earlier than 10.7 to be virtualized, VMWare and Parallels would allow it as well. The EULAs for the older desktop OSes do not specifically grant virtualization rights while the server versions do. The nature of software licenses is that the only rights granted to a user are those stated in the EULA.
     
  18. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #18
    Perhaps you do not "get out much!" hahahaha ;)

    That being said, I am going to focus, for now, on the OP's request for a solution to his problem and not get involved in side-issues, especially ones that tend to distract him from his goal and/or confuse the issues for him.

    In the meantime, the important information that I await from the OP is clarification on:

    1) The name of the PowerPC software that the OP needs to run with Rosetta;

    2) The reason why the OP thinks he needs to virtualize Snow Leopard client in favor of Snow Leopard Server.
     
  19. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #19
    Maybe because the OP has already spent $20 on the client and doesn't want to spend another $20 on the server. Nothing wrong with that reasoning.
     
  20. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #20
    Nothing wrong with that reasoning, so long as YOU are willing to spend YOUR time and effort on supporting his efforts to virtualize Snow Leopard client.

    As for me, I came to the decision some time ago, that my time in supporting the installation, maintenance and running of Snow Leopard client in virtualization is worth MUCH MORE than the $20 it would cost users to purchase Snow Leopard Server and their ability to much more easily do the same!

    And to show you how strongly I feel about this issue, I will let you know that I have actually trans-shipped copies of Snow Leopard Server to several forum members in foreign countries that could not easily purchase Snow Leopard Server!

    So, I will just wait to hear from the OP himself on this issue and not continue to engage in idle speculation...
     
  21. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #21
    No strongly enough to purchase an actual PPC Mac apparently (assuming your reason for virtualizing Snow leopard is the same as the OP's). The emulation Rosetta provides is not as reliable as physical hardware.

    By the way, I've gotten PPC Macs for under $20 before.
     
  22. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #22
    My reason is that "necessity is the mother of invention" in that I had a problem with some PowerPC software when my iMac G5 died for the last time and I purchased a Lion 2011 Mac Mini in the late Summer of 2011.

    But my specific reasons are now irrelevant, as I have turned my experience into a thread that helps others with the same problem; i.e., running PowerPC software on modern day Macs.

    The reason I do not suggest purchasing $20 "old Macs" is readily apparent. The user with this problem alreadys owns an "old Mac" that will run PowerPC software. It is the failure of that Mac and/or the users' desire to purchase a new Mac that raises the problem for which a solution is needed.

    Suggesting that the user purchase an older, used Mac is just offering them a ticking time bomb; not giving them a semi-permanent solution.
     
  23. redheeler, Jan 28, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015

    redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #23
    You do know the mid 2011 iMac will natively run Snow Leopard client, no virtualization required, right?
    Edit: Somehow I missed where you said Mac mini. You're right, that one shipped with Lion.

    Often times it's the user's desire to sell the old Mac to help pay for the new one, thinking it would be simple to virtualize Snow Leopard client on the new one to run their old software. They simply don't know it can't easily be done.

    Not one of my PowerPC Macs has died while in my possession. I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, I'm just stating a fact.
     
  24. MichaelLAX macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #24
    You and I could discuss dozens of issues that are off-topic and will only serve to confuse the OP, so let us avoid the temptation to do just that , OK?

    Once the OP is satisfied, fire away! :)
     
  25. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #25
    These threads often go a little off-topic. It can be hilarious sometimes, especially when it's two idiots arguing :)
     

Share This Page