MustBJones
Contributor
Contributor

Running 10.6 Snow Leopard client in Fusion?

Can Fusion run 10.6 client?  The FAQ mentions the Server version?  Can it run the client from a different partition (separate hard drive) as it does Windows via BootCamp?  I have some older applications at need Rosetta to work.

0 Kudos
36 Replies
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

At the present time Apple's SLA for Mac OS X only allows for Mac OS X Server 10.5 and higher to be legally installed  on and or virtualized on Apple Branded Hardware and the only VMware  product that is supported for this is VMware Fusion when being run on a  Genuine Intel Based Mac!

If you wnat to run OS X Snow Leopard Client then you will need to install it natively on a genuine Intel based Mac.

If you are running the Developer GM Mac OS X Lion and want also the run OS X Snow Leopard Client you could dual-boot the Mac if you wanted to.  (That is what I'm doing at the present time.)

0 Kudos
MustBJones
Contributor
Contributor

Ok so that is why the FAQ only mentions the Server version.  But, it has been posted on several Mac websites that the new SLA will allow for up to three instances.  I want to upgrade to Lion but as I said, I have several applications that require Rosetta.  I know that hard drives are cheap, and I could put Snow Leopard on a disk all its own and just boot into it when needed (much like doing Windows.)  So, given that Apple is changing the SLA, or just theoretically, is it possible to run 10.6 with Fusion, and can it be done the same way that Fusion runs Windows, from the separate boot partition?

0 Kudos
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

As far as I know the change in the SLA is for Lion not previous versions of OS X.

Also at the present time VMware Fusion is coded not to allow the Client versions of OS X (including Lion) to run and will have to be changed to accommodate the new SLA for Lion however whatever you've read as far as the SLA is concerned until the official release of Lion and official changes to existing SLA's for previous version of OS X it is all moot.

0 Kudos
SASDALLAS
Contributor
Contributor

I too want to upgrade to Lion, but I have _one_ Mac application (Quickbooks) which will force a $200 upgrade to accomplish it (nice, huh?)  Really did not want to install Mac OS X on Fusion, but thought "if I have to," fine.

Just tried and it will not recognize the OS.

I am not as savvy as most on this board, so please excuse the question if obvious from the previous replies...

Are you saying I "can't" install MacOS "Snow Leopard?" My Mac is Dual-Core Intel Xeon.

Thanks,

SAS

0 Kudos
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

I am not as savvy as most on this board, so please excuse the question if obvious from the previous replies...

What do you not understand that I've said in my two previous replies in this thread?

Are you saying I "can't" install MacOS "Snow Leopard?" My Mac is Dual-Core Intel Xeon.

You can install Mac OS X 10.5 Server and higher versions of Server not the Client versions.

If you look at the choices offered as you walk through the New Virtual Machine Assistant and select Apple Mac OS X as the Operating System then in the Version list box your only choices are Server versions!

Choose_Operating_System.png

0 Kudos
SASDALLAS
Contributor
Contributor

Well, don't most consumers have the "Client" version?

I'm sorry, but I don't even know what the "Server" version is...

; (

SAS

0 Kudos
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

Well, don't most consumers have the "Client" version?

Yes

I'm sorry, but I don't even know what the "Server" version is...

Have a look at: Apple - Mac OS X Server Snow Leopard and Wikipedia - Mac OS X Server

0 Kudos
SASDALLAS
Contributor
Contributor

Oh, just great.

Thanks for the reply, though.....

Probably just easier to pony up the d@#$ $185 and buy QB.....

: (

SAS

0 Kudos
Mikero
Community Manager
Community Manager

You could of course choose to _not_ upgrade to Lion.

-
Michael Roy - PM/PMM: Fusion & Workstation
0 Kudos
SASDALLAS
Contributor
Contributor

Ha!  Good point, of course....

; )

SAS

0 Kudos
Mikero
Community Manager
Community Manager

Tongue in cheek aside and in all seriousness if the system is one which is business critical, updating to a .0 release of any software, especially the Host OS, is probably not the best idea to begin with.

Give it a bit of time, let the bugs get ironed out, and upgrade when everything you need to work has been vetted in a .1 or .2 release.

-
Michael Roy - PM/PMM: Fusion & Workstation
0 Kudos
greg409
Contributor
Contributor

I'm no lawyer but I don't see anything in the Apple's SLA that prohibits running Snow Leopard client as a Fusion VM running under Lion.

"A. Single Use License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, unless you have purchased a Family Pack or Upgrade license for the Apple Software, you are granted a limited non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer at a time."

The term "Apple Software" refers to Snow Leopard, not Lion. Therefore, if you install Snow Leopard as a VM (running under Lion) you are only running one copy of Snow Leopard on a single Apple-branded computer at a time, as per the license.

The term Apple Software can not collectively refer to both Snow Leopard and Lion because Lion has an entirely different SLA. And of course you need a different license to run Lion. i.e. you can't claim the license for Snow Leopard applies to Lion, or visa versa. You can't obtain the Lion installer without paying for it and run it by claiming you have already have a license for "Apple Software".

While the SLA clearly prohibits running Snow Leopard as a Fusion VM running under Snow Leopard (i.e. 2 copies of Snow Leopard on the same machine), I don't understand how there is a prohibition for running Snow Leopard (as a VM) and Lion at the same time.

If I'm wrong would someone please explain why?

0 Kudos
hanssonrickard
Contributor
Contributor

And it only applies to a single copy license, you should theoretically be able to buy an family license and install multiple copies?!

"unless you have purchased a Family Pack or Upgrade license for the  Apple Software, you are granted a limited non-exclusive license to  install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single  Apple-branded computer at a time."

0 Kudos
bitnaut
Contributor
Contributor

A very good point! I think running a different operating system from the host OS should be allowed.

0 Kudos
greg409
Contributor
Contributor

"And it only applies to a single copy license, you should theoretically be able to buy an family license and install multiple copies?!"

No, I don't believe that is true. The license says,

"If you have purchased a Family Pack license, then subject to the terms and conditions of this License, you are granted a limited non- exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on up to a maximum of five (5) Apple-branded computers at a time ..."

So that limits you to ONE copy of Snow Leopard on a single computer.

I wish some lawyers would weigh in on this issue, but again I don't see anything that prohibits running both Lion and Snow Leopard (as a VM) on the same computer, and that would solve the "no Rosetta" problem for Snow Leopard. I hope VMWare will make it easy to load Snow Leopard client as a VM once Lion comes out.

0 Kudos
dlhotka
Champion
Champion

This has been covered a number of times.  Apple's EULA prohibits virtualization of OSX on anything but Apple Hardware and OSX server.  10.7 changes that but only allows virtualization of 10.7 - NOT of 10.6.  Playing armchair attorney won't change anything (it falls into the "I wish I was taller" category).


VMWare Fusion implements technical controls to enforce the EULA.  I'm sure that their attornies would allow them to change those controls if the license allowed anything else.

0 Kudos
greg409
Contributor
Contributor

"This has been covered a number of times.  Apple's EULA prohibits virtualization of OSX on anything but Apple Hardware and OSX server."

Covered by whom? I don't see any lawyers posting opinions here.

Apples SLA doesn't even mention virtualization, and we are talking about Apple Hardware, nothing else.

Can you cite any words in the SLA that support your opinion?

"Playing armchair attorney won't change anything (it falls into the "I wish I was taller" category).

Please don't be insulting. This is a legitimate issue to some people now that Rosetta is being deleted from Lion. What is often taken as "common knowledge" or "covered before" isn't always true. I'm simply reading the rather simple language of the SLA and not finding any prohibition from running Snow Leopard as a VM under a Lion host. I've searched the net and can't find any reference to words in the SLA that prohibit it. Just a lot of "it's been covered" remarks.

"VMWare Fusion implements technical controls to enforce the EULA.  I'm sure that their attornies would allow them to change those controls if the license allowed anything else."

If Fusion permitted installing Snow Leopard as a VM on a Snow Leopard host that would violate the SLA. But if Fusion first checked the host and then allowed Snow Leopard to be installed as a VM under Lion (or any non-Snow Leopard OS X version) I don't see anything in the SLA that prohibits that. If I'm wrong would someone please cite the words in the SLA that prohibit that?

0 Kudos
WoodyZ
Immortal
Immortal

Like you've already said, your not a lawyer, so that says it all.

The bottom line is until Lion is released to the general public there is no SLA that covers it since it's not been released to the general public yet.

Until VMware get the okay from Apple to change the current controls then the only thing you can install legally is OS X Server 10.5 and higher.

Deal with it! Smiley Wink

0 Kudos
greg409
Contributor
Contributor

"Like you've already said, your not a lawyer, so that says it all."

I'm not a lawyer, that's why I posed the issue and said I hoped a lawyer would respond (or perhaps VMWare would respond based on their legal opinion).

"The bottom line is until Lion is released to the general public there is no SLA that covers it since it's not been released to the general public yet."

This really isn't a Lion issue so the Lion SLA doesn't matter. The same issue would apply to running Snow Leopard as a VM under a Leopard host, or visa-vers.

"Until VMware get the okay from Apple to change the current controls then the only thing you can install legally is OS X Server 10.5 and higher."

Thanks for your opinion on what's legal, but if you aren't a lawyer than you are simply repeating the "common wisdom" without anything in the SLA (that I can see) to back up that opinion.

"Deal with it! Smiley Wink"

I really don't understand the hostility about bringing up this issue. Perhaps VMWare simply took the easy way out and won't allow Snow Leopard client to be virtualized because installing it under a Snow Leopard host would violate the SLA? Perhaps they simply need to check and make sure the same version of OS X isn't used as a VM and a host to comply with the SLA?

0 Kudos