This isn't for VMware to do, it's for Apple to make it happen (license, etc..)
Thanks for the reply. Maybe I thought about this problem too simple. I was thinking that VMWare can implement a special type of virtual machine ONLY for the Intel-based Mac hardware.
\* For general computation, memory and disk access will get it from the virtual machine.
\* For special machine instructions, accessing the EFI firmware, or functionalities only available in the logic board, the virtual machine can directly access to them.
Because of the second point, this type of VM will not work on other PC hardware or software products.
This idea came from a defect when I was using VMWare Workstation 3 on Linux-Mandrake. I have to change the power management for Windows 98 (guest OS), so that it does not put monitor or hard drive to sleep. Otherwise I have to kill X11 or reboot to wake the monitor up from sleep, or I have to press the power button on the physical host to get the computer awaken. But for Mac, I think this would be an approach since Apple worked hard to keep OS X away from non-Apple hardware. In this way, OS X is still running on Apple hardware.
License is not a issue for us, we always obtain separate license for each virtual machine we have.
On the other hand, you guys have been working closer with Apple. I think it is more efficient to raise such a concern to Apple as VMWare, instead of a customer (individual) like me. I understand this is probably not going to happen in the next version of VMWare Fusion because this "easy sound" plan would take a lot of work to implement.
We have raised this with Apple "as VMware", but Apple needs to hear it from their customers too.
>In this way, OS X is still running on Apple hardware
No, it isn't. Every VMware virtual machine runs on its own virtual hardware. That's why virtual machines are portable between different host PCs, and even different host OS's, and even different VMware products!
If you have an OSX guest, it \*WILL* be able to run on ANY computer which VMware supports. Mark my words - even if VMware somehow locks the guest to Fusion-only, hackers WILL crack it sooner or later (and probably sooner). Look how short of a time it took for the hackers to modify OSX-x86 to run inside VMware, and on other non-Apple hardware.
No, the only resolution to this is for Apple's legal / marketing department to get their heads out of their behinds, and realize that if they want ANY market penetration in the computer OS space, they MUST start selling their OS as a product - and allow it to run on ANY hardware. As long as they keep this close-minded view of only allowing their OS to run on their hardware, they will never gain market share; and will only keep the pirate/hacker community's skills sharp as they learn to crack each new attempt Apple puts out there.
No, the only resolution to this is for Apple's legal / marketing department to get their heads out of their behinds ...
I absolutely agree with what you said. It is definitely ideal if Apple to make Mac OS X for general x86/x64 hardware, so that it can be truly virtualized across all VMWare products. When I was reading your comment as well as typing this up, I can almost hear the word "no" from Apple IMO, Apple transisted to Intel processor most likely because POWER processors could not satisfy their sale goals for hardware, especially the portable market, not like they want to port Mac OS X to PC hardware. I will write this up to Apple OS feedback, and still hope they will do that in the future.
If you have an OSX guest, it \*WILL* be able to run on ANY computer which VMware supports. --
This is the case if OS X is truly virtualized, which doesn't seem to be, and far for me to dream that can happen. I was proposing to virtualize anything it could be virtualized (virtual hardware), and interact with the physical host for things specific to Apple (physical hardware). That's why I said OS X is still running on Apple hardware.
... Look how short of a time it took for the hackers to modify OSX-x86 to run inside VMware, and on other non-Apple hardware.
I heard about the x86project story, I was not surprised they made OSX to VMWare or install on well-branded standard PC, especially the one closed to the transition machine, which has a BIOS and a P4 processor, it is more like a PC with minor tweaks, and a lot of OS functions did not work. It is far different than the production version of Intel Mac. I don't even know if the current version of Tiger still works on it.
It is not important, and let's not spend time and paragraphs to argue on that.
Thanks for your inputs.
>...It is far different than the production version of Intel Mac.
Yes, but the hackers have 10.4.8 and even 10.4.9 working on VMware and on non-Apple hardware... and have an early testing verson of 10.4.10 working. They just used the 10.4.3/4 betas as a jumping-off point.
Now that the new Mac OS X Server Leopard allows for virtualization, is VMWare Fusion going to support that ? I hope so...