Fusion now allows non-server OSX 10.5 and 6 to be virualized

  • Thread starter Thread starter Parallels User
  • Start date Start date
Think the folks at Parallels may wait a while to see if Apple issues a warning to the VMWare devs.
This said, it would be most welcome to run SL without dedicating a drive/partition.
 
If Parallels could do this, it would give me a reason to upgrade from 6 to 7.

If we don't hear an announcement of intent from Parallels in the next couple of weeks about this, I guess I'm switching to Fusion after many years with Parallels... Being able to run PPC apps in a VM rather than rebooting to SL is too powerful an incentive, even though I otherwise prefer Parallels.
 
There's no going back for VMWare now, imagine they remove the functionality on the next version, people will get mad and not upgrade, they can't also remove access to VMs created this way, that would be very damaging for customers, so there's simply no going back.
I hope Parallels realizes the cat is out of the bag, Virtualbox already allowed this before, and now Parallels is the only one that prohibits this.
 
Parallels:

PLEASE look into this as you would be solving some enormous user efficiency issues for many users.

I myself have enjoyed using Parallels, but if Apple doesn't have licensing issues with VM Fusion, and Parallels sits on their laurels, then I'll switch to VM Fusion in a heart beat. DUAL BOOT INTO PPC VOLUME TAKES TOO LONG. THAT'S WHY I WENT WITH PARALLELS FOR USING WINDOWS ON MY MAC.

I look forward to Parallel's response to all of us whom have an interest in this.

Thank you.
 
Another one tempted to jump to the "other guys"

Hey, Parallels. We really need to hear something on being able to run non-server pre-Lion Mac OS's in virtualization under Parallels. If I weren't already running Win under Parallels on my MBP (i.e., Apple SLA appropriate), and weren't already a big Parallels fan, I would already have made the jump. Being able to run Lion and Snow Leopard together using Parallels, with the same ease that I now run Win and Snow Leopard, will solve a lot of problems for me. Don't remain silent on this key, new development. Even if you tell us you're in discussions with Apple to get the green light on this. I'll wait for about a week for word of your plans, then I'm gone as a customer if I hear a no, or don't hear anything at all.
 
And people will simply not upgrade, also I don't think they will disallow access to VMs already created that would just be lame.
 
Agreed. Though id make a backup of the app and vm just in case.
Would be great if Apple put out a Lite version of 10.6/10.5 simply for this purpose.
 
It would be quite expectable if Apple initates trial against VMWare due to this.. In the blog it is said that it is just a bug in Fusion.

It is not an official information, just my opinion: unless Apple allow virtualization (i don't understand why they forbid this..), running non-server 10.6 Mac OS X in virtual machines is violation of Software License Agreement.
 
kiwi66 said:
But be aware that the MacOS X license does not dissalow the virtualisation. At least not the EULA in europe (maybe the US does).
Click to expand...

So the dissalowing the virtualisation is dfferent in US and Europe




__________________
Macbook Pro 17 2.8Ghz; Host OS: Snow Leopard 10.6.2, 32-bit;Guest OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64... Proud
text-smiley.png
 
Are you talking about the Lion EULA or the Snow Leopard EULA, they are radically different in this aspect.

Anyway, here's the good news that shatters all these restrictions:
http://www.paragon-software.com/home/vm-mac/

Paragon is a credible software house, I haven't tried this myself yet, but the prospects look good.
 
EULA in Europe are radically different than in USA. Furthermore some US rules are not enforcable in europe. For example if you can only see the EULA after installing the software, its considered not applicable because at the moment you purchased the software you purchased the right to use it and this means EULA are not seen at that moment and is not part of the purchase contract. But this is legal mumbo jumbo.

Paragon offering virtualisation sounds interesting. Was not aware of that before. What scares me off however is this:

*except OS X Lion


And I'm looking into virtualizing Lion on a server. But there is no solution for that. Not VMWare, not Parallels do Lion on servers (Mac servers). Or at least not yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top