Snow Leopard virtual machine on PD9

[JonSmith]

Hello all.

Apologies this seems like the sort of topic that should have been posted already but I haven't been able to find any related previous posts.

Hardware--
Model: Mac Mini Late 2012
Processor: 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
1 processor, 4 cores, 8 threads
L2 cache: 256KB x 4
Memory: 2 x 8GB 1600MHz DDR3
OS X 10.8.4

I am attempting create a virtual Snow Leopard machine using a trial version of PD9, I'm using PD6 on my old OS X 10.6.8 Macbook. However whenever attempting to install the VM using a Snow Leopard installation disk (10.6.3) the installation fails due to "an invalid Mac OS version is installed" as shown in the image below:

Not really sure what to try next as Parallels is telling my I have an install disk for a different OS. Very glad I decided to try the PD9 trial before buying it!

 

[JonSmith]

Seriously nobody else has encountered (or heard of) this issue?

 

[Parallels User]

If you look at the system requirements page you'll see, like the error message says, that only Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server is supported and not the Client version, the reason as to why the client version is 'blocked' is not a technical one and is related to the EULAs of these products, you can search these forums for more information on this if you are curious (there are plenty of posts about this matter).

(in case you are wondering about VMWare Fusion, they also block the client version of SL)

 

[joevt]

the reason as to why the client version is 'blocked' is not a technical one and is related to the EULAs of these products, you can search these forums for more information on this if you are curious (there are plenty of posts about this matter).

(in case you are wondering about VMWare Fusion, they also block the client version of SL)

The license is for the end user, so I wonder why the makers of virtual machines have to enforce it while the makers of real machines do not?

The EULA for the use of the OS is easy to find (http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/). Is there a related license agreement for developers?

For Snow Leopard, the EULA says "You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non- Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so." Do you think the "or to enable others to do so" part restricts a developer from making a virtual machine that allows the OS to be installed? Is a virtual machine considered "non-Apple branded" even if it's running on an Apple-branded computer? If the virtual machine is considered "non-Apple branded", does running the Apple Software on it mean that the Apple Software is not running on the Apple-branded computer that the virtual machine is running on?

 

[Parallels User]

The license is for the end user, so I wonder why the makers of virtual machines have to enforce it while the makers of real machines do not?

The EULA for the use of the OS is easy to find (http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/). Is there a related license agreement for developers?

For Snow Leopard, the EULA says "You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non- Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so." Do you think the "or to enable others to do so" part restricts a developer from making a virtual machine that allows the OS to be installed? Is a virtual machine considered "non-Apple branded" even if it's running on an Apple-branded computer? If the virtual machine is considered "non-Apple branded", does running the Apple Software on it mean that the Apple Software is not running on the Apple-branded computer that the virtual machine is running on?

Why do Parallels, VMWare and VirtualBox 'decided' to enforce Apple's stance on virtualization? AFAIK I'm sure there were backstage negotiations that lead to this, but contrary to hardware makers these companies require to be in a good relationship with Apple.

I've discussed the EULAs too many times, I won't go thru it again. The result of my own research on the matter: http://forum.parallels.com/showthre...-Guest-on-Lion&p=647036&viewfull=1#post647036