Macworld Forums

Macworld Forums: VMware Fusion update lets users virtualize Leopard, Snow Leopard - Macworld Forums

Jump to content

  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

VMware Fusion update lets users virtualize Leopard, Snow Leopard

#1 User is offline   Macworld 

  • Story Poster
  • Group: MW Bot
  • Posts: 34,402
  • Joined: 30-November 07

Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:04 PM

Post your comments for VMware Fusion update lets users virtualize Leopard, Snow Leopard here
1

#2 User is offline   TopherKessler 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 18-November 11

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:26 PM

Prepare for Apple Legal to jump on this article (and on VMWare).
-2

#3 User is offline   Jason Snell 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 11-December 00

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:26 PM

Apple Legal? Seriously? Have you heard of the first amendment, or freedom of the press?

Will be interesting to see if Apple cares enough to engage VMware on this. As for us, we report the facts... any lawyer who would try to tell us not to can [series of impossible actions omitted].

I Am Not A Lawyer, but I think Apple's EULA for Leopard and Snow Leopard is pretty murky when it comes to virtualization. VMware could make a case that it allows it. But more to the point, does Apple really care enough to make a stink? Guess we'll find out.

This post has been edited by Jason Snell: 18 November 2011 - 05:37 PM


#4 User is offline   TopherKessler 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 18-November 11

Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:38 PM

View PostJason Snell, on 18 November 2011 - 05:26 PM, said:

Apple Legal? Seriously? Have you heard of the first amendment, or freedom of the press?


Wow there, don't be so edgy and defensive. Perhaps its needless to say, but the rudeness of your response here is a bit disappointing. I was just pointing out how Apple tends to have a hissy fit over its EULAs and similar issues.
-2

#5 User is offline   leehinde1j0q 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 15-November 11

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:38 PM

You reached out to Apple! Shhhhhhhh.... :-)
0

#6 User is offline   Jason Snell 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 11-December 00

Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:40 PM

View Postleehinde1j0q, on 18 November 2011 - 05:38 PM, said:

You reached out to Apple! Shhhhhhhh.... :-)


It's my job. They read the site, though, too... so they'll hear about it regardless. Better to give them a chance to respond immediately, though on a late Friday afternoon it seemed unlikely.

This post has been edited by Jason Snell: 18 November 2011 - 06:01 PM


#7 User is offline   FrankCDN 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: 17-November 05

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:51 PM

*whispers* Here's to hoping Parallels adopts the same capabilities
Jason any chance you can try a USB scanner to see if it runs adequately?
Only reason I have 10.6.8 on a separate drive is to run this scanner which would be a shame to toss.
0

#8 User is offline   Jason Snell 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3,293
  • Joined: 11-December 00

Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:52 PM

View PostFrankCDN, on 18 November 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

*whispers* Here's to hoping Parallels adopts the same capabilities
Jason any chance you can try a USB scanner to see if it runs adequately?
Only reason I have 10.6.8 on a separate drive is to run this scanner which would be a shame to toss.


I don't have any way to do that, but I wouldn't be surprised if it works, since you can "channel" different USB devices to different VMs.

#9 User is offline   TopherKessler 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 18-November 11

Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:59 PM

View PostJason Snell, on 18 November 2011 - 05:40 PM, said:

Hmm, yet you decided to direct your comment to me and make it about lawyers "jumping" on this article. And secondarily, about VMware.


I mentioned a possibility and in no way came down on you or this article. If you can't just accept it as a possibility without being rude (even if you think it is incorrect) then that just reflects poorly on your column and on Macworld.

This post has been edited by Jason Snell: 18 November 2011 - 06:04 PM

0

#10 User is offline   kinless 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 102
  • Joined: 18-August 05

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:37 PM

I updated to 4.1 via Fusion's software update yesterday, but I think I'll download the standalone from their site too... just in case... ;)

Maybe I won't have to dump Quicken 2007 just yet.
2008 Mac Pro 2.8GHz 8-core | 20.0GB RAM | ATI 2600 HD | WD 2TB, 1TB, 1TB, 500GB
2004 12" PowerBook G4 1.33GHz | 1.25GB RAM | WD 160GB
iPhone 4S | 32GB | Sprint
0

#11 User is offline   SpottyOz 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 18-November 11

  Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:36 PM

Fantastic! A deal maker. And why should there be any licensing issue? I purchased and have legit copies of Leopard and Snow, and I want to use them on my Mac that has Lion, so I will only be running one instance of Leopard and/or Snow on a VM on a Mac running lion. Seems OK to me. Now I will be able to use older software that needs rosetta still (many educational titles, simple children's games and some hardware interfaced software) and enjoy Lion.

Cheers
0

#12 User is offline   jeffm23 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 03-October 10

Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:51 PM

View PostFrankCDN, on 18 November 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

*whispers* Here's to hoping Parallels adopts the same capabilities



I was under the impression you could create a Mac OS X VM with Parallels, but I guess not (maybe in one of their more expensive versions). I've actually thought about doing it, y'know, to have an older version of OS X available for, oh, Rosetta? There is a option for "Install OS X Lion from the Recovery Partition", but I'm unsure exactly what it does.

I'm surprised. I would have thought a VM was a VM; if I can install Ubuntu or whatever, why not OS X from a install disk, I wonder...
0

#13 User is offline   shootanyangle 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 03-February 10

  Posted 19 November 2011 - 12:23 AM

Make it run old Mac OS 9 and 68k programs from the good old days. Then I'll buy it.
0

#14 User is offline   heisetax 

  • Veteran
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,130
  • Joined: 02-October 03

  Posted 19 November 2011 - 12:38 AM

Not to take away from this good news of the new Fusion feature. So far the thing that makes the most difference to me about Fusion 4.1 was the fact that my Windows hard drive C: finally became the size that I requested & the program said was happening, not the previous 20 GB size.

Now in the near future I will be installing at least Mac OS 10.6 Snow Leopard. I may also install Mac OS 10.5 Leopard to work with older versions of software. This point now gives Fusion the lead over Parallels Desktop for the current time. Unless Apple puts a stop to this change it will only take Parallels a short time to add this new feature. To me this helps Apple more than anyone else. It gives those that can only run Lion or later the ability to run PPC programs through Rosetta. This takes most of the requests from the many prior Mac User's that still need Rosetta on their Intel Macs. I hope that Apple does not push the point. If they do then they will look bad in not allowing something that MicroSoft & other OSes allow to be done using either of the Mac virtualization programs.
0

Share this topic:


  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users