OS X Server as a Guest

[admin]

For those of you not at Macworld, we're showing off an unmodified OS X Server as a guest.

http://blogs.vmware.com/vmtn/2008/01/virtual-leopa-1.html

http://digg.com/apple/Mac_OS_X_Leopard_Server_in_a_Virtual_Machine_Screenshots

[trodemaster]

This is excellent!

Not that I'm a eula breaker but seems to me a regular copy of Leopard might also run in this environment..

Blake-

[WoodyZ]

Not that I'm a eula breaker but seems to me a regular copy of Leopard might also run in this environment.

Until Apple allows for Non-Server OS X to be Virtualized Im quite sure that VMware will incorporate some mechanism to allow that to not happen. That's not to say that someone won't come up with a hack other than what's already out on the Internet.

I'm more interested in seeing Fusion brought to the level where Workstation already is than than to see OS X virtualized. Not that I don't want that too I just want Fusion to be equal or better than Workstation first.

[nospamboz]

So is there a new VMware virtual machine standard coming?

Using the native USB mouse and keyboard drivers makes me

think. So does 64-bit.

[lsoltero]

Am I correct in assuming that the only restriction to virtualizing OS X server is that vmware run on apple hardware? or will guest OS X Server only run on fusion?

I currently run ubuntu linux on my Quad Mac pro. My hope is that Workstation for linux will run OS X Server as a guest. Anyone know?

--luis

[hoosiermac]

Apple's server license allows for OS X Server to be run virtually only on OS X Server.

[DaveP]

Great news. I am looking to ramp up software development on Mac OS X and having 2 things in the VMware product range would be fanatastic:

1. OS X virtualization - happy if on Mac hardware.

2. Workstation faciltities - mutliple snaphots, clones, teams, VIX, Crosstalk etc., to give me the best developer experience, similar to what I do today on Windows and Linux

I would be happy if this was a separate product priced at Workstation prices.

[Bob_Zimmerman]

No, it does not. The only requirement is that it be on Apple hardware:

A. Mac OS X Server Software. This License allows you to install and

use one copy of the Mac OS X Server software (the “Mac OS X Server

Software”) on a single Apple-labeled computer. You may also install

and use other copies of Mac OS X Server Software on the same Apple-

labeled computer, provided that you acquire an individual and valid

license from Apple for each of these other copies of Mac OS X Server

Software.

It doesn't specify the host OS at all.

[admin]

So is there a new VMware virtual machine standard coming?

Using the native USB mouse and keyboard drivers makes me

think. So does 64-bit.

The blog post refers to drivers in the guest, e.g. we're not injecting our own drivers. This is the same as for other guests (before you install Tools). Fusion had support for 64-bit guests from day 1. I can't comment on unannounced products, of course, but at least from these perspectives, a new standard is not necessary.

[SMB1]

That depends on how you read "You may also install and use other copies of Mac OS X Server Software on the same Apple-labeled computer." To me it seems the same as the Windows 2003 Enterprise license that allows you to run it and 4 copies of it on one machine. In order to do so the host must be that same Enterprise licensed copy on the host that is on the guests.

I read that statement like "you may install one copy of OS X Server on a single Apple branded computer. You may also install other licensed copies of OS X Server on that same single copy of OS X Server on an Apple branded computer."

[Pat_Lee]

Eric,

Thanks for posting this. It was long and crazy day at Macworld yesterday.

It is exciting to show of this Technology Preview. The team probably installed Mac OS X Server off the Apple image probably 25 times in demos yesterday while running another already installed copy at the same time alongside Windows XP running in Unity, and Ubuntu 7.1 all running in separate Spaces.

Pat

[davidaf]

So, how long before this is available (beta or GA)? Will it be an upgrade or a new product similar to how the competition is doing it?

[Bob_Zimmerman]

Note that it does not say that you have to install it natively. The license just allows you to install it once "on a single Apple-labeled computer". That could potentially be inside a virtual machine on an Apple-labeled computer. Admittedly, that's probably not what they intend, but the literal language of the license could permit OS X Server to run on other host operating systems so long as it is on an Apple-labeled computer.

[WoodyZ]

So, how long before this is available (beta or GA)? Will it be an upgrade or a new product similar to how the competition is doing it?

VMware does not comment on it product development plans until they decide to comment on what and when so it's a waste of time asking!

[davidaf]

Thanks Woody, Then i'll ask my sales rep and say yes to their silly NDA.

[MKleinpaste]

So.... Any word on getting this sucker out? Parallels is already at public BETA 3 and taking purchase quotes! I really love VMWare products and want to get this running on my Xserve! It surprises me that a newer company could get their VM product out faster than VMWare.

Thanks in advance.

[admin]

No word yet. I'll also note that their beta 3 does not support OS X Server as a guest.

[MicahBaker]

Parallels Server for Mac is now release candidate and runs OS X 10.5 Server only, but well. I have three XServes running it right now. I'm sad to hear the VMWare is not taking this market seriously. I'm going to have to standardize my virtualization technology on Parallels now.

[MKleinpaste]

It is unfortunate. I don't think they realize how many people want this.

[RDPetruska]

It is unfortunate. I don't think they realize how many people want this.

I don't believe it has anything to do with "realizing how many people want" the feature; I believe it is a technical/licensing issue. Do you have any idea how (and if) Parallels is enforcing that the OSX 10.5 Server Virtual Machine can ONLY run on an OSX 10.5 Server host OS, and Apple hardware? Because if they are not, then Parallels will be in violation of Apple's EULA as well as every one of their users who uses the product for OSX Server guests!!

One of the main benefits of virtualization is the portability of virtual machines. In order to comply with Apple's licensing, that portability MUST be compromised in this case. And that, I believe, is a very difficult thing to accomplish.