Parallels: We won’t virtualize Mac OS X on non-Macs unless Apple approves

“When the news came out that Parallels was actually owned by enterprise software maker SWSoft about a month ago, there was a not-so-tiny detail from Forbes article that drew a lot of interest. That detail was that SWSoft’s CEO hinted that it wouldn’t be difficult to run OS X in a virtualization environment. In the same article, VMWare confirmed the comment, saying that they’ve been resisting temptation to do so for seemingly too long. ‘We were trying to do it the way they wanted to, but in hindsight we should have just gone ahead. I wonder what Steve Jobs is going to do, because there is so much pressure to run Mac OS on non-Macs,’ VMWare’s CEO Diane Greene said,” Jacqui Cheng reports for Ars Technica.

Cheng reports, “Well, Parallels has decided that unlike VMWare’s moral conflict over the issue, they have no qualms over being the good guys (in Apple’s eyes), for the time being. Marketing Manager Ben Rudolph responded to my pleas for an answer on the topic, and said that due to the EULA in OS X that forbids virtualization, Parallels will not be enabling users to virtualize OS X anytime soon.”

Full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Eric” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Fortune: Michael Dell reiterates he’d love to sell Apple’s Mac OS X if only Jobs would license – January 22, 2007
EULA be damned! ZDNet tests Apple Mac OS X on x86 on 1.2GHz Pentium M Toshiba notebook – November 09, 2005

86 Comments

  1. Good thing as why would a Mac user want to run virtualized. I mean sure there is that entire testing issue in large scale environments. There is also the easy restore/backout of bad installers. No it is much better to rebuild the machine for testing then to move a file around. I don’t blame Parallels for this choice, it is all on Apple. Get it right Apple, and allow for this. I am not exclusively a home user. I think in terms of thousands of Macs not one or two.

  2. $5 says they are going to be bought out just before 10.5 is released. Seriously. This really is the last little bit of info that confirms it.

    If you have used Parallels, it’s an amazing program. Apple would be stupid NOT to buy the program.

  3. The longer I have to wait for a Mac that we can afford at our house .. the more people get to see that crippled piece of crap G3 iMac that I’m currently stuck with. Sadly, they don’t know any better and think they are seeing a typical Mac in action. Needless to say, it’s a horrible fucking embarrassment.

    OS X shouldn’t be restricted only to wealthy people.

  4. nsapap,

    Core Duo in the mini, that’s why. We’d be in the same boat as we are with the G3. EOL on the processor or probably darned close to it. And what have I got for a monitor? Nothin’. It’s an iMac. Best I could do is run the iMac’s built-in monitor as a remote to the mini, apparently.

    Listen .. we’ll be purchasing a new Mac at mid-year, i hope. But I can assure you that people are indeed seeing what I’ve now and they aren’t liking it.

  5. gwm,

    nsapap is right. Mac minis are perfectly affordable solutions to your problem and you can throw together cheap peripherals. Macs are state of the art machines… why would you expect to pay bargain prices for them? Being specifically made for specific hardware makes them awesome… taking that away makes them like that crappy OS Windows. You wouldn’t buy a BMW exterior with a KIA interior would you?

    MDN word: although, as in Although I am telling you to get over the fact that they aren’t cheap, I still wish they were.

  6. Why would I ruin a perfectly good Vista PC with a virtualized Mac OS X?

    I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at this one: “…there is so much pressure to run Mac OS on non-Macs.” Dream on buddy. Nobody, and I mean nobody wants Mac OS on anything but a bunch of crazed hippy zealots who haven’t figured out how magnificent Windows Vista truly is. 95% of the planet gets it. I don’t know why you Mac lemmings don’t get it.

    Don’t listen to the biased reviewers or whiners who can’t install Vista right (probably Mac switchers) but go right to the source: Microsoft. Bill Gates’ genuine enthusiasm has been electrifying because the Chief Software Architect knows he has a winner. Congratulations on a job well done, Microsoft! Great effort!

    Your potential. Our passion.

  7. gwm:

    You don’t say what G3 iMac you have. I’ve run Tiger on a G3 iMac DV (need the DV for the Tiger install DVD), and it ran pretty well. My only problems were with running video – then it could not keep up. I’m sure the G3 was under Apple’s suggested specs for running Tiger, but it was still pretty good, good enough for most things.

    If money is such an issue, consider a used Mac. MDN would appreciate it if you visited some of those used Mac dealers who advertise on this very page. As a Mac IT professional, I have seen many ancient Macs still in active service. i have a client who still has G3 beige boxes as part of their essential hardware. On one of them, the keyboard has been used so much that there is a deep “dent” in the spacebar, from the literally millions of times it has been pressed.

    Macs last nearly forever; or as they say, try running Vista on a seven year old FeeCee.

  8. You’d think your visitors would forgive you, as your machine is at least 6 yrs old. I suppose the ram it has isn’t anything to brag about as well? Also you could look into a refurbished machine, and save some money. I feel your pain.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.