Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Can You Run OS X on a Virtual Machine?

<< < (3/6) > >>

Darwin:
If Apple wants a better chance of taking over the operating system market share, the least they could do is make it easy for developers to run OS X on a virtual machine so that you don't have to buy an Apple machine just to run OS X.
-VideoInPicture (October 05, 2008, 05:29 PM)
--- End quote ---

That's just it, though, I don't think Apple IS that interested in selling the OS to the unwashed, non-Apple hardware using masses... I mean, with their move to Intel chips you'd *think* that they'd do this eventually, but... For now it seems to me that they are content to position themselves as a premium hardware and OS supplier, trading on the perception of exclusivity that goes along with their strategy.

Carol Haynes:
Out of curiosity I just gave the lifehacker installer a whirl in VMWare 6 and I can't get it to install. I think the problem arises because the ISO has been modified to use a fairly restricted range of devices (motherboards, graphics, sound) and it just doesn't like the ATA drive in VMWare. I tried SCSI and it liked that even less.

nontroppo:
Darwin: agreed, there is no technical limitation, but Apple is a hardware company and uses OS X as part of the package which differentiates its hardware. This is a crying shame as OS X is such a fantastic OS.

Apple would sink if it had to support the hardware diversity Windows does, and it would add a whole lot of bloat to the OS supporting such a convoluted mass of devices. So, in a selfish sense, I don't want OS X to end up being tied to endless legacy spaces for years as Windows is.

Nevertheless, if Apple tunes OS X for its hardware only but leaves the EULA general enough and the kernel open, then the barrier for virtualising/abstracting OS X would be lowered while maintaining the technical solidity of Apple's all-in-one package. The hackintosh community already does a pretty impressive job of opening compatibility with numerous devices, the community would only grow to provide a linux like solution for those wanting a brilliant OS working on generic hardware. It wouldn't impact sales of mainstream Macs, and could actually stimulate them (just look at the high rate of eventual Mac purchases within the hackintosh community).

Carol: do a search on Leo4VMware, which seems to have been tailored for VMWare specifically. I haven't tried it out but several reports say it works fine on Core2duo-based hardware.

f0dder:
I thought OS X had artificial constricting to the hardware it will run on - which is why you have to either grab a pirate pre-patched torrent, do manual modification of OS files, or buy one of those new USB devices that do a lot of system hacking magic?

Apple would sink if it had to support the hardware diversity Windows does, and it would add a whole lot of bloat to the OS supporting such a convoluted mass of devices. So, in a selfish sense, I don't want OS X to end up being tied to endless legacy spaces for years as Windows is.
--- End quote ---
Why would it add bloat? Afaik OS X is pretty modular, so it would just be the addition of a few modules. On windows (and linux?) both ATI and NVidia support pretty much all their cards (except really old ones) via unified drivers...

As for other types of devices, you already have the need for the supporting "framework" (printer management, wlan management, sound management etc.) so all you need are relatively small individual driver modules - not entire "bloated" subsystems.

Apple isn't interested in making their system open - and it certainly isn't right now. AES-encrypting of modules, hiding the encryption keys, etc... that's in a sense even worse than Win64's patchguard. At least patchguard's justification (apart from protection DRM subsystems) is making exploits harder. Apple's system? To prevent people from running custom kernels.

MrCrispy:
The only reason Apple goes to extreme lengths to prevent you from running OSX on Intel hardware is that if they didn't, there would be no reason to buy overpriced Mac hardware which is 100% identical to any pc clone (except for some minor design features). The value proposition of Apple lies in OSX, their apps and the software experience, and it makes sense that they want to protect it.

And apart from this, Apple is just about the most closed, paranoid and secretive company out there, they carefully cultivate a 'cult of Mac' and would not want to let in the 'lowly' pc users who they make fun of in their ads.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page