-
All replies
-
Helpful answers
-
-
Apr 4, 2012 8:44 AM in response to Csound1by Király,Once more, that is a violation of the license,
Csound1, that isn't true. That idea is all based on rumor and speculation, not fact. If you want to keep believing it, fine, but you need to stop posting it in these forums. Remember the terms of use of these forums prohibit speculation on Apple products or decisions.
-
Apr 4, 2012 8:58 AM in response to Királyby celliott147,Actually, it is if you read the EULA of SL. SL Server can be virtualized legally though...
-
Apr 4, 2012 9:12 AM in response to Királyby Csound1,Király wrote:
Once more, that is a violation of the license,
Csound1, that isn't true. That idea is all based on rumor and speculation, not fact. If you want to keep believing it, fine, but you need to stop posting it in these forums. Remember the terms of use of these forums prohibit speculation on Apple products or decisions.
You are wrong! SL Server may be virtualized, SL may not, stop encouraging this behaviour.
-
Apr 4, 2012 9:22 AM in response to celliott147by Király,I've read the Snow Leopard SLA and there is no mention of it being a license violation. Have you read it?
All we know is that makers of VM software disallow Snow Leopard Client from being virtualized. We don't know the reason why, because the reason has never been made public. People have speculated on the reasons. At some point somebody speculated that "Snow Leopard client is not licensed to run under virtualization on a host Mac running Lion", and that rumour has spread like wildfire. It has become one of the most pervasive bits of Mac folklore ever perpetuated.
The rumour can be laid to rest simply by reading the Snow Leopard SLA, in which no such prohibition exists.
It's time to put the rumour to rest for good, and stop posting about it here in the forums, where this kind of speculation is prohibited under the forum's terms of use.
-
Apr 4, 2012 9:37 AM in response to Királyby babowa,Would you mind elaborating on why running an OS in VM is specifically mentioned/allowed in the Lion SLA, but is not mentioned at all (that I could find) in the Snow Leopard SLA?
-
Apr 4, 2012 9:45 AM in response to babowaby Király,It's to allow up to three copies of Lion to be running sumultaneously on the same Mac (one natively, and two under a VM).
The Snow Leopard license allows only one copy to be running at any given time. One copy running is one copy running, whether under a VM or not. Snow Leopard running under virtualization on a Mac running Snow Leopard = two copies running sumiltaneously, which is not allowed. Snow Leopard running under virtualization on a Mac running Lion is one copy running, and as such is compliant with the SLA.
Why did Apple make this change in Lion? I don't know, and I won't speculate, because that's not allowed on these forums.
-
Apr 4, 2012 9:54 AM in response to babowaby MlchaelLAX,babowa wrote:
Would you mind elaborating on why running an OS in VM is specifically mentioned/allowed in the Lion SLA, but is not mentioned at all (that I could find) in the Snow Leopard SLA?
I still use ProDOS on my Apple //c. Did you happen to notice if anything in the Lion SLA changes my abilities to utilize ProDOS in the future?
-
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:18 AM in response to babowaby MlchaelLAX,babowa wrote:
Would you mind elaborating on why running an OS in VM is specifically mentioned/allowed in the Lion SLA, but is not mentioned at all (that I could find) in the Snow Leopard SLA?
MichaelLAX wrote:
I still use ProDOS on my Apple //c. Did you happen to notice if anything in the Lion SLA changes my abilities to utilize ProDOS in the future?
babowa wrote:
I have no idea; the SLA's are available for download here:
I was facetiously using "analogy" to respond to your question to Kiråly...
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:19 AM in response to babowaby Csound1,babowa wrote:
Would you mind elaborating on why running an OS in VM is specifically mentioned/allowed in the Lion SLA, but is not mentioned at all (that I could find) in the Snow Leopard SLA?
My interpretation is that Apples SLA state clearly what is allowed, Lion (client) states that virtualization is allowed, Snow Leopard (client) does not, I read this as virtualization not allowed. This viewpoint is shared by all major virtualization software providers so I am comfortable with it.
Both SL and Lion (server) also state that virtualization is allowed.
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:24 AM in response to babowaby MlchaelLAX,Put another way:
All Men are mortal.
Socrates is a Man.
Therefore Socrates is mortal.
But we learn nothing from:
Snow Leopards are friendly.
Three Lions can run in the jungle at the same time.
Can a Snow Leopard run in the jungle?
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:30 AM in response to MlchaelLAXby Csound1,MlchaelLAX wrote:
Put another way:
All Men are mortal.
Socrates is a Man.
Therefore Socrates is mortal.
But we learn nothing from:
Snow Leopards are friendly.
Three Lions can run in the jungle at the same time.
Can a Snow Leopard run in the jungle?
Socrates is dead, so he was mortal and is that a real or virtual jungle?
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:32 AM in response to Csound1by MlchaelLAX,So if I want to use Adobe's Photoshop CS4, how many of Adobe's other products' SLAs (that I may not even own) do I have to read before I can be really, really sure I have the right to use Photoshop CS4?
-
Apr 4, 2012 10:36 AM in response to MlchaelLAXby Csound1,MlchaelLAX wrote:
So if I want to use Adobe's Photoshop CS4, how many of Adobe's other products' SLAs (that I may not even own) do I have to read before I can be really, really sure I have the right to use Photoshop CS4?
How would I know, ask Adobe!