Q: How to dual-boot OS X Yosemite and OS X Snow Leopard?

back up ALL your data, wipe your drive, launch the Snow Leopard installer, reformat the drive into two partitions, install Snow Leopard, run all updates, launch the Yosemite installer, install to the 2nd partition.

Alternately

buy an external HD and boot off the snow leopard DVD, install to that external. Probably want to backup jut in case but you seem to want to throw caution to the wind. Have at it!

Back up your data, choose Utilities from the Finder's Go menu, open the Disk Utility, and repartition the drives. You don't need to erase it before proceeding.

Regardless of anything else, all drives will eventually fail. Any files you'd like to keep should be on at least two.

(127900)

if your going to repartition instead of reformat I would backup without question.

I do recall an instance where I could not launch the 10.6 install from Yosemite and had to boot directly to the DVD and run the installer from there but it's possibly isolated. With that in mind one stupid move from a boot installer could end badly. I don't trust repartition over partition when external drives are very cheap and indispensable right now but I try and always have a backup plan for those unexpected results.

Another way to install and run Snow Leopard is to create a Virtual Machine using VMware Fusion, Parallels, or Virtual Box, buy Snow Leopard Server (Part number MC588Z/A for $20) from Apple (by phone 800-692-7753 and say "I want to purchase Snow Leopard Server") and install it. It won't be quite as fast as an actual install but you can run Yosemite and Snow Leopard together.

That way you avoid the repartitioning hassle (risk?) and take up much less drive space in the process. You can also create a backup of the VM file, create snapshots if you want to try something and retreat to the pre-snapshot state if things go wrong.

LukesQueriesOnMacAndiOS wrote:

 

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

...buy Snow Leopard Server (Part number MC588Z/A for $20) from Apple...

 

Can't I just install the standard consumer version of Snow Leopard on a virtual machine? or would it be too convenient for that to be the case?

While this can generate considerable argument, Fusion and Parallels will not virtualize plain Snow Leopard because of Apple licensing restrictions. SL Server is OK. What's changed is that Server used to sell for about $500, so the current $20 is a pretty good deal.

Snow Leopard server for use with the above. Call 1-800-692-7753 and order part number MC588Z/A. Cost is $19.99 + sales tax and shipping. You may be told it is no longer available, depending on who you talk to. Ask to talk to someone else or call back.

LukesQueriesOnMacAndiOS wrote:

 

Is there a way I can do it using disk utility? Because I have LOTS of data on my current partition and nowhere to back it up. I have an external hard drive but I would need to partition it, is that also possible through disk utility?

Hard drives are so cheap now that there is no reason to not have several on hand, including at least two full backups. It's not clear that you now have an adequate backup of either your internal or external drive. You risk losing whatever you have stored on either drive.

With only 4GB of RAM, you may not want to opt for a virtual machine. If the internal HD in your laptop is the one that originally came with it, this would be a good time to make a fresh start with a larger internal drive, partitioned as you want.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Snow Leopard volume's Startup Disk preference wont "see" the Yosemite volume, so to switch from Snow Leopard to Yosemite, you will have to restart holding the option key to select the Yosemite volume as your startup drive..

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

LukesQueriesOnMacAndiOS wrote:

 

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

...buy Snow Leopard Server (Part number MC588Z/A for $20) from Apple...

 

Can't I just install the standard consumer version of Snow Leopard on a virtual machine? or would it be too convenient for that to be the case?

While this can generate considerable argument, Fusion and Parallels will not virtualize plain Snow Leopard because of Apple licensing restrictions. SL Server is OK. What's changed is that Server used to sell for about $500, so the current $20 is a pretty good deal.

The common urban myth that the Snow Leopard EULA prohibited its virtualization on a Mac running OS X 10.7, 10.8, 10.9 or 10.10 has been debunked over the years since its original propagation in 2011.

You can install the standard consumer version of Snow Leopard on a virtual machine (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1365439), but quite honestly, for $20, you will be much happier in the long run installing Snow Leopard Server on a virtual machine (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=17285039&postcount=564), as it is much more "convenient" to install and maintain.

I always recommend that you keep your new data files outside of the virtual environment (even when using Windows in virtualization), for ease of backup and restoration in the event that your virtual machine goes South!

Running Snow Leopard natively will allow your PowerPC applications to run faster and some people like to have access to both solutions: partition and install Yosemite in the new partition (do NOT install Yosemite over Snow Leopard, as this will destroy the Snow Leopard environment), and install Snow Leopard Server into virtualization in the new partition as well!

Keep in mind that PowerPC applications that use the Internet, such as Eudora, are now more vulnerable to attack since it appears that Apple has abandoned security updates for Snow Leopard.

Which PowerPC applications do you want to continue to use?

MlchaelLAX wrote:

 

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

While this can generate considerable argument, Fusion and Parallels will not virtualize plain Snow Leopard because of Apple licensing restrictions. SL Server is OK. What's changed is that Server used to sell for about $500, so the current $20 is a pretty good deal.

 

The common urban myth that the Snow Leopard EULA prohibited its virtualization on a Mac running OS X 10.7, 10.8, 10.9 or 10.10 has been debunked over the years since its original propagation in 2011...

Thank you for proving my point about generating argument. I knew you would. But what I stated was true: that Fusion and Parallels will not, by design (based on their understanding of Apple's licensing restrictions), virtualize Snow Leopard, though their design can be overridden by the hack you've offered in your link to your posted instructions. The issue is made moot, as we both pointed out, by the price drop and easy availability of SL Server.

Well, if you post an incorrect statement and then somehow claim that a response to correct it is "considerable argument" then congratulations!  You proved your own point!

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

Thank you for proving my point about generating argument. I knew you would. But what I stated was true: that Fusion and Parallels will not, by design (based on their understanding of Apple's licensing restrictions), virtualize Snow Leopard, though their design can be overridden by the hack you've offered in your link to your posted instructions. The issue is made moot, as we both pointed out, by the price drop and easy availability of SL Server.

Their design is not based upon the Snow Leopard EULA, but their own licensing agreements with Apple, which, of course, they are required to follow.  Snow Leopard users are not bound by these private agreements between the virtualization companies and Apple; only the Snow Leopard EULA, which does not prohibit the virtualization of Snow Leopard on a Mac using Lion, Mt. Lion, Mavericks or Yosemite.

The source of the confusion was a Technical Support document posted by Parallels, which incorrectly made the statement that their requirements for installation was a direct result of not wanting to violate the Snow Leopard EULA (as opposed to a correct statement that they would not want to violate their private agreement with Apple).

This statement has been proved false many times and unfortunately Parallels does not remove it from their archives.  But that does not change the fact that there has NEVER been any official Apple statement that corroborates your incorrect beliefs and there will not be any!

You are correct in your statement that, with the price drop, the issue is made largely moot!  But if someone like the OP, chooses to use the client version of Snow Leopard in virtualization, for example being in a country where Apple will not provide Snow Leopard Server, or when the day comes that Apple ceases selling SLS for a reasonable price, then of course this issue is NOT moot!

MlchaelLAX wrote:

 

Well, if you post an incorrect statement and then somehow claim that a response to correct it is "considerable argument" then congratulations!  You proved your own point!

 

FatMac>MacPro wrote:

 

Thank you for proving my point about generating argument. I knew you would. But what I stated was true: that Fusion and Parallels will not, by design (based on their understanding of Apple's licensing restrictions), virtualize Snow Leopard, though their design can be overridden by the hack you've offered in your link to your posted instructions. The issue is made moot, as we both pointed out, by the price drop and easy availability of SL Server.

 

Their design is not based upon the Snow Leopard EULA, but their own licensing agreements with Apple, which, of course, they are required to follow...

Thank you once again for showing how argument can be generated. I made no mention of the EULA; you did. The two companies are understandably bound by their licensing with Apple so the end result is that Snow Leopard cannot be virtualized using their software as sold; it takes your hack to break that restriction.

MlchaelLAX wrote:

 

...You are correct in your statement that, with the price drop, the issue is made largely moot!  But if someone like the OP, chooses to use the client version of Snow Leopard in virtualization, for example being in a country where Apple will not provide Snow Leopard Server, or when the day comes that Apple ceases selling SLS for a reasonable price, then of course this issue is NOT moot!

When those eventualities occur, I promise not to call the issue "moot" any more.

I will not attempt to make you understand the circularity of your incorrect statements.  It is only important to point out that your incorrect statements have the tendency to wrongfully deter those in need of a solution to their problem of running PowerPC applications on a modern Intel Mac from an existing solution to do so!

More importantly, to those users in countries where Apple does not offer the telephone support to sell Snow Leopard Server, this issue is currently NOT moot!

Now, I have actually cross-shipped Snow Leopard Server to some of these users in need of this solution for only the cost of SLS plus the extra cost of shipping.

Other than make incorrect statements that deter these users from using Snow Leopard client in virtualization as their only hope of a solution, what have YOU done for them?