LukesQueriesOnMacAndiOS

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

Hi. I've recently decided that I want to run PowerPC software on my Intel-based Macbook pro. I've heard the only way to do this is via Rosetta (which is no longer supported as of OS X Lion) and now I need to install OS X Snow Leopard. I do not wish to stop using Yosemite so I need to dual-boot with two partitions so I can have 10.10 on one partition and 10.6 on the other, however, I have no idea how to go about doing this and I need someone to provide me with a guide as to how I can do it. (Don't warn me about drivers and all that; my laptop shipped with Snow leopard so I know it's supported.)

 

Please can someone help me?

MacBook Pro, OS X Yosemite (10.10), 13", 2.66ghz Core 2 Duo, 4GB ram

Posted on May 26, 2015 6:23 AM

Close

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

  • All replies
  • Helpful answers

Previous Page 2 of 3 last Next
  • by FatMac>MacPro,

    FatMac>MacPro FatMac>MacPro May 28, 2015 6:20 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 5 (4,805 points)
    May 28, 2015 6:20 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    ...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?

    Deter? Their only hope? No, their best hope for virtualization, and keeping it simple to boot (not 1,800 words of hack instructions). Most users come here for help, not long-winded off-putting arguments. The simple solution is what I've attempted to provide; then you, not surprisingly, dropped in with your favorite subject.

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX May 29, 2015 11:48 AM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    May 29, 2015 11:48 AM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    The problems suffered by PowerPC application users in countries where they cannot obtain Snow Leopard Server directly from Apple will not be helped by your ad hominem attack on me.

     

    The applicable links are in my earlier post for those who need them, and there is no reason to beat this horse to death any further...

  • by FatMac>MacPro,

    FatMac>MacPro FatMac>MacPro May 29, 2015 11:50 AM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 5 (4,805 points)
    May 29, 2015 11:50 AM in response to MlchaelLAX

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    ...there is no reason to beat this horse to death any further...

    Then why did you start beating it?

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX May 29, 2015 11:59 AM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    May 29, 2015 11:59 AM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    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. (emphasis added)

     

    Because of this incorrect statement on your part to the OP!  It is just flat wrong and your own responses have confirmed that at least Parallels will virtualize plain Snow Leopard (and there are reports that Fusion will as well).

  • by FatMac>MacPro,

    FatMac>MacPro FatMac>MacPro May 29, 2015 12:04 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 5 (4,805 points)
    May 29, 2015 12:04 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    ...your own responses have confirmed that Fusion and Parallels will virtualize plain Snow Leopard.

    No they haven't because Fusion and Parallels won't if used as the manufacturers intended (i.e. buy them and try such an installation - which is what most people do). But there's no need to go over all that again because it's all in the last ten or so posts.

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX May 29, 2015 12:13 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    May 29, 2015 12:13 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    The online Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "hack" as:

     

    a usually creative solution to a computer hardware or programming problem or limitation

     

    Thank you for your continuing complements, as unintended as I am sure they were...

  • by FatMac>MacPro,

    FatMac>MacPro FatMac>MacPro May 29, 2015 12:54 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 5 (4,805 points)
    May 29, 2015 12:54 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    The online Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "hack" as:

     

    a usually creative solution to a computer hardware or programming problem or limitation

     

    Thank you for your continuing complements, as unintended as I am sure they were...

    Unintended? Not at all. Your hack has always represented a remarkable effort to override the restriction built into Parallels specifically to prevent installation of Snow Leopard. Moreover, the organization and presentation of it demonstrate what instructions for hacking should look like (so people can actually follow them; e.g. the caution about the length of line 12 of the code presented in step 3.2 and the mention of rtf being the default format in TextEdit), along with the conscientious effort to keep it current.

     

    My point from the beginning has been that using Parallels or Fusion in the way most people do will result in failure to virtualize Snow Leopard and that purchasing and using Server would be the most expeditious way to solve that problem. I have more experience with Fusion, which is currently at version 7.1.1. That restriction was introduced all the way back in version 4.1.1 (SL virtualization was still possible in version 4.0 and, by mistake, in 4.1). So I will continue to recommend the $20 Server as the Snow Leopard virtualization solution (FWIW, Snow Leopard is still my favorite OS X) and skip the details.

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX May 29, 2015 2:06 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    May 29, 2015 2:06 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    FatMac>MacPro wrote:

     

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    The online Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "hack" as:

     

    a usually creative solution to a computer hardware or programming problem or limitation

     

    Thank you for your continuing complements, as unintended as I am sure they were...

    Unintended? Not at all. Your hack has always represented a remarkable effort to override the restriction built into Parallels specifically to prevent installation of Snow Leopard. Moreover, the organization and presentation of it demonstrate what instructions for hacking should look like (so people can actually follow them; e.g. the caution about the length of line 12 of the code presented in step 3.2 and the mention of rtf being the default format in TextEdit), along with the conscientious effort to keep it current.

     

    My point from the beginning has been that using Parallels or Fusion in the way most people do will result in failure to virtualize Snow Leopard and that purchasing and using Server would be the most expeditious way to solve that problem. I have more experience with Fusion, which is currently at version 7.1.1. That restriction was introduced all the way back in version 4.1.1 (SL virtualization was still possible in version 4.0 and, by mistake, in 4.1). So I will continue to recommend the $20 Server as the Snow Leopard virtualization solution (FWIW, Snow Leopard is still my favorite OS X) and skip the details.

     

    We are in agreement 100% with this statement, and thank you for your intended compliments.  So I do not understand why you go out of your way to bait me with an incorrect statement and then engage me in this debate!   Maybe this is a good point to end the debate...

  • by FatMac>MacPro,

    FatMac>MacPro FatMac>MacPro May 29, 2015 2:31 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 5 (4,805 points)
    May 29, 2015 2:31 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    MlchaelLAX wrote:

     

    FatMac>MacPro wrote:

     

    ...My point from the beginning has been that using Parallels or Fusion in the way most people do will result in failure to virtualize Snow Leopard and that purchasing and using Server would be the most expeditious way to solve that problem. I have more experience with Fusion, which is currently at version 7.1.1. That restriction was introduced all the way back in version 4.1.1 (SL virtualization was still possible in version 4.0 and, by mistake, in 4.1). So I will continue to recommend the $20 Server as the Snow Leopard virtualization solution (FWIW, Snow Leopard is still my favorite OS X) and skip the details.

     

    We are in agreement 100% with this statement, and thank you for your intended compliments.  So I do not understand why you go out of your way to bait me with an incorrect statement and then engage me in this debate!   Maybe this is a good point to end the debate...

    I will have to archive your preceding post for future reference. You've just agreed that my starting point was a correct solution for the problem originally presented, despite the omission of historical background and your impressive hack, which SL Server @ $20 made unnecessary.

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX May 29, 2015 2:37 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    May 29, 2015 2:37 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    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.

     

    Yeah: Leave this out, too! 

  • by scfw0x0f,

    scfw0x0f scfw0x0f Jul 15, 2015 4:15 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 1 (0 points)
    Jul 15, 2015 4:15 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    I just ordered a copy, due to arrive Monday. So apparently it is still in stock. I did use the part number (M588Z/A) to order.Screen Shot 2015-07-15 at 4.14.35 PM.png

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX Jul 15, 2015 5:18 PM in response to scfw0x0f
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    Jul 15, 2015 5:18 PM in response to scfw0x0f

    Good work!

  • by jaw444,

    jaw444 jaw444 Aug 25, 2015 6:11 PM in response to MlchaelLAX
    Level 1 (13 points)
    Desktops
    Aug 25, 2015 6:11 PM in response to MlchaelLAX

    thank you to FatMac and Michael for the debate.  It's uplifting just to learn that there is the potential to still be able to use Snow Leopard, as well as having functionality it doesn't have. 

     

    I am going to buy the server now, can i buy it on line or do i have to call on the phone?  I think they're closed now, 6pm?  also i don't want to deal with anyone who is going to tell me it's not available anymore, how depressing, even if untrue. i don't need stress.

     

    Why did Apple stop supporting Rosetta, what is their benefit in doing that?   The main solution i have thought of before this, is to put a few hundred, at least, into repairing my MacBook that has Snow Leopard. i'll need a hard drive and a track pad repair or replacement, probably some other things.  And it would mean having to use two computers.   But having tried out alternatives to my *key* powerPC programs, i have confirmed that it will be worth it. 

     

    but if getting the SLS would be more streamlined for accessing what i need on one computer, that's what i've been hungering for. 

     

    Thanks again.

  • by MlchaelLAX,

    MlchaelLAX MlchaelLAX Aug 25, 2015 6:32 PM in response to jaw444
    Level 4 (2,256 points)
    Aug 25, 2015 6:32 PM in response to jaw444

    As I reported in reply to your other post, I gave you the cautions and links for getting SLS up and running in Parallels 10.

     

    Yes, you must call and even some of the Apple Store reps will incorrectly suggest that they do not offer it anymore.  Be persistent or hang up and call back for a different rep!  Use the part number.  I assume they are open 24/7.

     

    Sorry you had to waste time reading that debate.  His position is largely untenable!

     

    Good luck!

  • by Csound1,

    Csound1 Csound1 Aug 25, 2015 6:36 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro
    Level 9 (50,245 points)
    Desktops
    Aug 25, 2015 6:36 PM in response to FatMac>MacPro

    FatMac>MacPro wrote:

     

    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.

    And VirtualBox is the same, it too will not install Snow Leopard unless it is the server version.

Previous Page 2 of 3 last Next