How to install Mavericks virtual machine in Parallels Desktop 10

I've only created a Mavericks VM from Mavericks, but I imagine the same approach will work. I subsequently upgraded this to Yosemite for testing purposes. Must say I'm glad I haven't upgraded my host OS yet!

Anyway, I happened to have "Install OS X Mavericks.app" on my disk still, and Parallels 10 was quite happy to use that when I tried making a new VM from Disk Image. Of course the Installer package does indeed contain a disk image.

Hi jb9572,

Unfortunately, Mavericks is not licensed to be run in a virtual machine unless the host OS is also Mavericks. Since 10.7, both the host and guest OS have to be the same version for a virtual machine to be compliant with the license.

This is the relevant part of the SLA that permits you (emphasis added):

Hi Király,

I can't find a copy of the Yosemite SLA on the Apple site using Search functions in the Support section of that site. I tried all sorts of things including just a general "Software Licensing Agreement". Got a list of sorts, not including Yosemite. Do you have a URL?

I don't want to confirm your comment re VMs, though, as an aside, I'd point out that Apple "invited" me to upgrade after I correctly made a Mavericks VM while running Mavericks. I do want to read what the ruling would be on having Yosemite on an external bootable drive, given my internal drive boots Mavericks.

StevenAR wrote:

Hi Király,

I can't find a copy of the Yosemite SLA on the Apple site using Search functions in the Support section of that site. I tried all sorts of things including just a general "Software Licensing Agreement". Got a list of sorts, not including Yosemite. Do you have a URL?

It's here: OS X (Yosemite)

The link can be found here: http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

The SLA that applies in the OP's case, though, is the Mavericks SLA, since that's what he wants to install in a VM.

I don't want to confirm your comment re VMs, though, as an aside, I'd point out that Apple "invited" me to upgrade after I correctly made a Mavericks VM while running Mavericks. I do want to read what the ruling would be on having Yosemite on an external bootable drive, given my internal drive boots Mavericks.

There are no licensing restrictions against having different versions of OS X on external bootable drives. That's fine. It's running OS X in VMs that is restricted. "The Apple Software" as defined by the Mavericks license, can be run in a VM, as long as the Mac computer that is running it is "already running the Apple software."

If Apple had allowed 10.9 to be run inside a VM with a different OS X version as the host, the license would have said this:

(iii) to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using OS X Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use.

But that's not what it says, of course.

jb9573 wrote:

So even if I have an old version of OS X on disc (I think I have an old version of Lion or Mountain Lion on disc, whatever the last version was that you purchased discs for), there isn't a legal way for me to run an old version of OS X in a VM to get to software that's now broken in 10.10?

Lion and Mountain Lion never came on discs, they were download only (except for Lion which also came on a USB stick that almost nobody bought).

Only OS X 10.6 and earlier came on discs. Fortunately for you, no legal restrictions in any of their SLAs prevent you from installing them in a virtual machine on a Mac with a different OS as the host. That restriction started with 10.7.

Unfortunately for you, though, none of the VM companies support the installation of non-Server versions of OS X 10.6 and earlier into their virtual machines. The reason they don't support it is unknown, but I suspect it has something to do with some agreement that they have with Apple.

Fortunately for you, though (sounds like we're playing ping pong here) Snow Leopard 10.6 Server can be run in a virtual machine with a newer OS as the host. All of the most popular VM companies support 10.6 Server, and Apple now sells it for only $20.

I guess this means I must access it via another machine running an older version of OS X?

There is another way. You could partition your hard drive, and install a copy of 10.10 and 10.9 on each. Reboot between the two of them to use them. Unfortunately you won't be able to use both of them at the same time.

This is what I do now when I need to run an old app. Just reboot into Snow Leopard.

See this link on installing:

Installing Snow Leopard Server into Parallels

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1365439

Purchase info:

Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard - Apple Store (U.S.) $19.99 + sales tax & shipping (call 1.800.MYAPPLE

1.800.692.7753). Part no: MC588Z/A

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC573/mac-os-x-106-snow-leopard

So the next question is how hard is this to do (10.6 Serve in a Parallels VM)? Will this be a challenge or will it be fairly straight-forward?

It's a piece of cake. Easy.

Additionally, are there any implications of doing this (e.g. will the VM try to index information for Spotlight from the parent OS X installation and vice versa)? If so, I'd like to make this 10.6 Server VM be an island (networking, file sharing, device sharing, Internet access, etc.) as much as possible since it'll really just be a read-only deal anyway.

An island is exactly what you'll get - 10.6 Server running in its own VM window. Nothing will cross over between the VM and the host system unless you explicitly transfer a file across or some such.

One more thing: You have to call Apple on the phone to order Snow Leopard Server. It isn't available in the web Apple Store. Use the phone number and quote the part number that dianeoforegon gave you. But don't order from the link that she provided - that's for the non-Server version!

jb9573 wrote:

Thanks for all the assistance. Apple said it won't be here until around 12/4.

If you placed the order, you will be surprised at how quickly SLS will arrive in the USA. Let us know when it does arrive.

jb9573 wrote:

That's under promising and over performing!

Seems to be their pattern with SLS over the past year or so...

As you yourself noted, earlier, best to buy a copy now and keep it on the shelf for that day when you will need it in the future and It may not be available from Apple, or back at its old $499+ retail price!