Sheepshaver for Intel OSX to replace VMs

[TiddK]

Are there any plans to either develop Sheepshaver to replace Intel VM software (e.g. Parallels and VMWare), or to create a new emulator for older versions of OS X to run on Apple silicon?

I ask because currently I have:

• System 7.5.3 in Basilisk
  OS 8.6 and 9.0.4 in Sheepshaver
  OS X 10.6.8 and 10.9.5 and 10.12 as Parallels VM installations

Although it seems that Sheepshaver (and Basilisk?) will run on M1 as applications in Rosetta 2, no x86 OS will be able to be installed in VM software running on M1, though it seems Windows 10 WILL. The ability to run older versions of OS X is crucial to me. However, they could theoretically install and run in emulation mode in Rosetta 2 rather than as VMs, if software 'envelopes' like Sheepshaver existed for them. Yes, there would be a performance hit, but 1. current Sheepshaver emulations don't seem to suffer from slowdowns on Intel Macs, and 2. the performance being delivered by Rosetta 2 on M1 is pretty impressive.

What do you think, guys? It would be VERY ironic if I got an M1 Mac and could still run System 7.5.3 and OS 8.6 and 9.0.4, but couldn't run any flavour of OS X prior to Catalina!

[Ronald P. Regensburg]

SheepShaver is a PPC Mac emulator. It will run System 7.5.3 through MacOS 9.0.4. I do not expect it to ever run MacOS beyond 9.0.4 unless someone develops a workable MMU for it. It is highly unlikely that it will ever run any version of MacOSX. It runs with Rosetta 2 on arm64 (Apple Silicon). I expect future development of both BasiliskII and SheepShaver to run natively on arm64 without Rosetta 2.

The Qemu PPC Mac emulator will run MacOS 9 through MacOSX 10.5 (Leopard) on Intel. I do not know if it runs with Rosetta 2 on arm64, nor if it will be developed further to run on arm64 natively.

To run Intel MacOSX/OSX/macOS 10.6 through 10.15 on an arm64, you would need an Intel Mac emulator that runs on arm64. I do not know if there are any plans for developing such an emulator.

[TiddK]

Thanks for the reply Ronald. I'd not be even remotely interested in Qemu because I can run pre-OS X apps - even pre-PPC - in Sheepshaver, and can run OS X Classic apps in Rosetta in the 10.6.8 Parallels VM.

I'm a bit puzzled as to how Sheepshaver and Basilisk can even run on M1 devices - have they been updated as 64-bit apps that Rosetta 2 can recognise and run?

I'd hope someone somewhere is intending to fill a big gap that will open up - Sheepshaver etc can take care of all apps up to 1999/2000, while Rosetta 2 will run many 64-bit apps that pre-date Catalina; however, the "gap" involves all apps and utilities that may be 32-bit between 2000 and 2019. In other words, that will run on an Intel-based x86 platform. After all, before OS X there was Soft-PC to fill that particular Microsoft gap, then there was Sheepshaver, then there were x86 VMs. I'd hope that someone will take on the "Sheepshaver mantle" (using that as a metaphor) and write an emulator for x86 OS's that will do the same job for a vast array of apps from 2000 up to 2019, that Sheepshaver etc do for most apps before 2000.

[Ronald P. Regensburg]

I'm a bit puzzled as to how Sheepshaver and Basilisk can even run on M1 devices - have they been updated as 64-bit apps that Rosetta 2 can recognise and run?

Early 64-bit versions were available since 2010, but they failed to run in 64-bit mode in later OSX versions. My more recent BasiliskII and SheepShaver builds from kanjitalk755 fork are 64-bit, hardened, signed, and notarized.
See this SheepShaver build history: https://www.emaculation.com/sheepshaver ... istory.txt
See SheepShaver downloads: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7360
See BasiliskII downloads: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7361

the "gap" involves all apps and utilities that may be 32-bit between 2000 and 2019. In other words, that will run an Intel-based x86 platform.

You probably refer to the period from 2010, MacOSX 10.7 (Lion) to 2018, macOS 10.14 (Mojave). At some point during that period Apple stopped prohibiting OSX/macOS installation in Intel virtualisation software on Macs. Not sure when, but you can certainly install macOS 10.13 High Sierra and macOS 10.14 (Mojave) on virtualisation software to run 32-bit Intel OSX apps.

[TiddK]

I'm a bit puzzled as to how Sheepshaver and Basilisk can even run on M1 devices - have they been updated as 64-bit apps that Rosetta 2 can recognise and run?

Early 64-bit versions were available since 2010, but they failed to run in 64-bit mode in later OSX versions. My more recent BasiliskII and SheepShaver builds from kanjitalk755 fork are 64-bit, hardened, signed, and notarized.
See this SheepShaver build history: https://www.emaculation.com/sheepshaver ... istory.txt
See SheepShaver downloads: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7360
See BasiliskII downloads: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7361

Thanks - I'll have a look at those.

the "gap" involves all apps and utilities that may be 32-bit between 2000 and 2019. In other words, that will run an Intel-based x86 platform.

You probably refer to the period from 2010, MacOSX 10.7 (Lion) to 2018, macOS 10.14 (Mojave). At some point during that period Apple stopped prohibiting OSX/macOS installation in Intel virtualisation software on Macs. Not sure when, but you can certainly install macOS 10.13 High Sierra and macOS 10.14 (Mojave) on virtualisation software to run 32-bit Intel OSX apps.

Before Lion, Apple's EULA restricted users to creating an OS X VM using server software (which my 10.6.8 VM is using); from Lion onwards there was no separate server OS so Apple couldn't prevent the regular OS being installed into VM software.

Parallels has now been updated to run VMs on M1 Macs, but it won't install & run x86 OS's such as High Sierra and Mojave, because x86 system instructions won't translate on the ARM chip which is an entirely different beast to Intel and all other x86 chips. Yes, individual APPs may run via Rosetta 2, but some software - for example iTunes 10, and Hear, and some text expanders - require the relevant OS running on x86 in order to run via the execution of system code, not just the Rosetta 2 emulator. If it was just applications, there wouldn't be a problem (possibly?). I'm sure you will understand that - most of the software that runs in Basilisk and Sheepshaver won't run in OS X, which is why the emulation software exists.

[Ronald P. Regensburg]

No, of course. I meant that you can run Intel macOS versions in a VM like Parallels on Intel Mac.

On M1 Macs one can run BasiliskII and SheepShaver with Rosetta 2 and in the future very likely natively on arm64. BasiliskII will run System 7 through MacOS 8.1, SheepShaver will run MacOS 7.5.3 through MacOS 9.0.4.

Maybe Qemu will run with Rosetta 2 on M1 Macs, I do not know if anyone tried yet. With Qemu one can run PPC MacOSX up to MacOSX 10.5 (Leopard). I do not know if it can be developed to run natively on arm64, but I suppose it is possible.

To run Intel MacOSX 10.5 (Leopard) through macOS 10.15 (Catalina) on M1 Macs one would need an Intel Mac emulator for arm64. Such emulators do not exist as far as I am aware (not counting Rosetta 2). I think there is little chance we will see an Intel Mac emulator on arm64 as it will not be needed to run Windows. Microsoft is working on a Windows for arm64, so virtualizing on a M1 Mac will be possible.

I suppose Rosetta 2 will last only two or three successive macOS versions (like Rosetta before). So, yes, if there will be no Intel Mac on arm64 emulator, it will not be possible to run Intel Mac apps (whether 32-bit or 64-bit) on future arm64 Macs.

[TiddK]

To run Intel MacOSX 10.5 (Leopard) through macOS 10.15 (Catalina) on M1 Macs one would need an Intel Mac emulator for arm64. Such emulators do not exist as far as I am aware (not counting Rosetta 2). I think there is little chance we will see an Intel Mac emulator on arm64 as it will not be needed to run Windows. Microsoft is working on a Windows for arm64, so virtualizing on a M1 Mac will be possible.

I suppose Rosetta 2 will last only two or three successive macOS versions (like Rosetta before). So, yes, if there will be no Intel Mac on arm64 emulator, it will not be possible to run Intel Mac apps (whether 32-bit or 64-bit) on future arm64 Macs.

I'm not sure that is necessarily true? It *IS* true that running earlier versions of OS X as VMs was a by-product of the software having been created in the first place in order to run Windows concurrently with OS X, but Sheepshaver was originally developed independently of Windows to run pre-OS X Mac apps once Apple moved to Intel in 2006. It's only my opinion of course, but I would have thought the demand to run 32-bit Mac apps plus any 64-bit apps that won't run in Rosetta 2, will be even stronger than the demand to run 7-years-old (or more) apps was in 2006.

(Incidentally, Microsoft have already developed a Rosetta 2-like emulator for x86 to run within their own ARM system, so even now Windows 10 for ARM will install in M1 via a Parallels VM.)

[Ronald P. Regensburg]

I would have thought the demand to run 32-bit Mac apps plus any 64-bit apps that won't run in Rosetta 2, will be even stronger than the demand to run 7-years-old (or more) apps was in 2006.

It is not about demand. There is no commercial interest in these emulator projects. It needs developers who take an interest in creating such software, to invest time and effort in their free time to develop a new emulator that will be used by hobbyists mostly. The vast majority of Mac users will eventually update to new versions of their software or will replace abandoned software as they have done before.

[TiddK]

It is not about demand. There is no commercial interest in these emulator projects. It needs developers who take an interest in creating such software, to invest time and effort in their free time to develop a new emulator that will be used by hobbyists mostly. The vast majority of Mac users will eventually update to new versions of their software or will replace abandoned software as they have done before.

Yes, "demand" is the wrong word really. I meant "impulse", such as goes on all the time with open source software, and software created to preserve avenues closed down by Apple. Lots of things out there, e.g. on GitHub, or sites like Macintosh Garden. I agree the numbers aren’t high, but there is often a great deal of minority enthusiasm and that spurs creative people to meet it. After all, look at yourself and Sheepshaver! Not a big "demand" but greatly appreciated by those who use it.

[adespoton]

(Incidentally, Microsoft have already developed a Rosetta 2-like emulator for x86 to run within their own ARM system, so even now Windows 10 for ARM will install in M1 via a Parallels VM.)

There is already a build of QEMU-AA64 that virtualizes Windows 10 for ARM on top of Big Sur on an M1. Supposedly it's REALLY fast. As a result, because of Rosetta 2 on Big Sur and x64 emulation on Windows ARM, most legacy software will run either natively in one of these environments or inside an emulator in one of these environments.

Personally, I'm anticipating QEMU becoming the environment for running just about any software before long; it can use virtualization if using the existing host architecture, or use an emulator core for any of the hardware that isn't physically available.

Of course, QEMU-M68k doesn't fully support a Quadra boot yet, and will likely never support the 128k, so there will always be a place for all the emulators that support 68k Mac hardware. But with VirtualBox being silent on ARM virtualization, VMWare only doing virtualization and not emulation, and Parallels likely following in VMWare's footsteps, 32-bit Intel appears to only be supported by QEMU-x86 or QEMU-ia64 with an OS that supports 32-bit software. And people have indeed run OS X and macOS on QEMU -- usually using KVM and QEMU's x86 virtualization, but it should also be possible to use the emulation core. And Docker+QEMU-x86 on ARM is already a thing.

[TiddK]

Personally, I'm anticipating QEMU becoming the environment for running just about any software before long; it can use virtualization if using the existing host architecture, or use an emulator core for any of the hardware that isn't physically available.

Of course, QEMU-M68k doesn't fully support a Quadra boot yet, and will likely never support the 128k, so there will always be a place for all the emulators that support 68k Mac hardware. But with VirtualBox being silent on ARM virtualization, VMWare only doing virtualization and not emulation, and Parallels likely following in VMWare's footsteps, 32-bit Intel appears to only be supported by QEMU-x86 or QEMU-ia64 with an OS that supports 32-bit software. And people have indeed run OS X and macOS on QEMU -- usually using KVM and QEMU's x86 virtualization, but it should also be possible to use the emulation core. And Docker+QEMU-x86 on ARM is already a thing.

Would that make it possible to install and run Snow Leopard and Mavericks in QEMU? I only ask because Snow Leopard supports a few apps via Rosetta that I still use (e.g. Journler, which has never been either updated, surpassed, or replaced), and Mavericks is my current OS of choice, mainly because it still runs iTunes 10 and the audio software Hear (which enhances native Mac audio brilliantly well, but is no longer developed and does not run from Sierra onward).

[adespoton]

Personally, I'm anticipating QEMU becoming the environment for running just about any software before long; it can use virtualization if using the existing host architecture, or use an emulator core for any of the hardware that isn't physically available.

Of course, QEMU-M68k doesn't fully support a Quadra boot yet, and will likely never support the 128k, so there will always be a place for all the emulators that support 68k Mac hardware. But with VirtualBox being silent on ARM virtualization, VMWare only doing virtualization and not emulation, and Parallels likely following in VMWare's footsteps, 32-bit Intel appears to only be supported by QEMU-x86 or QEMU-ia64 with an OS that supports 32-bit software. And people have indeed run OS X and macOS on QEMU -- usually using KVM and QEMU's x86 virtualization, but it should also be possible to use the emulation core. And Docker+QEMU-x86 on ARM is already a thing.

Would that make it possible to install and run Snow Leopard and Mavericks in QEMU? I only ask because Snow Leopard supports a few apps via Rosetta that I still use (e.g. Journler, which has never been either updated, surpassed, or replaced), and Mavericks is my current OS of choice, mainly because it still runs iTunes 10 and the audio software Hear (which enhances native Mac audio brilliantly well, but is no longer developed and does not run from Sierra onward).

Theoretically, you should be able to run QEMU-X86 on the M1, and run 10.6 and 10.9 in that emulated environment. It WOULD be emulated though, not virtualized, and there's likely bugs in that code, as most people haven't actually had to do much emulating of x86 in recent history.

So the real answer is likely: people need to start trying it, and providing feedback to the QEMU dev lists when they find things that break. I have no doubt that we'll be seeing lots of eyes on QEMU-X86 in the near future as more people move to ARM hosts for their regular work.

[TiddK]

Would that make it possible to install and run Snow Leopard and Mavericks in QEMU? I only ask because Snow Leopard supports a few apps via Rosetta that I still use (e.g. Journler, which has never been either updated, surpassed, or replaced), and Mavericks is my current OS of choice, mainly because it still runs iTunes 10 and the audio software Hear (which enhances native Mac audio brilliantly well, but is no longer developed and does not run from Sierra onward).

Theoretically, you should be able to run QEMU-X86 on the M1, and run 10.6 and 10.9 in that emulated environment. It WOULD be emulated though, not virtualized, and there's likely bugs in that code, as most people haven't actually had to do much emulating of x86 in recent history.

So the real answer is likely: people need to start trying it, and providing feedback to the QEMU dev lists when they find things that break. I have no doubt that we'll be seeing lots of eyes on QEMU-X86 in the near future as more people move to ARM hosts for their regular work.

I'm not too worried about emulation versus virtualisation. Given the speed of Sheepshaver installations on x86, and given also the speed of M1 versus x86 (Classic Lightroom running in Rosetta 2 is apparently no slower than running natively on x86) I think emulation of x86 Mac OS shouldn't be even remotely like the days of Soft-PC!

I'm not yet ready to jump into ARM's arms - after all, no iMac has yet been released with M1 - but I'll certainly keep my eyes on QEMU in the meantime.