We offer open-source (Linux/Unix) virtual machines (VDIs) for VirtualBox, we install and make them ready-to-use VirtualBox images for you. From here you can download and attach the VDI image to your VirtualBox and use it. We offer images for both architectures 32bit and 64bit, you can download for free for both architectures. At the moment we have plans to offer you 30+ Linux/Unix distributions, we may add more to our list in near future, you can also send us suggestions if we are missing any popular distribution from our list.
You can check for Credentials( Username & Password) for VDI images. Here you can follow the how to attach/configure VDI image with VirtualBox. We do not install ‘Guest Additions’ in the OS or add any kind of stuff, read our. VirtualBox is the most easiest way to run secondary OS on your primary operating system, If your hardware doesn’t allow you to install any other operating system then VirtualBox comes in hand. It is a free and powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product available for most of the operating systems such as Linux, Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, Solaris and ported version for FreeBSD. Read about VirtualBox.
My mac does not heat abnormally when I don't use VirtualBox. I try with the same configuration (Same OS, VirtualBox version) on another mac form 2013 and the After running for over 20 minutes, the fan starts going and the CPU sits at 100%, eventually the mouse even stops working on the Host OS. Ie, VirtualBox and VMware were slow to the point I'd consider them unusable (I'm latency sensitive, eg, I consider Eclipse to the be same and other people think it's I've used Virtualbox and VMWare on my MacBook Pros, and interactive latency has always been indistinguishable from a native application.
![Mac Mac](http://www.bala-krishna.com/webfiles/uploads/2011/04/virtual-box-mac-osx-nested-paging-setting.jpg)
You can follow our for new images we release for VirtualBox.
Is that a terrible idea? I’m deep in hardware anxiety, wanting an expandable nvidia GPU-focused workstation with lots of storage but also wanting a Mac.
I’m currently semi resigned to getting two things, a low-to-midrange Mac laptop plus a headless GPU box. But I was thinking - is it mad to set up a hefty workstation running Linux and then run OS X on that in a VM as a primary machine? VMs should make things reasonably stable which I would assume would bypass a lot of the hackintosh stuffaround, although I could be totally barking up the wrong tree here. Someone tell me how dumb an idea this is, please. Um, actually.
I read up on this at one point last year. VMware supports MacOS as a valid client OS within Fusion. If you hunt around on internet you can find a way to revise VMware Player for Windows (free) to also support MacOS as a valid client OS. I assume the same is possible with Player for Linux, but didn't actually look for that myself. Once you have VMware Player installed and patched appropriately, you will find MacOS suddenly appears as a valid client OS option. Then you just have to obtain an appropriate VM image (also easily found via Google) or build your own.
I was curious so tested this for a laugh. The Mac Store appeared to work fine, as did installation of MacOS updates. Performance was perfectly decent for non-graphical apps. I was just playing with it so I never tried logging in with an Apple ID or anything more complicated (like enabling 3d acceleration in the VM and seeing what performance would be like for graphical applications), so no idea how all that works. I'm sure Google will tell you if you ask it nicely.
It.ought. to work, somewhat reasonably.
I've done this, albeit on Mac hardware on a regular basis. I usually have 3-4 Mac OS VM's running on my Mac Pro at work for testing, and I run multiple Mac OS guests under a ESX host at home (albeit running on an old xServe).
VMWare support is. 'meh' on it, but it works. Running on non-Apple hardware will give you a couple of additional hoops to jump through, but from what I've read it will work. Just make sure you consider your software needs. Some software won't run properly in a VM, even on Apple hardware. The App Store running in a VM on my Mac Pro won't let me download Final Cut or Motion, for example, because it doesn't recognize the VMWare video driver as an adequate GPU to run the apps. For most things though, should work reasonably well.
I've been tilting at this windmill for YEARS. I toyed with the idea of funding a small side-project to build this, but I couldn't make the economics work.
The problem is lack of Quartz Extreme/Core Image accelerated video drivers. This impacts lots of apps that just won't run, or won't run well, and it completely sucks. I don't understand why VMWware and/or Parallels aren't able to convince Apple to sign a specific video driver that would be compatible with MacOS running on official Apple hardware.
It would open up the door to a lot of IT and Development use-cases for virtual machines of MacOS that are currently closed. Question along similar lines. I'm on El Cap on Mid 2010 27' iMac 2.93 I7 cpu + 32gb ram + 2TB spinny hdd Runs well enough & happy with it. I have a 20gb Windows XP Bootcamp partition that I use for old games (Deus Ex, Thief Gold.etc) I also use VirtualBox quite heavily. Is it possible to install OS X High Sierra on a vbox vm? This is so I can test it before deciding if it's worthwhile to upgrade or not.
Why not buy or use an external storage to test out new versions of the OS? I do this every time they do a new release. Test it out and decide if moving up is worth it. I do this regularly. I've done it on Thinkpads, and I'm doing it currently on my Dell Latitude 7280. It works beautifully on both VirtualBox and VMWare.
I don't have a VMWare license any more, so I use VirtualBox nowawadays. I could use VMWare Player but then I miss snapshot support. Updates to Mac OS can break things, but they are easy to fix again, and unlike a Hackintosh, you have snapshots to rollback to in case you've borken something. Stuff like iMessages and Continuity won't work properly.
You'll need to edit a couple VirtualBox config files (simple to do, just a couple of plain text files that you add a couple lines to) to enable Mac support on non-Mac hardware. I'd heartily recommend it for iOS development. I actually prefer it to my actual, real-life Mac (a 2017 MBP 13'), because even with a VM and a Linux host running simulatenously, and both being pushed hard, I still get better battery life on my Dell. Plus I get an actual.nix environment, not a Mac OS environment with.nix tools that are years out of date.
I can't comment on GPU performance, as I haven't had a machine with a discrete GPU in over 15 years. My host has been Kubuntu. Hackintoshes are hard to build because Apple uses a very small subset of the available parts out there. You have to match those exact parts, in the combination they are used in an actual Mac for everything to work. It's not that hard, and yes if you pick parts closest to a real Mac it does make it easier. I am on my second Hackintosh.
The first one I kinda went in a little blind, and picked a CPU which wasn't really supported by Apple. It worked just fine and the community had lots of guides to help make it work. It didn't prevent any issues since it the same architecture and worked flawlessly. I also have a VM of 10.6 in Virtual Box but have to use a bootloader to make it work since 10.6 doesn't support the newer CPU my real hardware has. OP sounds like a candidate for a Hackintosh. I won't ever go back to genuine Apple for a desktop unless they totally shutdown Hackintosh's.
VMWare Tools are binaries for the guest OS, not for the host, so really, are host-independent. Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant actually installing the Tools binaries - in Windows at least, it's done through the VM menu, Install VMware Tools. Since out of box Workstation on Windows and Linux doesn't support macOS guests I'm wondering if that menu path works on those systems. Ah, I see what you are saying. You can download the Tools directly from VMWare's website, mount it in the virtual CD ROM in Mac OS, then run the installer from there. The Tools disc image can be found on VMWare's website here. Under each release, check the 'packages' folder.
For example, here are the Tools image for v10. The appropriate Mac OS version is called 'darwin'.
VMWare Tools are binaries for the guest OS, not for the host, so really, are host-independent. Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant actually installing the Tools binaries - in Windows at least, it's done through the VM menu, Install VMware Tools. Since out of box Workstation on Windows and Linux doesn't support macOS guests I'm wondering if that menu path works on those systems. Once you apply the patch to Player/Workstation, you get full MacOS support. When I tested with VMware Player 12 the normal method for installing VMware tools (via the menu) worked for MacOS just as it would for any other OS.
You have to tell Player to go download the VMware tools packages, if I remember correctly. But my notes from the testing don't mention any issues with tools installation. And once installed you get the normal auto-resolution-adjustment and other stuff you'd expect from fully integrated VMware tools experience. I've been tilting at this windmill for YEARS. I toyed with the idea of funding a small side-project to build this, but I couldn't make the economics work. The problem is lack of Quartz Extreme/Core Image accelerated video drivers. This impacts lots of apps that just won't run, or won't run well, and it completely sucks.
I don't understand why VMWware and/or Parallels aren't able to convince Apple to sign a specific video driver that would be compatible with MacOS running on official Apple hardware. It would open up the door to a lot of IT and Development use-cases for virtual machines of MacOS that are currently closed. I remember a couple of years ago a tech at vmfusion said it was 'coming' but my gut tells me that apple know if it exists in any form, it'll be hacked to run on a pc by teatime. It would sure be useful for all those 32bit apps tho, loosing quicktime pro is going to bite.
It would sure be useful for all those 32bit apps tho, loosing quicktime pro is going to bite Keeping a copy of Snow Leopard around in a VM can be useful for old apps. (raising hand) I do this.
I have an entirely illegitimate copy of Snow Leopard Server installed in a Parallels VM. I've used it maaaaaybe half a dozen times across two or three years just to crack open some old piece of software for some reason. It's a super useful tool when I actually need it, but that's obviously not that often. I've got some digital asset installers on old backups that were sold sealed up in powerpc wrappers, impossible to open otherwise.
I'm careful about not having to reinstall them, but it makes me unreasonably angsty. Is that a terrible idea?. Someone tell me how dumb an idea this is, please Sorry but it's not a dumb idea, even if like any hack it's some effort to set up (though can be a lot less effort to maintain). With PCIe passthrough macOS can run very well virtualized under a hypervisor or even just under Linux directly in something like QEMU (there are lots of people playing with this though some of it is more experimental then others, see for example and it's sub ).
Like Windows there is no paravirtualization really with macOS, so for these solutions you need a modern CPU including hardware virtualization/IOMMU support. In turn if you're getting an Intel setup that is not Xeon then you'd want to double check that (Intel likes to segregate functionality in odd ways sometimes), but if you're looking for something higher performance that'd be a given anyway.
There is a minimal performance hit (couple of percent) but macOS virtualized can still slaughter any Mac regardless because Apple just doesn't offer any really high powered hardware at all anymore. The extra complexity does at least also offer the same added advantages you'd get from a hypervisor setup anyway, including ease of LOM, hardware abstraction, trivial rollbacks if something goes wrong, etc. Also means your core system can still be fully supported like normal (depending on OEM).
So if you're up for it it's not like you just get better performance and some insulation from Apple forgetting about the Mac for random intervals. Whether it's worth it or not is subjective.
In terms of hardware just remember that using PCIe passthrough is exposing something to the OS natively so you still have to worry about basic compatibility same as if it was just installed directly on a cMP or something. An Nvidia GPU will still need the web drivers installed for example. And even many virtualized interfaces still need to have internal driver support in a way that macOS will understand.
It does at least free you from needing to worry about EFI flashing, and somethings like storage and network interfaces are of course virtualized easily. It definitely isn't turnkey yet, and some setups I'd like to try out remain works in progress (for a type-2 I'd prefer FreeBSD to Linux so I'd love to just be able to use bhyve and all the native ZFS goodness as well, but bhyve itself is simply much less mature then a lot of other solutions period). Perhaps after 9 years Apple will really make a good Mac Pro once again and make this a non-issue. But it's not something that's at all a bad idea to keep an eye on. Longer term in particular it's a really promising potential escape valve.
Just came across this topic and thought I'd chime in. I've been running macOS in a VM with a GTX 1060 passed through and it works great. I find this setup preferable to a bare metal Hackintosh as it's much easier to backup should something go wrong, although so far, I've had no issues. Been running it for two months now and it runs 24/7.
Here is a Geekbench I ran, I'm sure there's some performance overhead but it offers better performance than most of the 2018 MBPs, and is comparable to the i9 model even though I'm only running an i5 8600K: I would rather just use Linux 100% of the time but Gnome doesn't perform well on my setup, and I'm not a fan of the other DEs out there. So, I do most of my work on the macOS VM while running anything that's headless on the Linux host. I used the OSX-KVM guide on github to set it up, was pretty straightforward to setup for me - only took a few hours, but I have experience with GPU passthrough on Windows as well. The r/VFIO subreddit is a good resource for info.
Just came across this topic and thought I'd chime in. I've been running macOS in a VM with a GTX 1060 passed through and it works great.
I find this setup preferable to a bare metal Hackintosh as it's much easier to backup should something go wrong, although so far, I've had no issues. Been running it for two months now and it runs 24/7.
Here is a Geekbench I ran, I'm sure there's some performance overhead but it offers better performance than most of the 2018 MBPs, and is comparable to the i9 model even though I'm only running an i5 8600K: I would rather just use Linux 100% of the time but Gnome doesn't perform well on my setup, and I'm not a fan of the other DEs out there. So, I do most of my work on the macOS VM while running anything that's headless on the Linux host. I used the OSX-KVM guide on github to set it up, was pretty straightforward to setup for me - only took a few hours, but I have experience with GPU passthrough on Windows as well. The r/VFIO subreddit is a good resource for info. This is very encouraging - sounds like almost exactly what I want to do. Have you had any of the issues mentioned above i.e. Mac App Store not registering your video card as supported for some apps?
Overall, I’ve kind of resigned myself to using either OS X on my MacBook or iOS on my iPad for the non-programming work. I don’t do video or CAD, it’s really just data crunching, and that means nvidia GPUs, and that (at the moment) pretty much rules out Macs for fully supported options. If they take a while to update drivers after an OS X update, or they decide it’s not worth the effort to continue doing so, it’s not really worth the risk for me. But it’s good to know it’s possible to go the VM route if I want an OS X desktop after I get my Linux one.
This thread has me thinking. I was planning on buying an older (2009) Mac Pro and upgrading it (flash firmware, 2x6-core CPU, etc.). But I just built a new server. I've got a dual-6 core box with gobs of RAM running ESXi.
I may just try to install OS X and pass through the GPU as described. If I could get it working reliably, I'd just stick the server under the desk and call it a day - All home storage/etc. Is being served out by other VM's on the box, so I've got RAM and disk to spare, and I'd already have to look at hacking the 'real' Mac shortly just to keep current OS's running (would have to flash firmware just to get High Sierra on it, then have to upgrade GPU to get Mojave running. So why not try a VM?
Seems like if it works, the worst case might be needing to buy a solid GPU for it. Cheaper than buying a whole Mac Pro, and one less box in the office isn't a bad thing. @x3sphere - what are the specs on your host system if you don't mind my asking? Your benchmark is slightly better than the best I'm seeing on Geekbench with my CPUs natively (2xL5640's), but I also have a pair of X5670's that I was planning on using on the Mac Pro once I got it. That ought to put me in the range of your scores if running on bare hardware. Yes, I’ve been running a fully updated hackingtosh in a VM for a few months now. I would never use it as a primary machine, so it’s been very interesting to read about people doing exactly that.
Why I don’t use as a primary machine: - lack of iMessage support (can log into iCloud but not sign into iMessage, I have tried a few fixes linked to generating logic board serial numbers and checking that they are not already in use, but none have worked. ) This might be fixable. didn’t work with my old Apple keyboard. I just got a later model Apple keyboard that works fine with it, so this is fixed.
concern that an update will bring it crashing down in the middle of a big project. I tinker a lot with my main machine, a MacBook Air, and it’s been rock solid for years. What do I use the VM for? - iCloud local storage backup. I have 2 TB iCloud and the VM has a dedicated 4TB 2.5” Hdd and keeps a local copy of all my family’s iCloud storage, photos etc. (VM runs on 70 GB of SSD space) - TIme Machine local host for my family’s MacBooks. TM goes on half of the 4TB disk I mentioned above.
Might change to CCC at some point. iCloud local cache. Means MacBooks and idevices in my house can pull down updates, family photos and videos etc lightning fast. Unfortunately I haven’t been able to get this to work, probably for the same reason as the iMessage issue above.
Ars Macintoshian people, I have a question. At the moment, I have a login account for each one of my family members on the VM High Sierra and leave it logged into all of them all the time, and hope it keeps up with downloading their ICloud files.
This isn’t deal especially when OSX has to restart or the host has to restart. Is there a better way of doing it? Ps a tip on reducing power usage for the VM.
I discovered recently that it was taking 50% of the host’s CPU when idle. I tracked that down to OSX’s default screensaver coming on when idle, inside the VM. Several days of 50% CPU spent on rendering a bloody flickering rainbow screen saver. Just curious, are you passing the GPU through directly as described by other posters?
Wondering about just turning off the screen saver. FWIW, the 'Flurry' screen saver is fairly brutal on the CPU (relatively speaking). I set all of our machines to default to just the computer name text on the screen. Power usage starts becoming a factor when you start talking about a few hundred boxes.
I just set it to use a blank screen for screensaver. I don’t use the VM for graphical stuff as I already have a MacBook Air for my primary computer.
The host is a cheap itx win10 i3 gtx1050 box that sits behind the tv & the family use it for media / minecraft / homework (with their own login accounts.) I have the admin account & sometimes RDP in (thanks to the RDP unlock fix) from another room for VM tinkering or to stream windows Steam games to my MacBook. Never bothered to look into GPU passthrough but might do so in future. But I just built a new server.
I've got a dual-6 core box with gobs of RAM running ESXi. I may just try to install OS X and pass through the GPU as described. If you end up doing this, please report back with results. I have an Xserve 2,1, but I don't think I'll put it in service ever because it's a lot more power hungry than the Dell R710 I'm using for ESXi 6.7, while being substantially more underpowered (3 non-RAID drive bays vs 6 on a PERC 6/i, 8 single hreaded Harpertown cores vs 8 (and soon to be 12) Nehalem hyperthreaded cores, 16GB RAM vs 120GB). I'd love to be able to run Mac OS on my Dell, but I'm not sure I want to hack ESXi to do it. Though from my understanding, it's a very easy to perform hack. I'd still prefer to hear real-life feedback before going that route.
But I just built a new server. I've got a dual-6 core box with gobs of RAM running ESXi.
I may just try to install OS X and pass through the GPU as described. If you end up doing this, please report back with results. I have an Xserve 2,1, but I don't think I'll put it in service ever because it's a lot more power hungry than the Dell R710 I'm using for ESXi 6.7, while being substantially more underpowered (3 non-RAID drive bays vs 6 on a PERC 6/i, 8 single hreaded Harpertown cores vs 8 (and soon to be 12) Nehalem hyperthreaded cores, 16GB RAM vs 120GB). I'd love to be able to run Mac OS on my Dell, but I'm not sure I want to hack ESXi to do it. Though from my understanding, it's a very easy to perform hack.
I'd still prefer to hear real-life feedback before going that route. I’m planning on grabbing a second-hand R720 or similar to host some VMs and would be interested in having an OS X machine on there.
This thread has me thinking. I was planning on buying an older (2009) Mac Pro and upgrading it (flash firmware, 2x6-core CPU, etc.). But I just built a new server. I've got a dual-6 core box with gobs of RAM running ESXi. I may just try to install OS X and pass through the GPU as described.
If I could get it working reliably, I'd just stick the server under the desk and call it a day - All home storage/etc. Is being served out by other VM's on the box, so I've got RAM and disk to spare, and I'd already have to look at hacking the 'real' Mac shortly just to keep current OS's running (would have to flash firmware just to get High Sierra on it, then have to upgrade GPU to get Mojave running. So why not try a VM? Seems like if it works, the worst case might be needing to buy a solid GPU for it. Cheaper than buying a whole Mac Pro, and one less box in the office isn't a bad thing. @x3sphere - what are the specs on your host system if you don't mind my asking? Your benchmark is slightly better than the best I'm seeing on Geekbench with my CPUs natively (2xL5640's), but I also have a pair of X5670's that I was planning on using on the Mac Pro once I got it.
That ought to put me in the range of your scores if running on bare hardware. Amongst others I've got a 2010 MP tricked out reasonably hard with X5690's, 6 Gbps SATA (and 8x drive options in the 5.25' bay), USB 3.0 via PCIe etc. I experimented with running macOS under ESXi on a lab system with a decent GPU in pass through, and while I unfortunately didn't save my benches they beat my MP. I'm also pretty hesitant at this point about sinking anymore money into it, it's getting harder to keep going with modern features and while processor speed boosts have slowed down a lot Westmere-EP is pretty long in the tooth at this point, Sandy Bridge was a real boost. I've seen some people manage to get NVMe devices and flashed BIOS Nvidia cards and the like even working but the rabbit hole seems to be getting pretty deep and obscure at this point for some of this stuff. Granted at the same time I'm hesitant on pulling the trigger on my own new ESXi build too right now and moving to that entirely, though I've been speccing out stuff from places like Puget.
Intel will only really be getting into significant Spectre/Meltdown/L1TF/etc, though I guess Whiskey Lake has one, and even that is only the start of a long road. I haven't had a chance to try out whether virtualization means macOS will run well on AMD kit myself, though in principle that might be an option.
I also am curious about how Nvidia will act with Mojave and Turing. I can hold out with my current setup for a while longer so I probably will wait until we hear more about what Apple will actually do with the 2019 Mac Pro and see how some of this other stuff shakes out. Might try to pick up a few old rack mount systems in the mean time though to experiment with. A few years ago I saw a really interesting looking setup with ESXi and ZFS (via Nexenta in that case) all on one box, that used PCIe passthrough as well but for an LSI SAS JBOD card so that even in a VM ZFS could have raw access to the drives. ZFS FS could then be shared over a virtual switch back to other VMs, which might seem a little convoluted but a virtualized internal IP interface can be about as fast as hardware allows. I like the idea of that to a bit because while O3X is an awesome effort overall it just doesn't have that much dev time being sunk into it vs other platforms and is less polished, being able to keep its advantages regardless would be interesting.
I'd have to experiment with how HFS+ or APFS acted on top of it, but they can work quite well on ZVOLs at least. Some of the advantages of native management might become trickier but could be worth it for maintainability depending on Apple's long term path. FWIW, this is veering slightly OT, but the pass-through that you described is exactly what I've already been doing for a couple of years. ESX, running (in my case) OpenIndiana, with an LSI2008 card presenting 8 drives to OpenIndiana for ZFS, and then sharing that back out to other VM's. Box I'm building now I'm going to try to do the same, but running Xpenology instead of the ZFS setup. If I can get OS X running on the same physical host, passing through a GPU, I'll be able to feed it more RAM, storage, and network than I could do in a Mac Pro, and have one less box under the desk.
Present the storage as iSCSI from Xpenology to VMWare, then carve it up and present it to Mac OS as scsi or sata and we're golden. Having some issues with the mobo I was building this out of though, may run out of time to play with it for a few weeks if I don't get it resolved soon.
FWIW, this is veering slightly OT, but the pass-through that you described is exactly what I've already been doing for a couple of years. ESX, running (in my case) OpenIndiana, with an LSI2008 card presenting 8 drives to OpenIndiana for ZFS, and then sharing that back out to other VM's. Box I'm building now I'm going to try to do the same, but running Xpenology instead of the ZFS setup. If I can get OS X running on the same physical host, passing through a GPU, I'll be able to feed it more RAM, storage, and network than I could do in a Mac Pro, and have one less box under the desk. Present the storage as iSCSI from Xpenology to VMWare, then carve it up and present it to Mac OS as scsi or sata and we're golden. Having some issues with the mobo I was building this out of though, may run out of time to play with it for a few weeks if I don't get it resolved soon.
Will definitely be interested to hear about your experiences and tests whenever you can get around to it. Is there any particular reason you went with OpenIndiana vs something like OmniOS or FreeBSD? Was it just familiarity and a basic GUI on illumos? I can see not bothering with NexentaStor though since the CE has a really low 10TB limit.
Hardware-wise I'm fortunate enough to have a long term location for my personal office right now and a full rack plus some long range extension kit to my desk I got cheap and have experimented with so I'm free of having to worry about noise issues and the like, so I'm inclined to just go with a 3U or 4U and be done with it. Some box consolidation would still be good though, and I wouldn't mind doing away with my DVI KVM either at some point since I'm concerned about it's longevity.
A setup like that or you've been running is extremely attractive at this point in a lot of ways with where I'm at now if macOS runs even reasonably well on it. Perhaps even now I'm still kind of carrying a torch for the Mac Pro though, in principle at least Apple could still do some cool tech there if they wanted even though I suspect they will not. FWIW, went with OpenIndiana after messing with FreeNAS and others for a bit - think it was just the last thing I 'experimented' with at the time, but this was all quite a few years back (my original zVol was made of 750gb drives which were huge, if you need a reference I was planning on building this server and then upgrading a 2009 Mac Pro, but if this build works the way I want, I think it might kill two birds with one stone. I've already designed it to be fairly quiet - low power Xeons, with quiet fans, loudest thing when it is running is all of the drives and they're not bad. I think any noise from it will be offset in the WAF by the ability to get the rack out of the office and free up some space. I don't need the 'Mac' VM to be 100% as good as a physical box, I just need it to work well enough for the kids to use for homework, and for me to do some photo editing on the big screen, and HOPEFULLY well enough to spin up a few VM's for testing things occasionally (I'm a Mac sys admin by day, often easier to test some of my 'random thoughts' at home than in our somewhat locked down environment at work). FWIW, went with OpenIndiana after messing with FreeNAS and others for a bit - think it was just the last thing I 'experimented' with at the time, but this was all quite a few years back (my original zVol was made of 750gb drives which were huge, if you need a reference Hah, fair enough, and might as well stick with what you're familiar with anyway at this point.
OpenIndiana is built right on illumos anyway so it's not going to lag as far as OpenZFS goes, and seems to have healthy development. I might experiment a bit with FreeBSD and OmniOS anyway since I'm already used to the former and for the latter the minimalist focus and stability makes sense, but I'll have to research how things have gone with the CE maintenance in the last year or so since OmniTI pulled out of its primary position. Performance would be kind of interesting as well and easy to try out early on before I settle in. I was planning on building this server and then upgrading a 2009 Mac Pro, but if this build works the way I want, I think it might kill two birds with one stone.
As someone with something more tricked out already then what you're planning I'd definitely see if your build works for you first before diving into a 4,1. Even for the 5,1s the writing is very much on the wall at this point, even in terms of small things like all the elegant storage hack additions that used to be available but have now dried up. I'll end with a good 3-4 years out of it and I needed to the breathing room, but I'd be more hesitant to embark on it again today. They also don't look that cheap for 8 year old systems that often need to have more money pumped in on top (memory/storage, maybe GPU) frankly. Virtualization in principle should take care of some of the edge issues of upgrading old systems, like EFI boot screen being harder/more expensive to get working. I think any noise from it will be offset in the WAF by the ability to get the rack out of the office and free up some space.
![Virtualbox Virtualbox](/uploads/1/2/5/3/125358198/339922181.jpg)
FWIW, one thing I've been able to find used that has been really useful in that role is old Gefen gear that let's you pipe DVI or DisplayPort over standard fiber optic cable. DP stuff can be harder to get cheap since it's newer, but the DVI kit in particular can often be found quite cheap at this point if you hunt around, and that means I can have my desk and work space with screens, keyboard etc a good 70 someodd feet (vertical and horizontal) away from where my systems and everything else lives. Total isolation and I don't even have to think about noise when I buy something, can use all the loud tiny fans or anything else I want so long as it disperses heat (and the rack room can have its own cooling and filtering of course for a small volume of space). Been rock solid. Totally situational of course, lots of people aren't going to have the living space with a closet or climate controlled basement area or whatever to spare, but it's a interesting tradeoff if it works. Means paying some more money for the adapters and a bit more for cable, but money and stress can be saved in turn if system noise is effectively eliminated as a necessary consideration.
It's kind of cool too, almost like way back with the last thinclient I used in the 90s I think it was, just screens and IO boxes and such at my desk and no computer in sight, all quiet, even with full power at its disposal. I don't need the 'Mac' VM to be 100% as good as a physical box, I just need it to work well enough for the kids to use for homework, and for me to do some photo editing on the big screen, and HOPEFULLY well enough to spin up a few VM's for testing things occasionally (I'm a Mac sys admin by day, often easier to test some of my 'random thoughts' at home than in our somewhat locked down environment at work). Any VM given a hardware GPU (even the cheapest bargain basement one) should blow away Mac guest performance under macOS right? IME performance there stinks given that I don't think any of the Mac native VMs support 3D accel, and macOS is so dependent on it at this point for basic UI. Even turning off Beamsync doesn't seem to help much under 10.11/10.12/10.13.