Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple's Mac OS X 10.5.3 Has Landed

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the little-nudges dept.

OS X 161

jaymus of dawning writes with word that, as promised, "Apple has just released the latest major revision of OS X. The update yields improvements to tons of system components and applications including the Software Update system, Address Book, AirPort, Automater, iCal, iChat, Mail, Parental Controls, Spaces, Time Machine and VoiceOver. This release contains 200 bug fixes from 10.5.2. See Apple's release page for all the delicious details."

cancel ×

161 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

New Features (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23574899)

They finally added a video tutorial showing how to properly give a fellow Mac fanboi a blowjob. This is a huge leap forward in the development of the Mac UI experience.

Re:New Features (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23578375)

funny thing is, Mac fanboys tend to be able to get blowjobs pretty easily (applicable categories: young, rich, artist, gay, all of the above), but you're still looking for tutorials on how to deliver them.

It's 9D34 (4, Informative)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23574909)

Just like yesterday's test build.

Re:It's 9D34 (5, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576089)

Updating for those of us at work:

I'm still at work but I'd like to come home to a freshly updated system, you can do system updates over SSH.

>sudo softwareupdate -i -a
Software Update Tool
Copyright 2002-2007 Apple

Downloading Mac OS X Update 0.
---
Then it'll install and you can do a
> sudo shutdown -r now

Hurray for BSD underpinnings.

Re:It's 9D34 (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23579959)

That won't work because the 10.5.3 update installs a new PAM that throws sudo off prior to rebooting, so the last step you mentioned won't run. So what you have to do instead is this:

sudo -s
softwareupdate -i -a
shutdown -r now

Re:It's 9D34 (1)

yanos (633109) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576563)

Is the infamous airport disconnection issue [google.ca] finally been fixed?

Re:It's 9D34 (1)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578599)

I never had problems before, however after 10.5.3 I initially could not get an IP from my AP. Another reboot fixed it though. Maybe the update cleans/breaks something, and that break, when detected, gets cleaned on reboot? Seems like they're forcing all airport settings to reset in one way or other.

Now, like all updates (5, Insightful)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23574959)

Now, like all updates, I'll wait a week to make sure there are no serious problems. (For those of you still in disbelief, yes, Mac systems do have their share of problems. Like pesky system updates that may or may not allow you to boot into your OS. I forget which revision that was.)

Re:Now, like all updates (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23575023)

or it might have ******* in the ***** applications that some of us are not allowed to talk about due to nda!

Re:Now, like all updates (2, Interesting)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575329)

pesky system updates that may or may not allow you to boot into your OS

You know, I've had my share of problems with Macs over the years but even though I've heard lots of horror stories, no system update has ever hosed my computer. I've used some pretty unusual combinations of Apple/third party hardware, too, like a Centris 650 (68040 chip) with a PPC upgrade card and an ancient Toby Frame Buffer video card out of a Mac II installed.

Re:Now, like all updates (4, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575679)

Hang around in #MacOSX on Freenode for the next week, I guarantee you will see hosed systems :) (And not just from random people popping in, regulars will be hit as well). Happens every release.

Re:Now, like all updates (2, Insightful)

Lars T. (470328) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578527)

Hang around in #MacOSX on Freenode for the next week, I guarantee you will see hosed systems :) (And not just from random people popping in, regulars will be hit as well). Happens every release.
Yeah, and like every release, many of the problems will have nothing to do with the update.

Re:Now, like all updates (0, Offtopic)

Megane (129182) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575703)

One update, I think it was 10.2.9, broke Classic. After re-installing and re-updating the OS, I somehow guessed correctly that it was a problem with the combo updater. So I downloaded the previous version's combo update, and the current non-combo update. Another system re-install and the two updates later, and Classic was working again.

Re:Now, like all updates (3, Informative)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575849)

Hate to be pedantic, but there was no 10.2.9. The 10.2 series stopped at 10.2.8.

Re:Now, like all updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23577585)

WTF is this a reply to?

Re:Now, like all updates (1)

jhesse (138516) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578741)

10.2.7 and 10.2.9 were for G5 machines, which were released a couple of months before 10.3 was ready.

Re:Now, like all updates (1)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23579191)

You're correct about 10.2.7, and G5 machines *did* have a special 10.2.8, but there was never a 10.2.9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_10.2 [wikipedia.org]

OMG Leoptard is TEH AWESUM!!11! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23575691)

What you say? Teh Leoptard is teh awesum, it have know bugs and is teh more secure, kuz teh windoze isnt lul!!1!

Dere no Blew Screan, kuz teh Appel sez der not be. It jus teh M$ FUD, cuz dey a munopluly, an Stev Ballzmer is teh bald, lulz! An ppl trew eggz at him, lulz!

Iff I had Mac, I sure use teh Leoptard, cuz it teh awesum, wit no bugz or nuttin. Not evn needin teh service pak, cuz dat just for teh windoze who is teh suck, lulz!

Re:Now, like all updates (1)

raddan (519638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575911)

I forget which revision that was.
10.5.2. You have a short memory! :^)

Re:Now, like all updates (1)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576059)

Actually 10.5.2 did not do that to me. I've never had this issue. It was a friend running 10.4 when I was still on 10.3, I believe.

Re:Now, like all updates (3, Interesting)

raddan (519638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576195)

10.5.2 made my machine unbootable. Fortunately, I got in the habit of making backups before applying updates when the same thing happened to me sometime in the 10.4 era (10.4.8? I can't remember).

Well two of us cannot install it. (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577527)

My friend and I are both on white iMacs, use different isps, and neither can install the upgrade, a package error is encountered.

I haven't checked the official site but I doubt we are alone in this issue.

While I haven't had an update completely scramble my setup its not a big fear if you keep to a regular schedule of backups, including immediate ones prior to trying to upgrade.

freakin scary, that was (5, Informative)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575009)

During install, my MBP restarted an additional time or two. I thought for a minute there that I was gonna have to restore from a week old super dupe. Alas, on the third startup, it actually started.

Re:freakin scary, that was (4, Informative)

BarryJacobsen (526926) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575079)

During install, my MBP restarted an additional time or two. I thought for a minute there that I was gonna have to restore from a week old super dupe. Alas, on the third startup, it actually started.
Well, the update was 420mb; it's understandable that you'd need to wait a little for the smoke to clear :P

Kidding aside, this is semi-common with OS X updates. Usually if it doesn't require an extra reboot, the reboot it does do takes a few extra minutes. I'm guessing that since this update is

Re:freakin scary, that was (2, Informative)

jaredmauch (633928) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575167)

I have 3 macs two got the 198M update one got the 420M. Odd, they're all intel and I don't immediately know why the variance.

The dual-reboot thing has gotten to be more common than in the past, the first time it happened i freaked out thinking the box ate itself. Just worrying when it happens for the first time. And a reminder to do a backup before any upgrades :).

Re:freakin scary, that was (2, Informative)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575491)

Interesting, I had a similar experience. Moreover, the machine that got the 200M update took *forever* to install, but the 420M update machine went blazing quick.

By any chance, are your two 198M macs running with ATi Graphics?

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

JohnnyGTO (102952) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575943)

Perhaps the 200mb install was mostly patches and the 420 was outright file replacements?

Re:freakin scary, that was (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23578207)

yes, my update is 198 meg and I am running ATI Graphics.

Re:freakin scary, that was (3, Informative)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578669)

Oof I hate to reply to myself, but so far my experience has been that (1) ATi machines get the smaller update and (2) said machines seem to take an extremely long time to install.

MacBook (Intel graphics) got the 400M update, and sped right through it. iMac (ATi) got the 200M, and seemed to die on "Running Installer Script".

Anybody got an nVidia Mac to report in here? Anybody else seeing the same thing?

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

xrayspx (13127) | more than 6 years ago | (#23579747)

I have a first gen. MacBook (Intel Graphics), and I got the 198MB update. Roll of the dice?

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23580693)

I should have specified. Mine is late 2007 MacBook (GMA X3100). FWIW, I noted more OpenGL capabilities after the 10.5.3 update. I think, for the X3100, the 10.5.3 update brought it to the same level as their fancy DirectX 10 Vista driver.

As for GMA950 (iirc, that's in first gen MacBoook) I can't really say.

Also, since yours is first-gen, it's 32-bit Intel; maybe a 32 versus 64-bit problem?

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

xrayspx (13127) | more than 6 years ago | (#23581817)

My quad core Pro got a 200MB update too. I'd almost put it down to "some update servers are serving gzipped files and some aren't, or are compressing on the fly (mod_gzip or somesuch)". You could watch it go across the wire, or update the same machine a bunch of times, but hey, I got my updates, ultimately, I don't think there's a broken patch or anything here.

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

Malekin (1079147) | more than 6 years ago | (#23580053)

12" PowerBook G4 (nVidia GeForce FX Go5200) and I got the 420MB, along with more than one restart.

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

milkman_matt (593465) | more than 6 years ago | (#23580365)

Same here, Haven't restarted yet though. Hoping we can play DVDs again now...

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

artifex2004 (766107) | more than 6 years ago | (#23581743)

My G4 Mini (ATI, of course) got the 200 meg update (was it that big?), but the reboot time was faster than when it moved from 10.5.1 to 10.5.2.

Re:freakin scary, that was (2, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575215)

More than one reboot is not uncommon in my experience with previous major updates. Although, I don't remember them occurring before I switched to Intel Macs excluding obvious things like firmware updates.

Re:freakin scary, that was (4, Insightful)

dal20402 (895630) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575995)

The first dual reboot I remember was 10.4.3 on a PowerMac G5.

Both multiple reboots and extra-long initial boot times are very common after 10.x.x updates. Apple should do a better job of publicizing their existence. After every single one I see a bunch of posts like "OMG! My computer took three minutes to boot! This new OS is t3h sukc!"

(Not that I ever understood the obsession with boot time, either. But it's amazing how many people shut down the machine every single time they stop using it.)

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576965)

Also, Spotlight will sometimes rebuild its index of a drive after a new update, possibly leading to performance misperceptions.

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23579119)

That's exactly why I always hit CMD+V when rebooting from an update... they'll generally print to stdout what's really going on.

Re:freakin scary, that was (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23580943)

Some people pay their electric bills and or have issues with sleep on their systems.

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

Niten (201835) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575521)

If that scared you, you should have seen what it did to my old iBook G4 ;)

Re:freakin scary, that was (1)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577243)

Soo, it's turning out that Apple is becoming more like Microsoft? Or at least OSX is becoming more like Windows?

Re:freakin scary, that was (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23578763)

No, our updates still improve performance.

Luke (0, Offtopic)

Joseph1337 (1146047) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575231)

Luke: "I sense a distortion in the force is coming..."

No Server version yet (5, Informative)

audunr (906697) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575257)

10.5.2 Server has a show-stopper bug with AFP/Open Directory which gradually makes authentication impossible. Gradually, you get no file access, no VNC, no SSH and in the end you cannot log on locally with an attached screen and keyboard. The issue has been heavily discussed at http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1251475&tstart=0 [apple.com]

Re:No Server version yet (3, Informative)

SoylentRed (1246018) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577449)

This is what has kept us from 10.5... we upgraded from 10.4.x about 2-3 months after Leopard launched.

We ran into issue after issue of this exact same bug. We even ran into this in our Apple Training - was great watching the trainer think nothing was "officially" wrong. Seems for us that it was when we did screen sharing (during training) just 1 computer connecting to the server would cause the crash.

Now - we have purchased servers that only support 10.5 - and we haven't had a SINGLE issue with AFP crashing - it isn't hosting home folders for OD - but it was setup as a file share for administering tests - we ran for 2 months of testing without a hick-up.

Either way - that was a long-winded reply to us really just crossing our fingers 10.5.3 fixes the AFP - we like a lot of the new features - but having to reset the servers 2-5 times a day due to AFP crashes is completely unacceptable.

Re:No Server version yet (1)

TheVoice900 (467327) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578931)

We ran in to the same problem. We had to roll back our file server to 10.4

couldn't wait for this one to be vetted. (1, Troll)

soupdevil (587476) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575333)

I've had serious crashes in 10.5.2 with CoreAudio and Time Capsule, and many small annoyances with iChat, window behavior, Spaces, etc. Hopefully this fixes the bulk of them, at least the serious ones. So far, so good.

Service Pack 3 (-1, Flamebait)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575367)

So, we've got another service pack for the infallable mac osx.

I'm hardly stating the popular opinion, but vista only has 1 service pack so far... and osx has 3 - and the hardware to run osx is much more expensive, but virtually the same. (then again, at least it is OSX-ready)

Re:Service Pack 3 (5, Insightful)

SageinaRage (966293) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575393)

You prefer your bugs to go UN-fixed?

Re:Service Pack 3 (3, Interesting)

ProfessionalCookie (673314) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576881)

I prefer not to have to install little patches that have many dependencies on other patches and require restarts individually when I have a fresh Windows install.

It would be nice if Microsoft bundled their updates quarterly and let you download one blob and then select the updates to install in one shot.

SP3 was in the oven for a long time and I'm so glad it's here now, but getting an SP2 or earlier system up to date was a huge pain in March.

Quarterly updates (delta and combo version) are helpful. They would reduce my work building slipstream disks by a lot.

You don't miss bug fixes because you just do quarterly+other updates as they come- but for new installs combo updates are wonderful.

Re:Service Pack 3 (5, Insightful)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575605)

I'm hardly stating the popular opinion, but vista only has 1 service pack so far... and osx has 3 - and the hardware to run osx is much more expensive, but virtually the same. (then again, at least it is OSX-ready)
Actually, I don't know what it is you're trying to state. Yes, Vista only has 1 Service Pack out. This is the third revision for OS X. These revisions acknowledge bugs or imperfections with the system (in my philosophical opinion, nothing created by a human [a flawed being] can be infallable) and tries to improve the imperfections and fix the bugs.

Why would this be a problem? I'd rather my OS manufacturer pay attention and regularly release updates rather than stockpile them for a rainy day (never used XP at home, so I'm not sure how MS does the Windows SPs).

If you're going to judge an OS by the number of service packs released, it can go both ways. "Oh, this one only has one service pack, it must be really stable." -- "Oh, this one only has one service pack, this other company must pay closer attention to bug reports".

Re:Service Pack 3 (1)

twotommylong (794494) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576483)

the other factor on OS X releases is that Apple is constantly releasing new integration features and hardware (MBA, Iphone, Time Machine, New graphics drivers for new MPBs, etc), that it wants OS X to be optimized to work with. I'm not surprised that with the near advent of Iphone 2, there needed to be some interface work done to support the new system... (One of note that seemed to commented on MacRumors.com is a GoogleSync Library file.)

It's this philosophy (Mac OS X is the preferred integration point for the entire Apple Product Line) that promotes more frequent releases.

I don't think Microsoft follows the same philosophy, hence every product (MS or 3rd Party) typically comes with a CD to upload a driver that may or may not have been consistently tested (both as a user experience and purely technical integration) against Windows. Also, given the fact that Windows has hundreds of key components that 3rd parties (read: graphics drivers, disk drives, network controller etc) need to support against Windows, issuing Service Pack level upgrades more frequently would only lower the quality of the 'microsoft experience.' So For microsoft, less equals better user experience.

Re:Service Pack 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23577833)

Microsoft updates windows monthly or when a major security issue occurs. Service packs are to update installation disks/directories with latest security updates or add features. Service packs are mainly an IT tool so you don't have to download 50 billion updates after a clean install. That's why they are called "service" packs.
There has only been 1 update with clean installs of WinXP SP3 for the month of may for example. If you install stuff like WMP11 and IE7. There are 3 extra updates but are unrelated to SP3. Makes things a heck of a lot smoother for IT guys.

Re:Service Pack 3 (1)

Manuscript Replica (307437) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576621)

I guess the question is, do you really think that those numbers are an accurate metric of stability, or reliability, or quality in general?

installing (0)

marvelouspatric (1112793) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575419)

hmm... 400+ mb? mine is only 192....
i'm on a macbook pro 1.8ghz core duo. i wonder why mine is smaller.
wonder what my powermac's upgrade size will be.

Re:installing (1)

marvelouspatric (1112793) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576167)

i've finished my install and everything appears to be working. nothing seems any different than before, but i'm sure everything is much better than it was. ;-)

Re:installing (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576811)

The large download is the Combo update. If you used Software Update, you've got the smaller Delta (10.5.2->10.5.3) version.

Re:installing (2, Informative)

dal20402 (895630) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577713)

Nope. I got the 420 MB version through Software Update on both of my MBPs (one 2.16GHz Core Duo, one 2.4GHz Penryn).

Retardedness (0)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575553)

I'm still waiting for a fix for the stupid Dock folder problem [arstechnica.com] . Yes, I know there's a workaround (you can put a file or an alias or a folder or something inside the folder, name it something that will be first in an alphabetical sort, and paste a reasonable icon onto that). But I want Apple to recognize how completely retarded this idea was from the beginning, and actually FIX it, the way they fixed the menubar transparency issue [furbo.org] first by reducing the transparency [sulciphur.com] before release, then eventually adding an option to disable it altogether.

Seriously, who thought either of these would be a good idea? I know what they were thinking with the menubar, they were thinking "Windows Vista has lots of transparency, we don't want to look boring by comparison!" Come on Apple, I know you can make usability a priority without sacrificing aesthetics when you put your collective mind to it. Focusing entirely on aesthetics at the expense of usability really damages your image.

Re:Retardedness (4, Informative)

Poltras (680608) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575619)

You know they actually fixed the dock folder problem, right? If you right click and check "Display as Folder", it shows as the icon of the folder itself. You can then choose the icon of the folder itself to fit your needs. It's been there since at least 10.5.2.

Re:Retardedness (1)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575885)

Correct. It was changed in 10.5.2 specifically.

Re:Retardedness (4, Funny)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575955)

If you right click ...
Hey, now! Shhh! Don't let them know we've been able to do that.

Re:Retardedness (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575969)

Ooh, my bad! Thanks, it looks like that's exactly what I was looking for. I must have missed hearing about this when the 10.5.2 update came out. (I haven't upgraded to Leopard yet, that's why I hadn't seen the option for myself).

Re:Retardedness Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23578851)

If you hadn't upgraded to Leopard yet, then what the good goddamn were you complaining about

Re:Retardedness Indeed (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578905)

That was one of the reasons I hadn't upgraded yet. I'm insulted that Apple could be so stupid.

Re:Retardedness Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23578955)

Not as stupid as the person who kept himself from upgrading over a single instance of GUI that was changed months ago

Re:Retardedness Indeed (2, Insightful)

brad-x (566807) | more than 6 years ago | (#23580067)

Hahah.

Re:Retardedness (1)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576073)

It was enhanced yes, but even after you reconfigure the icon, it still takes two clicks to open the folder. That's still the opposite of an improvement over Tigers dock. Stacks was a horrid idea.

Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (3, Informative)

neoform (551705) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575595)

Am I just not seeing why this would be hard?

I really want to be able to backup to a remote drive. Perhaps allowing me to save to a disk image?

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (5, Informative)

raddan (519638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575965)

Just use SuperDuper! [shirt-pocket.com] . Their Smart Update feature is fast enough that taking the 15 minutes out of your day to do a backup is relatively painless.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23576023)

The app you want is called CCC and is available at www.bombich.com. It works wonders, can clone discs or create images that can be burned. Has built in ASR support as well. Good stuff.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (5, Informative)

GalionTheElf (515869) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576409)

If you mean remote as in a share on your network, you can enable using Time Machine on SMB & NFS shares by entering "defaults write com.apple.systempreferences TMShowUnsupportedNetworkVolumes 1" in a console.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (1)

freedumb2000 (966222) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576689)

Bad idea. TimeMachine cannot tell when the remotw drive is full and will act unexpectedly putting your backed-up data in danger.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (3, Informative)

willy_me (212994) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576861)

You can create a custom sparse disk image that has a maximum size limit - then TimeMachine will know. There are instructions posted on macosxhints.com [macosxhints.com] .

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23576549)

I think the general reason why it hasn't been generally offered or encouraged (since early 10.5 beta days, anyway) is that it's not always possible to ensure that your data is on the drive after a backup. I might be wrong here, but this is my guess.

The basic problem is that a local disk you can tell to write all pending data to disk. When that has happened, Time Machine knows that the backup is complete and safe. If you have an AFP server, this can be done remotely. I'm guessing you want to do it to a USB-connected drive on an Airport base station. In that case, there are at least two problems - first, it may not be possible to tell the Airport to tell the USB drive to flush its cache; and second, apparently many USB drives ignore the request anyway.

Bottom line, it seems that (at least for now), there's no easy solution. You can either get hardware that supports this for remote operations (another computer or a Time Capsule), back up locally, or modify your system to allow remote backups (despite the danger of it not being removed in future OS versions, or the danger of data loss in your backup).

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576793)

Time Machine uses Unix/HFS filesystem-only features such as "hard links" to achieve its time-travel tricks and these features don't work (or don't work reliably) via networks.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577095)

My Mac is backing up to a remote drive right now. It's a SATA drive in a 3rd party enclosure hooked up to an Airport. This is supposedly "unsupported" but I set it up through the GUI. No command line "hacks" required.

Works great. I'm using GigE, not wireless.

-Peter

Supported from the start (4, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577929)

Actually ever since the release of Leopard you could use Time Machine on a network drive, as long as it was shared by another Mac.

You mean a standalone network drive, and that need is supported by Time Capsule.

Or you could create the TM volume on a disk attached to your local system, then put it up on a network shared device (like attached to an Airport).

Or you could use any number of workarounds to allow you to use the remote system as a TM drive...

It's not like there are not options, some of them even Apple supported, and many of them working ever since TM was out.

What new drivers are in there for hardware that ap (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575827)

What new drivers are in there for hardware that apple has not came out with yet?

how long be for psystar comes out with own update (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575863)

how long be for psystar comes out with own update for 10.5.3?

Re:how long be for psystar comes out with own upda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23576539)

Psystar does not "come out with their own update." They leech off the efforts of the OSx86 community for profit.

Re:how long be for psystar comes out with own upda (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576863)

Shortly after Kalyway [insanelymac.com] finishes it, I expect.

Jumped right in and did the update... (1)

SmoothTom (455688) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575923)

Usually I wait AT LEAST a week to see what sort of problems folks have before considering going for a big update, but this time I decided that I'd just go ahead and give it a shot on my lappy (2.2G Macbook).

It was a 420MB monster for this machine, and took a considerable time and a couple of auto-starts, but it's up, it's running, I don't have any new problems (yet?), and a couple of small peeves with 10.5.2 appear to have gone away.

Time will tell, but so far I'm either lucky or actually came through unscathed.

(As to number of updates, I'd rather have Apple's way of doing it over Microsoft's - I don't understand waiting for long periods until you get a large enough mass of updates to make a giant "Service Pack" for the system. Quicker, more directed upgrades at reasonable intervals suit me fine.)

--Tomas

Re:Jumped right in and did the update... (1)

kelnos (564113) | more than 6 years ago | (#23581203)

(As to number of updates, I'd rather have Apple's way of doing it over Microsoft's - I don't understand waiting for long periods until you get a large enough mass of updates to make a giant "Service Pack" for the system. Quicker, more directed upgrades at reasonable intervals suit me fine.)
I thought MS released patches once a month [wikipedia.org] ...

poor Balmer (-1, Flamebait)

Tom (822) | more than 6 years ago | (#23575951)

Now he has to send his crew back to the drawing board for windows 7. There's new features to copy and then fuck up.

WWDC (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 6 years ago | (#23576173)

Since the timing is only 2 weeks away from WWDC, I think this is going to be used as filler material for the Keynote. "We just released 10.5.3 and it, like Leopard, have been doing phenomenally well......". Timing seems a bit too convenient. Yes, I know they've been working on this for several months. Still.

Opposite (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577953)

I think they released this early exactly so they would not have to talk about it, but leave room for other more important things...

Re:WWDC (2, Insightful)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578419)

I don't recall His Steveness ever spending much time talking about double point updates to OS X. He certainly doesn't talk about "how well it's doing."

The keynote is almost certainly going to be dominated by iPhone. I'm sure he'll also mention the old standards, that iTunes is the biggest US retailer of music and that Mac sales have continued to grow faster than the industry average.

Re:WWDC (2, Insightful)

HumanEmulator (1062440) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578645)

Since the timing is only 2 weeks away from WWDC, I think this is going to be used as filler material for the Keynote. "We just released 10.5.3 and it, like Leopard, have been doing phenomenally well......". Timing seems a bit too convenient. Yes, I know they've been working on this for several months. Still.

I agree about the timing, but I disagree about it being filler. I'm guessing that there are features built into the new OS that are required by the presumed new iPhone to be announced. Google syncing being one of the obvious ones. By releasing the update now, people won't need to do 200 and 400MB downloads when the phone is released.

One thing that supports this theory is the new iPhone SDK Beta released today requires 10.5.3 to install. I don't think this is arbitrary. The iPhone SDK has done a lot to destabilize my system and I suspect it needed OS support and fixes to work out the kinks.

It could also be bandwidth planning. After all regardless of a new phone, the iPhone App Store is coming in June and that's going to bring the inevitable iTunes update that will be downloaded by millions of people =P

If the installer fails, run it again! (1)

Jay L (74152) | more than 6 years ago | (#23577489)

I encountered an error installing 10.5.3; downloading the Combo Update and running it again fixed the problem. I had moved some of Apple's software from /Applications to /Applications/Apple; the installer tries to guess where you've moved it, but apparently the 10.5.2 installer guesses wrong. My /var/log/install.log read:

May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: Diverting "./Applications/iSync.
app/Contents/Resources" to "/System/Library/Frameworks/Ruby.framework/Versions/1
.8/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/actionpack-1.13.6/rdoc/files/lib/action_controller/
vendor/html-scanner/html/version_rb.html/Contents/Resources"
May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: BomFileError 20: Not a directory
- /System/Library/Frameworks/Ruby.framework/Versions/1.8/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/d
oc/actionpack-1.13.6/rdoc/files/lib/action_controller/vendor/html-scanner/html/v
ersion_rb.html/Contents/Resources
May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: 20418 of 20418 files written in
21.95 seconds.
May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: 1261696 kilobytes installed at 5
6.1 MB/s.
May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: Error extracting archive.
May 28 15:14:57 macpro payloadExtractor[5981]: pkgExtractor exited with error 1
while processing package '/Library/Updates/Mac OS X Update/Packages/MacOSXUpd10.
5.3.pkg'
May 28 15:14:57 macpro /System/Library/CoreServices/Software Update.app/Contents
/MacOS/Software Update[5947]: Install failed: The Installer could not install so
me files in "/". Contact the software manufacturer for assistance.
It looks like it realized I'd moved iSync, but it somehow thought I'd moved it deep into the Rails gem in Ruby. Oops.

You can download the 10.5.3 combo installer here [apple.com] . Running again worked fine, so I'm guessing they fixed the bug in 10.5.3; you just need 10.5.3 to run the fixed pkgExtractor!

 

Address Book syncs with Gmail (1)

Christopher Rogers (873720) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578237)

Amongst all the bug fixes, they added a new feature to the Address Book that lets you sync your contacts with Gmail now.

http://googlemac.blogspot.com/2008/05/mac-os-x-1053-sync-google-contacts.html [blogspot.com]

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578667)

...if you have an iphone. If you don't, you can't. Bastards.

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail (1)

Christopher Rogers (873720) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578703)

I just realized that too. That sucks (for people who don't have an iPhone anyway).

Careful Hackintoshes with NVInject... (1)

hyperz69 (1226464) | more than 6 years ago | (#23578335)

This update when applied correctly *see favorite hackintosh site for details* kills OpenGL/CI/QE if you using NVInject. EFI String Folks seem to be ok.

This pretty much fixes Spaces (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23579033)

Leopard's Spaces had been criticized for making it hard to organize virtual desktops by task rather than by application (for example at http://blogs.sun.com/bblfish/entry/why_apple_spaces_is_broken [sun.com] and http://www.dribin.org/dave/blog/archives/2007/11/13/spaces/ [dribin.org] ).

10.5.3 seems to address most of these criticisms with two small changes: Command-Tab now tries to find application windows in the current space before switching spaces, and there's a new preference to not switch spaces at all when switching applications.

This makes a big different in the usability of Spaces!

Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces (1)

Tim_UWA (1015591) | more than 6 years ago | (#23581339)

I still have a minor grievance. Suppose you havea Safari window open on space 1. Then you change to space 2, which has no Safari windows open. If you want to open a Safari window in this space, you need to right-click on the Dock icon and hit "New Window". I would much prefer it if there are no windows open in the current space but the application is running, Command+Tab gives the app focus but not any windows (same as if there are no windows open and you C+T to it). That way you can open a new window without moving your hands off the keyboard.

Install stalls after "sleep" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23581389)

Am i the only one who has this? My macbook pro is set to sleep after some 10 mins. I started the update and went somewhere.(download was done, was in the "Update in progres. System will restart after update" dialog) When I was back, my system had already "slept".I woke it up and for the next 30 mins the progress bar would not move. i "power button" rebooted it and had to use the standalone installer (and this took just 20 mins).

Mac Book Pro stuck-in-sleep bug fixed? (1)

kevinmarchibald (1190871) | more than 6 years ago | (#23581727)

Does the update include a fix for the Mac Book Pro stuck-in-sleep bug? I bought my wife a MBP for Xmas, and every few weeks she complains that the laptop doesn't wake up when she opens the screen.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>