Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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 OS X 10.5.6 Update Breaks Some MacBook Pros

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the somebody-just-got-fired dept.

OS X 313

Newscloud writes "As PC Mag reported last week, Apple OS X 10.5.6 can break some MacBook Pros leaving some users (like me) with a dead backlit black screen after the Apple logo appears. While I initially thought I had a hardware failure, it turns out that there is a fix as long as you have an external display, keyboard and mouse. The problem only appears on the second restart, so if you sleep your MacBook a lot as I do, you might not realize the problem is related to the OS update you did the week before. The problem was related to older, incompatible firmware that Software Update wasn't flagging before the upgrade. This definitely gives weight to the argument for waiting a bit to run software upgrades."

cancel ×

313 comments

More bricked computers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241755)

Yet another FW update that bricks machines.

Re:More bricked computers (4, Insightful)

noidentity (188756) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241781)

Yet another misuse of the term "brick".

Re:More bricked computers (1)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241851)

What def would you use? Software almost never makes a piece of hardware completely unfixable. Honestly I'm curious because I don't know.

Re:More bricked computers (3, Informative)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241939)

Exactly â"Âalmost never â" bricking is a very rare occurrence, and it's not happening in this case.

uh-oh (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241935)

The Jews are on another murderous rampage with their American Killing Machines.

Good luck dropping bombs from airplanes and shooting missiles from helicoptors, you greedy kikes.

Re:uh-oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242123)

Oh it seems like soneone is a litte bit sad in gaza city, am I right?

Sooo... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241759)

So, when you discouvered your Mac had what you thought was a hardware failure, who talked you back from the ledge? Are you in therapy?

Yawn. (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242227)

So, when you discouvered your Mac had what you thought was a hardware failure, who talked you back from the ledge? Are you in therapy?

OK. I'm not a Mac fanboy, but I do use a MacBook (not Pro) among other platforms, and I briefly had serious issues with a newly-purchased (cheapie) Huawei E169 mobile broadband dongle (well, strictly speaking, fraudband but enough to meet requirements). The 10.5.6 update fixed the problem instantly.

FWIW, I have no idea why this worked, nor do I care, since I ran the update without bothering to look for any changelogs. Sometimes "quick and dirty" is good enough...

Hi, I'm a Mac! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241761)

Hi, I'm a Mac! Look at me, I can update myself! Hi, I'm a PC! Wow look at that, he's updating himself! So how's the update going, Mac? Hello? Hello? Hellooooo!

Re:Hi, I'm a Mac! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242225)

What do "I'm a Mac", "I'm a PC", and "Can you hear me now?" have in common? They are all phrases uttered by characters that I would tremendously enjoy brutally killing in the longest, most agonizing fashion possible.

Re:Hi, I'm a Mac! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242411)

Sorry, posted before I had a chance to finish my thoughts. Afterwards, I will sodomize their dead bodies. I'll suck off the "I'm a Mac" and probably just buttfuck the other two. On second thought, I'll probably suck off Mac guy before I kill him. In fact, forget the killing entirely. I think I'd rather lock them in the basement ("home" as I call it) and make them my sex slaves. But damn 'll have fun injecting 2 liters of saline into "Can you hear me now?" guy's ballsack!

Re:Hi, I'm a Mac! (1)

olliec420 (1023207) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242481)

At least its fixable if you have a monitor to connect to it. Im sure anyone can find one around somewhere, cant that much for ya'lls vista problems

Re:Hi, I'm a Mac! (1)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242569)

You forgot to mention the Windows Genuine Advantage security check that rivals airport security and results in as many false positives.

haha (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241763)

:-D

Here we go (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241765)

Apple zealots defending this lack of testing to their death. Imagine the trolls that would be out if this were a Vista update ;-)

Re:Here we go (0, Troll)

synthesizerpatel (1210598) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241873)

Also, as a MacBook owner who hasn't dealt with any of these problems I can't speak as an injured party. But, if I did experience a bug like this? .. A little downtime to get it fixed is worth the heaps of benefits I reap otherwise not having to use Vista.

I traded in blue screens every couple of weeks for problems with my MacBook once or twice a year. I'm ok with that.

Re:Here we go (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241945)

I traded in blue screens every couple of weeks for problems with my MacBook once or twice a year. I'm ok with that.

Here we go matching anecdote with anecdote, but I cannot resist.

Look.. I'm a UNIX/Linux guy.. as matter of fact I'm typing this on Slackware. I also like Macs.. but please dispense with the bullshit you're spouting.

I work in higher education as a network admin and work along side the end user support folks. I've seen maybe four Vista crashes out of hundreds of machines coming in through the door.

For the record I've seen a couple of Macs with serious problems as well, including one that lost all of the data on a non-faulty hard drive.

If you don't like Vista, don't use it. I fall into that category, but I don't run around spreading disinformation.

Re:Here we go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242223)

Well you may be a nix guy, but try getting my new printer/scanner/etc thing to work with Linux. I am really exausted with the "ease" that linux handles so many things. I work with both macs and linux, and both have problems. But my linux admin will say "sure we can do that, no problem..." and 5 hours later he's still looking for the right source to compile, or figure out why my new Dell has some difference that prevents something from working. Years ago, nix was behind with usb and a few other outrageous things. They got caught up, but this problem just repeats itself over and over in other forms as hardware evolves.

Re:Here we go (2, Informative)

synthesizerpatel (1210598) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242413)

CUPS is easy to configure if you know what you're doing. So it might not be the service that is the unwilling participant in your scenario.

FYI, OSX uses CUPS as it's printing backend. It's just generally transparent if you're not doing anything crazy.

Re:Here we go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242491)

Who ever claimed linux was easy?

Re:Here we go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242371)

1) There's no such thing as a UNIX/Linux guy. You're a Linux guy if you're typing it on Slackware. If you were a UNIX guy you'd be typing it on Solaris or BSD. Also, Slackware? Are you guys on ELF binaries yet?

2) You're a network admin yet you feel confident you can accurately summarize all the Vista blue-screen issues other people you work with have dealt with.

3) Every computer has hardware issues, Mac, PC, etc. There's no such thing as faultless manufacturing.

Too much of your post reads like a Microsoft apologist shill.. I can't take you seriously.

Re:Here we go (1)

Smooth and Shiny (1097089) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242013)

So you traded your blue screens, which more often than not are user/hardware error, for kernel panics and cryptic, obscure error messages? Yep... you've stepped up in the PC world!

Re:Here we go (2, Insightful)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242523)

Umm... Pretty much by definition, blue screens can't be user error, unless that "user error" involves something like disconnecting the hard drive while it's in use. If the user can reliably cause a blue screen through software methods, then that is a bug in the software, and not the user's fault.

The fact that you think you can dismiss most blue screens as user or hardware errors shows that your standards have been lowered so far that you're pretty much incapable of making a meaningful judgment on the issue. (In my experience, most blue screens are caused by buggy drivers, and thus not entirely Microsoft's fault, either.)

Re:Here we go (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242583)

Actually OSX error messages are in pretty verbose. Especially for kernel panics. /Library/Logs/PanicReporter/ /Library/Logs/HangReporter /Library/Logs/CrashReporter

Diagnosing problems is much easier than Windows since the files are in plain-text and usually give you a clear indication of what the problem is. Event logs aside from being binary format (which if corrupted will negate readability in any of the standard utilities) are the _real_ villains when it comes to cryptic error codes that require an internet connection to look up..

Re:Here we go (1)

Jaktar (975138) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242057)

As a non Apple product owner who hasn't dealt with any of these problems on Microsoft products or Linux either I can't speak as an injured party. But, if I did experience a bug like this? I'd fix it myself because that's what a person with real choice can do.

I've run Vista 64 SP1 for the last year and have experienced 1 crash, and that was due to a FOSS app which I simply stopped using. I didn't have to trade blue screens for sad faces and bombs, I'm ok with that.

Re:Here we go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242095)

Every couple of weeks? What the hell were you doing to Vista that invoked Blue Screens that often?

No one, and I mean no one will agree with you that Vista is that unstable!

The only problems I have experienced so far in my year and a half with Vista have been software compatibility issues that arise with any OS. That, and hardware malfunction from me dropping the laptop about six feet or so.

I've also seen one thing that resembled a blue screen, but I haven't got a clue when that was or what triggered it, and I have never seen it again.

How about you stop actively trying to break your Microsoft products, alright?

P.S.: lol, captcha code is "brainy". Ironic at all?

Re:Here we go (2, Interesting)

guorbatschow (870695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242149)

The problems lies in right management. Vista is pretty stable - only if you use it in lock down mode as a user with limited rights. As long as you use it with an admin account though, things can go wrong very soon.

As single user on a machine, people tend to use an admin account though, since it makes installing stuff etc. not as long-winded. UAC is a good idea, except that it comes way too often and makes people get annoyed so they don't even thing when they click on OK. Similarly, on OS X, we have password prompts, which don't occur as often, but also guarantees authorization. You can also authorize yourself as an admin even when the current session is from a limited user.

Re:Here we go (4, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242211)

What the hell were you doing to Vista that invoked Blue Screens that often?

Switching it on?

Re:Here we go (1)

ailnlv (1291644) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242533)

I traded in blue screens every couple of weeks for no problems at all with ubuntu, and i didn't even have to pay a thing!

Re:Here we go (4, Insightful)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242193)

I don't see defensive Apple zealots, in fact, here are ALL the posts above, including yours..

Yet another FW update that bricks machines.

So, when you discouvered your Mac had what you thought was a hardware failure, who talked you back from the ledge? Are you in therapy?

Hi, I'm a Mac! Look at me, I can update myself! Hi, I'm a PC! Wow look at that, he's updating himself! So how's the update going, Mac? Hello? Hello? Hellooooo!

Haha :-D

Apple zealots defending this lack of testing to their death. Imagine the trolls that would be out if this were a Vista update ;-)

I know which system slashtarded trolls mostly support, and it's not Vista either. It's the one system that doesn't get idiotic comments like all the above, because updates _neeeeeever_ break it, and bad things just don't happen to it (that Slashdot reports). Quit making the rest of that community look bad.

I'll toss a log into the fire (3, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242527)

And assert that certain linux distributions are far worse then this. And by "certian" I am refering to Gentoo. Nothing is more exciting then either

a) some jackass removed some library in a way that breaks half your dependencies. Lesson? Always make sure you can restart ssh and then log in before you close your existing ssh session.

b) having your upgrade break because some jackass depreciated some library in a way that forces you to upgrade in a very rigid step-by-step manner. Lesson? Be afraid of updating your system--it will probably break.

Funner still is searching the Gentoo forums for an answer and sifting through the "this was in the archives, jackass", "this is what you get for waiting a week between updates," and "didn't you read the CVS commit on mailing-list XYZ? We discussed this already, so it isn't my fault".

You haven't experienced "update breaks system" until you've experienced the "Gentoo update breaks system". Gentoo is good in theory and there is a lot I like--for example I love the use of color in their toolkit and the command line. I with other distros and unix's would make their utilities use color more. But Gentoo is a bitch to update.

No one is safe from the "oops" bug (0)

slashuzer (580287) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241775)

These problems can happen with any company's product these days: Microsoft, Apple or even the open source OS like Linux or Freebsd. There are so many configurations to test that it is difficult to gurantee that the updates will work flaswlessly across the board.

It is nice that this issue can be fixed by users themselves without having to send the computers for repair.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (5, Funny)

noidentity (188756) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241803)

Apple controls the hardware, so they can be sure everything runs smoothly on it. That's what you get for running Mac OS X on unsupported hardware. Oh, wait....

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (5, Funny)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241821)

True, my AppleTV iBricked itself after the last "update". The only solution is to take it to your local Apple Store for a factory reset. Trouble is, my nearest Apple Store is 160 miles away. :-(

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (4, Insightful)

Tanman (90298) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241905)

So, how's that 'just workin' for ya?

Sorry, I don't mean to be flamebait, but this story is irritating. If it were a Windows story, it would be, "Microsoft update bricks user pc's" with the summary "Microsoft, in yet another example of shoddy programming, has managed to brick billions of users' pc's with their latest auto-update. With most users unaware they can even disable these updates, is it really any surprise that they've screwed their customer once again?"

Instead, we get this, "Ah gee golly look, I guess this little update means we should let someone else work the kinks out before we update our macs!" Nevermind that Apple has a history of shutting down their hardware via updates.

NOTE: I believe brick == unrecoverable. I'm merely stating what I think the summary would have been, not what it should have been/etc.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (2, Insightful)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242611)

It's worth noting that Apple's Software Update always asks for user confirmation before installing anything. This is substantively different from Microsoft's strategy of installing any and all updates without asking until the user uses the control panel to change the policy.

While this difference doesn't change the number of suckers using each respective platform, Apple's the vendor that makes it easy to put off updates until they've been in the wild for a while. It's also much less presumptive of Apple. (Though their update process with the iPhone offsets any goodwill they may have gotten from that.)

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (4, Informative)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241925)

Get a USB patch stick (search on google code), which includes SSH as an install... then do a search for "downgrade apple tv" and you'll find a little script which will download and install the 2.2 firmware for you (or 2.1 if you're so inclined)... then we it reboots, go and turn off the auto-update feature under settings.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242021)

Hey, good tip, thanks a million. That has definitely saved me driving down to the smoke next week. Cheers :-)

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (0)

Phelan (30485) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242055)

AppleTV can't brick. It has a partition with a restore copy of the original software on it. Disconnect the thing and start it again a couple of times, it will panic and send you to the restore partition and then you only do the 'factory reset' on there and boom you are done.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242165)

Sorry Phelan, it's been restarted & rebooted a couple of dozen times. All I get is the Apple logo twice then blankety-blank.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (2, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242373)

Sorry Phelan, it's been restarted & rebooted a couple of dozen times. All I get is the Apple logo twice then blankety-blank.

You're probably not looking at it right. Or you have the wrong kind of candles. You sure the Pentagram is exact?

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (4, Insightful)

cnettel (836611) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241825)

Well, you would suppose that the limited flexibility in configurations where you can get OS X would mean that those configurations that are supported are tested properly.

Apple machines may be overpriced or not, but it's hard to deny that the company tries to make the argument that it provides an integrated environment.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241855)

These problems can happen with any company's product these days: Microsoft, Apple or even the open source OS like Linux or Freebsd. There are so many configurations to test that it is difficult to gurantee that the updates will work flaswlessly across the board.

LOL at this guy trying to equate the number of Mac configs with the number of different configurations Microsoft and the Linux community have to deal with. :-D Change your name from "slashuzer" to "crackuzer"!!! OMG LAUGH OUT LOUD!!!!!!

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241857)

The difference is: when it happens to Apple, then ..well "shit happens". When it happens with MS, then it's "haha" time on /.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242107)

The reason for the difference is that by and large Apple provides a better user experience. Therefore Apple owners are more likely to be fanboys, because when you are treated well, it generates loyalty. I don't know why this is, but the experience of owning a Windows machine is qualitatively different than owning a Mac. Is Apple a corporation interested in its stock price? Yep. But the culture at Apple seems to be different such the user experience is different from that of MS users.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242159)

Better experience for who? I have been a Mac and Windows user since MacOS 7 and I still dislike both MacOs and OSX with all my heart. It's not a bad system, but there are lots of those little irritating things that makes a mac, oh so Fisher pricish....

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (3, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242177)

But the culture at Apple seems to be different such the user experience is different from that of MS users.

Perhaps at the "Reality Distortion Field" level the culture is different. But I don't see a hell of lot of difference between the 'user experience' of a BSOD and the failure of a point upgrade that would require a non technical user to return the computer to the store / factory. The OS X kernel panic screen has nifty graphics but also has even more incomprehensible babble than the typical BSOD screen (really, I don't understand Mandarin Chinese, I don't). That's not the user experience you're looking for....

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (2, Interesting)

nneonneo (911150) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242573)

1) It's Japanese on the panic message, not Chinese

2) When written, you just call it Chinese and not Mandarin Chinese; the distinctions "Mandarin" and "Cantonese" are primarily for spoken language, as the written languages are very nearly identical

3) I fail to see how it could be incomprehensible, seeing as it is pretty much obvious that there are different languages on the panic screen, and that it is giving you very clear instructions on what to do next: see one for yourself [macamour.com]

Besides, Windows XP (and likely Vista too) ship in a default configuration where they do not show BSODs (at least, that was the way it was set up on my system, a consumer-level laptop). This means that all the user gets to see is the system *instantly restarting*, without any sort of warning whatsoever. It also means that they won't see a BSOD, but will be informed after startup that their system "recovered from a serious error" or something like that.

One argument for the OS X panic message is that it doesn't replace the entire screen, meaning that whatever you may have been working on is still potentially recoverable. With a full-screen BSOD, where technical details essentially fill the screen, this doesn't happen.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242273)

There was a "haha" post at 10:58 douche bag, if you think Apple has a better time on Slashdot than Microsoft, you're a fucking 'tard.

The real question is which one do Linux fanbois decide to hate the most on any given day of the week. Is it Microsoft didn't invent anything or look, an Apple product "didn't work".

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241875)

It is nice that this issue can be fixed by users themselves without having to send the computers for repair.

If they have additional hardware like an external keyboard, mouse and display. Otherwise, I assume they'll have to send/take it in.

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241931)

Or a friend or neighbor with such obscure hardware....

Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (1)

LinkX39 (1100879) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242627)

It is true that these things happen to even the best of companies and it's impossible to remove 100% of the bugs in software before it's released. The thing I'm sick of though is that had this happened to even the most obscure laptop manufacturer (and remember, this particular case involves a very popular and very expensive laptop) running Windows after a Windows update there would be hundreds of "this wouldn't happen on a Mac" posts. Such a double standard around here really. It's nice every now and then to see Apple and their herd of zombie followers (which by the way I am not including yourself in, generalized comment) brought down a peg and realize their sacred fruit can also be a rotten apple. Now, excuse me while I go finish trying to get the rest of my software running on Vista.....

How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (4, Insightful)

Assmasher (456699) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241793)

...when they have such a small hardware deployment environment? Seriously... Linux runs on TONS of hardware, Windows runs on TONS of hardware. Apple's OSX runs (in a supported fashion ;)) on VERY little hardware.

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (4, Insightful)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241831)

Exactly, I thought the whole point of Apple tightly controlling all the hardware was so this wouldn't happen. In agreeing with you I would add that Windows and Linux have nothing to very little to do with the hardware side of things.

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (2, Informative)

db32 (862117) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242147)

Yeah...it seems when they sent their people out to check every purchased machine to make sure the user had updated their firmware they missed a few addresses. I bet those people didn't register their hardware or something...

This wasn't a hardware problem, it was an obscure firmware issue. My MBP updated its firmware on its own many months ago and then took 10.5.6 with no problems.

Also...Linux FAILS on TONS of hardware, Windows FAILS on TONS of hardware. With the exception of my laptop here and a throwaway windows install for games (Fallout 3 was just too much to resist) all of my PCs run some variety of linux. I have had infinitely more headaches following Linux/Windows updates than I have with OS X updates. I mean really...pause and think for a moment. If it was all handled perfectly the first time around would there even be software updates? Of course none of it is perfect, which is why all of these systems have updates. To think any given update is going to be the perfect update to end all future updates is pretty goofy.

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (2, Insightful)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242301)

Yeah...it seems when they sent their people out to check every purchased machine to make sure the user had updated their firmware they missed a few addresses. I bet those people didn't register their hardware or something...

Seems to me the OS update could just check to see if the latest firmware was installed. That or they could have tested it on the older firmware.

Also...Linux FAILS on TONS of hardware, Windows FAILS on TONS of hardware.

Windows and Linux fail on more machines than Apple even supports. The number of hardware configurations that Apple supports compared to Windows or Linux is tiny.

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242313)

Yeah...it seems when they sent their people out to check every purchased machine to make sure the user had updated their firmware they missed a few addresses. I bet those people didn't register their hardware or something... This wasn't a hardware problem, it was an obscure firmware issue. My MBP updated its firmware on its own many months ago and then took 10.5.6 with no problems.

Even with that in mind, the install set that Apple needs to check is tiny compared to Microsoft - and yes, if this update relies on functionality only available after a certain firmware revision, then it should either apply it first, or block the update until the user applies the newer firmware. The same goes for the QAed version of the update - if the QA process was only applied to systems with a certain set of firmware revisions, the update should require those revisions and no other.

It should never simply assume...

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (1)

maztuhblastah (745586) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242353)

Maybe because the bug can't be reproduced on the hardware every time?

Their HCL does have every currently supported Mac, and they do test on them -- but it seems possible that it might be an issue once you throw user-installed kexts, etc. into the mix (I have no idea whether or not this this case though.)

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242485)

You missed one: AOS X's core, BSD runs on tons of hardware.

Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242587)

I don't think you appreciate how quickly the number of possible combinations grows. It is impossible to test every one.

I'll say this with a wide smile! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241839)

It just works!

Amazing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241841)

so if you sleep your MacBook a lot as I do

I know some people really love their Macs but this is ridiculous.

Re:Amazing (1)

windsurfer619 (958212) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241989)

Hm, maybe that's why the new macs don't have firewire ports...

this sounds like user error to me (4, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241847)

Hooray, my MacBook Pro is working again. And this seems to confirm for me that the 10.5.6 update breaks some systems if you are running older firmware.

Sorry but if you're skipping a firmware update, and running a major OS update on old firmware, you deserve a headache.

The Software Update presents updates in the order Apple recommends you install them. Skipping one update to run another is a stupid thing to do. The worst combination I can imagine is a firmware and an os update being installed out of order.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (4, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241867)

I would amend this by saying Apple probably shouldn't have let him do this. There is a firmware update required to update to mac os 9 (from 8.6) and another on some machines before upgrading from 9.1 to 9.2. (imacs only I think?) Apple will not ALLOW those OS's to install until the firmware update is applied. Some machines also required a firmware update before installing OS X.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241907)

Sorry but if you're skipping a firmware update, and running a major OS update on old firmware, you deserve a headache.

I didn't think mac users needed to know anything about that stuff. Why would the newest update not include or look for the older update to already be installed. It seems reasonable to me that many users would just choose the newest update without thinking they had to do all prior ones.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242045)

Exactly. This is where Apple is failing big time. It's just like any other computer system. You have to understand what is going on, have to RTFM (or at least run around on the Internet looking for information). Wait, did I say RTFM - Apple doesn't HAVE FM's. The documentation is the worst I've seen since the printed assembly dumps of CP/M.

And yes, you shouldn't just click the "want to update your software" now when the bouncy ball shows up. You want to download the combo updater. But how the hell is my wife (who views any computer with derision and disdain) supposed to know what to do?

I really like OS X - it's one hell of lot better than Windows. I like Linux but it won't run Photoshop (and no GIMPing today - it's too early in the morning). But I am really disappointed in Apple's quality control. It's going to bite them big time if they keep it up.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242331)

Wait, did I say RTFM - Apple doesn't HAVE FM's. The documentation is the worst I've seen since the printed assembly dumps of CP/M.

This is true. As an old UNIX hand, I was somewhat disappointed by this at first, but as with any OS, the forum postings tend to be more useful in any case.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242341)

Apple is failing big time because you have to understand what's going on? Can you be more specific?

The documentation is the worst I've seen since the printed assembly dumps of CP/M.

/presses F1 , browses help screens. ...

again, could you be more specific?
What do you need to understand to do a software update? Click install... ?

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

janopdm (1292860) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241965)

Sorry but if you're skipping a firmware update, and running a major OS update on old firmware, you deserve a headache.

Lame excuse. Tell that to my mom. After so much effort put on making things easier for non tech savvy users, Apple bricks their computers via software update. That's a major screw up.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

jeremyp (130771) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241981)

I think the point was that Apple failed to flag a required firmware update. I may be wrong, I haven't read the article yet.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242117)

Wait, what? If the OS update requires the new firmware, it should refuse to install with the old firmware. Since they are both separate installs, it is entirely possible that a user might skip the firmware update. I did for a long time, since the firmware (EFI) update is a lot more effort than the normal updates.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242265)

since the firmware (EFI) update is a lot more effort than the normal updates.

please elaborate? Here, they are functionally identical. Both download, both state they need a restart, both restart, install, and restart again. Nowadays you don't even have to hold the power button to unlock the firmware.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242395)

Last EFI update I installed on my MBP required:
  1. Run Software Update.
  2. Reboot (this reboot may have been caused by another update installed at the same time).
  3. Run EFI Updater tool.
  4. Reboot.
  5. Hold down power button for 15 seconds on reboot.
  6. Reboot again.

This makes it very easy to skip, deliberately or accidentally, since installing via Software Update doesn't actually install the EFI update, just the update utility. Maybe they've simplified the procedure recently, but if so then they haven't released any new updates for my model of MBP since they did.

Close, but Wrong (2, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242565)

The installer shouldn't refuse to continue, it should upgrade the firmware! OSX has a luxury no other operating system has--it runs on purpose built hardware under its control. Thus its installer has no excuse to not just update the firmware.

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242269)

Then why would the update run on outdated firmware? There should be code in there that checks and tells you need to update the firmware before deploying the patch.

Apples are supposed to be ez-mode after all no?

Re:this sounds like user error to me (1)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242419)

Apples are supposed to be ez-mode after all no?

1. Apple takes away option to install individual software updates
2. There are fifty more "Apple is so Fischer Price", "Mac don't give you the same level of control as Linux" etc posts in every Apple related article
3. Linux and Windows systems don't check firmware levels before updates at all. AFAIK, Solaris patches don't even automatically check firmware levels or block installs, but I might be wrong.
4 Well, yes, the update should've checked first. Apple must have assumed body would uncheck the firmware update but still install the system update. Assume == Ass

Wait? (1)

biocute (936687) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241881)

Waiting on Apple? Look, if you're not the first one to greet and hug your dad, you'll feel less love next time!

Obviously if your dad is Vista, the first one to greet and hug usually gets smack on the head.

all you need is an external monitor (3, Informative)

burris (122191) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241889)

Except after two months you still can't get the dual link dvi adapters [apple.com] . Those with 30" monitors were already pretty peeved that they haven't been able to use them. Now you have to buy a useless $30 attachment or go to the Apple store to fix your mac after a firmware bug. No thanks.

I ALWAYS make a backup before I update the OS (0)

crovira (10242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241943)

I've been bit once when switching from OS X 10.4.x to OS X 10.4.y

I instituted the policy and bought a FireWire backup drive on which to duplicate my system disk BEFORE doing anything to the OS.

If the update fails, I just switch boot disk and wait until the fix is made and shown to work.

I really should do that with my Linux disk but I don't use it for work and I can multi-boot it from different partitions.

Re:I ALWAYS make a backup before I update the OS (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242131)

And this is how you spot the recent switchers. The older ones remember the 10.3.8 update, which damaged the contents of external firewire drives.

Now the trolls understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26241947)

Why Microsoft tests every hotfix carefully before releasing it.

Some advice... (3, Informative)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 5 years ago | (#26241975)

Typically it is advisable to download and run the Combo update installer for these point releases. While Software Update is great for the little things, these bigger updates can cause issues for a variety of reasons if done through Software Update (sometimes files don't get updated that should be updated due to permissions or corruption or some other random change the update is not expecting to see).

Macs go Moo. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242017)

Remember the mooing and the random shutdown. No amount of zealoting will get rid of the inconvenient truths.

I'm a PC and proud of it. I was a linux zealot back in 2003, but then i discovered the eXPerience of drivers, software and ease of use.

-1, troll for all. I'd rather been a -1 troll windows user than 5, insightful zealot in denial.

MacBooks too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242053)

I have a MacBook 3,1 and ever since 10.5.6 I've been experiencing around 3 kernel panics a day. I've used both the software update and the downloadable installer, to no avail. Problems with 10.5.6 seem to be wide-ranging and all over the Apple forums.

Fear of the unknown (2, Interesting)

lanner (107308) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242065)

This definitely gives weight to the argument for waiting a bit to run software upgrades."

I'm going to pick on submitter here. This is your fear of the unknown. There is another guy who I work with that likes to pull this BS out of the air all the time when a new release comes out.

His argument: Ohnoz, I'm scared.

My argument: Here is the changelog. These are the real risks that are posed by continuing to use the old version. These are the benefits of upgrading.

When I started working for the company, software was years and years out of date. He had used this excuse for a long time to basically not do anything he thought was risky, but had in fact amassed a huge amount of risk to the business that ended up costing us a lot of real money.

Granted, there is some value to waiting a reasonable short period of time to gather your wits and read the changelog before upgrading/patching, but that should never be an excuse to coddle a fear of the unknown.

Re:Fear of the unknown (3, Informative)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242393)

I'd say both of you were wrong.

Machines NOT on the internet (or, completely firewalled off) do not need to be updated as religiously as machines getting direct exposure. Simple as that.

Secondly, if you're running Unix-like systems, you can directly see what is being changed and back it up specifically, using any assortment of services. If an update doesnt work, just delete/restore from backup. Simple.

On Windows, updates are inherently scary. Yes, there are single-issue updates, but they're a PITA do deal with in normal cases. And any update can potentially cause issues with your provided service. The only way to properly do a Windows update is to make a server with exact hardware/software and implement the update on that machine (and test with your testbed). Only then, after the updates show no side effects can you attempt to touch the production server.. and it still might screw up.

That's when you think about switching to a system that doesnt send updates in 200MB patches. I heard on the BSD's and Linux systems you can see whatc specific packages are going to be updated and control which ones do and dont.

Tools break? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242101)

Whenever someone I know tells me that they won't try Linux because they're afraid something will break and they won't be able to fix, I point at these kind of events.

The fact of the matter is, no matter what operating system we use, things break.. I'm actually impressed they don't break more.. as equally impressed as I am that bald-monkeys can rocket down asphalt at 60mph and generally make it to where they're going.

I simply switched to Linux because I'd rather have someone break my tool for free than pay them to do it.. and that it has forced me to experiment more with that tool, and thus understand it better.

But maybe that's all to reasonable.. so let the OS oneupmanship begin!

Macbook Pro User (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242103)

I had no problems running the 10.5.6 combo update. A lot of people reported having problems using the software update method.

Run Debian! (5, Funny)

fuego451 (958976) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242153)

You hardly ever have to worry about pesky OS upgrades.

Re:Run Debian! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242305)

Why to run Debian because for that? You can run any Linux Operating System distribution and you only need to reboot the computer when you update the Linux Operating System. All other system files like GNU software etc, you can update without rebooting computer, but Linux OS demands reboot (and you can even update it without rebooting if you have skills).

I can just see Microsoft plotting their next ad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242181)

"Everybody using OS X is disappointed because it breaks their PC [sic], try Vista - it just works (and look how shiny it is)"

Apple made another major fuck up, nothing new. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242277)

It's always amazing when this sort of things happen. If it were windows, Microsoft would had been crucified. It's also quite ironic that the summary mentioned sleep mode. I do recall a very similar bug that affects mac book pros - when the device wakes up from sleep, the backlit dies.

Bah, This is /. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26242283)

No one cares about problems with Apple products, just Microsoft's. Take this anti-Apple rhetoric and peddle it elsewhere so the readers can continue to live in blissful ignorance believing that Apple can do no wrong and MSFT can do no right.

Completely Unacceptable (1)

cc_pirate (82470) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242289)

Jobs should fire his OS validation team.

It is completely unacceptable not to find this when you control ALL of the hardware.

Pathetic. The mind just boggles.

Apple really screwed the pooch on this one.

10.5.5 did this to me (1, Redundant)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242293)

When I upgraded to 10.5.5 two issues appeared on my macbook pro (coreduo 15"):

* Battery meter would get to between 40-60% and then the laptop would abruptly poweroff. When I was at 10.5.4, the battery meter would drain, as expected, down and warn as expected when it got to 10% or so.

* After about 30seconds of being powered on, the keyboard and touchpad would become unresponsive. External keyboards/mice continue to work.

Both of these issues are documented on apple's forums.

Increase you brightness (1)

JGH4 (124117) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242435)

I had this happen to me after update, I fixed it by increasing the brightness on my screen as the update sometimes lowers the brightness setting to 0.

Apple computers... (1)

acedotcom (998378) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242457)

they just work!

wasn't this the update (1)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 5 years ago | (#26242513)

the one that was supposed to kill what apple thinks are illegal install's of it's os?
if it was it looks like it has a pretty high friendly fire rate..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...