Slashdot Mirror
MacFixIt Details Mac OS X 10.2.8 Bugs
mneptok writes "Premier Macintosh troubleshooting site MacFixIt has just posted a detailed report on the bugs and broken features in Apple's latest point release for MacOSX. As reported previously on Slashdot, the 10.2.8 update was released and pulled within hours earlier this week. Many users upgraded before the update was pulled and are being bitten, and MacFixIt has run down the behavior you can attribute to Apple's goof."
Several MacFixIt readers have noted a problem where iMac and eMac systems (primarily) display a blue screen at startup rather than proceeding to the Desktop.
Ahh... seems I installed XP Service Pack 1 on my iMac by mistake. My bad.
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
When are people going to learn to wait a few days before doing an upgrade? How many times do you have to read about people getting burned?
Um, actually, if everyone waits, there'll be nobody to play the guinea pigs. Forget what I just said, unenlightened masses -- download immediately, for my benefit!
c-hack.com |
So what should they do? Shut-up about it?
Come on people, apple is a cool company but you don't have to make excuses for their mistakes.
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
Someone has released a utility to fix the problem until Apple releases the fixed update. The comments on it all seem to say it works well and takes care of things.
If the lack of virtual desktops is such a big problem, perhaps you should check out CodeTek's Virtual Desktop software. That should do what you need.
I meta-mod all positive moderation Unfair, because it's abuse of the system.
I installed the update and have had no problems. I have an iBook 700mhz, and It even took care of that annoying poping noise coming from the speaking when operating on battery power.
Apple has been hinting of late that it's becoming more uncomfortable with seeding pre-release software to developers. Routinely, leaks of the new features and builds in the latest versions of the software make it to the mac rumor sites within hours of being made available in the seed channels.
Of course the argument was that it was a necessary evil to put up with this stuff because the feedback that Apple received from developers (both in quality and quantity) helped catch glaring bugs.
10.2.8 news has been rampant through the rumor channels for a LONG time. Now that it's finally out, there are quick glaring holes that cause the recall of the update and lots of bad publicity for Apple.
I certainly hope Apple doesn't get paranoid about the release of new software to paying seed developers, but this is just another reason that the scale may be tipping toward the paranoid, closed-testing route than the limited open-seeding way it is today.
I run a lab with an OS X server which relies on ssh for remote access, and all I wanted was a point patch to fix the ssh security hole announced two weeks ago.
However, Apple failed to provide us one. Instead, they rolled the patch into the 10.2.8 release, thus exposing anyone who upgraded solely for the security fix to additional instability caused by changes to other OS components.
I feel sorry for those server administrators who were unable to upgrade to 10.2.8 because it means the server is still vulnerable to the ssh security hole.
Yeah, it's really funny to watch this repeated update fiasco and see how almost nobody even utters a peep of anything negative about it. If this were Microsoft making all these screwups with point updates you know we'd be all over them, tearing them to pieces. I've made comments a few times and gotten zero attention and no responses.
;)
I see a lot of comments from people like "it worked with my system" or "it's only a few people that are affected" or "most of the affected systems had third-party software/hardware installed, they should have known better". It's all so idiotic.
It's really not the number of affected systems that keeps me from installing my own update, it's the severity of the symptoms. Apple keeps releasing these updates that are supposed to fix things, and then it's like, "Oh by the way, there's a small chance that this will hose your system so bad that you won't be able to boot up anymore or repair your system with the CD repair tools or uninstall the update, and the only way to repair your system will be to reinstall the OS from scratch from the CD . You won't even be able to boot into "Safe Mode". But that's ok, right, because you all have spare huge-ass hard drives that you can use solely for backing up your entire main drive, and you'll do that before you try this update, just in case something goes wrong." I've literally seen dozens of people on the Apple discussion forums saying exactly that, "Just back up your whole drive with Carbon Copy Cloner or something before you do any sort of update, and everything will be cool. No problem."
Huh? How is that acceptable? No way to uninstall if you have problems? Systems hosed so bad they can't be repaired by any known method short of a complete reinstall?
Microsoft is bad enough, but I don't recall a lot of their updates causing people to need to reformat and reinstall from scratch once a month. To this day I can't understand why Apple isn't getting ripped to shreds for these terrible update problems. Is it just because only a few people are affected and everyone else just doesn't care? If you don't believe me that the problems were that bad, you just need to spend some time checking out the discussion forums on Apple's website, and probably other Apple discussion websites, where they talk about the 10.2.1-10.2.8+ updates.
Oh, and I see you've gotten a "Troll" rating already. Congratulations. That's what you get when you buck the tide, buddy. We'll show you. Maybe this post will bring in my first "Troll" rating. Keep your fingers crossed.
It sounds to me a lot like you're looking for X - your "real work done" comment just shows that your version of "real work" is different from a lot of people's. I've used X desktops for a while, and switched to a Mac with OS X. I've found that most 'new' X desktops that try to be cute and modern really are just flashy icons that never realy work exactly like they should... I realize that they're a work in progress, and that the're perfect for many uses... but not for everyone.
I personally find Mac OS X better for getting "real work done" - when I've got a lot of windows open, lots of graphics, lots of text, I find that Aqua buckles a LOT less than X. The X11 architecture is seeming more and more ancient -- sure, multiple desktops can be nice, and being able to run programs across a network was an idea WAY ahead of it's time - but X is starting to show it's age.
I thikn that's the root reason that you can't run Aqua ('regular OS X') apps through X - it'd mean basically doing a total screen redraw from Aqua (PDF-based) to X - and that would be S-L-O-W. And it's not very reasonable to ask for programs that were never designed to work with X11 to magically work through X11 - there are PC X11 servers, you don't expect to be able to run WinXP apps through them. What OS X _can_ do is (using Apple's relatively good X11 server) run pretty much any X11 app under the sun - a number of apps (including the Gimp and (IIRC) Open Office) have been ported to the OSX-X11 combo - while still using Aqua for all your other apps. And for most of us, Aqua is fast enough, efficient, and 'lickable'.
But if you want a pure Unix-like set up (X11, boot into console, etc.), then OS X isn't for you - it's got the power 'under the hood' but you clearly want the engine exposed. Fine. You're right, the hardware is amazing.
Tim
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.