Apple's Mac OS X 10.5.3 Has Landed

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."

Comments

New Features

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[TJamieson]

Just like yesterday's test build.

Re:It's 9D34

[0100010001010011]

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

[yanos]

Is the infamous airport disconnection issue finally been fixed?

Re:It's 9D34

[TJamieson]

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.

Re:It's 9D34

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up, seems to be right. Now I'm stuck with a computer 12000km away (not kidding) that I can't reboot.

Re:It's 9D34

[Jberg88]

that's sweet

Now, like all updates

[oahazmatt]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[gyrogeerloose]

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

[Richard_at_work]

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

[Megane]

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

[TJamieson]

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

[raddan]

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

Re:Now, like all updates

[oahazmatt]

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

[raddan]

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).

Re:Now, like all updates

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF is this a reply to?

Re:Now, like all updates

[Lars T.]

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

[jhesse]

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

[TJamieson]

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

Re:Now, like all updates

[Richard_at_work]

Regardless, there are always systems that worked before, and then don't work after - what would an end user blame?

Re:Now, like all updates

[lucas teh geek]

10.5.3 hosed my system. clicked "restart" from the update window before I went to lunch, came back an hour later to find the machine endlessly attempting to start the window server, showing me some nice blue wallpaper for 30 seconds and then crashing and attempting to start the window server again.

rather than try and work out what was wrong I decided to try out a full restore from time machine, only to find that the on installer dvd when you get to the screen where you pick the drive to restore from the friggin "choose a remote drive" button is greyed out. So I'm allowed to back up to another mac, but they left out the ability to restore from one? pulling the drive out of the other mac and putting it in an external enclosure has got things going, but it's not really something that should have to be done.

far from happy with Apple today.

Re:Now, like all updates

[g-san]

The OP could be talking about Leopard hosing systems with the beta of BootCamp. I had a system with 10.4 and a beta of BootCamp. Updated to Leopard, rebooted, system was toast. I had to mount my laptop hard drive as a firewire drive, copy my essentials, then had to reformat and reinstall. So it does happen, but I was playing with unreleased software.

I am going to blame Windows for this, however, since this is Slashdot and this is a Mac topic.

Re:Now, like all updates

[barzok]

No problem there. At the rate it was downloading for me last night, it'll be a week before I even can install it. Stuck on "about 4 hours remaining" for 2 1/2 hours (and yes, it was downloading all the while).

Re:Now, like all updates

[camperslo]

Like pesky system updates that may or may not allow you to boot into your OS. I forget which revision that was.)

Yes, although it wasn't Apple's fault, that still was a pain for a some when certain unsupported 3rd party hacks to add OS 9 style system extensions broke with an update.
There was good reason for Apple doing away with the OS 9 type of system extensions when releasing OS X. While they allowed doing some great things, they were a major source of stability issues in OS 9 and earlier. Not only did those extensions often break with system updates, a significant number had problems with each other.

If one reads the Apple "Important: Read before installing" text (follow link "Apple's release page" in summary), they do warn of such things.

"You may experience unexpected results if you have third-party system software modifications installed, or if you've modified the operating system through other means. (This does not apply to normal application software installation.)"

The update went without a hitch on a Core Duo (32-bit) Intel system here (which took the smaller download). The machine worked well before, but my first impression is that Firefox feels a bit snappier now.

Re:Now, like all updates

[CreepingEye]

i agree. however, i usually load it on my macbook, and leave my desktop alone. It's a good way to also help relay any issues that you find.

Re:Now, like all updates

[Dr.D.IS.GREAT]

"You may experience unexpected results if you have third-party system software modifications installed, or if you've modified the operating system through other means. (This does not apply to normal application software installation.)" Sounds like Apple recognizes the hackintosh crowd and heeds them with a warning too.

Re:Now, like all updates

[contrapunctus]

but I was playing with unreleased software and there is the key sentence

freakin scary, that was

[Gewalt]

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

[BarryJacobsen]

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

[jaredmauch]

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

[bonch]

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

[TJamieson]

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

[Niten]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[JohnnyGTO]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[dal20402]

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

[bonch]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[r_jensen11]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[TJamieson]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

No, our updates still improve performance.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[TJamieson]

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

[xrayspx]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Malekin]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[milkman_matt]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[TJamieson]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:freakin scary, that was

[artifex2004]

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

[xrayspx]

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

[johannesg]

But it's amazing how many people shut down the machine every single time they stop using it.) It is called "conserving energy", and if more people practiced it the world would be a better place.

I *really* don't need my equipment to be consuming power 24/7 when I'm only using it maybe four-six hours per day.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm amazed at how many people leave their computer idle and don't turn it off. Just as I'm amazed at how many people don't care about the environment.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[sjmacko29]

My Macbook Pro CD has ATI graphics (256MB), and it received the 400+ MB version.... My Santa Rosa Macbook also got the 400+ MB version. I just started the update on my iBook G4 (PPC), and it also received the heftier version...

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you also amazed when people turn off the lights of a room they aren't in, or that they turn off their car when they're not using it?

Does it really amaze you... are you that easily amazed?

Re:freakin scary, that was

[jaredmauch]

Yes, that appears to be the case. IPs removed from my squid logs, but here they are.

1211997986.688 552573 x.x.x.x TCP_MISS/200 208454949 GET http://swcdn.apple.com/content/downloads/03/41/zzz061-4766/4pL8t6BvzyWS9jWBx3hh2gnfJJXDtM3w9M/MacOSXUpd10.5.3Patch.pkg - NONE/- text/plain
1211997986.688 1179742 x.x.x.x TCP_MISS/200 208454950 GET http://swcdn.apple.com/content/downloads/03/41/zzz061-4766/4pL8t6BvzyWS9jWBx3hh2gnfJJXDtM3w9M/MacOSXUpd10.5.3Patch.pkg - DIRECT/x.x.x.x text/plain
1212008353.826 2709439 x.x.x.x TCP_MISS/200 441389738 GET http://swcdn.apple.com/content/downloads/03/41/zzz061-4766/4pL8t6BvzyWS9jWBx3hh2gnfJJXDtM3w9M/MacOSXUpd10.5.3.pkg - DIRECT/x.x.x.x text/plain

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Lars T.]

The funny thing is, Macs use less power when sleeping than most PCs when "off".

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Lars T.]

Offtopic? The truth hurts, hrmm?

Re:freakin scary, that was

[GWBasic]

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

Boot time becomes noticeable when I sit down at a computer and it demands that I reboot to install an update. It's really annoying when it happens more then once a month.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

The funny thing is, Macs use less power when sleeping than most PCs when "off".

Offtopic dumbass.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Lars T.]

That's what the AC says, but at least I am right.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

MacBook (Intel graphics) got the 400M update, and sped right through it. iMac (ATi) got the 200M No.

i have a macbook with intel gma950. got the 198Mb update.
everything works fine.

--
f

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

No references, nothing to backup your offtopic claim, but at least you know how to use italics.

What a dumbass.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Lars T.]

How nice of you to sign your posts, Mr. AC. As for sources - read about any tests of Macs and PCs.

Re:freakin scary, that was

[Anonymous Coward]

As for sources - read about any tests of Macs and PCs.

Too lazy to link to such a test? Or too much of a dumbass? Or perhaps such tests don't support your assertion?

I'm guessing a combination of options 2 & 3.

Luke

[Joseph1337]

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

No Server version yet

[audunr]

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

Re:No Server version yet

[SoylentRed]

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

[kisielk]

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.

[soupdevil]

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.

Re:couldn't wait for this one to be vetted.

[ACMENEWSLLC]

I think iChat got worse. Video & Audio chats crash more often for me. Sykpe works great though.

Still have issues when I press keys they don't appear in what I am typing. This release, it's the return key - often when trying to log on.

Service Pack 3

[PC and Sony Fanboy]

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

[SageinaRage]

You prefer your bugs to go UN-fixed?

Re:Service Pack 3

[oahazmatt]

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

[twotommylong]

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

[Manuscript Replica]

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

Re:Service Pack 3

[ProfessionalCookie]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a slight troll to augment your philosophy: I took some clay this morning and created the perfect lump of clay. As far as clay lumps go. this is the most lumpiest and clayful possible. flawless.

installing

[marvelouspatric]

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

[marvelouspatric]

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

[Farmer Tim]

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

[dal20402]

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

Re:installing

[Farmer Tim]

Odd, two iBooks and a white Intel iMac all showed 198MB through Software Update at my end.

You are correct, according to Apple, but that only adds to the mystery. Out of curiosity, were there any updates you'd skipped?

Re:installing

[dal20402]

Nope. Both machines were up-to-date.

I haven't yet figured out what the difference between the ~200 and ~400 MB delta updates is, although it seems like more PPC and white iMac users are getting the smaller update. The combo update, it turns out, is 536 MB.

Re:installing

[Farmer Tim]

Just tried on a MacPro and it asks for the larger update, so it appears hardware related in some way. No mention on Macintouch or Macfixit, though, and I'd expect the regulars there to notice if it was widespread. Time to examine the installer packages.

Thanks for the feedback.

Retardedness

[Phroggy]

I'm still waiting for a fix for the stupid Dock folder problem. 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 first by reducing the transparency 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

[Poltras]

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

[TJamieson]

Correct. It was changed in 10.5.2 specifically.

Re:Retardedness

[oahazmatt]

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

Re:Retardedness

[Phroggy]

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

[Gewalt]

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.

Re:Retardedness

[poopdeville]

No, that was a pretty crappy "fix". I want my "Unsorted" folder icon to open a Finder window, like it did in every other OS X release before Leopard. Not a 500 item long list of files. I currently have a shell script set up to change a plist file and kill/restart the Dock at boot. I haven't been interested enough in changing the plist's cryptographic hash, so OS X won't "fix" my changes at boot.

Re:Retardedness

[gullevek]

Yeah, I was actually looking forward for a way to change stacks back to the Tiger way. But still nothing :( makes it unusable, as most stuff I have has subfolders, why click there if you land in a finder window again ... really idiotic design

Re:Retardedness

[jaunty]

How can a person do a right click? My Macbook only has one mouse button. Steve has determined that one button is sufficient.

Re:Retardedness

[Poltras]

Go flame away or learn to read. That topic has been answered a thousand of times. If you really had a Macbook, you'd know the answer for sure. Troll!

Re:Retardedness

[ykiwi]

thanks! no really.

Re:Retardedness

[poopdeville]

http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20071111202112177

That shell script is a good start. You have to run it after each boot, since it modifies a cryptographically signed plist. (If you're interested, you can figure out how to use OS X's plist utilities to change the plist's cryptographic hash)

Re:Retardedness

[gullevek]

Thanks a lot, that helps :)

Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[neoform]

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

[raddan]

Just use SuperDuper!. 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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[GalionTheElf]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[freedumb2000]

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

[itsdapead]

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

[willy_me]

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.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[Kupek]

http://www.apple.com/timecapsule/

?

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[pete-classic]

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

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[strikethree]

"by entering "defaults write com.apple.systempreferences TMShowUnsupportedNetworkVolumes 1" in a console."

Pfft. And they say that Linux isn't ready for the masses yet.

strike

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[bill_mcgonigle]

Watch out for that. SuperDuper will stop if it encounters any error at all. Like if the 3rd file on your hard drive has a problem you won't get any backup at all. It seems to detect problems that other backup and disk repair utilities can't find. :/

Anyway, make sure your backup is complete before you need it if you're using SuperDuper. Or use something that behaves differently.

Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive

[osssmkatz]

Do not do that. It's unsupported for a reason. when your time machine designated partition fills up, it corrupts the disk image. Until Apple says it's OK, (or TUAW), I'd avoid it.

OMG Leoptard is TEH AWESUM!!11!

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

What new drivers are in there for hardware that ap

[Joe The Dragon]

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

[Joe The Dragon]

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

Jumped right in and did the update...

[SmoothTom]

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...

[kelnos]

(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...

poor Balmer

[Tom]

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

[failedlogic]

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.

Re:WWDC

[ceoyoyo]

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

[HumanEmulator]

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

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Farmer Tim]

Shortly after Kalyway finishes it, I expect.

If the installer fails, run it again!

[Jay L]

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. 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!

Well two of us cannot install it.

[Shivetya]

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.

Supported from the start

[SuperKendall]

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.

Re:Supported from the start

[lucas teh geek]

I've been using time machine over the network to another mac for a while now, I learnt something interesting today though.

I installed 10.5.3 and it messed up and wouldnt boot. kept crashing shortly after loading the window server, getting into an endless loop of loading the window server, crashing and attempting to load the window server again.

"never mind" I though, "I'll try out the time machine complete restore". so I boot off the leopard dvd and pick restore from backup. I get to the screen where you pick the drive to restore from. there's a greyed out button that says something along the lines of "choose a remote drive" which you obviously cant click, and the window itself only shows locally connected drives. fantastic, they've left out network restores from the installer disk. luckily I had an external hdd case I could put the backup drive into, but I'm rather pissed that they left out a very important feature.

Re:Supported from the start

[SuperKendall]

Actually network restore works, but it's annoying to get to. You have to open up Terminal.app (!) before you start the restore (one of the options from the menu at the top when you boot from disc) and mount the remote TM volume, then go through the restore process and it will treat that TM volume like a local drive. I think the command is afp_mount, or something like that...

I had to do that myself once...

The weird thing about that is, I can't see how that works with Time Capsule either unless you do the same thing. I always figured more recent Leopard discs have fixed that issue.

Opposite

[SuperKendall]

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

Address Book syncs with Gmail

[Christopher Rogers]

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

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[RMH101]

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

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[Christopher Rogers]

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

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[Homer1946]

Are we sure. It looks to me to be a feature of Address Book that in no way requires an iPhone.

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[RMH101]

there's a plist hack that turns it on without one, but it doesn't actually do the sync until you sync an iphone or possibly a recent ipod. bastards.

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[Corrado]

Now all I need is the ability to sync my events between iCal and Google Calendar and I'll be all set. :)

I know you can subscribe to Google Calendar from iCal, but its not the same as its read-only. Come on, let's have a bi-directional sync!

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[Homer1946]

That seems like a very odd choice...

Re:Address Book syncs with Gmail

[RMH101]

Yes. What we all really want is to get rid of .mac and have full contacts and calendar synch with Google, I guess. Apple Mail and GMail IMAP rocks, and it'd be very cool to add to this with calendar and address book.

Careful Hackintoshes with NVInject...

[hyperz69]

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.

Re:Careful Hackintoshes with NVInject...

[Dr.D.IS.GREAT]

Indeed, some are reporting of inconsistant performance with amd / ati hardware as well.

Hail Hackintosh

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[Phroggy]

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

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

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

This pretty much fixes Spaces

[Anonymous Coward]

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 and http://www.dribin.org/dave/blog/archives/2007/11/13/spaces/).

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

[Tim_UWA]

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.

Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces

[Anonymous Coward]

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. In the Spaces system preference pane, uncheck "When switching to an application, switch to a space with open windows for the application". I think this will give you the behavior you are seeking.

This preference option is new in 10.5.3.

Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces

[gullevek]

What I miss most are two things.

* quick move a window to a different space. I use this all the time in KDE. I really miss this, because using the f8 + drag & drop is really time consuming.

* stick a window to all space. Another one I dearly miss. I have pidgin and one console visible on all virtual desktops in KDE. I can't do that in Spaces, so its a real real pain to work with them ...

Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces

[raadradd]

What I miss most are two things. * quick move a window to a different space. I use this all the time in KDE. I really miss this, because using the f8 + drag & drop is really time consuming. Click on the title bar and while holding the mouse button down press ctrl + space number (ctrl-2).

* stick a window to all space. Another one I dearly miss. I have pidgin and one console visible on all virtual desktops in KDE. I can't do that in Spaces, so its a real real pain to work with them ... You can assign an application to all spaces in System Preferences -> Expose & Spaces -> Spaces tab.

Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces

[Tim_UWA]

Well I feel like an idiot! I misinterpreted that. Thanks.

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[brad-x]

Hahah.

Install stalls after "sleep"

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

[kevinmarchibald]

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.

Re:Mac Book Pro stuck-in-sleep bug fixed?

[Anonymous Coward]

The MBP firmware update from a week or two ago fixes this. You download it from software update. Then you may need to run it manually from the utilities folder.

Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Where can I download the source code for it?

"Major revision"?

[Artichoke]

10.5.2 -> 10.5.3 === M.m.p -> M.m.(p+1)

Isn't this merely a point revision? Oh, "revision" not "version". Back to sleep...

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[Poltras]

I don't think you should call them stupid. They made a design decision at first, then listened to the public and changed it 3 months after Leopard was out. And, as some AC has pointed (using less friendly words), Leopard has many features that, IMO, outweighs that one by a lot...

Tiger (10.4.11) Also

[konohitowa]

For you Tiger users, part of this update also includes security updates for Tiger. See the tech note for details.

Of interest to me was the Adobe Flash fix. That was overdue.

Let me know...

[Anonymous Coward]

...when Apple releases an update that gives us the ability to remove Finder, Safari, and Quicktime completely from the system, allowing us to use alternatives that don't suck a fat one.

in b4 HURR DONT USE THEM. They're still tightly integrated with the system. Which on a UNIX box is ridiculous.

Re:Retardedness Indeed

[Phroggy]

I applaud them for listening to the public, but didn't they do any usability testing first? I mean, Leopard had been in development for like a year and a half before it shipped, and they never realized the dock folder icon thing was a problem? It makes me wonder what other terrible design decisions they haven't gotten around to fixing yet.

Again, I had heard about the transparency option for the menubar in 10.5.2, but I hadn't heard about the "display as folder" option. I'm glad they fixed it.

my school is going to kill me =D

[kakiller]

i actually downloaded and installed this update while in school on my MBP (downloaded during English, installed during Japanese) and the install went flawless for me.

i started the update, put the comp on the desk behind me, took a test, and by the time i was done it was prompting me to restart =P in my experience with OSX (only about 6 months still newbie when it comes to mac) i have had very few problems, much less then the windows updates I'm used to.

I am expecting a call from the tech department of my school (still in high school) asking how i managed to take up half the schools bandwidth =). they already throttled our maclab (which i helped build) after 6 new iMac's and a mac mini tried to download the 10.5.2 update at the same time.

Dual Boot

[ConanG]

Some people notice boot times because they dual boot, not because they shut down every night. I have to boot into Windows almost every day, so I do notice it. I'm not obsessed with boot times, though. I'm just saying I understand why some people could be.

Copy bad read hang

[HTH NE1]

It will still fail to properly terminate a file copy when it experiences a low-level read error. After acknowledging the error dialog, the progress dialog sticks around without progress for hours unless the Finder is force-quitted, and sometimes the problem drive has to be powered down temporarily for the Finder to relaunch.

I've been getting this with external SATA drives connected via a backplane to the two extra SATA ports in a Mac Pro that aren't lined up with hard drive bays (presumably intended for use with SATA optical drives).