Slashdot Mirror


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."

34 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. It's 9D34 by TJamieson · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just like yesterday's test build.

    --
    For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    1. Re:It's 9D34 by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:It's 9D34 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      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

  2. Now, like all updates by oahazmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.)

    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
    1. Re:Now, like all updates by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
    2. Re:Now, like all updates by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    3. Re:Now, like all updates by TJamieson · · Score: 3, Informative

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

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    4. Re:Now, like all updates by raddan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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).

    5. Re:Now, like all updates by Lars+T. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.
      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  3. freakin scary, that was by Gewalt · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    --
    Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    1. Re:freakin scary, that was by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 4, Informative

      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
    2. Re:freakin scary, that was by jaredmauch · · Score: 2, Informative
      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 :).

    3. Re:freakin scary, that was by TJamieson · · Score: 2, Informative

      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?

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    4. Re:freakin scary, that was by dal20402 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.)

    5. Re:freakin scary, that was by TJamieson · · Score: 3, Informative

      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?

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
  4. No Server version yet by audunr · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

    1. Re:No Server version yet by SoylentRed · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

  5. Re:Service Pack 3 by SageinaRage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You prefer your bugs to go UN-fixed?

  6. Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive by neoform · · Score: 3, Informative

    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?

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
    1. Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive by raddan · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

    3. Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive by GalionTheElf · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

      --
      I'm going over here and I don't know why!
    4. Re:Still No TimeMachine On Remote Drive by willy_me · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

  7. Re:Service Pack 3 by oahazmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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".
    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
  8. Re:Retardedness by Poltras · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  9. Re:Retardedness by oahazmatt · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you right click ... Hey, now! Shhh! Don't let them know we've been able to do that.
    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
  10. Re:Service Pack 3 by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  11. Re:installing by dal20402 · · Score: 2, Informative

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

  12. Supported from the start by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  13. Re:WWDC by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  14. Re:WWDC by HumanEmulator · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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

  15. This pretty much fixes Spaces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    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!

    1. Re:This pretty much fixes Spaces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.
  16. Re:Retardedness Indeed by brad-x · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hahah.

    --
    // -- http://www.BRAD-X.com/ -- //