Apple OS X 10.5.6 Update Breaks Some MacBook Pros 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."
Re:More bricked computers (Score:4, Insightful)
How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (Score:5, Insightful)
...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:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (Score:5, Insightful)
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:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (Score:4, Insightful)
this sounds like user error to me (Score:4, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
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:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (Score:4, Insightful)
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:this sounds like user error to me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here we go (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (Score:3, Insightful)
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:Here we go (Score:3, Insightful)
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:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (Score:3, Insightful)
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.)
Well, that is a trade off (Score:4, Insightful)
If Apple had the market share of Windows and still had the default be "dont automatically install most updates", they'd be a huge source of botnets. Microsoft instead chose to install most updates by default (which is probably what most people want) and let nerds who know what they are doing turn that feature off.
Personally, I am surprised to learn Apple doesn't install most updates by default. I think for a consumer OS, such a policy is a very insecure one and is asking for trouble. Are you telling me it won't update itself without asking even if there is a zero-day exploit in the wild?
Re:More bricked computers (Score:2, Insightful)
But it's not actually bricked. It might appear to be bricked, but it wouldn't be wise to make the judgment that it's bricked without at least doing some basic diagnostics such as putting the machine into target disk mode or testing an external display.
Bricking a piece of hardware is relatively difficult for a piece of software to do, even with firmware, because replacing the firmware is usually possible.
Speaking as a bit of a language Nazi (and geek), bricking is one of those terms that should be reserved for extreme cases where the hardware actually IS bricked. Using it for situations where the hardware is recoverable dilutes the meaning and makes it much more difficult to convey when hardware is legitimately bricked.
Re:Here we go (Score:1, Insightful)
> 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.
Oh, right, because nobody could EVER use both, at different times, for different reasons.
You know, you should just pull your own plug because you are effectively brain-dead.
Re:I'll toss a log into the fire (Score:3, Insightful)
I installed Gentoo once and while it helped me understanding how a Linux distro works and how everything fits together, I never intented to use it as my OS.
If you do, you can expect stuff like this. Nobody every said Gentoo was for normal, non-pro users.
Re:I'll toss a log into the fire (Score:4, Insightful)
And assert that certain linux distributions are far worse then this. And by "certian" I am refering to Gentoo.
Yeah, but Gentoo's pretty much unique amongst Linux distros in that respect. It's also impossible to test upgrades properly, due to the very large number of possible combinations of packages, useflags, etc. This is why Gentoo is not suitable for normal users - it's more like an easier-to-maintain version of Linux From Scratch that a real distro.
(Also, believe it or not, Gentoo has actually improved quite a bit in this regard over the years.)
Re:No one is safe from the "oops" bug (Score:4, Insightful)
And here's what the popup box says: To allow, click the mouse button. To deny, click the mouse button.
Srsly, unless it said that it would totally bork your display, asking for confirmation is a waste of time and totally irrelevant. Obsequious != user friendly.
Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (Score:5, Insightful)
the problem was it was a faulty firmware that slipped through software update and was pulled a half hour later. It was replaced with the right firmware but a few people needing to be on the BLEEDING EDGE of updates never reapplied the right firmware, and thus are the ones complaining now.
Cut out the apologist bullshit.
Was it an official Apple update? Was it reasonable that those users would install an official update with no indication that there was a risk to their system?
Perhaps occasional f***-ups are inevitable, but it was still Apple's fault. Trying to imply that those users are to blame is fanboyish cult-defence of the worst order.
Re:How does Apple's QA miss problems like these... (Score:3, Insightful)
Second...a firmware issue is a huge difference from a hardware problem. A hardware problem would indicate that all MBPs of a particular model would suffer. A firmware problem would indicate that all MBPs with similar firmware would all have the same problem. Now that COULD be dependent on hardware as well, but if Apple ships firmware bundles that cover multiple MBPs then you could even get down to only MBPs with a specific hardware configuration with a specific firmware version are affected. Which again...is a bug in the firmware not a fault in the hardware. In fact yes...all hardware problems are physical...hence the differentiated names of hardware/firmware/software.
As pointed out previously their limited set of hardware isn't as limited as everyone would like to blather on about. Yes, it is FAR more limited than the free for all PC market. But there are Mac Books, Mac Book Pros, Mac Pros, Mac Minis, iMacs, and many generations with multiple configurations of each of those for many years all capable of running 10.5.6.
Again...stupid bug? trivial to reproduce? I haven't even seen what exactly was causing it. I have seen no evidence that says ALL MBPs with a particular firmware had the problem, or that all MBPs with a particular hardware configuration had the problem. Did you actually read the links? All PCmag is doing is quoting users with aliases from the apple discussion boards providing very random and incomplete information about the problem. I have perused the discussion boards at Apple and it has been about the same, a bunch of random complaints and random solutions with no word on a specific cause. I am fighting a Windows update problem...specific software crashes on some machines...same patch level, same hardware. Turns out command.com didn't get updated correctly on a few of them and they are running an older version that is causing problems. So...I could scream and moan about how this should have been an easy thing to catch...but 3 out of 500 computers have shown this problem and all are XP SP3 and all 3 have XP SP3 machines with identical hardware without the problem. So...bizarre fluke on a tiny fraction of the machines causes major problems. By all means..show me hard evidence that ALL identically configured/installed MBPs have this problem, show me hard evidence exactly what it was that was causing this problem. The links in the summary sure as shit don't have any definitive information. A link to a discussion on apple that has a wide variety of complaints, a pcmag story quoting a wide variety of complaints from the apple discussions, and a blog from someone that says they found a fix. All of this has triggered an outpouring of nonsense pundit opinion on slashdot bitching about how Apple fucked up because something went wrong with NO NONE NADA ZERO ZILCH indication how widespread this problem really is or if all of these users bitching even have the same issue. Is it 50%, is it
I can see the advertisement now .. (Score:3, Insightful)
Gentoo, the Linux distro for professionals who don't want a working OS.