Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
OS X Operating Systems Apple

Ask Slashdot: Did You Upgrade To macOS Big Sur? (wccftech.com) 101

Yesterday, Apple released the latest version of macOS: macOS Big Sur (also known as macOS 11.0) and the rollout was anything but smooth. Many users have complained about Apple services such as iMessage, or even Apple Pay, not working for them. Personally, my 5K iMac (2013), which isn't even compatible with Big Sur, ground to a halt yesterday, as I was unable to open up Google Chrome or any of my Adobe Creative Cloud apps. Even navigating my system preferences was painfully slow.

According to developer Jeff Johnson, the reason apps were failing to launch was because a process called "trustd" failed to attempt to connect to Apple's Online Certificate Status Protocol website (oscp.apple.com). "[D]enying the connection between "trustd" and oscp.apple.com fixes the issue, as does disabling a Mac's connection to the internet," notes Apple Insider. Slashdot reader shanen shares their experience: The story is about different problems, so I'll just start with my own anecdote. The 12GB download was amazingly slow. I'm being charitable and willing to attribute that to high demand. Eventually it did finish. The installation process didn't seem to be too bad. Then I did something with the Mac and it immediately wanted another upgrade. Turned out to be a double upgrade of two slightly different versions of some tools, but another (slow) GB bites the dust. Meanwhile, it decided to do that double-upgrade again? One of those two must have succeeded, because the third attempt failed with the appropriate notice that it had succeeded.

Bottom line? Not reassuring, but it seems to be okay now. I should have made a note about what triggered the extra GB, but I don't think I did anything unusual that should have required an OS-level extension of the system. Ergo, whatever was going on, I think it belonged in the original 12 GB download... Disclaimer needed: I just had an extremely negative interaction with Apple about the battery swelling problem in the course of attempting to consider whether or not I should upgrade my old MacBook Pro. It started on the Apple website, which was amazingly unhelpful even after it dangled a trade-in offer of some kind. Then it continued with a long phone call to a very kind and friendly person who seemed to know not so much, though he eventually led me to the search that revealed "Optimized Battery Charging" as an option that my old Mac cannot use. By the way, new iPhones apparently have it, too. So right now I think Apple finally figured out how to stop the battery swelling, but I am still screwed. I regard the Mac as a sunk cost, and the second rule of sunk cost is to NOT throw good money after bad. The first rule is that no one wants to talk about their mistakes, eh?

So did your upgrade to Big Sur go better than mine? I really hope so. Why share the misery? We have plenty of that with "He whose name need not be mentioned" anymore.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: Did You Upgrade To macOS Big Sur?

Comments Filter:
  • No (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It's a dumb OS name. That's why I'm stuck on Maverick.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Don't you mean Big Brother?

  • More locked down, for your happiness and computing pleasure.
  • by ruddk ( 5153113 )

    My late 2013 iMac is just too old right now.
    But with an external SSD, I still use it to edit 4K videos in FCPX and right now is bad time to buy a new one with the architecture changes coming etc. I looked at the DaVinci Resolve Presentation, maybe I should switch to that and ditch the Apple platform. But FCPX has been running and performing much better on my 2013 mac than fx. Premier pro does on a 2017 PC that has better specs.
    Oh well, I'll make that decision when the iMac dies since I just do videos for f

    • My 2014 MBPro will take it but I can't take it after seeing early adopters wind up losing their hair.

      I'll just wait until the new MBPro's hit the Apple Stores and by then 90+% of the bugs will be gone.

  • I'm rocking a 2012 Mac Mini (mostly just used for porting work), so Catalina is where my updates stop.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by doggo666 ( 6771818 )
      Same. But just ordered a new Mac Mini M1. You guys can go ahead and argue blah blah blah, I went through the first round of OS wars. I've supported a department full of Windows PC, run Linux & Sun servers, and played around with OSes for decades. At home, it's always been a Mac or a Linux box. Now in retirement, fuck it, I don't want to spend hours screwing around with computers to get them to work. So, back to the Mac. Big Sur will iron itself out in a couple of updates... And you guys can keep wast
  • H*** no. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @06:41PM (#60721628) Homepage Journal

    Like a decent percentage of users, I haven't even moved to Catalina. I'm stuck on Mojave because of incompatible apps. I don't know which sucks more — Apple dropping 32-bit app support or the realization that if they had just waited just a few more months and never shipped that one first-generation MacBook Pro with the crappy Core Duo, they could have skipped 32-bit x86 support entirely, and nobody would be swearing at them for dropping 32-bit support more than a decade later.

    • In the meantime, I type these words on a 2011 black box PC (Phenom2 6x) running current Debian Unstable (my 64-core box is at the other home), and tomorrow morning will turn on a 2004 64-bit Pentium4 machine for a monthly off-site backup job. Another 2004 Pentium4 (32-bit) is physically lying on the other one.

      All running newest versions of the OS (bleeding edge and most recent release, respectively), with no planned obsolescence.
      I prefer a set of big monitors, but got multiple ARM laptops sitting around, a

    • 32-bit support is needed for a lot of things. Sure, they could have said "nope, won't do it" but it might not have attracted the same number of customers. There is, not unsurprisingly, a lot of of software code that is not readily portable between 32 and 64 bit systems. When the first x86 Macs came out, 64-bit was still not common and most open source software was not all that portable.

      The hardware supports 32-bit, so it's really not that much software that they need to support to keep 32-bit running. M

      • The hardware supports 32-bit, so it's really not that much software that they need to support to keep 32-bit running. Microsoft does it and they're certainly not known for being nice to customers.

        They do have to do more testing, although I would hope that would be automated anyway. But as for Microsoft, they are known for backwards compatibility. I think that reputation is somewhat overrated, but they certainly always seem to try to provide it.

      • by Bert64 ( 520050 )

        As someone who used an Alpha in the 90s i can say open source software has been very portable for a long time.
        The Alpha was a 64bit cpu from the ground up, not a 64bit extension to a 32bit architecture.

        I also had 64bit Sparc, POWER and MIPS systems, although these typically used a 32bit userland it was possible to compile code in 64bit mode too.

        All of the major open source projects would compile and run fine on 64bit systems, problems were very rare. I remember encountering a tiny handful of niche open sour

        • Yes, I used an Alpha in the 90s. And I have run across unportable open source software that won't run there. I have run across third party expensive libraries that come with source code that aren't portable. The Unix stuff is generally better since you really can't write Unix code that's unportable without knowing about it very soon (but even then I see conflicts between bsd and linux APIs).

          There's also a lot of naivete. As in either not expecting the code to last more than a couple of years, or assuming

        • by hawk ( 1151 )

          the stuff that wouldn't comply to 64 bits existed, all right.

          As a grad student with a 9600 line to my student apartment, there was a Mac program that would let me run 7 simultaneous terminals (whee!). I could only go in through the older, non-alpha, workstations.

          It's been a while (as if the 9600 ISN line didn't tell you that . . .), but it seems to me that the code compiled but segfaulted on execution on the alphas.

          And then, for some reason, after some months I could only make the first 3 or 4 terminals w

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Not portable? Just tell the compiler that int is 32 bits and it will generate the right 64 bit code for you. That's the default. It's completely transparent to 99.999% of developers.

        Remember they were switching over from PPC anyway so all x86 software was new at the time. The far, far bigger issue was switching from big endian to little endian. They were on big from back in the 68000 days.

        • No, there are alignment issues if you have a 64-bit int in structs. Ie, code for 32-bit Intel will lay out structs differently than on a 32-bit Arm (raspberry pi). And then going to 64-bit Intel and Arm had some other issues that popped up though not as directly related to struct layouts.

      • I wonder if itâ(TM)s conceivable to do a Rosetta-style code translator that auto-converts a 32-bit app to 64-bit?

      • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        32-bit support is needed for a lot of things. Sure, they could have said "nope, won't do it" but it might not have attracted the same number of customers. There is, not unsurprisingly, a lot of of software code that is not readily portable between 32 and 64 bit systems. When the first x86 Macs came out, 64-bit was still not common and most open source software was not all that portable.

        That's the thing, any Mac apps had to be significantly modified to move from big-endian to little-endian during the transition anyway. Instead of doing everything in one transition, Apple made everybody do the endianness transition and then *immediately* turn around and do a second transition for 64-bit, which is why a sizable number of apps never made that second leap. I think everybody would have been better off if they had waited one more year and skipped 32-bit Intel entirely.

        Besides, most open source

    • by antdude ( 79039 )

      Ditto. 32-bit apps like old Office 2011 that still works. We still have another year of Mojave v10.14.6 support. I might upgrade to Catalina next year, but I will lose its iTunes, 32-bit app support, etc. :(

  • by vux984 ( 928602 )

    Dear Valued [company] Customer,

    This is an important notice concerning Appleâ(TM)s latest desktop operating system macOS Big Sur and [product]

    [company] highly recommends that macOS devices running [product] not be upgraded to macOS Big Sur.

    yada yada yada big Sur dropping support for kext in favor of sysext
    update scheduled for release early 2021

  • ...no! A couple months after a release there are still many bugs, would it be MacOS or iOS. I certainly would not try and install it the same day it is released.
  • by DaveM753 ( 844913 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @06:50PM (#60721664)

    'nuff said.

  • Waiting for .1 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 )

    Tempting as it is for the features, I always like to let an OS release marinate for a while before I upgrade... for various reasons I didn't even upgrade to Catalina until June this year. Some Big Sur features are compelling enough to me to update a bit sooner though, so probably will update in December.

    Interesting that the very verification system that keeps applications relatively secure on the Mac, has come to bite some people - I didn't see any issues today personally.

  • Apple fans realizing their favorite computer company is just as bad as all the others.

  • I own two macs, a 2009 MacBook Pro and a PowerMac G4 ("gigabit" tower).
  • by Peganthyrus ( 713645 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @07:15PM (#60721734) Homepage

    Catalina didn't offer anything that felt worth the hassle of losing a couple 32-bit things that will never be updated, and of discovering if the new separate Music app is as much of a pain in the ass about hassling me to subscribe to their streaming service as iOS Music is.

    At this point I think it is pretty clear that the only thing that's gonna get me onto a new version of MacOS is buying a new computer, and that's not gonna be until like 2022 or 2023. Which feels kinda weird given that I've been on the current OS once a .1 release came out since like Tiger.

  • My 2012 Mac Mini isnâ(TM)t supported by Big Sur, but I heard about too many problems with Catalina to bother, so Iâ(TM)m sticking with El Capitan until I get one of the new M-series macs.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Because I don't rush in to upgrade on Day 1. Let other people like you have all the difficulties and allow Apple to fix all the issues, then I can come along in 2 or 3 weeks' time and have a smooth experience.
  • by esme ( 17526 )

    I'm personally watching Homebrew's compatibility tracking issue (https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/issues/7857). Last I checked, Java, Go, Bash, and a lot of other stuff wasn't working, so there's no way I'm upgrading yet.

  • by I75BJC ( 4590021 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @07:32PM (#60721776)
    A software vendor (whose software I use on a regular basis) suggested waiting for the second or third update. They say that by the time the 11.0.3 or 11.0.4 updates come out all the shaky features and unexpected bugs will be taken care of.

    Waiting to hear what the early adopters said is something that I do will new OSes on every platform. I will eventually upgrade to 11.0 but right now all the programs that I use are running properly on 10.x.

    I do update iOS as soon as I can because our security advisors recommend to for keeping our security updates at the highest level.
    • Actually, every MacOS update in the last few years is always described on their page as being about their built-in applications. The OS itself (ie, kernel, libraries, filesystems, etc) are either not mentioned or only briefly alluded to in highly untechnical terms. And few people I know use the built in MacOS applications (or the built in Windows ones for that matter).

      • by shanen ( 462549 )

        Hmm... Actually the only significant use I ever found for the MacBook Pro was mostly using two of their built-in applications. Does dictation count as a full application? Anyway, I was doing some of my writing by dictating first drafts into Apple's mail app and sending them to another machine that was better for final polishing.

        Then an upgrade broke the way that the dictation worked. I struggled with it for a few months and finally gave up. Apple broke it right proper.

        Switched to Android for first-draft dic

  • Initial attempts to start the upgrade process on my 2014 MacBook Pro yesterday afternoon ran into the problem where the download wouldn't even begin, just giving an error, but by 1900 PT I was able to successfully start the download, which took about 10 minutes, after which it installed, restarted, asked about analytics, and it was done.

    Apple seems to have botched their online delivery early on, but otherwise the install and upgrade process here was smooth and easy here.

    Yaz

  • by e**(i pi)-1 ( 462311 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @07:36PM (#60721784) Homepage Journal
    I upgraded today and things are going well so far. Its nice that no revolutionary changes were made. What is important in our time is stability for operating systems and low latency and this is where apple currently delivers.
  • Hell no (Score:5, Informative)

    by robi5 ( 1261542 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @07:42PM (#60721802)
  • Stands for Linux i^HOS Love. :)

  • I wonâ(TM)t pay another penny to Microsoft for Mac Office and the 32 bit Excel runs just fine.

  • I did the upgrade from Catalina and so far it's working fine. I think it's an improvement and am not at all sorry I upgraded.
  • by ugen ( 93902 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @08:12PM (#60721882)

    On Mojave, no plans to upgrade. This is their last OS that supports 32 bit applications and hence - non-subscription Photoshop.

    Add to that silly "security" decisions in Catalina and Big Sur, and there really isn't any reason to "upgrade" (not until this one becomes completely unusable)

    • yup, with my 32 bit Office Suite. Word is a virus but I skipped Catalina to delay pointless money sent to Redmond, and will continue to do so for as long as I can.
  • I upgraded my 5K iMac (2019) this morning: left it chugging away and went for a bike ride. Brightly-coloured login screen waiting for me on my return. Seems to be less disruptive than Catalina, so far, although there's a good deal more visual redesign than the last several changes. All of my usual apps re-opened. Network drives in the dock re-mounted. Nothing adverse to report, so far. Quite boring, really. Oh, there's one (?) extra slice on the root partition and root is now mounted "sealed". Good.

  • Mine went smooth. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by surfcow ( 169572 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @09:17PM (#60722054) Homepage

    My install went smooth. I started it, took a walk, it was done. I like the useful new stuff, and the new look.

    And the price.

    I have read the complaints, I am reserving judgement. Actually trying the product.

  • The only reason I'm running Catalina on my primary computer is it's a 16" MacBook Pro. IE, the ones that came out after Catalina was released. If I could reasonably download, I would've. I have 0 desire whatsoever for my desktop to look like an iOS device. It's likely I'll never "upgrade" to Big Sur.

  • by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @10:33PM (#60722332)

    I'm still using a 2010 Mac mini, you insensitive clod!

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Considering that the primary point of Big Sur was to add support for Apple's new ARM processors, I wouldn't expect that installing it would improve the performance of my Intel based Macs at all. Quite the opposite, I'd imagine.

  • by cloudkucooland ( 1756238 ) on Friday November 13, 2020 @11:57PM (#60722638) Homepage
    I upgraded my laptop, leaving my desktop on Catalina for now. It took a while to download, but once it started it went fine. The 12Gb downloaded in about 40 minutes. A few reboots later and everything looks good. I'm still adjusting to the UI changes. I've not had any issues with audio production software (even from vendors who discouraged the upgrade; not that I do much audio work on this laptop). My word processor, web browser, terminal and other such tools are all just fine. I'll upgrade the desktop once I get confirmation from my audio interface's manufacturer that it will work. I usually wait several months to upgrade that system. I'll probably spring for a new M1 Apple silicon Mini to test early next year.
    • by m2pc ( 546641 )

      Same here -- I couldn't even attempt the installation for the better half of the day here due to the overloaded servers. I kept getting an odd message like "An error occurred installing the selected updates" and I did experience some very weird system pauses and hangs before I was able to actually download and install the update (turns out these were due to Apple's "gatekeeper" web services being online but very slow to respond).

      The actual download only took about 15-20min for me at 450mbps, and after abo

  • The 12GB download was amazingly slow. I'm being charitable and willing to attribute that to high demand.

    High demand caused a slow download? How very 1990s. Haven't Apple heard of BitTorrent?

    • On the next release they will add a new INNOVATIVE feature called iBit (a new UI/interface for BitTorrent) and all iFans will call it the best things since sliced bread.

    • by kmoser ( 1469707 )
      If only Apple had enough money to set up a CDN to support lots of traffic.
  • The point of operating system is to run stuff. Windows 10 runs boatloads of new and old games and LTSC edition is free of nagware. ChromeOS has a bloat free browser and Android/Linux support. But Big Sur? No 32 bit games, no touchscreen/mobile apps. Why would I want to upgrade from Catalina and give up real functionality for a couple of UI gimmicks?

  • I have become used to with Apple updates.
    Upgrade to macOS 11, took approx 6.5 hours
    Reboot could not log in while optimization ran, took approx 12.75 hours.
    Update XCode to 12.2, took approx 8.25 hours
    All total 27.5 hours, and the downloads went really well for an Apple Update.
    But the Install, Optimization, XCode Install was ungodly long.
    • Funny so the code signing and provisioning is f'd up.
      Can not create new ones using my dev user account to try because it is 0501 hours and the Client(Enterprise Account Owner) has not logged in and accepted the new Terms and Conditions ;) Fun Fun
  • Big nope, thanks for beta testing for me! ;)
    Seriously Catalina made enough changes though luckily I seems to have avoided them all. Biggest change I saw so far was that you need to move things out of the jail when installing with xattr.
    This is my work machine so I am not going to attempt an upgrade until much later.

  • Snow Leopard on the Xeon.

    OS X is dead to me.

  • ... Manjaro XFCE on a 14" Tuxedo Laptop with 1tb of storage and 24gb of memory for a third of the price an apple equivalent would cost. My last macOS was Yosemite. My last spoke Apple service was a 2011 macbook air.

    Doesn't look like I'll be going back, for a bunch of reasons.

  • Download went fine and install was good on iMac, but it bricked my 2014 MBP. After the install restart, only the backlight comes on. No way to do a clean install or restore because there is no boot. Thanks a lot, Big Sur!
  • If your 2013 Mac is incompatible, why did you upgrade then complain? It just sounds pretty silly to me.
  • Apple finally outdid Microsoft & Google and people are not up in arms about it. Remember how much stink there was all over the interwebs about Microsofts telemetry, which can be disabled? Apparently, on Big Sur, Apple's even more extensive telemetry (hash on every app you run), has not option to be disabled. In fact, nobody really knew about it until Apple, being classically incompetent in setting up servers as they have in the last few years, could not server the requests which did not allow for users

  • I didn't think a 5K iMac (2013) could get the Big Sur update. Thought my Retina 5K, iMac 2017 was the bottom line that was recommended for update. My download was 48G and took 1.5 hours to download with 25Mbps speed. It took almost 45 (?) minutes to install - no info lost. Everything running great so far. All the Apple major apps did an update afterwards. Other commenters have said they have never updated other iOS updates rather than lose apps/programs. I hated it when my PowerPC G4 got old, but at a ce
    • by burnetd ( 90848 )

      Installed it on Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014 iMac from the App Store, took ~ a hour from kicking of the download to a Big Sur desktop.

      Only thing I've found broke so far was the version of Thunderbird I was on. Just upgraded it to the latest Beta,

      Still got updating my MacPort installed stuff to try though.

  • I have more than one mac, so I went ahead and allowed the upgrade on one of them yesterday (11/13). 12 GB is a lot to download but it actually went fast for me and I didn't experience any double-upgrades as the OP has. The upgrade did surface one problem with an old Python script I have that uses Matplotlib; as soon as the plot tried to draw, segfault was raised from some OSX screen drawing APIs. The script was using Python2 which is obsolete anyway, so I updated it to use Python3 and the issue cleared.
  • ...of aapplefegs who cry over lack of 32-bit support. Killing off the old rubbish spurs innovation and people creating for the new way of 64-but and soon AArch64. Move with the times, or be roadkill! If you want support for your crappy old hardware, just use Linux.
  • On a 2020 16" mbp.

    The update was slow and buggy, restarting the download several times and presenting a progress bar that would make windows 95 proud.

    Now the icons have changed. I haven't seen anything else new.

  • For those who upgraded already? Why does Apple get to tell you when to upgrade? Said nicer, what features made the update a necessity for you?
  • I updated and everything went well. I see that Homebrew doesn't officially support Big Sur yet, but my updates have all been working without issue so far. The current version of MacUpdate crashes under Big Sur, but that's not a huge problem as I can always install any needed app updates manually. The only other app I have installed that doesn't run is Inkscape. So far, I like the look of the windows and notification center. I hear there have been issues with the older (2013-14) Macbook Pro's so I would wait

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...