or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple to deploy Mac OS X 10.4.1 for testing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to deploy Mac OS X 10.4.1 for testing

post #1 of 115
Thread Starter 
The first stable builds of a maintenance and security update to Apple's recently released Tiger operating system are being passed around the company's Cupertino headquarters, AppleInsider has learned.

Anonymous but reliable sources say that after a month in development, Mac OS X 10.4.1 Update, code-named "Atlanta," is ready to be deployed for rigorous and wide-spread testing. Its objective will be to rectify any and all outstanding issues present in the shipping version of Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," which went on sale over the weekend.

Software builds of the Mac OS X 10.4.1 Update have reportedly been assigned to the 8Bx millstone, with the most recent builds rumored to be Mac OS X 10.4.1 build 8B5, 8B7 and 8B9.

According to various contacts, the update will address issues with over three dozen components of the Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" operating system, with an emphasis on improving general stability and reliability.

Some of the key areas to be targeted by the update include: AFPServer, AddressBook, AppKit, Bluetooth, Carbon, CoreFoundation, CoreGraphics, DashBoard Widgets, DVD Player, Directory Services, Fonts, Help, iCal, iSync, Mail, Preview, Printing, OpenLDAP, Quartz, SecurityAgent, and WebCore.

Insiders also believe that Mac OS X 10.4.1 will include updates to Tiger's .Mac synchronization and notification components and pack a new version of the Mac OS X xnu kernel.

Already, insiders tell AppleInsider that recent builds of the system update have addressed nearly two dozen bugs located in Tiger, including sleep issues with iMacs, random crashes related to the new H.264 video codec, PDF printing problems with Safari and Bluetooth FTP.

Problems with AddressBook, .Mac registration, iPhoto, Pages, iCal, iSync and iDVD have also been rectified, sources said.

Of interest to some users, sources said Mac OS X 10.4.1 will also correct DHCP issues experienced by some Tiger users who own certain D-Link wireless routers.

Mac OS X 10.4.1, which currently weighs in at approximately 35MB, is slated for a mid to late-May release.
post #2 of 115
It better do something about Safari crashing every five minutes.....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #3 of 115
UPS is delivering my Family Pack today so it's going on the least critical Mac, but I'll wait for 4.1 before loading it on the two used for work. Must say that Apple is responding rather fast now that they are getting consumer feedback.
Ken
Reply
Ken
Reply
post #4 of 115
what about write ftp/smb support in Finder (or heck, sftp support)?

or System Preferences spotlight that works for everybody (doesn't work for me), or a Hardware System Preference that actually works.

i really hope, as segovius said, that they fix the safari crashing, and get rid of the ridiculous download confirmation (just let me turn it off).

and maybe Dashboard widgets that don't take up 44MB of RAM (almost 200 virtual). that seems a little exessive.

Tiger is great, but there are definitely some things that need to be ironed out.
post #5 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by AppleInsider
Insiders also believe that Mac OS X 10.4.1 will [..] pack a new version of the Mac OS X xnu kernel.

Why does Kasper keep bringing this up? Every single update to OS X has so far brought a new kernel. This is no news at all, and shouldn't surprise anyone.
post #6 of 115
My Safari has been perfectly stable since installation. I assume you guys aren't using any Safari 'enhancers' or hacks held over from Panther/Jaguar like Pith Helmet or Saft.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]

"What's your point?" ~ Mark Solomon...
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]

"What's your point?" ~ Mark Solomon...
Reply
post #7 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
It better do something about Safari crashing every five minutes.....

Huh? I've been running Safari since installing Tiger a week ago and haven't had any problems. Maybe you should try an archive & install, or an erase & install -- and be sure to follow MacFixit's troubleshooting tips before & after installing Tiger, such as running DiskWarrior, repairing permissions, etc.
post #8 of 115
Safari crashing problems appear to be very rare and usually associated with buggy third party software.

What is commonplace and widespread is iChat AV videoconferencing issues... and I didn't see those referenced in the article
post #9 of 115
Excuse my ignorance, but what is "Bluetooth over FTP" anyways?
post #10 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by davidswelt
Excuse my ignorance, but what is "Bluetooth over FTP" anyways?

It's utter nonsense :-)

What Kasper means is the Bluetooth FTP profile, which transfers files between Bluetooth devices, e.g. sends ringtones to your cellphone, etc.
post #11 of 115
No third party extensions here. Safari crashes all the time on my 867 Tibook. I have yet to run disc utilities from the DVD though. I'll hold off on Discwarrior for a few until they come out with a 10.4 update.

Archive and installed, fixed and backed up everything beforehand, ran disc permissions afterwards...

Safari's in Debug mode, that may have something to do with it.

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #12 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by tink
I'll hold off on Discwarrior for a few until they come out with a 10.4 update.

Ask, and ye shall receive.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #13 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by Booga
What is commonplace and widespread is iChat AV videoconferencing issues... and I didn't see those referenced in the article

YES! Why is iChat not mentioned!?!
post #14 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by tink
No third party extensions here. Safari crashes all the time on my 867 Tibook. I have yet to run disc utilities from the DVD though. I'll hold off on Discwarrior for a few until they come out with a 10.4 update.

Archive and installed, fixed and backed up everything beforehand, ran disc permissions afterwards...

Safari's in Debug mode, that may have something to do with it.

I'm in debug mode too but also have Pith Helmet. No otther extensions and it only crashes on certain pages now....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #15 of 115
I've also read (but not been able to test yet) that VPC networking is broken, and that there are PPTP problems too. I don't see any mention of those in this update :-/
post #16 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist
My Safari has been perfectly stable since installation. I assume you guys aren't using any Safari 'enhancers' or hacks held over from Panther/Jaguar like Pith Helmet or Saft.

I use Pith helmet 2.5 and everything is honkey-dorey.
post #17 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
Ask, and ye shall receive.

Nice!

How bout a large pizza and a beer!

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #18 of 115
Sounds good, send 'em over as payment for the link.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #19 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by AppleInsider
Problems with AddressBook, .Mac registration, iPhoto, Pages, iCal, iSync and iDVD have also been rectified, sources said.

Re: iPhoto Problems

I've noticed since installing Tiger that when I do something to a photo (red eye, adjust color etc.) that when I click to a different photo and iPhoto applies the changes, it brightens/washes out the color in that photo.

Here's hoping this update will fix that.
post #20 of 115
I think reasons entirely unrelated to the OS's state of preparedness (or, more accurately, lack of preparedness) influenced the rush to get it out the door.

It is painfully obvious that Tiger was poorly tested and management was aware of this and shipped it anyway.

Apple should expend more effort testing and less chasing rumours.

Shame, shame, shame!
post #21 of 115
This is a big one Kickaha! You see what I meant?
post #22 of 115
There can be a hundred small bugs, but as long as there are no *critical* ones, it's shippable. This doesn't change my opinion one bit, sorry.

Interesting research article in this month's IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering that addresses this beautifully. It's a study done by the U of Washington Business School in collaboration with (IIRC) UCLA CS dept, on the relative advantages (or lack thereof) in various styles of maintenance scheduling: a) continuous, b) fixed, c) fixed but flexible. c) won out rather conclusively. What this means is that you *stop fixing bugs* at some point, and ship the product, then step back, reassess, and attack the bugs en masse. This provided a *much* better scale of economics than the continuous approach (where you just keep stomping bugs as you run across them).

You're advocating continuous... just keep stomping bugs until there aren't any. It isn't the most effective. Bugs need to get ranked according to severity, and if not a single critical bug exists, it's shippable. *Then* you rally the troops, and attack the bugs as a concerted effort in a cleanup phase. This provides not only the best economic approach to the company, but also produces the cleanest code in the end, in a more timely manner.

I haven't seen any critical bugs so far... the worst one I've seen is the apparent bug in Mail 2's importer barfing on certain IMAP boxes. No data loss, however, it just requires a manual import. Unfortunately, some folks are trashing the mail folders in an attempt to 'fix' it, and *are* losing data that way. The rest of the bugs seem to fall into the annoying category, for some value of annoying.

This is how software development works when it's being done right. You can argue that they shouldn't have released 10.4 until they had finished the cleanup phase, and if it were a product to be released in a vacuum, I'd probably agree with you. Given that it is a strategic piece of a much larger pie, however, I'm sure you can agree that there are probably many other considerations on timing that you and I are not privy to. I'm not going to be arrogant enough to be the armchair CEO and claim that I know better on the business end how they should time their releases.

I can only address the engineering aspects, and on that front they're doing what they should to deliver the best product in the least amount of time for the least cost.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #23 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha


There can be a hundred small bugs, but as long as there are no *critical* ones, it's shippable. This doesn't change my opinion one bit, sorry.

Interesting research article in this month's IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering that addresses this beautifully. It's a study done by the U of Washington Business School in collaboration with (IIRC) UCLA CS dept, on the relative advantages (or lack thereof) in various styles of maintenance scheduling: a) continuous, b) fixed, c) fixed but flexible. c) won out rather conclusively. What this means is that you *stop fixing bugs* at some point, and ship the product, then step back, reassess, and attack the bugs en masse. This provided a *much* better scale of economics than the continuous approach (where you just keep stomping bugs as you run across them).

You're advocating continuous... just keep stomping bugs until there aren't any. It isn't the most effective. Bugs need to get ranked according to severity, and if not a single critical bug exists, it's shippable. *Then* you rally the troops, and attack the bugs as a concerted effort in a cleanup phase. This provides not only the best economic approach to the company, but also produces the cleanest code in the end, in a more timely manner.

I haven't seen any critical bugs so far... the worst one I've seen is the apparent bug in Mail 2's importer barfing on certain IMAP boxes. No data loss, however, it just requires a manual import. Unfortunately, some folks are trashing the mail folders in an attempt to 'fix' it, and *are* losing data that way. The rest of the bugs seem to fall into the annoying category, for some value of annoying.

This is how software development works when it's being done right. You can argue that they shouldn't have released 10.4 until they had finished the cleanup phase, and if it were a product to be released in a vacuum, I'd probably agree with you. Given that it is a strategic piece of a much larger pie, however, I'm sure you can agree that there are probably many other considerations on timing that you and I are not privy to. I'm not going to be arrogant enough to be the armchair CEO and claim that I know better on the business end how they should time their releases.

I can only address the engineering aspects, and on that front they're doing what they should to deliver the best product in the least amount of time for the least cost.

It is continuous while they are still in pre-release. That's what pre-release development is. It can't be done any other way.
But beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs in the final stage. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Apple takes a short cut here. Over the years I worked on any number of software projects., as well as beta tested many others. None of these products, including Photoshop, were ever released with KNOWN bugs.

The better the beta program the more bugs are found and fixed before release. Apple is known to have a poor beta program. They keep it to as small a group as they can. If they spread it out more, the way developers have been asking them to do, then a lot more of these bugs would have been found out earlier and squashed.

I'm sorry, but making excuses for them doesn't change it. Some of these bugs are more severe than others, but to say that if it isn't a show stopper it's ok for release is just too fanboy.

Let's admit when Apple screws up. They do, you know.

If MS comes out with buggy software, our Mac community points, and says how incompetent they are. We sometimes have to point that same finger backwards.

Yes, they shouldn't have released until they finished the cleanup phase. That's what it's for.

They did this to get some cash for this quarter that would otherwise go to the next quarter. I hope it's not to cover for some bad news.

But it wasn't in the interest of their customers. The first adopters, such as myself, would have been happy if it were released at the end of May, or during the conference. No one would have been the wiser. Everyone would still have rejoiced that it came out on time.
post #24 of 115
Quote:
Safari's in Debug mode, that may have something to do with it.

there's a debug 'mode' ? afaik it's just a menu item. visible or hidden, this shouldn't be responsible for any crashes.
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion
Reply
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion
Reply
post #25 of 115
While I think the economic argument is very valid and a good practice, Apple testing does need to improve. I know that I am weary of the Apple Software update panel on my critical systems (as well as my not so critical systems).

In regards to Safari quits this may be my issue since I have Speed Download. I'll check on it when i get home. Macintouch
Quote:
May 5, 2005

Tips

John Tierney
After installing 10.4 (archive and preserve settings on a G4) I was experiencing a lot of unexpended quits from Safari. I finally traced it down to Speed Download 3 that I honestly had forgotten I had installed. After running their included un-install program Safari has been much more stable.

In regards to DiscWarrior, I have 3.02 and wrote tech support to see when an update will be posted since they only had earlier version upgrading noted on the site.

They wrote back noting...
Quote:
DiskWarrior 3.0.3 (adding Mac OS X 10.4.x "Tiger" compatibility) will be
available later in the week as a free download from the Alsoft website
for current users of DiskWarrior 3.0., 3.0.1 & 3.0.2. This download will
walk you through creating an updated DiskWarrior CD using your original
disk, a CD burner and a blank CD-R.

A DiskWarrior 3.0.3 Update CD will also be available directly from
Alsoft. For current users of DiskWarrior 3.x this updated CD will be
available for about $20. These can be ordered by contacting our Sales
Department at 1-800-257-6381 (US Toll Free) or at 1-281-353-4090
(International).

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply

All my life, I always wanted to be somebody. Now I see that I should have been more specific.
- Lily Tomlin
Reply
post #26 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It is continuous while they are still in pre-release. That's what pre-release development is. It can't be done any other way.
But beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs in the final stage. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Apple takes a short cut here. Over the years I worked on any number of software projects., as well as beta tested many others. None of these products, including Photoshop, were ever released with KNOWN bugs.

The better the beta program the more bugs are found and fixed before release. Apple is known to have a poor beta program. They keep it to as small a group as they can. If they spread it out more, the way developers have been asking them to do, then a lot more of these bugs would have been found out earlier and squashed.

I'm sorry, but making excuses for them doesn't change it. Some of these bugs are more severe than others, but to say that if it isn't a show stopper it's ok for release is just too fanboy.

Let's admit when Apple screws up. They do, you know.

If MS comes out with buggy software, our Mac community points, and says how incompetent they are. We sometimes have to point that same finger backwards.

Yes, they shouldn't have released until they finished the cleanup phase. That's what it's for.

They did this to get some cash for this quarter that would otherwise go to the next quarter. I hope it's not to cover for some bad news.

But it wasn't in the interest of their customers. The first adopters, such as myself, would have been happy if it were released at the end of May, or during the conference. No one would have been the wiser. Everyone would still have rejoiced that it came out on time.

Actually you are wrong that beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs.

Beta testers are to tag any and all bugs that are SHOWSTOPPERS.

Submitted bugs then get validated, confirmed and if a workaround is present gets implemented until an elegant solution can be implemented.

If critical system issues are still prevalent then showstoppers are prevalent and the system gets that round of solutions implemented, a new build is produced and sent to beta testers for another thorough regression.

If still some non-showstopper bugs are prevalent that aren't addressed in the beta build release notes those get filed as New. Others get tagged as a redundant bug cross-referenced with the earlier verified bug in the Tracker solution at Apple.

If no showstoppers are still prevalent the build is rolled GM, stamped and pressed for us to use. Upon that build they return to stomping out workaround bug fixes and the rest of the bugs in-house testing can catch for the next incremental free update.
post #27 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by mdriftmeyer
Actually you are wrong that beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs.

Beta testers are to tag any and all bugs that are SHOWSTOPPERS.

Submitted bugs then get validated, confirmed and if a workaround is present gets implemented until an elegant solution can be implemented.

If critical system issues are still prevalent then showstoppers are prevalent and the system gets that round of solutions implemented, a new build is produced and sent to beta testers for another thorough regression.

If still some non-showstopper bugs are prevalent that aren't addressed in the beta build release notes those get filed as New. Others get tagged as a redundant bug cross-referenced with the earlier verified bug in the Tracker solution at Apple.

If no showstoppers are still prevalent the build is rolled GM, stamped and pressed for us to use. Upon that build they return to stomping out workaround bug fixes and the rest of the bugs in-house testing can catch for the next incremental free update.

If that's how Apple is doing it, then they are taking shortcuts. Buggy features should be delisted if they can't be fixed on release. If the feature is major then it must be fixed for release.

Many times over the years that very methodology has been used. Adobe uses it as well. If a feature has a bug, and it isn't fixable for release, it is removed. If it is a major feature, then Adobe has released a .5 update later on with that and others that it was working on in the meantime.
post #28 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It is continuous while they are still in pre-release. That's what pre-release development is. It can't be done any other way.

Correct.

Quote:
But beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs in the final stage. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

I'm sorry, but you must be testing 100-lines-of-code shareware then.

Quote:
Apple takes a short cut here. Over the years I worked on any number of software projects., as well as beta tested many others. None of these products, including Photoshop, were ever released with KNOWN bugs.

I'm 110% sure no version of Photoshop ever got released without known bugs. And operating systems have an order of a magnitude more code, much of which in OS X's case isn't even Apple's own code and thus not directly under their control.

Quote:
The better the beta program the more bugs are found and fixed before release.

Duh.

Quote:
Apple is known to have a poor beta program. They keep it to as small a group as they can. If they spread it out more, the way developers have been asking them to do, then a lot more of these bugs would have been found out earlier and squashed.

And more moronic beta testers will leak builds than already do.

Quote:
Some of these bugs are more severe than others, but to say that if it isn't a show stopper it's ok for release is just too fanboy.

Sure, go ahead, give any and all software developer fanboy attributes.

OR you could get a clue and look into public bug trackers. You would realize that no big software projects exist without known bugs. Mozilla, GNOME and similar projects have, over the years, accumulated several thousands of unresolved bugs. And not so because they're badly-managed.

Quote:
Let's admit when Apple screws up. They do, you know.

Yes, they do.

Quote:
If MS comes out with buggy software, our Mac community points, and says how incompetent they are.

I don't, unless there's alot of major bugs that can be easily reproduced. Which in no Windows release I've tested myself was the case.

Windows NT 3.50 had 40,000 known bugs upon release. Windows NT 3.51 had 11,000 known bugs upon release. Just a few numbers for you to deal with.

Quote:
Yes, they shouldn't have released until they finished the cleanup phase. That's what it's for.

There was a cleanup phase of several months.

Quote:
They did this to get some cash for this quarter that would otherwise go to the next quarter.

FUD.
post #29 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Apple takes a short cut here. Over the years I worked on any number of software projects., as well as beta tested many others. None of these products, including Photoshop, were ever released with KNOWN bugs.



Products are shipped with known bugs all the time. If a minor bug crashes 0.001 % of your users, you're not gonna hold back the release. It all depends on the product, distribution, the audience, and the company however. At the end of the day there's a business to run.
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #30 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
Correct.



I'm sorry, but you must be testing 100-lines-of-code shareware then.



I'm 110% sure no version of Photoshop ever got released without known bugs. And operating systems have an order of a magnitude more code, much of which in OS X's case isn't even Apple's own code and thus not directly under their control.



Duh.



And more moronic beta testers will leak builds than already do.



Sure, go ahead, give any and all software developer fanboy attributes.

OR you could get a clue and look into public bug trackers. You would realize that no big software projects exist without known bugs. Mozilla, GNOME and similar projects have, over the years, accumulated several thousands of unresolved bugs. And not so because they're badly-managed.



Yes, they do.



I don't, unless there's alot of major bugs that can be easily reproduced. Which in no Windows release I've tested myself was the case.

Windows NT 3.50 had 40,000 known bugs upon release. Windows NT 3.51 had 11,000 known bugs upon release. Just a few numbers for you to deal with.



There was a cleanup phase of several months.



FUD.

If you had read my previous post completely, you would have seen what I've said about my beta experience. You can be as sure as you want to about Photoshop. But don't speak about what you don't know. With Photoshop, I've been beta testing since 1.0.3. Adobe has NEVER allowed a known bug out. does that mean that a (rare) bug didn't make it through? Of course not. I've also written some rather lengthy Fortran code for the Vax regarding imaging. I've been involved in other projects as well. I started learning Fortran IV in high school in 1965. So I've seen this for awhile.

None were 100 line shareware programs.

I'm aware of how complex a modern OS is. I chided a poster once for "claiming" to be a beta tester for Apple's OS, and having tested, as he put it, ----E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G----. We all know that it's just not possible.

He also claimed that Apple did so as well. Also nonsense. I also pointed out that there is code in BSD that no one knows anything about.

So I do understand the issues.

But we are talking about KNOWN bugs. Bugs that affect the operation. There are bugs that don't affect the operation, and even if these are known, they are often left for a later time (if ever). But I'm not referring to those.

Apple should stop caring if moronic developers leak builds or not. The one good thing about MS is that they have public betas all the time. What MS does about the feedback is another issue, but Apple should take a look at that.

I'm not giving developers fanboy attributes, just Kickaha and friends.

I'm also not interested in what open source does. They are looking for people to help with their public projects. That's a totally different environment.

And as you are telling me to look at them, you should as well. All of these open source projects have more than one track and build. The stable build, which is the debugged and official release, and the experimental releases which are still in development.

That would be almost what MS does with their technology releases, like the past and current Longhorn releases (and future). And the XP release. Except that while they are looking for feedback, they are not looking for volunteer programmers.

Of course the XP release isn't all that great, but that's MS.

Apple used to be known for very stable and bug free OS releases. Like it or not, this release is considered, by those developers you mentioned, to be the buggiest release since 10.0.

As I've said MS is not the pinnacle of perfection. They are not my, and shouldn't be your, standard. Apple has always set a higher standard. I would just like to see them stay with it.

They couldn't have had a cleanup phase of several months because they were continuing to add features into March. The cleanup phase begins after the feature set is locked. Unless some features are removed at the last minute because of intractable bugs.
post #31 of 115
(edit) My apologies. Whilst my original point still stands, I don't think this particular post of mine added anything of use to the thread.

Just for the record though, with the exception of Windows XP x64 Edition, fully public beta tests are very uncommon at Microsoft.
post #32 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
But beta testers aren't supposed to see any bugs in the final stage. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Apple takes a short cut here..


So you are saying that Windows is always released with every known bug fixed?

At some point you have to put it out there, and fix some things later.

As far as developers complaining. What I've heard and what was said on Ars Technica is that Apple has always said the way the kernal was set up was not permanent and would change. Many are confused as to why some developers were not prepared.
post #33 of 115
This whole idea about never sending anything out until it has no bugs (perfection in my book) is the same reason some people keep taking college courses, piling on degrees and never stepping into the real world.

Name one profession or one product in any line of business that would ever be able to say they or it is 100% ready.

This argument is just tiresome.
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
post #34 of 115
I've been doing software and hardware product management for over 15 years, so I think I can add a bit to this discussion from the "corporate" perspective. In software development, there are usually two high-level questions: 1) when is the ship date, and 2) how many bugs of what severity level are acceptable for a released product. Nobody likes to ship buggy products, but the reality is that, at some point, you've got to say "ship it!"

Many software and hardware companies have moved to the "train leaving the station" model: the software will ship on (insert date here), and it will either be ready to ship by then or troublesome features will be removed to make it ready to ship (i.e., they will "miss the train"). The "train" model ensures that *something* is released on time to meet the expectations of customers, stockholders, the media, etc., and it also ensures that development resources get freed-up for other projects. For public companies, shipping late can have disastrous consequences for stock prices and can put a company at a competitive disadvantage if another company gets their product to market first.

Most product bugs are ranked by severity (or priority): P1 bugs prevent a product from shipping: they affect the primary function of the product for many users and cannot be worked around. Products should never ship with any P1 bugs. P2 bugs are somewhat less severe or have work-arounds; a small number of P2s are present in most shipping software. Priorities often go as deep as 9 levels (a P9 is often related to documentation or minor appearance flaws that have no affect on performance or usability, and is classified as an "enhancement").

I have never heard of any software product shipping without any bugs at all.

Beta testing is really hard for corporate developers. You generally want to keep betas under some control (i.e., not available to just anyone) to allow a bit of surprise to customers, to prevent late betas from being distributed illegally, and to allow the project managers to keep track of test results. Unfortunately, there are so many permutations of hardware and software, that it is literally impossible to develop test cases that cover everything. A problem is that 500 public beta testers may essentially test the same things, and none may hit the critical sequence that triggers a problem. Also, while many beta testers have good intentions, it is often true that they - as a group - don't do the thorough testing expected by the developers.

Some companies I've worked with are even considering paid beta programs: you get the software and a list of things to test; when you submit documentation on schedule that shows test results for specific tests, you get paid. Otherwise, you get a "thank you" and no payment.

I don't plan to upgrade to Tiger until at least 10.4.1, but I think anyone who's using 10.4.0 should be getting a fairly solid release, especially when used on unmodified hardware running common apps.
You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
post #35 of 115
I hope this update fixes some of the quirkiness of Spotlight.
post #36 of 115
I can pretty much promise you Adobe lets software out with known bugs...

We've worked with Adobe pretty closely on a variety of issues we have had with their software (we're a rather large unit). Adobe has even sent techs to our site to see first hand what our issues are.

So far, we still see issues we reported early in the previous version of Creative Suite in the new one. We also have found issues in the first two days of using the new version that we may consider show stoppers until fixed.

This tells me either Adobe is doing a pretty crappy job of testing different environments or they realize they have to make a buck or two too and can fix some problems later.

I also agree Adobe simply turns off a variety of features that they can't get working well. It's a double edge sword. How often do you suppose they consider all the "planned" updates they cut when they set their pricing?
post #37 of 115
I am concerned about the size of the update.

It's too small. Given all of the bugs in Tiger, it's way too small.

I really love Tiger, and want to move to it on my full-time work machines, but it is simply way to buggy. I was hoping for an enormous upgrade.

Yes, we all know they shipped a "kinda-good-enough" version that needed at least 2 more months of bug fixing and testing. I just hope to God 10.4.1 is a solid release. The bugs in Tiger are embarrassingly bad, and I can't believe Apple hasn't seen bad press about it.

They got lucky. Let's hope they don't push their luck.
post #38 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by MPMoriarty
I hope this update fixes some of the quirkiness of Spotlight.

I couldn't agree more.

And the big problem is, if you can't trust Spotlight to find all of your files, then it is totally useless. It's not a work-around type bug.

I am VERY concerned Spotlight was not one of the components mentioned for fixing in v10.4.1.

I really hope this version is the one Apple SHOULD of shipped.
post #39 of 115
Quote:
Originally posted by BWhaler
The bugs in Tiger are embarrassingly bad, and I can't believe Apple hasn't seen bad press about it.

They got lucky. Let's hope they don't push their luck.

They haven't gotten bad press? They got lucky?

Tiger Gripes?
Apple Tiger doesnt play with other hardware
Apple's Tiger makes some companies growl
Tiger Bugs Break Networking Software
Tiger Networking Bugs
Apple's Tiger not house trained, firms claim
Network apps panic at Tiger kernel rewrite
Wait a While Before Jumping on Apple's Tiger

etc...

I'm not saying they are all valid or point out a wide range of flaws, but the point is the bad headlines are out there and plentiful and that scares away the IT bean counters...and likely newbies/switchers.

Yes, WE all have it and use it but we're a scant million or so.
"The Roots of Violence: wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice, politics...
Reply
"The Roots of Violence: wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice, politics...
Reply
post #40 of 115
Quote:
Hopefully, he does not develop software for NASA or a nuclear plant or an airplane.

Actually, i have no idea what his point is. I read all his replies and still couldn't figure out what he was saying.. the best i could gather is that he is saying it's ok for apple to release a crappy operating system cause microsoft is crappier. Also i think he was saying no one releases 100% bug proof software. Hopefully, he does not develop software for NASA or a nuclear plant or an airplane. He is an example of someone who thinks he knows what's he talking about and actually sounds intelligent untill you start thinking of the implications of what he's saying. The space shuttle is one of the most complicated piece of hardware known to man and it has millions of lines of code. It's code probably rivals that of an operating system and it certainly would not be utilized with a known bug. An airplane is made by private companies who have all stayed in business by not releasing a product with known software bugs. Yes, a general purpose operating system is different from the software in a plane but to state that software is released with known bugs?. I work on a software project right now and we never release any software with a known bug. If it's known, it's fixed. I was kinda amused reading about all companies releasing software with known bugs.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple to deploy Mac OS X 10.4.1 for testing