or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Latest Mac OS X Security Update breaks 64-bit application support
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Latest Mac OS X Security Update breaks 64-bit application support

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
The most recent Mac OS X security update from Apple Computer includes a glitch that prevents users from running 64-bit applications on the company's new Tiger operating system, AppleInsider has confirmed.

After being applied to versions of Mac OS X Tiger, Apple's recently released Security Update 005-007 has been reported to break 64-bit application support. The update offered nearly three dozen fixes for several security exploits, including Apple's Safari web browser, Bluetooth, networking tools, Mac OS X Server components such as Apache 2 and MySQL, and many more.

Wolfram Research, makers of the popular Mathematica software, began informing its customers of the issue in an email on Tuesday. The company said the security update disables its flagship Mathematica software: "Due to an error on the part of Apple, this update prevents any 64-bit-native application from running. In particular, this means that Mathematica 5.2 will not run on any G5 system if it has installed this Security Update."

Apple's Tiger operating system, released earlier this year, was the first version of the Mac operating system to support 64-bit computing, which enables 64-bit applications to address massive amounts of memory, while retaining compatibility with existing 32-bit applications.

Although they're currently limited to background and terminal-based utilities, Apple says 64-bit applications can address up to four billion times as much memory as 32-bit applications; however, in practical terms, memory is often limited by both hardware configuration and support.

Wolfram said it discovered the issue with 64-bit applications after Mathematica users were unable to perform simple math operations following the application of the Apple security update. The company said it had confirmed the issue internally as well as with Apple, which was unable to offer a workaround for the problem.

According to Wolfram, Apple is currently investigating the problem and plans to offer a revised update to correct the issue in the near future.

"If you have been affected, then Mathematica 5.2 will generate a MathLink error when you try to do any computation with it. (If you run MathKernel directly from the command line, it will crash at startup.) Apple has informed us that there is no workaround for this problem," Wolfram said in the email to customers.

"Apple is investigating the problem at high priority, and intends to distribute a new Security Update in the very near future. This update will correct the problem and allow Mathematica to run successfully."

Wolfram told customers that Apple had assured it the company had stopped automatic distribution of Security Update 2005-007 by Tuesday evening, but as of Wednesday morning the software remained available via Apple's web site and Mac OS X Software Update mechanism.

Update: Apple on Wednesday evening corrected the aforementioned glitch with the release of Security Update 2005-007 v1.1, which replaces Security Update 2005-007 v1.0 for Tiger systems Mac OS X v10.4.2. Apple advocates that users who have already installed v1.0 on Tiger systems should install v1.1.

"Security Update 2005-007 v1.1 provides a combined 32- and 64-bit version of LibSystem to replace the 32-bit version that was delivered in v1.0. No other changes have been made in version 1.1", the company said.
post #2 of 27
Oooooops!

Now it's time to see how long it takes Apple to fix this problem. You can also be sure that Wolfram will be included in all future beta testing for OS X products.
Ken
Reply
Ken
Reply
post #3 of 27
You'd think it would have been caught by SOME tester even without Wolfram on board.
post #4 of 27
Thats sucks for Apple!!!

And me!! now I cant use my 8gbs of ram
post #5 of 27
Quote:
Apple's Tiger operating system, released earlier this year, was the first version of the Mac operating system to support 64-bit computing, which enables 64-bit applications to address massive amounts of memory, while retaining compatibility with existing 32-bit applications.

Um, or 10.2.7. To be fair, the per-process limit was still 4GB until 10.3.
Ridiculous lucky captain rabbit king, lucky captain rabbit king nuggets are for the youth!
Reply
Ridiculous lucky captain rabbit king, lucky captain rabbit king nuggets are for the youth!
Reply
post #6 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by Ringo
Um, or 10.2.7. To be fair, the per-process limit was still 4GB until 10.3.

Actually, 10.2.7 and 10.3 only had the 64-bit ability to deal with large amounts of RAM. Tiger included actual 64-bit abilities, like using 64-bit registers, additions, etc, etc, etc. Although its all at the BSD layer, not in the Cocoa/Carbon layer.

And I would think for calculations and all, 64-bit math would be more important than 64-bit memory addressing. But what do I know, I still think no one needs more than 24 bits at a time (System 7 was the downfall of "Real" computing with their lame-ass 32-bitness they threw in there, more for marketing then any real usefulness! Hell, 24-bits let programmers write really cool programs and do cool stuff like store info in those other 8-bits. But, no, Apple had to take it all away!)
post #7 of 27
This is where I issue my regular complaint that Apple doesn't do enough testing. It's truely hard to believe that Apple does not have a G5 machine on their premises. It's also just as hard to believe that they don't have any 64 bit apps around that they can try.

What I don't understand is why they can't send these updates out to their developers and give them a few days to test it first.

The one thing that Apple has an advantage over MS in is that these exploits have not occured. Therefore they can afford a few days of developer testing before they release it. I haven't updated any of my machines with this yet because I'm still waiting for more feedback. Some nasty problems have occured from Apple's security updates recently.
post #8 of 27
Apple needs to take the same attitude with their os and apps that they do with their new hardware.

"It will be done when its done and out when its out,and boom dropped it on ya all unexpected like" that way they dont realease half baked betas...

Which is what The first Issuing of Tiger was IMHO...
They have the ability to outdo micro$$$$ at any game,they dont need to race against time...

AND,They need to nail down Tiger!!!! and keep pounding down microsoft with the real work and creative Ethics they are known for...

CHA CHING THAT WILL BE O.2 CENTS MR CATMAN...
post #9 of 27
Pathetic!

No wonder they can't get a foothold in the enterprise market with bungles like this.
post #10 of 27
Hi-larious...I have stopped installing security updates for a while now, can't remember which one it was but it was a pre-tiger one which caused me to wipe my PB completely clean! Usually wait a good two weeks to read the bug reports!
post #11 of 27
Son of a b***h!

I have a dual 2 GHz G5 and had no problems with the Security Update. Why am I mad? I have a 64-bit machine and evidently, I am not using those extra 32 bits, otherwise I'd have a problem. It's like driving a Porsche through rush hour traffic. A Hyundai will do for that case.
post #12 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by macFanDave
Son of a b***h!

I have a dual 2 GHz G5 and had no problems with the Security Update. Why am I mad? I have a 64-bit machine and evidently, I am not using those extra 32 bits, otherwise I'd have a problem. It's like driving a Porsche through rush hour traffic. A Hyundai will do for that case.

Yeah. Turn off half your cylinders.
post #13 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by macFanDave
It's like driving a Porsche through rush hour traffic. A Hyundai will do for that case.

Hey, don't knock Hyundais. They're good cars...now. I drive a Sonata and LOVE it!
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #14 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoNut
Hey, don't knock Hyundais. They're good cars...now. I drive a Sonata and LOVE it!

I heard that a long time ago that Lexuses (Lexi) were a copy of Mercedes and then they became a really nice car... maybe the same thing will happen with Hyundai... but dont worry... I dont think Daewoos will do the same thing... lol.
post #15 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by macFanDave
Son of a b***h!

I have a dual 2 GHz G5 and had no problems with the Security Update. Why am I mad? I have a 64-bit machine and evidently, I am not using those extra 32 bits, otherwise I'd have a problem. It's like driving a Porsche through rush hour traffic. A Hyundai will do for that case.

Not quite. Running a 64-bit machine in 32-bit mode is like unhooking a trailer that would be carrying around mostly scrap metal. I'm not sure why people think that copying around twice as much data, most of it which is 0's, would make things faster.
post #16 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by nagromme
You'd think it would have been caught by SOME tester even without Wolfram on board.

It's pretty obvious from the 64-bit limitations (ie. You can't have a UI on a 64-bit binary) that 64-bits was 95% marketing gimmick and 5% useful. Apple and most of its customers would have been way better off spending the silicon on an extra functional unit or quadruple the cache or something, and leave it at the old limit.

And as you say, Apple can't have tested a single 64-bit app on this release or they'd have found the problem, which shows its priority in Cupertino.
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by Booga
It's pretty obvious from the 64-bit limitations (ie. You can't have a UI on a 64-bit binary) that 64-bits was 95% marketing gimmick and 5% useful.

Yes, but won't the history books always say that Apple released the FIRST 64-bit personal computer?
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #18 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by Booga
It's pretty obvious from the 64-bit limitations (ie. You can't have a UI on a 64-bit binary) that 64-bits was 95% marketing gimmick and 5% useful. Apple and most of its customers would have been way better off spending the silicon on an extra functional unit or quadruple the cache or something, and leave it at the old limit.

And as you say, Apple can't have tested a single 64-bit app on this release or they'd have found the problem, which shows its priority in Cupertino.

64 bits is VERY useful - for those who need it. In a couple of years, a large percentage of programs will be 64 bits. You don't really need a 64 bit UI.
post #19 of 27
I feel bad for the users who actually use 64 bit functionality. This is a major faux pas on Apple's part as testing a single 64 bit app would have revealed the problem. Guess Mathematica is gonna be added to the standard test suite from now on.
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 #20 of 27
there is more problem form many people.
after security update, my "mail" application is not working at all and many other people had kernel panic.
probably there is more problem.
what is going on??
post #21 of 27
Quote:
Originally posted by Xool
I feel bad for the users who actually use 64 bit functionality. This is a major faux pas on Apple's part as testing a single 64 bit app would have revealed the problem. Guess Mathematica is gonna be added to the standard test suite from now on.

problemas fixed now.

i think the download was supposed to have 32-bit and 64-bit versions by the sound of it but maybe at the final stage someone screwed up and left out the 64-bit part.

i think they've always tested on 32/64bitness. someone just jacked up the bundling for the software update methinks...
post #22 of 27
Well, since 1.1...my WIDGETS no longer work. I had to remove them and re-add them to get response.

wth?

update:

since the re-add of some of the widgets, now when i go to manage them, I have little (X) all over my screen when the widgets are in view....this is not good.

third update:

I even have freaky little dots show up when I bring up my widgets.

I'd attribute this to ram, but it happened RIGHT after my update to 1.1. I happened to look at my widgets prior to the update and reboot - no problems. Now, ick.

You can see the (x) in this pic, and some white and black specs if you look closely. More show in regular widget view mode.



dots:

:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
post #23 of 27
well, after a reboot, the white and black dots are gone, but now I checked out my widgets and a bunch were auto added and it shows the manager. Note the text in the manager and how it doesn't relate to what is on the screen!

"Overflow text case"
"One more is four"

oh boy.

:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
post #24 of 27
dumb question, but did you restart?

edit:
okay. so the first problem was because that you didn't restart. the second problem above though... weird
post #25 of 27
dude, awesome widescreen though!!
post #26 of 27
thanks, that's a mac mini with a dell 2005fpw widescreen 20.1"...cost all of $359 shipped new from dell. sweeeet deal. Not as pretty as the apple version but much more affordable.
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
post #27 of 27
The question is whether Dell is losing money on every unit they sell. Apple's prices do have to come down though. They used to be cheaper than the competition in LCD displays. Now they are more. Sometimes several times more. The 20" should be under $600, the 23" under $900, and the 30" under $2,300.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Latest Mac OS X Security Update breaks 64-bit application support