6 ms·

Sadly, there are hundreds of common bugs and annoyances that exist in all of Apple platforms that bite people everyday but will never get fixed. Reporting them

Sadly, there are hundreds of common bugs and annoyances that exist in all of Apple platforms that bite people everyday but will never get fixed. Reporting them is pointless because Apple rarely appears to stop to fix things. In the past, reporting them might've been helpful, but these days, it's as useful as shrieking into a hurricane. Here's a list I started of just what I've found and could think of readily: https://git.io/JvCNb https://git.io/JvCNb

harry8 7y ago
That's because you don't pay and the Cascade of attention deficient teenagers doesn't care about fixing bugs. If you paid you'd get service and you wouldn't be the product. Oh wait it's 2020, sorry, that's not playing anymore. What's this year's RDF spin?
- tom_ 7y ago
  But you do pay! Apple hardware is famous for that! (I expect the problem is that you mainly pay for the hardware, not so much the software. At some Apple found out that if the hardware is nice enough, the software can be a bit shit, and people won't mind.)
  - xkemp 7y ago
    This is said the other way around at least as often. As in: the high price of Apple Hardware is only worth it because it's a requirement to get MacOS. And I'm willing to admit that there have been more annoyances in the OS. But having recently tried Windows and Linux again for the first time in over a decade, I can report that nothing much has changed in their relative standings. Just the Windows Activation process alone is a crime against customers. System settings/Utilities/etc are some abomination of cruft accumulated over decades, in a conglomerate of interfaces that seem to try to emulate websites, and sometimes actually are websites that somehow make changes to your system.
- harry8 7y ago
  I'm actually really happy that this needled the incessant apple boosters around here. You love a company that literally refuses to fix bugs. You pay for that. Sometimes trolling has a point - Pin for the reality distortion field bubble.
raverbashing 7y ago
One bug that's very annoying and doesn't seem to be on Apple's radar: finder has a hard time understanding non US date formats and will show files as having "no date" sometimes
- Cthulhu_ 7y ago
  File system dates are stored in a locale dependent format?
  - raverbashing 7y ago
    No, I don't think the issue is in the fs format, it's on Finder "sort by date"
    - chongli 7y ago
      Finder sort by date operates on the locale dependent date instead of Unix time? That is pretty silly!
diroussel 7y ago
> Dropping support for 32-bit apps was a terrible idea. What? Never? First of all I think old CPU instruction sets should be deprecated in finite time. Secondly I think a decade is a reasonable time frame to do it in. It too fast, not too slow. I go my first 64-bit mac in 2006. Fourteen years later why should the Mac have to support the older slower way that doesn’t release the potential of the hardware? I welcome a 64-bit only OS and haven’t suffered any loss from it.
- samastur 7y ago
  I agree even though I haven't switched yet because some of my apps would not work properly (or at all). Decade should be enough. But hey, I also think switch to Python 3 gave enough time to everyone to switch too and there's no shortage of people who disagree :)
- cpcallen 7y ago
  I still use a lot of software, like Aperture, for which there is no good replacement and no possibility of me recompiling it for 64-bit. I will probably never upgrade my personal machine to Catalina as a consequence. When it becomes infeasible to continue using Mojave I will probably abandon MacOS entirely.
  - ElFitz 7y ago
    Wouldn't it work via a VM? Aside from that, Aperture was abandoned 5 years ago. I would blame Apple for not releasing a 64-bit version of it before dropping it, but not for dropping 32-bit altogether.
  - rimliu 7y ago
    I liked Aperture, but moved on to Lightroom and then to Capture One.
  - haxxorfreak 7y ago
    Aperture is actually a 64-bit app but it depends on some system frameworks that weren't migrated to 64-bit and dropped in Catalina. It's possible to get it running in 10.15 by removing the references to those frameworks, it breaks some of the features like slideshows but the app will still run: https://medium.com/@cormiertyshawn895/deep-dive-how-does-retroactive-work-95fe0e5ea49e https://medium.com/@cormiertyshawn895/deep-dive-how-does-ret... (the author has also made an app that automates this process, I haven't tried it so I can't vouch for how well it works)
apfsx 7y ago
> It should be possible to buy a license for macOS for non-Apple PC's that includes a number of drivers to make it work. This will literally NEVER happen and it makes me so sad. Apple would rather drop macOS completely then let this happen. In my opinion this is also the only reason for the T1/T2 security chips on the recent Macs. Yes I understand the other features of the T1/T2 chip (secure boot, touch id, etc) but to me these have got to be bullshit reasons. There is no reason why Apple's special little security chip should be controlling the exposure of your webcam[0]. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208862 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208862
- xkemp 7y ago
  I've been using a "Hackintosh" desktop for the last five years, and once it was set up, it has worked flawlessly. That includes all the hardware except the Intel Bluetooth, which was replaced by a tiny dongle that came with something or other. Even the yearly major update has never been a problem. It's far less hassle than my last Linux-on-Desktop attempts, even though Apple isn't even trying. So that would seem to be evidence against your theory that Apple is concerned about people running MacOS on generic hardware. While some cryptographic hardware would indeed be needed to reliably prevent such shenanigans, I'm somewhat certain they could sabotage such systems with minimal effort and raise the pain to levels where it's just not worth it. They don't even bother to, say, check the CPU and refuse to run on AMD. That could probably be done in a single line of sourcecode. Not doing anything like that and instead designing custom silicone just isn't rational behaviour.
  - apfsx 7y ago
    I think the reason you've been having a good Hackintosh experience is solely because of the amazing Hackintosh community and the advancements that have been made within these past few years. I've been involved in that community for a little over 10 years now. Sometime back we did not have these incredible tools (new bootloaders like Clover/Open Core, vastly improved audio/storage/graphics kexts, advanced SSDT/DSDT tools & patching) that now in its current state make Hackintosh much easier and straightforward. I agree with you that Apple hasn't been actively going against the community but its definitely begun. To approach what you said about sabotaging the Hackintosh systems with minimal effort... they definitely wouldn't just start pushing software updates hunting for Hackintosh systems. It would work but it'd be feeding more into the cat and mouse games we see. (This behavior is not out of line with them... see their war on iPhone app sideloading & iPhone jailbreaking). The best approach would be to begin integrating these chips in the lineup and soon enough after some generations of new hardware and software, Mac's without these chips won't be supported by macOS. Effectively choking out the Hackintosh community silently.

harry8 7y ago

That's because you don't pay and the Cascade of attention deficient teenagers doesn't care about fixing bugs. If you paid you'd get service and you wouldn't be the product. Oh wait it's 2020, sorry, that's not playing anymore. What's this year's RDF spin?

tom_ 7y ago
But you do pay! Apple hardware is famous for that! (I expect the problem is that you mainly pay for the hardware, not so much the software. At some Apple found out that if the hardware is nice enough, the software can be a bit shit, and people won't mind.)
- xkemp 7y ago
  This is said the other way around at least as often. As in: the high price of Apple Hardware is only worth it because it's a requirement to get MacOS. And I'm willing to admit that there have been more annoyances in the OS. But having recently tried Windows and Linux again for the first time in over a decade, I can report that nothing much has changed in their relative standings. Just the Windows Activation process alone is a crime against customers. System settings/Utilities/etc are some abomination of cruft accumulated over decades, in a conglomerate of interfaces that seem to try to emulate websites, and sometimes actually are websites that somehow make changes to your system.
harry8 7y ago
I'm actually really happy that this needled the incessant apple boosters around here. You love a company that literally refuses to fix bugs. You pay for that. Sometimes trolling has a point - Pin for the reality distortion field bubble.

raverbashing 7y ago

One bug that's very annoying and doesn't seem to be on Apple's radar: finder has a hard time understanding non US date formats and will show files as having "no date" sometimes

Cthulhu_ 7y ago
File system dates are stored in a locale dependent format?
- raverbashing 7y ago
  No, I don't think the issue is in the fs format, it's on Finder "sort by date"
  - chongli 7y ago
    Finder sort by date operates on the locale dependent date instead of Unix time? That is pretty silly!

diroussel 7y ago

> Dropping support for 32-bit apps was a terrible idea. What? Never? First of all I think old CPU instruction sets should be deprecated in finite time. Secondly I think a decade is a reasonable time frame to do it in. It too fast, not too slow. I go my first 64-bit mac in 2006. Fourteen years later why should the Mac have to support the older slower way that doesn’t release the potential of the hardware? I welcome a 64-bit only OS and haven’t suffered any loss from it.

samastur 7y ago
I agree even though I haven't switched yet because some of my apps would not work properly (or at all). Decade should be enough. But hey, I also think switch to Python 3 gave enough time to everyone to switch too and there's no shortage of people who disagree :)
cpcallen 7y ago
I still use a lot of software, like Aperture, for which there is no good replacement and no possibility of me recompiling it for 64-bit. I will probably never upgrade my personal machine to Catalina as a consequence. When it becomes infeasible to continue using Mojave I will probably abandon MacOS entirely.
- ElFitz 7y ago
  Wouldn't it work via a VM? Aside from that, Aperture was abandoned 5 years ago. I would blame Apple for not releasing a 64-bit version of it before dropping it, but not for dropping 32-bit altogether.
- rimliu 7y ago
  I liked Aperture, but moved on to Lightroom and then to Capture One.
- haxxorfreak 7y ago
  Aperture is actually a 64-bit app but it depends on some system frameworks that weren't migrated to 64-bit and dropped in Catalina. It's possible to get it running in 10.15 by removing the references to those frameworks, it breaks some of the features like slideshows but the app will still run: https://medium.com/@cormiertyshawn895/deep-dive-how-does-retroactive-work-95fe0e5ea49e https://medium.com/@cormiertyshawn895/deep-dive-how-does-ret... (the author has also made an app that automates this process, I haven't tried it so I can't vouch for how well it works)

apfsx 7y ago

> It should be possible to buy a license for macOS for non-Apple PC's that includes a number of drivers to make it work. This will literally NEVER happen and it makes me so sad. Apple would rather drop macOS completely then let this happen. In my opinion this is also the only reason for the T1/T2 security chips on the recent Macs. Yes I understand the other features of the T1/T2 chip (secure boot, touch id, etc) but to me these have got to be bullshit reasons. There is no reason why Apple's special little security chip should be controlling the exposure of your webcam[0]. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208862 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208862

xkemp 7y ago
I've been using a "Hackintosh" desktop for the last five years, and once it was set up, it has worked flawlessly. That includes all the hardware except the Intel Bluetooth, which was replaced by a tiny dongle that came with something or other. Even the yearly major update has never been a problem. It's far less hassle than my last Linux-on-Desktop attempts, even though Apple isn't even trying. So that would seem to be evidence against your theory that Apple is concerned about people running MacOS on generic hardware. While some cryptographic hardware would indeed be needed to reliably prevent such shenanigans, I'm somewhat certain they could sabotage such systems with minimal effort and raise the pain to levels where it's just not worth it. They don't even bother to, say, check the CPU and refuse to run on AMD. That could probably be done in a single line of sourcecode. Not doing anything like that and instead designing custom silicone just isn't rational behaviour.
- apfsx 7y ago
  I think the reason you've been having a good Hackintosh experience is solely because of the amazing Hackintosh community and the advancements that have been made within these past few years. I've been involved in that community for a little over 10 years now. Sometime back we did not have these incredible tools (new bootloaders like Clover/Open Core, vastly improved audio/storage/graphics kexts, advanced SSDT/DSDT tools & patching) that now in its current state make Hackintosh much easier and straightforward. I agree with you that Apple hasn't been actively going against the community but its definitely begun. To approach what you said about sabotaging the Hackintosh systems with minimal effort... they definitely wouldn't just start pushing software updates hunting for Hackintosh systems. It would work but it'd be feeding more into the cat and mouse games we see. (This behavior is not out of line with them... see their war on iPhone app sideloading & iPhone jailbreaking). The best approach would be to begin integrating these chips in the lineup and soon enough after some generations of new hardware and software, Mac's without these chips won't be supported by macOS. Effectively choking out the Hackintosh community silently.