PDA

View Full Version : Apple Seeds Build 12D61 of OS X Beta 10.8.3 to Developers




MacRumors
Jan 30, 2013, 04:11 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/30/apple-seeds-build-12d61-of-os-x-beta-10-8-3-to-developers/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2013/01/update12d61.pngApple today seeded build 12D61 of OS X Mountain Lion 10.8.3 to developers, marking the eighth beta iteration of the newest version of Mountain Lion. 10.8.3 was first seeded to developers back in November.

Build 12D61 has been released less than a week after build 12D58 (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/24/apple-seeds-build-12d58-of-os-x-beta-10-8-3-to-developers/). The new build asks developers and testers to focus on AirPlay, AirPort, Game Center, Graphics Drivers, and Safari.

As with previous builds, Apple mentions that it has significantly improved WiFi performance, as noted by 9to5Mac (http://9to5mac.com/2013/01/30/apple-seeds-os-x-10-8-3-build-12d61-to-developers/). Registered developers can download the update on Apple's Developer Page (https://developer.apple.com).

This post originally referred to Build 12D61 as the ninth developer seed of OS X 10.8.3 when it was actually the eighth seed.

Article Link: Apple Seeds Build 12D61 of OS X Beta 10.8.3 to Developers (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/30/apple-seeds-build-12d61-of-os-x-beta-10-8-3-to-developers/)



Mike MA
Jan 30, 2013, 04:13 PM
And they did it again :D

sshhoott
Jan 30, 2013, 04:15 PM
Keep 'em coming Apple, keep 'em coming...

ThomasJL
Jan 30, 2013, 04:18 PM
As much as I want to ditch 10.7.5 Lion, I am hoping that Apple takes their sweet time with the 10.8.3 update. I don't care about new features since lack of bugs is most important thing for me.

Aluminum213
Jan 30, 2013, 04:20 PM
What's new with 10.8.3?

Peace
Jan 30, 2013, 04:20 PM
I think this is the last build before going GM. A public release on Friday is my guess.

KevinMHC
Jan 30, 2013, 04:21 PM
Wish they release this soon. Cannot stand all the UI lag on my rMBP.

Sound214
Jan 30, 2013, 04:22 PM
As much as I want to ditch 10.7.5 Lion, I am hoping that Apple takes their sweet time with the 10.8.3 update. I don't care about new features since lack of bugs is most important thing for me.

Then why on earth are you still on Lion? ML is far more polished, which you've certainly read a couple of thousand times.

buddybd
Jan 30, 2013, 04:25 PM
Safari already feels snappier.

cmChimera
Jan 30, 2013, 04:26 PM
Sigh....Let me have it.

PBP
Jan 30, 2013, 04:28 PM
Safar.... damn beaten :mad:

Twimfy
Jan 30, 2013, 04:32 PM
Then why on earth are you still on Lion? ML is far more polished, which you've certainly read a couple of thousand times.

I was going to ask the same thing. Who in their right mind would stay on Lion? You either come to ML or go back to SL.

ScruffyS
Jan 30, 2013, 04:37 PM
Sweetness.. Downloading now.

DJJAZZYJET
Jan 30, 2013, 04:53 PM
Soon

Xenomorph
Jan 30, 2013, 05:03 PM
I was going to ask the same thing. Who in their right mind would stay on Lion? You either come to ML or go back to SL.

My old MacBook Pro only goes up to Lion.

I want Notes and iMessage. :(

I can't go to Snow Leopard, because I would lose support for the latest Xcode!

CrazyForApple
Jan 30, 2013, 05:16 PM
Another one? Then the final one should be great

Risco
Jan 30, 2013, 05:23 PM
Has it fixed the slow shutdown? What about settings options having to be launched twice such as change desktop background?

GIZBUG
Jan 30, 2013, 05:43 PM
Safari already feels snappier.

These comments were funny about 2 years ago...........kind of old and worn out now....:confused:

Swiss-G
Jan 30, 2013, 05:53 PM
Has it fixed the slow shutdown? What about settings options having to be launched twice such as change desktop background?

Unfortunately not fixed :confused:

afterafx
Jan 30, 2013, 06:00 PM
Great news, but I hope they fix the problem where every time I restart my rMBP the background changes back to the last one I had.

ThomasJL
Jan 30, 2013, 06:26 PM
Then why on earth are you still on Lion?

Because Mountain Lion is more buggy than Lion at this point in time. Are you actually unaware of that?

HenryDJP
Jan 30, 2013, 06:29 PM
Because Mountain Lion is more buggy than Lion at this point in time. Are you actually unaware of that?

It is not. ML runs amazingly well and Lion is the one that sucks. It's your system that you need to work on.

ThomasJL
Jan 30, 2013, 07:04 PM
It is not. ML runs amazingly well and Lion is the one that sucks.

Mountain Lion might run amazing well for you, but for the majority of users, 10.7.5 is more stable and reliable than 10.8.0, 10.8.1, and 10.8.2. Yes, Lion does suck, and Mountain Lion has the potential to be better than Lion, but as of 10.8.2, Mountain Lion still has far more bugs than 10.7.5.

It's your system that you need to work on.

For your information, I own the latest 13" MacBook Pro, and it's maxed out with 16GB of Crucial-brand RAM.

cmChimera
Jan 30, 2013, 07:23 PM
Mountain Lion might run amazing well for you, but for the majority of users, 10.7.5 is more stable and reliable than 10.8.0, 10.8.1, and 10.8.2. Yes, Lion does suck, and Mountain Lion has the potential to be better than Lion, but as of 10.8.2, Mountain Lion still has far more bugs than 10.7.5.
I don't think you actually speak for a majority of users.

teknishn
Jan 30, 2013, 07:29 PM
Mountain Lion might run amazing well for you, but for the majority of users, 10.7.5 is more stable and reliable than 10.8.0, 10.8.1, and 10.8.2. Yes, Lion does suck, and Mountain Lion has the potential to be better than Lion, but as of 10.8.2, Mountain Lion still has far more bugs than 10.7.5.



For your information, I own the latest 13" MacBook Pro, and it's maxed out with 16GB of Crucial-brand RAM.

This is just pure false. ML is far more stable, more secure, and faster than Lion by a wide margin. Frankly, I'm pretty shocked to hear anyone suggest otherwise. ML's vast superiority to Lion is pretty well documented fact by the vast majority.

HenryDJP
Jan 30, 2013, 07:32 PM
Mountain Lion might run amazing well for you, but for the majority of users, 10.7.5 is more stable and reliable than 10.8.0, 10.8.1, and 10.8.2. Yes, Lion does suck, and Mountain Lion has the potential to be better than Lion, but as of 10.8.2, Mountain Lion still has far more bugs than 10.7.5.



For your information, I own the latest 13" MacBook Pro, and it's maxed out with 16GB of Crucial-brand RAM.

Having the latest system doesn't mean anything. I didn't say you had a low powered system, I said you need to work on your system. Probably stuff you have installed doesn't agree with ML.
I have 5 Macs in my house including my family that have Macs with ML. No issues. I'm on this forum quite a bit and I don't see many threads of any major issues with ML, in fact around the web ML has gotten very good reviews. Since you said the "Majority" are having problems with ML, I'm going to Macworld SF tomorrow and Friday. I will ask the major podcasters that are friends of mine and I'll ask the vendors there of their experience with ML.

wlossw
Jan 30, 2013, 09:12 PM
Having the latest system doesn't mean anything. I didn't say you had a low powered system, I said you need to work on your system. Probably stuff you have installed doesn't agree with ML.
I have 5 Macs in my house including my family that have Macs with ML. No issues. I'm on this forum quite a bit and I don't see many threads of any major issues with ML, in fact around the web ML has gotten very good reviews. Since you said the "Majority" are having problems with ML, I'm going to Macworld SF tomorrow and Friday. I will ask the major podcasters that are friends of mine and I'll ask the vendors there of their experience with ML.

#powned. ;) give us those stats when you round em up.

b0fh
Jan 30, 2013, 09:20 PM
I will say this - in December, I installed one of the 10.8.3 betas and tested it with VMWare fusion 5. Crashorama. Two-three crashes a day. *UGH*.

Had to reinstall and go back to 10.8.2

craigfrankel
Jan 30, 2013, 09:23 PM
I have really found Mountain Lion 10.8.2 to have a ton of issues and regret upgrading from Lion (Upgraded 2 weeks ago.) I have steam for TF2 but other than that no unsupported apps. Starting right from login, issues like Audio Stuttering and Video lagging are occurring all the time. Makes things like browsing the internet, watching videos, and listening to music unbearable. Need 10.8.3 asap I heard it fixes all these issues.

WilliamG
Jan 30, 2013, 09:38 PM
I will say this - in December, I installed one of the 10.8.3 betas and tested it with VMWare fusion 5. Crashorama. Two-three crashes a day. *UGH*.

Had to reinstall and go back to 10.8.2

Fusion absolutely stinks. I switched to Parallels 8 and have never been happier.

Yamcha
Jan 30, 2013, 09:46 PM
Always nice to see a Safari update, but Apple has lost yet another user (me) to Chrome. I actually love everything about Safari except the lack of updates, Chrome & other browsers always seem to be ahead in terms of performance and memory usage.. Just got tired of waiting..

If they want more users using Safari they need to keep it updated frequently..

bedifferent
Jan 30, 2013, 10:16 PM
As much as I want to ditch 10.7.5 Lion, I am hoping that Apple takes their sweet time with the 10.8.3 update. I don't care about new features since lack of bugs is most important thing for me.

Since they're moving to an annual release cycle and based on how well that worked for Lion, I don't have much hope. With Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard, beta's required burning to a new DVD every other week for a fresh install. This is something then Senior VP of Software Engineering Bertrand Serlet insisted on to ensure a clean install for testing. Usually lasted 1 1/2 years with beta's every other week. It produced a solid OS X compared to Craig Federighi's work (and no, Bertrand was out in 2011 and had nothing to do with 10.7 Lion, which was introduced by Craig Federighi on stage in 2011's Lion announcement). There wasn't even a replacement for Bertrand in over a year until Craig Federighi was finally placed on Apple's board of directors as Senior V.P. for OS X Engineering in October 2012. Apple should return to a non-annual release cycle and release the OS X update when it's ready.

(before a certain someone drills into me again on this being opinion, do the research and you will learn these are facts based on events and quotes from Bertrand and others. I really do not wish to get into another ego contest, thanks :) )

PS Bring back Serlet!!!

From Apple:

Bertrand Serlet to Leave Apple (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/03/23Bertrand-Serlet-to-Leave-Apple.html)

CUPERTINO, California—March 23, 2011—

Apple® today announced that Bertrand Serlet, Apple’s senior vice president of Mac® Software Engineering, will be leaving the company. Craig Federighi, Apple’s vice president of Mac Software Engineering, will assume Serlet’s responsibilities and report to Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. Federighi is responsible for the development of Mac OS® X and has been managing the Mac OS software engineering group for the past two years.

“I’ve worked with Steve for 22 years and have had an incredible time developing products at both NeXT and Apple, but at this point, I want to focus less on products and more on science,” said Bertrand Serlet, Apple’s senior vice president of Software Engineering. “Craig has done a great job managing the Mac OS team for the past two years, Lion is a great release and the transition should be seamless.”

Federighi worked at NeXT, followed by Apple, and then spent a decade at Ariba where he held several roles including vice president of Internet Services and chief technology officer. He returned to Apple in 2009 to lead Mac OS X engineering. Federighi holds a Master of Science degree in Computer Science and a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the University of California, Berkeley.

Serlet joined Apple in 1997, and has been involved in the definition, development and creation of Mac OS X, the world’s most advanced operating system. Before joining Apple, Serlet spent four years at Xerox PARC, then joined NeXT in 1989. Serlet holds a doctorate in Computer Science from the University of Orsay, France.


Craig joined in 2009, worked on Lion as Serlet departed in early 2011. Many in Cupertino whom I worked with have blamed Federighi for 10.7/8's less than stellar releases, ranging from WiFi issues, SAMBA and other networking protocols being rewritten and more difficult in working with other platforms that 10.6 had no issue with, iOS/Social Networking focus (he and Forestall worked together on OS X in many areas), a lack of OpenGL Core support 4.0+, "Mission Control" was his "baby" and on and on.

bedifferent
Jan 30, 2013, 10:32 PM
This is just pure false. ML is far more stable, more secure, and faster than Lion by a wide margin. Frankly, I'm pretty shocked to hear anyone suggest otherwise. ML's vast superiority to Lion is pretty well documented fact by the vast majority.

10.6> 10.8 >10.7 It's all relative :p

JohnMantooth
Jan 30, 2013, 11:31 PM
I'm excited, maybe this version will actually save my View Options in the Finder.

Peace
Jan 30, 2013, 11:39 PM
I'm excited, maybe this version will actually save my View Options in the Finder.

I just tested that on my MBP and does save the view.

SeattleMoose
Jan 30, 2013, 11:59 PM
I don't care about new features since lack of bugs is most important thing for me.

Really, who cares about bug fixes and under the hood efficiency/speed improvements. REAL MEN WANT NEW SOCIAL MEDIA FEATURES!!!

I think I"ll give myself a thumbs down in advance. Oh wait, the forum is now PC, no down votes allowed. Everyone can only be a winner.

H2SO4
Jan 31, 2013, 01:14 AM
With Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard, beta's required burning to a new DVD every other week for a fresh install. This is something then Senior VP of Software Engineering Bertrand Serlet insisted on to ensure a clean install for testing.

How on earth does having it on DVD guarantee a clean install?

karsten
Jan 31, 2013, 01:22 AM
hopefully there's updated nvidia drivers to fix the pixelmator crashes on MBPs

monkeybagel
Jan 31, 2013, 01:51 AM
Fusion absolutely stinks. I switched to Parallels 8 and have never been happier.

I have had the opposite experience.

WilliamG
Jan 31, 2013, 02:07 AM
I have had the opposite experience.

Interesting. I've found literally everything to be better about Parallels. First, it doesn't lock up my new, 2012 iMac. Second, the file transfer speeds and graphics ability are light years ahead with Parallels. Heck, even reviews found the same thing.

Curious as to why you're having trouble...

Peace
Jan 31, 2013, 02:24 AM
How on earth does having it on DVD guarantee a clean install?

Betas used to come on DVD. In order to install the beta you had to boot from the DVD and the installer would format the hard drive removing all files then do a clean install of the OS. They weren't updates. They were the complete OS .

I think they did that with all major point releases up to leopard or snow leopard.

MadMitch89
Jan 31, 2013, 02:34 AM
Betas used to come on DVD. In order to install the beta you had to boot from the DVD and the installer would format the hard drive removing all files then do a clean install of the OS. They weren't updates. They were the complete OS .

I think they did that with all major point releases up to leopard or snow leopard.

Isn't it just as important to beta test the upgrade process as most users will update - from 10.x and 10.x.x upgrades - instead of clean install the OS?

Peace
Jan 31, 2013, 02:43 AM
Put it this way.

A clean install is considered best practices when installing a new major point beta.

Some versions weren't upgrade compatible. You had to do a clean install.

Those were mostly the first release builds.

I remember a few years back that was the only way to get the betas. Mailed to you on DVD.

JGRE
Jan 31, 2013, 04:11 AM
Always nice to see a Safari update, but Apple has lost yet another user (me) to Chrome. I actually love everything about Safari except the lack of updates, Chrome & other browsers always seem to be ahead in terms of performance and memory usage.. Just got tired of waiting..

If they want more users using Safari they need to keep it updated frequently..

I have been using Chrome for some time (and still, do on a Windows machine), but noticed that Safari outperformed all other browsers in the IE Fich tank test on my 2011 MBP.
Where Chrome ended up with about 20 FPS, Safari ran about 40 FPS for the same test. When Safari got the omnibar, I dropped Chrome and went right back to Safari. Firefox was slow as hell and I never tried it agian

----------

Really, who cares about bug fixes and under the hood efficiency/speed improvements. REAL MEN WANT NEW SOCIAL MEDIA FEATURES!!!

I think I"ll give myself a thumbs down in advance. Oh wait, the forum is now PC, no down votes allowed. Everyone can only be a winner.

I hope you're being sarcastic.......:D

iBug2
Jan 31, 2013, 05:15 AM
Isn't it just as important to beta test the upgrade process as most users will update - from 10.x and 10.x.x upgrades - instead of clean install the OS?

No. They should test the upgrade process of 10.x releases every now and then, so that updating gradually doesn't cause any issues. But developers who use and install betas know what they are doing, so Apple doesn't have to check and recheck if every beta incrementation upgrades successfully. So it's much easier for everyone if OS betas came as single disk install images with no upgrade option.

The Bulge
Jan 31, 2013, 05:35 AM
Fusion absolutely stinks. I switched to Parallels 8 and have never been happier.

Doesn't stink here. Parallels is also ok, but Vmware is just so much simpler as an application. You still need to install paralleles with an installer which puts stuff all over the place. Vmware is a drag and drop app now which is great.

Eithanius
Jan 31, 2013, 05:36 AM
Really, who cares about bug fixes and under the hood efficiency/speed improvements. REAL MEN WANT NEW SOCIAL MEDIA FEATURES!!!

I think I"ll give myself a thumbs down in advance. Oh wait, the forum is now PC, no down votes allowed. Everyone can only be a winner.

Go back to Windows crapware...! Only REAL SISSIES WANT SOCIAL MEDIA CRAP...! I wonder what other social media crap features do you want to see on 10.9 - Porntube build into NC...? :P

the8thark
Jan 31, 2013, 06:35 AM
I was going to ask the same thing. Who in their right mind would stay on Lion? You either come to ML or go back to SL.

I happen to agree. There are only 3 options.
Your Mac can run ML and you use it.
Your Mac can not run ML so you're still on SL (or forced to be stuck on L - either L, Leopard or Lion)
You are out of your mind and voluntarily choosing L (or SL when you can run ML).

AnonMac50
Jan 31, 2013, 06:36 AM
This is just pure false. ML is far more stable, more secure, and faster than Lion by a wide margin. Frankly, I'm pretty shocked to hear anyone suggest otherwise. ML's vast superiority to Lion is pretty well documented fact by the vast majority.

I'm not shocked, mainly because people's opinions vary, and in this case, I found 10.7.4 more stable than 10.8.2

Mr. Wonderful
Jan 31, 2013, 07:51 AM
I would just like the AirPlay issues to be fixed. I often have to restart my Mac because AirPlay just decides it's going to stop working.

The issue with third party SSDs causing the color profile to switch with GPUs is annoying, too.

Oh, and making Photoshop be able to use OpenCL acceleration with a 6490M like it did in 10.7 would be great, too.

As of now, I'm planning on switching all my Creative Suite stuff to Windows because of this issue.

RaceTripper
Jan 31, 2013, 08:22 AM
Because Mountain Lion is more buggy than Lion at this point in time. Are you actually unaware of that?

It is not. ML runs amazingly well and Lion is the one that sucks. It's your system that you need to work on.

10.8.2 is by far the most unstable version of Mac OS X I have ever used (I started with Tiger back in Winter '07). I am stuck using it on my 2012 Mac Mini, but wish I had stayed with Lion on my mid-2010 MBP.

bedifferent
Jan 31, 2013, 08:32 AM
How on earth does having it on DVD guarantee a clean install?

As already stated, the clean install by installing a new OS with every beta insured that the install would not be hindered by previous bugs or tweaks that the developer may have instigated. As well, the betas were much more developed than currently implemented since 10.7, and required a fresh install rather than modifying the already install beta OS. I recall a few betas in leopard that used ZFS+ but didn't make it to commercial release due to licensing issues.

milo
Jan 31, 2013, 09:04 AM
Because Mountain Lion is more buggy than Lion at this point in time. Are you actually unaware of that?

Not my experience at all. Far less buggy and performance is vastly better for me. Frankly, staying on Lion when another OS is available (whether that's going forward or going back) is insanity. I'm still not a big fan of ML but it beats the heck out of lion.


I will say this - in December, I installed one of the 10.8.3 betas and tested it with VMWare fusion 5. Crashorama. Two-three crashes a day. *UGH*.

Had to reinstall and go back to 10.8.2

Comes with the territory when you're running betas. If you want the best shot at avoiding crashes, stick with public releases.


So it's much easier for everyone if OS betas came as single disk install images with no upgrade option.

Easier? It's much more work and time consuming to do a fresh install every time. Apple wants seeders to test in their day to day use, if beta updates required a fresh install, people would be testing on a secondary machine (or partition) and not installing all their software. Not to mention that many testers would probably skip builds much more often.

There are advantages to fresh installs but it would probably reduce participation a fair amount. Thankfully there are testers who do fresh installs even though it's not required.

HenryDJP
Jan 31, 2013, 09:21 AM
10.8.2 is by far the most unstable version of Mac OS X I have ever used (I started with Tiger back in Winter '07). I am stuck using it on my 2012 Mac Mini, but wish I had stayed with Lion on my mid-2010 MBP.

These types of posts are very difficult to take seriously. Oh, what am I talking about? Oh, this...

"ML is by far the most unstable version of Mac OS X....."

"The Majority is having problems with ML...."

"Lion is better than ML in terms of stability..."

And as usual not one person cares to say what problems they are having. Probably because the problems they have are THEIR problems and not everyone else's. And please don't come back and reply me saying that you posted your issues on another thread along with everybody else's issues. If you're going to continue to make bold statements like ML is the most unstable..dadadada...then you need to continue to post the actual issues, or are people afraid there's an easy solution that might be given by someone on the forum, henceforth reducing their reasons for complaining about ML? ;)

RaceTripper
Jan 31, 2013, 09:37 AM
My mistake for posting. I forgot about the complete lack of respect everyone has for each other on MacRumors.

theanimaster
Jan 31, 2013, 10:16 AM
I wonder if they fixed the Thunderbolt/MiniDisplay/VGA-out problem where your start-up screen gets stuck on VGA resolution and you get a nasty graphics glitch that has you concerned about your graphics card.

Or at least I HOPE it's not really a problem with my gfx card!!!

The problem resolves through a Parameter-RAM reset, and only seems to come on when the minidisplay-VGA video out adapter is used. The problem doesn't manifest when using digital video out connections.

iBug2
Jan 31, 2013, 10:19 AM
Easier? It's much more work and time consuming to do a fresh install every time. Apple wants seeders to test in their day to day use, if beta updates required a fresh install, people would be testing on a secondary machine (or partition) and not installing all their software. Not to mention that many testers would probably skip builds much more often.

There are advantages to fresh installs but it would probably reduce participation a fair amount. Thankfully there are testers who do fresh installs even though it's not required.

I was talking about betas of new OS releases. Not betas of point updates. Though, I test even betas of point updates on a separate partition. I actually have had quite a bit of mishaps while using betas on my everyday machine. It's certainly not advisable. But DP's of new OS's can be really unstable so I do clean installs for them after every new DP release.

The Bulge
Jan 31, 2013, 12:22 PM
Slow shutdown is not resolved.

milo
Jan 31, 2013, 12:38 PM
I was talking about betas of new OS releases. Not betas of point updates.

Then you need to be more clear what you're talking about. The posts you were responding to were talking about a full install for every beta version.

ItWasNotMe
Jan 31, 2013, 01:12 PM
Slow shutdown is not resolved.

Its not the slow that I object to (provided its measured in seconds not eons) its a need for it to be reliable; that when I tell it to shut down it does - which is often not the case on my Mini

Risco
Jan 31, 2013, 01:27 PM
What exactly are they fixing? It seems like a hell of a long time for a point beta to go final. The last beta I tried made no difference!

JohnMantooth
Jan 31, 2013, 01:30 PM
I just tested that on my MBP and does save the view.

For me, it works on some windows and not others.

50548
Jan 31, 2013, 02:31 PM
Slow shutdown is not resolved.

Granted, I have been saying for ages that 10.8.2 is the worst 10.x.x release ever by Apple - Ethernet disconnections upon wake, countless Console messages associated with mdworker and sandboxing, black screen upon wake etc.

But pray tell: WHY does one need to shut a Mac down? I only do it when I travel for a long time...that's what fast sleep is for.

vanc
Jan 31, 2013, 03:22 PM
I will say this - in December, I installed one of the 10.8.3 betas and tested it with VMWare fusion 5. Crashorama. Two-three crashes a day. *UGH*.

Had to reinstall and go back to 10.8.2

I ran the last two betas and am running this one. Parallels 7.0 works just fine. No crashes found. I bought this version for $29. Upgrade to 8.0 will cost me $50. It's a no go.

The Bulge
Jan 31, 2013, 03:30 PM
But pray tell: WHY does one need to shut a Mac down? I only do it when I travel for a long time...that's what fast sleep is for.

Really? Let's axe it altogether then.

Makosuke
Jan 31, 2013, 04:09 PM
Mountain Lion might run amazing well for you, but for the majority of users, 10.7.5 is more stable and reliable than 10.8.0, 10.8.1, and 10.8.2.I'm genuinely surprised at this comment--you're the only person I've heard make that claim.

So far as I could tell, even 10.8.0 was more polished than any version of 10.7 for most purposes, and I've heard almost no one claim otherwise.

Heck, for practical purposes 10.8.0 IS 10.7.6.

smithrh
Jan 31, 2013, 04:30 PM
countless Console messages associated with mdworker and sandboxing

Just FYI - console messages don't always indicate a problem, so I wouldn't use this as a metric in determining how bad a release may or may not be.

As a developer, I've logged quite a few things to Unix consoles for recordkeeping and for potential troubleshooting. Sure, a few of them were outright errors but on the whole, most of them were informational only. It's not really expected that people are watching this output.

Yeah, I'd like to see some cleaner console output but it has to be a next to zero priority for Apple, and rightly so.

50548
Jan 31, 2013, 04:57 PM
Just FYI - console messages don't always indicate a problem, so I wouldn't use this as a metric in determining how bad a release may or may not be.

As a developer, I've logged quite a few things to Unix consoles for recordkeeping and for potential troubleshooting. Sure, a few of them were outright errors but on the whole, most of them were informational only. It's not really expected that people are watching this output.

Yeah, I'd like to see some cleaner console output but it has to be a next to zero priority for Apple, and rightly so.

A lot of those are related to faulty sandboxing, constant spotlight indexing and wake-from-sleep issues. How is that not a problem?

Saladinos
Jan 31, 2013, 05:47 PM
A lot of those are related to faulty sandboxing, constant spotlight indexing and wake-from-sleep issues. How is that not a problem?

iCloud doesn't work with my proxy because it doesn't have sandboxing permissions to talk to local addresses :facepalm:

RoelJuun
Jan 31, 2013, 06:14 PM
I was going to ask the same thing. Who in their right mind would stay on Lion? You either come to ML or go back to SL.

Yeah well I'll give you a reason. Apple thought the Macbook that I own (early 2008?) to be unable to run ML. My iMac is running ML, my iPhone is using iCloud. I want all my contacts/calendar etc on ALL my devices. Going back to SL is therefore out of the question. And please, when I updated my Macbook to Lion for a test drive, my SL on my iMac felt out-dated very fast. Although SL was the greatest OS at that time, it is not the best anymore.

And ML is full of bugs, I find 10.7.5 to be very stable.

ML:
- Wallpaper issues
- My external drive with my Time Machine backup needs force eject every time I try to eject the drive
- Disappearing mouse cursor
- Finder sometimes freezes when connecting with another Mac using FW
- Message…complete mess
- Reminders is slow (while it should be a light application)
- Performance in Safari is terrible when zooming in on a page
- After opening an application created in Automator the application doesn't launch
- After ejecting an external drive, when adding a folder from an external drive to the side-bar in Finder, the folder disappears from the side-bar.
- Lots of crashes with the DVD-player application

So, Lion isn't all that bad for me.

Kariya
Jan 31, 2013, 09:32 PM
Im quite happy with the latest builds of 10.8.3 even more so than i was with 10.7.5. Its stable, fast and all round responsive. Safari blazes even more.

Still not quite up to the level of 10.6.8 or 10.4.11 but definitely not far behind at all.

ultraspiracle
Feb 1, 2013, 12:54 AM
It makes me wonder what the hell it all even matters anyway.

Slow shutdown time? - If 20 seconds extra is going to make you miss the bus then leave earlier.

Slightly laggy? - What a nightmare, your friends are going to die if they don't see your amusing Facebook status right this second. Again, gain some patience.

Don't like "iOSification"? - Stop trying to be one of those hipsters who uses old stuff for the sake of being one of the "it ain't what it used to be/I was there in the beginning" people. Launchpad and iCloud are so discrete you won't even notice them.

Apple keep releasing too many updates too soon and ignoring you? - Apple can do whatever the **** they like and they certainly aren't going to listen to you whinge on a 3rd party forum.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dunno, I get fed up of people complaining about **** when they should consider themselves lucky to be using an expensive machine in the first place when the rest of the world struggles.

Seeing as we're dick waving, I use a 2008 24" 8,1 iMac with a broken backlight which is permanently stuck on max brightness and a SuperDrive that grinds up discs and literally fires them a good 10ft across the room. My shutdowns and startups are slow and I get random hangs when iTunes is playing and I have no idea why.

What do I do with my Mac? I'm a full time iOS developer and I sit at this machine 9-5 5 days a week and love every second of it bugs and all, and I cope with all of the little bugs because I'm a patient human being who has more important things to worry about than how many milliseconds it takes for my machine to do something. I can afford a new one but don't see any need to buy one..why? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER!! Specs do not make your cock bigger.

So if your fancy new rMBP is taking just a little too long to do something and that winds you up to the point where you argue with strangers on the internet in the hope that a multi-billion dollar corporation is going to listen to your argument then I suggest you 1. Sell you Machine, 2. buy a gun, 3. Kill yourself; as you've clearly taken a wrong turn in life and you need to go outside and appreciate what life is all about.

Rant over. Angry. Bring on the flames.

EDIT: Oh and quick addition...if the bugs on your Mac are complete game changers, then stop complaining and go and buy something else BUT don't tell us about it. Nobody cares. If you write "screw this I'm switching to Windows" we're not going to panic that a great Apple exodus is about to occur. You're one person and nobody gives a **** what you do.

I see what you are tying to say, but don't forget that 10.8.2 caused 20 second reboots on SSD/retina to go to nearly 2 minutes. For those of you who have spinning hard drives, I'm sure you don't notice the problem. For those who forked out 3k for SSD machines/retinas, the update to 10.8.2 was a real clunker. Yes, my computer is mobile, so I shut it down at night, turn it on in the AM, check email, shut it down, take to work, start it up, shut it down, and start it up again when I get home and repeat the whole process. If you don't do a proper shutdown, you get warnings about how you should have ejected the timemachine and other disks, yadda....

Come on guys, think about this without getting defensive. I don't feel "privileged" to be working on such a high tech machine - that's what I paid the money for, and I expect it to be "right". The SSD/retina MBPs shine for lightning-quick shutdowns and bootups (among other things) with a good OS. Maybe the shutdown fix will come with 10.8.4 - but it is certainly a bug they inadvertently created with 10.8.2 and its puzzling that they would leave it unaddressed in 10.8.3.

Guess I'll wait for the next version to upgrade again, since I downgraded to Lion due to the slow bootups - and yes, sorry to say that 10.7.5 Lion is much more stable than any iteration of 10.8 so far on a mid 2012 SSD machine. There are some features I miss in 10.8, but it can wait for a stable release as far as I'm concerned.

iBug2
Feb 1, 2013, 03:28 AM
I see what you are tying to say, but don't forget that 10.8.2 caused 20 second reboots on SSD/retina to go to nearly 2 minutes. For those of you who have spinning hard drives, I'm sure you don't notice the problem. For those who forked out 3k for SSD machines/retinas, the update to 10.8.2 was a real clunker.

My retina boots in 10 seconds on 10.8.2. Shutdowns can take 2 seconds or 15 seconds. Yes I'd love if they always took 2 seconds but I'm fine with 15 seconds as well. It's not that long for something I do once a week.

freedevil
Feb 1, 2013, 10:38 AM
Slow shutdown solution

8:37 up 42 days, 21:08, 2 users, load averages: 1.35 1.37 1.30

The Bulge
Feb 1, 2013, 11:12 AM
Slow shutdown solution

8:37 up 42 days, 21:08, 2 users, load averages: 1.35 1.37 1.30

No one gives a carot how you or anyone else rationalizes this. The simple truth is that on it's on the fact that it takes 30+ seconds to shut down the most advanced desktop OS as they makrket (even on a god damn clean install on a ****ing i7 maxed out iMac) it simply INEXCUSABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE.

All rationalizations at this point are useless.

JackieTreehorn
Feb 1, 2013, 11:16 AM
Slow shutdown solution

8:37 up 42 days, 21:08, 2 users, load averages: 1.35 1.37 1.30

I decided that some 3,5 months ago :D

r.harris1
Feb 1, 2013, 03:52 PM
No one gives a carot how you or anyone else rationalizes this. The simple truth is that on it's on the fact that it takes 30+ seconds to shut down the most advanced desktop OS as they makrket (even on a god damn clean install on a ****ing i7 maxed out iMac) it simply INEXCUSABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE.

All rationalizations at this point are useless.

My windows 7 desktop takes almost 3 minutes to shut down. My Mac Book Pro late 2008 10.8.2 takes about 20 seconds, 30 seconds at most. My linux desktop just short of 1 minute. How fast should an OS shut down? And why? And if it is inexcusable and unacceptable, what are you going to do about it? Write in all-caps? Switch OSs? Find something to do for 30 seconds? Lots of ways to approach the issue.

freedevil
Feb 1, 2013, 04:29 PM
No one gives a carot how you or anyone else rationalizes this. The simple truth is that on it's on the fact that it takes 30+ seconds to shut down the most advanced desktop OS as they makrket (even on a god damn clean install on a ****ing i7 maxed out iMac) it simply INEXCUSABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE.

All rationalizations at this point are useless.

Well, your carrot does not bother me but you need anger management.

The Bulge
Feb 1, 2013, 06:44 PM
Well, your carrot does not bother me but you need anger management.

You need to stop making excuses where there are none.

----------

My windows 7 desktop takes almost 3 minutes to shut down. My Mac Book Pro late 2008 10.8.2 takes about 20 seconds, 30 seconds at most. My linux desktop just short of 1 minute. How fast should an OS shut down? And why? And if it is inexcusable and unacceptable, what are you going to do about it? Write in all-caps? Switch OSs? Find something to do for 30 seconds? Lots of ways to approach the issue.

I'm not interested in how long it can take to shut down system due to usage and other factors, but when it's some kind of bug which artificially extends shut down time to almost minutes in some cases and is being actively ignored while at the same time a NINTH beta is issued …


As i said i'm not interested in how long it takes to shut down Windows or linux (my Windows 7 in Vmware shuts down faster than my Mac).

50548
Feb 1, 2013, 06:53 PM
You need to stop making excuses where there are none.

----------



I'm not interested in how long it can take to shut down system due to usage and other factors, but when it's some kind of bug which artificially extends shut down time to almost minutes in some cases and is being actively ignored while at the same time a NINTH beta is issued …


As i said i'm not interested in how long it takes to shut down Windows or linux (my Windows 7 in Vmware shuts down faster than my Mac).

Have you provided this feedback to Apple?

The Bulge
Feb 1, 2013, 07:04 PM
Have you provided this feedback to Apple?

Several times. Add on top the bloody hilarious file:/// bug. Try typing file:/// just with capital F in any of OS X text entry fields. See what happens. This is low priority too i guess.

r.harris1
Feb 2, 2013, 07:04 AM
You need to stop making excuses where there are none.

----------



I'm not interested in how long it can take to shut down system due to usage and other factors, but when it's some kind of bug which artificially extends shut down time to almost minutes in some cases and is being actively ignored while at the same time a NINTH beta is issued …


As i said i'm not interested in how long it takes to shut down Windows or linux (my Windows 7 in Vmware shuts down faster than my Mac).

You'll call this "making an excuse for Apple" but really, it comes from a lifetime of software development. If it is a Mac OS X bug, it's known and being tracked in a bug database. Each release, bugs get prioritized into "show-stopper", "critical", "average", "low" priorities (or something similar) for the teams to work on. The prioritization is done by the dev/management teams, and where it fits on the list often has to do with whether there is a workaround, albeit annoying (i.e. wait longer for the system to shut down in your case) and if there are resources to work on a particular bit of functionality. The argument "Apple has all this money, my bug should be fixed RIGHT NOW" doesn't work in reality. In every company, all resources (people, budget, etc) are finite so they have to prioritize. They don't get their priorities from people shouting on forums, though I'm sure they find the shouting highly amusing. If they did get their priorities in this way, nothing'd ever get done.

Everybody wants their bug list worked on as the top priority. I've got a huge list of issues I want the Mac, Windows and Ubuntu folks to work on but the bastards just aren't listening to me :)

MACRM32
Feb 2, 2013, 07:46 AM
Several times. Add on top the bloody hilarious file:/// bug. Try typing file:/// just with capital F in any of OS X text entry fields. See what happens. This is low priority too i guess.

I tried this on Spotlight. Did my taskbar icons just crash and reload? o.O

The Bulge
Feb 2, 2013, 08:18 AM
I tried this on Spotlight. Did my taskbar icons just crash and reload? o.O

Send someone imessage from an iOS device to a Mac see what happnes.

r.harris1
Feb 2, 2013, 08:26 AM
Send someone imessage from an iOS device to a Mac see what happnes.

It crashes the Messages app.

The Bulge
Feb 2, 2013, 08:38 AM
It crashes the Messages app.

and any attemp to open the app will result in crash. Unless that person knows where messages keeps the histroy database.

r.harris1
Feb 2, 2013, 08:54 AM
and any attemp to open the app will result in crash. Unless that person knows where messages keeps the histroy database.

Yeah - this one is serious *****. I wasn't able to type the "F-phrase" in Safari in this forum response without the browser going belly-up. Because I had another conversation going in Messages, I was just able to delete the offending one by hovering (not selecting) and hitting the "x" but yes, if that's the only one going, users would need to know where the database is kept and how to deal with it.

I'll submit with Apple (along with, I am sure, numerous others).

RedGeminiPA
Feb 4, 2013, 09:12 AM
Can anyone confirm a few of things?

1) HDMI output issues for monitors - I read earlier beta builds corrected this. Is it still holding up?

2) Safari and WebProcess taking up a lot of memory. Slowly creeps up to around 1GB combined.

3) Safari auto refreshing pages when you go back a page. Still doing this? It drives me insane when I'm browsing eBay and Craigslist. It completely throws off where you left off in a long list of items on a page.

I just bought a 2012 Mac mini with the stock 4GB of memory. I have Safari, Mail and Messages running. After a couple of minutes, I barely have 500MB of memory available. I'll be upgrading to 16GB within a week or so, but this is horrible for anyone that can't upgrade above 4GB.

Aluminum213
Feb 4, 2013, 09:55 AM
What's new with 10.8.3?

ghosthaunt11
Feb 4, 2013, 11:56 AM
Does anyone know when OS X 10.8.3 is expected to be released to the public?

PBP
Feb 4, 2013, 12:14 PM
Does anyone know when OS X 10.8.3 is expected to be released to the public?
No one knows. But i think this week.

sshhoott
Feb 4, 2013, 06:25 PM
Does anyone know when OS X 10.8.3 is expected to be released to the public?

Wednesday, February 6 at 2:00 PM PST

katewes
Feb 6, 2013, 01:26 AM
I was going to ask the same thing. Who in their right mind would stay on Lion? You either come to ML or go back to SL.

I'm staying with Lion 10.7.4 because everything works well for me, with no discernible bugs. Not saying it is perfect for everyone, but for me it works. As for 10.7.5, I've read about bugs where Time Machine take forever to do a backup. As for 10.8, whilst it might be more polished, those people would not claim it is fine-tuned.

The thing is, I use the Mac for work and for me 10.7.4 just works, and I don't care about the fancier features in ML. I'll wait till you kind souls have wrought your life with the angst that comes with beta-testing Apple's early releases of OSX, and I'll get on board when it's much more stable. By that stage, all you poor people are getting ready for the next roller coaster ride to beta test 10.9.

Usually I sit it out till 10.x.6 when the OS is smooth as butter, but this time with Lion I had to jump on sooner than usual since I bought a new Mac, and saw benefit in synched Calendar and Address Books with iCloud. But by the time of 10.7.4, things were quite good already. I missed the circus with 10.7 to 10.7.3, glad to say, thanks to all you kind paid-up beta-testers. Where would Apple be without generous people who volunteer to pay a token fee of $30-40 to beta-test their software.

So I get by with Lion's 2 second shutdown, while you folk help Apple figure out why Mountain Lion take several 10's of seconds often to shut down.

I lament (not) about missing features like Facebook integration, and thicker scroll bars.

Everyone goes on about how ML is so smooth, but on my Mac, with a clean install of 10.7.4 and extra memory, things here are smooth enough already, sufficient for me to forget about the Mac and get on with my work (except for times when I get distracted by MacRumors forums), so I can afford to wait till you guys help Apple iron out the bugs.

I have some Macs on SL, but prefer Lion because of synching of Address Book and Calendar with iCloud.

zz2k9
Feb 6, 2013, 12:24 PM
I'm staying with Lion 10.7.4 because everything works well for me, with no discernible bugs. Not saying it is perfect for everyone, but for me it works. As for 10.7.5, I've read about bugs where Time Machine take forever to do a backup. As for 10.8, whilst it might be more polished, those people would not claim it is fine-tuned.

The thing is, I use the Mac for work and for me 10.7.4 just works, and I don't care about the fancier features in ML. I'll wait till you kind souls have wrought your life with the angst that comes with beta-testing Apple's early releases of OSX, and I'll get on board when it's much more stable. By that stage, all you poor people are getting ready for the next roller coaster ride to beta test 10.9.

Usually I sit it out till 10.x.6 when the OS is smooth as butter, but this time with Lion I had to jump on sooner than usual since I bought a new Mac, and saw benefit in synched Calendar and Address Books with iCloud. But by the time of 10.7.4, things were quite good already. I missed the circus with 10.7 to 10.7.3, glad to say, thanks to all you kind paid-up beta-testers. Where would Apple be without generous people who volunteer to pay a token fee of $30-40 to beta-test their software.

So I get by with Lion's 2 second shutdown, while you folk help Apple figure out why Mountain Lion take several 10's of seconds often to shut down.

I lament (not) about missing features like Facebook integration, and thicker scroll bars.

Everyone goes on about how ML is so smooth, but on my Mac, with a clean install of 10.7.4 and extra memory, things here are smooth enough already, sufficient for me to forget about the Mac and get on with my work (except for times when I get distracted by MacRumors forums), so I can afford to wait till you guys help Apple iron out the bugs.

I have some Macs on SL, but prefer Lion because of synching of Address Book and Calendar with iCloud.

I totally agree. I went back from ML to Lion because of two major problems;
1 - Audio stutter system wide, playback music movies youtube, whatever.
2 - Sleep and external display issues. Often my mac would go to sleep with an attached monitor, and after a few hours the system would be awake but the fans are spinning full speed, screen black. I/O no feedback. only solution was a hard reset. This and no matter what my energy saver prefs are, the display will ALWAYS go to sleep after 60 seconds.

So I just had enough and went back to 10.7.5, and now i have total peace of mind.
I only miss pages and documents in the cloud. otherwise i am like you, i forget about the mac and just get on with work.
This yearly cycle of OS releases is another way to bag more cash and as a result makes for software that is buggy and in need of polishing. Snow Leopard was the only OS that was brilliant from release compared to Lion and ML.
Now soon we will see 10.9 with a bunch of new features. WOW big deal.
If you go on apple support forums, ML users have had audio issues from day one, and supposedly only until 10.8.3 is the issue being looked at.
That is disgraceful for apple.
Not asking for much here, just for an OS that does simple things properly. Dont give us shiny new features like notification centre to distract us from the underlying OS problems.

Just in case any forum member gets cute and starts mouthing off, I have a maxed out MBP 15 with 8gb ram and SSD, ive reinstalled and wiped my hard drive five times with 10.8 and nothing fixed the issues.

So in this case, Lion is a better OS because it actually works, for people who need to do work without headaches.

RedGeminiPA
Feb 6, 2013, 04:11 PM
Wednesday, February 6 at 2:00 PM PST

Nope... Didn't come yet... :(

Looks like probably at least another week... ugh! At least Apple is trying to make all necessary changes before release.

http://9to5mac.com/2013/02/06/apple-seeds-os-x-10-8-3-build-12d65-to-developers/

sshhoott
Feb 6, 2013, 11:14 PM
Nope... Didn't come yet... :(

Looks like probably at least another week... ugh! At least Apple is trying to make all necessary changes before release.

http://9to5mac.com/2013/02/06/apple-seeds-os-x-10-8-3-build-12d65-to-developers/

Yeah, I thought it was coming, but hey at least I got the time kind of right for the new beta. :D

I think its still going to be couple of weeks.

ThomasJL
Feb 7, 2013, 02:24 AM
I'm genuinely surprised at this comment--you're the only person I've heard make that claim.

So far as I could tell, even 10.8.0 was more polished than any version of 10.7 for most purposes, and I've heard almost no one claim otherwise.

Heck, for practical purposes 10.8.0 IS 10.7.6.

That sounds like an Apple apologist comment. So, I am the only person who you've heard claim that 10.7.5 is more stable than 10.8.0? Are you serious? How is it possible that a Mac OS version with zero bug fixes is more stable than the previous one with five bug fixes?

Look, I love Snow Leopard, and wish I had stayed on it (but that wasn't an option since I had to buy a mid-2012 Mac than shipped with Lion). I'm no fan of Lion, and I think that Mountain Lion has the potential to be a more stable OS than Lion, but it hasn't happened so far because it's only at 10.8.2 at the moment. Maybe by 10.8.3 (or 10.8.4 or 10.8.5, if those ever happen), Mountain Lion will be as stable as Lion.

By the way, "stable" does not mean "polished". The meaning of "stable" in the context of operating systems means "lacking many bugs".

milo
Feb 7, 2013, 09:25 AM
So, I am the only person who you've heard claim that 10.7.5 is more stable than 10.8.0?

Absolutely. And aside from stability, performance seems to be much better on 10.8.

How is it possible that a Mac OS version with zero bug fixes is more stable than the previous one with five bug fixes?

In the case of 10.8, it seems like much of the work they did was on bug fixes. You said yourself how much you liked 10.6 - 10.8 is a similar release where fixes were a higher priority than new features. I'm sorry you haven't found 10.8 as stable as 10.7 on your systems but your experience seems to be in the minority.

Makosuke
Feb 19, 2013, 06:12 PM
That sounds like an Apple apologist comment. So, I am the only person who you've heard claim that 10.7.5 is more stable than 10.8.0? Are you serious? How is it possible that a Mac OS version with zero bug fixes is more stable than the previous one with five bug fixes?Milo more or less already replied with what I would have said, but yes, and I'm not an apologist. 10.7, while I liked it, was somewhat flakey; it was unquestionably less stable than 10.6, even by 10.7.5.

10.8, in contrast, was largely a bug-fix/polishing release of 10.7, so in my experiments and experience, yes, it absolutely is more stable--in the terms you describe--than 10.7. I don't think it's reached the level of 10.6.8 yet, which remains the most stable version of OSX in my experience (and the main version I have rolled out to the dozen Macs at work as a result).

While I used and enjoyed 10.7 at home, I wouldn't have put anyone on it at work unless I had to because of the glitches and bugs. 10.7.5 was doing better, but I was still running into a lot of issues on my three home systems, and the people I've done freelance troubleshooting for. 10.8, in contrast, was ready enough for prime time that I have a couple of work users on it, and just moved the server to it as well (which I'm regretting a bit due to SMBX not being ready for prime time as a Samba replacement, although 10.7 Server was so much worse it wasn't even an option).

The bottom line is, like 10.6, 10.8 was a polish release of the previous OS version, and so in what I think has been most people's experience it has been more stable than its predecessor. Obviously that's not your experience, but that was surprising to me given what I and a lot of others have experienced. I've heard of a lot of people going back to 10.6 from 10.7 or 10.8, but I've never heard of anybody going from 10.8 back to 10.7.

Peace
Feb 19, 2013, 06:13 PM
We're up to 12D68 now. Can't this be closed ?

milo
Feb 20, 2013, 12:28 PM
It's really hilarious when someone points out how horrible 10.7 was and gets labeled "apologist" for it.