View Full Version : WOW! anyone seen this on OS X 10.1.2?

Feb 15, 2002, 12:00 AM
Okay this happened just a few mins ago. But this was the first time that OSX went down on me since I went to it in December and boy did it go down hard! I was typing on a message board with my iMac...not this one...in IE and just when I was about done...All of the sudden...LOCK and then weird things start scrolling right over top of the IE window and the entire desktop and then stopped. I wish I would have written some of them down. It was like a black background and "early 80's style" font. It mentioned a Kernal Error and then said it was trying to resolve, but it never resolved. I can't remember all the details, but if it ever happens again I am going to take some notes and share with you. I don't know a lot about computers on the deep programming side, but would like to learn what some of that stuff means. Has anyone else seen OSX crash...and does it crash like this? The old MacOS just locked. It never wrote a narrative about the crash over the screen in the final moment of life!

Feb 15, 2002, 12:17 AM
It's justa kernel panic. No problem unless it comes back. This is just how OS X crashes

Feb 15, 2002, 12:24 AM
Hi. Welcome to Club Panic. Now that you've had your first kernal panic, you can enjoy all the features of the club for free. These include:
Free scrolling text accross your monitor, available in one color!
Free freezes at random intervals!
Free crashes whenever you feel like it!
See the Unix guts of Mac OS X fail!
You now have a lifetime membership, cancellable at any time*!

*subject to a cancellation fee of between $1000 and $3500, payable to Apple Computer, Inc. Or better yet, send the money to me. I want a new DPG4.


Ok basically the Unix part of OSX failed. No big deal. Think of it as an OS 9 system error (you know, the white box with the bomb). Restart and move on. BTW, had you recently downloaded OmniWeb 4.1b. That's when I got my first one.

Feb 15, 2002, 12:45 AM
Although I hate to put it this way, that's the OS X version of a BSOD. Just take comfort in the fact that you'll see many fewer of the OS X variety.

Feb 15, 2002, 12:56 AM
BSOD? forgive me im not versed in whatever that refers to.

Feb 15, 2002, 01:20 AM
So basically this weird happening is sorta like the "blue screen of death" on a PC? It was kinda cool...to see it go bonkers for the first time (as long as it is the only time for a long time!)...but common Steve...PC's give you a pretty blue...this was kinda ugly! It did look "Unixie" (is that a word? hehe) from my little experience around such systems. I take it this is pretty rare.

Yeah it was a panic for sure. Hell I think that is as fast as I ever saw anything in OSX emerge from the screen! I finally had to search for that little reset button on the side of my iMac... It's been so long since I used it. Guess probably a good thing or else it might get sticky!

Feb 15, 2002, 01:49 AM
dude youre running os x on an imac 400! wow!

could this be a problem? or does this happen to anyone using OSX on any mac regardless of power and speed?

anyways I hope you dont have that problem much. take care.

Feb 15, 2002, 02:08 AM
it runs fine on an imac 400

don't panic just deep breathes in and out

Feb 15, 2002, 02:11 AM
Originally posted by mac15
it runs fine on an imac 400

don't panic just deep breathes in and out

okay cool... i was getting worried for my fellow mac user counterpart ..there.


Ensign Paris
Feb 15, 2002, 02:27 AM
its 10 times worse in windows!

Feb 15, 2002, 03:01 AM
You want to crash OSX?


1. fire up apache (share/webserver in system-extensions)
2. fire up Explorer X and connect to webserver at localhost: (now you are greeted by apache that the webserver works fine and is waiting for serving your sites)
3. fire up classic
4. fire up a classic browser and connect to the same

there you are....(no more)

Feb 15, 2002, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by mac15
it runs fine on an imac 400

don't panic just deep breathes in and out

yup, it runs nice and purdy

Feb 15, 2002, 08:37 AM
Yup. it's happened to me.

About three times!

And I don't us OS X much at the moment, still waiting for Quark to get their and Photoshop and so on.

But it has happened and I reckon since I've used the system only about 50 times or so at most, that's about 6%, which isn't what I was led to expect.

It also hung once, totally, when I tried to install a canon printer driver.


Feb 15, 2002, 08:56 AM
the only time OSX has reverted to white text on a black screen was when a Win2K box i'd mapped over the network at uni crashed whilst i was using some of the files.

Caused a kernel panic.

Can't really blame OSX for that one though; i put it down to micro$oft.

Feb 15, 2002, 09:16 AM
The only kernel panics I've seen were immediately after installing OS X, before I could add any updates or on machines that couldn't handle it. I think OS X on anything less than a G3 500Mhz with 512Mb of RAM is risky at best. Add a few PCI it doesn't know and the risk goes up exponentially. The most reliable Kernel Panic I've seen is on the Blue and Whites: The ATA controller on those Motherboards sux: Any HD over 10Gb won't be fully mapped and will have continual Fatal Adressing errors.

Feb 15, 2002, 09:48 AM
that is AIM localhost server lol.

Feb 15, 2002, 10:24 AM
here we are running OSX on a blueberry 350. Anybody slower? How low can you go?

Feb 15, 2002, 10:44 AM Is loopback - ROFL!!!

Feb 15, 2002, 10:47 AM
cant force one running two browsers from

Feb 15, 2002, 10:48 AM
ibook 300 mhz
of course i have 2x processors
(one online the other beside playing the music)

Feb 15, 2002, 11:07 AM
Actually...that was the only time I ever had that happen...I am running on a 400MHz with a paltry 128MB RAM. Now many would say...how in the world? Well first off...I have opened Classic maybe once in the past month. Everything I use is OSX and I have found if you only have 128MB RAM you get by just fine...as long as you ARE NOT running Classic on top of OSX. Now my iBook does have 256MB RAM and a 600MHz processor and the additional RAM and MHz does make a world of difference on the OS being "snappy" but as far as stability...they are both stable. One crash on the iMac and none on the iBook...but I use the desktop quite a bit more at this time.

As far as how low can you go? I thought as long as it was anykind of iMac from Bondi on up to the new flat panel or B&W G3 up to the new Quicksilver you can run OSX with no problems. I am not sure about the Powerbooks before the TiBook, but I also thought that all iBooks ever made will run it fine as well. Yeah I would like more RAM in my iMac. I think I can max it at 512MB...and I know that would help a lot...but how much would that cost? I have two 64MB's in it right now and I would have to take them out and buy two 256MB and put in. Would this make the system faster and more stable...even though I can't complain about stability with only one crash in two months.

Feb 15, 2002, 11:27 AM
...on a beige G3 233MHz with 384 MBs of RAM and a 30GB 7200rpm HD and it runs just fine. It's not exactly a speed demon (obviously), but quite useable.
All of these bouncemarks are on the second/third launch of the program.
About 2.5 bounces before IE stops bouncing
About 6.5 bounces before iMovie is up and running
3 bounces for mail to stop bouncing
3 bounces for AIM to stop bouncing
at most one bounce for iTunes to stop bouncing
how do these compare?

Feb 15, 2002, 12:06 PM
Catfish...It runs about the same on my machines as well. Looks to me then as long as you have any kind of G3 or better you can run OSX reasonably well. Just understand (speed wise) a G3 233-400 is not going to run it like a DP 1GHz...but we all knew that!!!!lol

Feb 15, 2002, 02:10 PM
I'm running OS X on a iMac DV+ with only 128 Mb RAM, and it works just fine, OK I have to admit, it slows down when I have a few apps open (IE, mail,iTunes, iPhoto, imovie, classic, powerpoint, photoshop,...) The way OSX handles the virtual memory is great, I have to admit, when I have all these, or most of these open, it sometimes takes a couple of microseconds before the dock reacts, or switches to another app, but when you have a couple of apps open, but are only working in 1, I do not feel that the system is slowed down. I only had on 'crash' so far. I would not exactly call it a crash, since I downloaded so many stuff, my osX partition got full, and I had a couple of programs open, so actually I was overwriting the apps OSX had put in the virtual, so Then he kind of freezed, only remedy was to push the restart button, I guess he would have recovered after a while, because I had that spinning rainbow thing, and I could still use the dock and menubar, but I couldn't activate anything anymore. So after a couple of minutes I restarted, changed my download folder to another partition, delete/moved a couple from the previous location, and OSX is running fine since then.

Only one thing comes to mind OSX is just great!

I do like a couple of extra RAM's though, that way osX has more space to breath and it would certainly shine even more.:p

Feb 15, 2002, 02:18 PM
I do feel that mail is a really heavy app though.
He surely quit a number of times without any reason, and to me this is the only app that can use some improvement. And I don't want to switch to entourage, I'm just not such a microsoft fan so.
Some tweaking of the mail app, and it's better then entourage!

Feb 15, 2002, 02:28 PM
its a panic or a core dump... its a UNIX thing. It just mean it crashed. If it happens all the time... you may need to reload your system. If it happens whill your running only certan apps... You many want to reload those...

Anything beta running when it happened?? Could have been serveral things that caused it. I would have to see the screen dump to narrow it down more.

I get that a lot running Solaris...

Feb 15, 2002, 04:58 PM
Rev A iMac 233, 96 MB RAM! was on 64 when i installed it....
and i have it running on a 4400! anyone want to try and beat that?
then agian, the only computer i USE for something other than storgae space is my Ti 400 ;)

Feb 16, 2002, 10:52 AM
It works fine on my dv 400 with 576 mb ram

i upgraded from 64 with a 512 module from other world computing for 55 bucks. it was cheap.

it runs pretty well.

HOW THE HECK DOES IT RUN ON A 4400? it doens't have a g3, unless you upgraded it.

Feb 16, 2002, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by blindman858
that is AIM localhost server lol.

ha ha that's funny. Blindman seems to need a pair of glasses so he can read his netstat -n information a little clearer.

Feb 17, 2002, 01:26 AM
i had a 40 GB HD in my iMac, wellm, the iMac decided it didn't want to run anymore (found out the modem was shorting the board...fixed now) so i put the 40 GB HD in my 4400 w/NIC so i could get my files and still play starcraft and Total Annihilation if all else faild...well, the computer got confused the first time i tried booting...gave me the flashing ?. so, i hit the power button, made sure the HD was in correctly, and it was, then started it again, and it went into OS X. told apple about it, and the guy asked me first "are you sure it's a 4400? i've never seen an actual working one of those." so, ya, i'm confused more than anyone, but it does run, and it's faster than an AirPort upload to my 867 Tower, and it can burn CD's or i can transfer stuff to the tower from the 4400 and use a DVD-R...but ya, that was a little rambled, but tit does work...

Feb 17, 2002, 06:45 AM
ok so i think most of us are familiar with what a kernal panic looks like but you have to admit the first time you see it, you probably reacted a bit like Abercrombieboy. i mean it is kinda neat. but im wondering how many of you saw os9 do its own version of a kernal panic. im not sure what its called (since there is no kernal like there is in osx) but you know when os9 freezes up and you get firmware code across the screen sometimes over your desktop and sometimes with just a back backdrop. now thats truly something to see. anyone else been blessed by this sort of freeze?

Feb 17, 2002, 07:25 AM
I run os x on my original tangerine iBook with 384mb ram. Not one kernal panic here, though it has been sticky a few times shutting down with OS9 running in the background. Some times I have to force quit 9 to get it to shut down. It is interesting how I can be on the net browsing, listening to i Tunes and printing something all at once without missing a beat. Maybe my expectations are low, but I am impressed.

T'hain Esh Kelch
Feb 17, 2002, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by groov'
You want to crash OSX?


1. fire up apache (share/webserver in system-extensions)
2. fire up Explorer X and connect to webserver at localhost: (now you are greeted by apache that the webserver works fine and is waiting for serving your sites)
3. fire up classic
4. fire up a classic browser and connect to the same

there you are....(no more)
I hope your right... I couldnt resist, so Classic is starting up as I write this...

Get ready to BOMB..! :D

[Edit:] Aw man... It didnt work... :( -It just stod there searching for the page (It works in OSX), and then I tried to write Apple.com instead (Just to see if the browser worked at all), and it loaded the page just fine. But when I clicked in the top of the browser to write again, classic went down...
Okay.. Some sort of a crash, but not a Kernel Panic... Now im sad... :( :(

Feb 17, 2002, 01:54 PM
Ya, I've seen the kernal panic crash.. Apple has been hard at work eliminating bugs in the unix foundation. They have proposed many changes to the open source BSD tree project which will enhance the userfullness and responsiveness of the unix underpinnings and are soon to move the Mac OS X flavor up to parity with BSD version 4. So far they've done a really good job I feel. The majority share of bugs which would cause a kernal panic were eliminated with the 10.1 release (a major improvement). Since installing 10.1.2 I've only experienced one kernal panic, and it was running a beta version of the new Aqua-interfaced Mozilla browser under heavy system load. Chances are currently if you don't play with betas, you won't get bit!

Feb 17, 2002, 04:06 PM
i've had the kernal panic twice since august (when i got my machine): once playing SimCity 3000 in Classic (game sucks) and once more during which i can't remeber what i was doing.

according to apple, OS X runs on any g3 except the original g3 powerbook and an upgraded computer. but, i have heard of people running it on a PPC upgraded with a card.

Feb 17, 2002, 04:33 PM
When I first got my Quicksilver 733 back in late July, OS X still had quite a way to go, so I always used 9. To clean up clutter I nested all of the OS X related files into one folder. Finally the day arrived when 10.1.2 was release, and I was ready to switch. I decided to load 10 one last time so I could appreciate the speed increase, and as it loaded suddenly, I guess that even though Startup Disk located 10, 10 couldn't find all it's parts, so the Unix guts spilled all over the happy mac startup screen ending with the line

we're hanging in here :(

I thought it was really cute, but other then that 10 has given me no problems except the Toast Titanium for 9 can't find the CD-RW drive through Classic, and occasionally internet dail-up gets screwy. The first problem made me go buy Titanium X and the latter goes away on restart.

Feb 17, 2002, 06:31 PM
i guess that the 4400 thing....

maybe the x installer checks to see if you have g3 or else it doesn't let you... if you install it on a hard disk in a comp with a g3 then move the hd to a computer without one, maybe you can get x on an OLD mac!!

probably not anything below powerpc though... ha ha

could you imagin running x on a powerbook duo 33mhz 040.

T'hain Esh Kelch
Feb 18, 2002, 06:40 AM
Actually... I think it's worth a shot.. :)

Feb 18, 2002, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Actually... I think it's worth a shot.. :)

Ur kidding, right? Otherwise i might try it... :cool:

How would i do that? Are external scsi's bootable... :rolleyes:

I could install x on an external scsi :o

except i couldn't because it requires more than a gig :(

and my only comp that has scsi is the duo :eek:

i guess i could do it over a network, but then i'd have to set up my dock...;)

wait it wouldnt work anyway :mad:

dang. he eh