Apple Fixes Bug That Bricked Some Intel Macs After macOS Monterey Install

[ApfelKuchen]

Rather interesting that as I checked the App Store for Apple Configurator 2, I was surprised to see that they just released a new version that's only 1 day old, from 2.14 to 2.15, and there are only two notes for it:

v.2.15 1d ago

• Allow skipping the App Store pane in Setup Assistant
• Bug fixes

I bet they encapsulated the BridgeOS update in the new version.

Edit: if you have Apple Configurator 2 installed, you can run "MCU Resource Updater" and that will also update all of its assets to reflect the latest available firmwares.

Betting that "they encapsulated Bridge OS update in the new version" is a very poor bet.

Configurator is a tool that installs software configurations and firmware, pretty much like iTunes'/Finder's role of installing iOS software updates. A large part of Configurator's user base doesn't even support Macs - they administer iPhones and iPads for corporations and schools - they're loading the organizations' standard system configurations (including device management) onto multiple devices. Heck, it's role in "refreshing" Mac firmware isn't even mentioned in the App Store description.

In all cases, if there's a new version of OS/firmware available for installation, the installer package is downloaded from Apple as needed (for iOS it's called an IPSW, I don't know what they call the bridgeOS firmware installer). Imagine, for a moment, if it was necessary to update iTunes or macOS (since Finder is baked into macOS) every time there was a new dot release of iOS.

Whatever bug fixes are incorporated in this release of Apple Configurator 2, they have to do with the functioning of Apple Configurator 2. Since the problem under discussion here was not caused by using Apple Configurator 2, why suspect that a Configurator 2 bug fix has anything to do with a macOS installer failure?

Yes, Configurator 2 is the tool needed for fixing the issue, just as iTunes/Finder is the tool for reinstalling iOS when an iPhone's OS must be erased/reinstalled. If the reports about bridgeOS being the culprit are accurate, Configurator 2 will download that new version of bridgeOS from Apple's servers if and when it's necessary to fix a Mac with this issue.

 

[DailySlow]

I know nothing about writing software, let alone an OS that straddles two microprocessor technologies in this day and age, but I know enough about chip manufacturing to accept that not every chip will perform identically in all situations. There only computer I have ever owned that did everything it was expected to do everytime without fail was a Commodore 64.
Swifter, higher, stronger has a price.
I have come to learn that when a .0 release appears on my screen, I come to forums like this to see what the reaction of the user community is.
Backup backup backup.
I trust that Apple will resolve any and all issues in accordance with the licensing agreement that we all accept when we purchase their products. Of course everyone has read and understands their licensing agreement don’t they?

And not just Time Machine (IF your USB is not “ticked“ or “bricked”) do a Carbon Copy Cloner bootable backup too.

 

[PlainBelliedSneetch]

point was merely that Apple's continuous buggy OS releases have been going on for so long that you would have to be particularly slow and stupid to rush out and update on a new OS release.

The majority of Mac users aren’t even aware of these bugs. I upgraded my Mac mini without running into this issue but know about it because of this article. I have certainly run across a few bugs over the years but the impression that there are continuous buggy OS releases comes from reading about them. I am not saying that the impression isn’t correct just that most probably aren’t aware of it to the same degree.

Kind of like whenever there is a story about a new version of AirPod firmware and everyone here starts complaining about how to get it to upgrade. Probably 99 percent of AirPod owners don’t even know they have firmware.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Are you intentionally being a dumbass?
If there is an update available and I am free, I will be installing it.

And you think I'm the dumbass?!

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

As the owner of the same model (2015) MBP I now appreciate how lucky it is.

But since you’re a software developer and (sometimes) critic of Apple, what’s your opinion on the subject of their beta releases? First there’s a developer beta, then a user beta, then it’s released to the rest of us. What kind of criteria do (you think) they use to move from one to the next? Do you think there has been a lowering of standards there?

Thnx.

I don't have any inside knowledge of their processes, but I can only presume they are broken and flawed. There's either incompetence, internal politics, conflicting agendas, or all of the above.

 

[newbmacuser2021]

I don't have any inside knowledge of their processes, but I can only presume they are broken and flawed. There's either incompetence, internal politics, conflicting agendas, or all of the above.

I personally only release beta software.

If you look at Apple’s software, like the Camera app, the UI/UX is terrible.

But the functionality is very rewarding.

So you sort of ignore the odd layout because it gives you photos and videos.

 

[DailySlow]

I know that sounds weird from an outsider's perspective but if Microsoft manages to hire all users to beta test their own Windows 10 builds for free, Apple certainly can do the same. Heck, iOS public beta program was introduced back in iOS 8 days iirc, and I jumped the gun on iOS 8.4 back then. macOS public beta followed soon after.

They SHOULD'VE actually tested macOS on their real hardware before shipping it out to customers, but they choose not to. I think one of your guesses seems logical, but Apple would never tell us publicly how they do internal testing anyways unless someone decides to blow it up.

Given how hostile Apple towards Intel stuff these days, starting from ripping random non-critical features from Intel Mac, I highly doubt such "long term maintenance support" would happen. Instead, I would not be surprised if they stop supporting Intel Mac in 2022, making ALL current Intel Macs stuck at Monterey forever. 2023 is fine too.

That's back in 1990 days, where people generally were a bit more careful about what they wrote. It's not like you can distribute thousands of floppies for a bug fix that you just found after sending the program to the manufacturer, unlike today.

err stuck at Big Sur, for a while anyway

 

[theunk]

FWIW, I just updated my 2018 i3 8gb 128gb mini to Monterey. Works fine.

 

[bw44]

I don't have any inside knowledge of their processes, but I can only presume they are broken and flawed. There's either incompetence, internal politics, conflicting agendas, or all of the above.

Thanks. I guess my question was naive, but I'm surprised there isn't some known or suspected criteria for how Apple decides to go from developer beta to user beta to public. I'm not saying (like some) that Apple is intentionally shifting the burden of release testing to the public, but if, for whatever reason there's a shortfall in beta testing, the result is the same. My experience on my old iMac (2009!) through the last point release of High Sierra was problem-free. I started with High Sierra on my MBP (2015) and haven't had any serious problems (now on Big Sur), but the problems with new releases reported here on MR have made me a lot more cautious about installing them until several point releases are out.

Obviously, if one has enough technical know-how and experience dealing with software problem to be a beta tester and/or is eager to get new features (or fixes!), then a new release is welcome. As a naive user, I'm not happy with what seems to be increasing risk. But, yes, I'm free to delay until a point release appears stable.

My two cents.

 

[Mr. Dee]

I know that sounds weird from an outsider's perspective but if Microsoft manages to hire all users to beta test their own Windows 10 builds for free, Apple certainly can do the same. Heck, iOS public beta program was introduced back in iOS 8 days iirc, and I jumped the gun on iOS 8.4 back then. macOS public beta followed soon after.

They SHOULD'VE actually tested macOS on their real hardware before shipping it out to customers, but they choose not to. I think one of your guesses seems logical, but Apple would never tell us publicly how they do internal testing anyways unless someone decides to blow it up.

Given how hostile Apple towards Intel stuff these days, starting from ripping random non-critical features from Intel Mac, I highly doubt such "long term maintenance support" would happen. Instead, I would not be surprised if they stop supporting Intel Mac in 2022, making ALL current Intel Macs stuck at Monterey forever. 2023 is fine too.

That's back in 1990 days, where people generally were a bit more careful about what they wrote. It's not like you can distribute thousands of floppies for a bug fix that you just found after sending the program to the manufacturer, unlike today.

That was in 2005, not the 90s, Marklar was 2001 to 2002. The fact is, the heavy lifting was being done by one guy for years in his home. But I was reading Quora a couple years ago where someone mentioned their testing methodologies changed around 2010. This is likely when started seeing Craig do more of the presentations. It was inevitable too as the projects got bigger.

But my hope was controlling much of the hardware, smaller fleet of makes and models would give them more advantage. Then again, 10.1 had a bad iTunes bug that could delete your files and 10.5 had a bug that deleted files when moved between partitions.

So, wasn’t all rosy in the early days either.

 

[hans1972]

The amount of smug victim-blaming that goes on here when Apple screws people over never ceases to gross me out.

If Apple publicly releases a software update then it should be vetted and ready for the public to install it on day one. If the public takes Apple at its word, installs it, and ends up with a bricked computer then the blame is 100% on Apple. Period. End of story.

Some of us are dealing with how the world is and not how it should be.

Even if Apple is 100% to blame, you could still end up with a Mac which doesn't boot and being you also having an enormous amount of anger.

By being a bit conservative with upgrades, you avoid most major problems, your Macs keep booting and you are happy in your computing life.

 

[hans1972]

The way some folks twist themselves into pretzels to avoid holding Apple accountable is super weird to me.

I mean, think about what he’s saying: just accept that this multi-trillion-dollar company you paid several thousand dollars to for this computer is perennially incompetent when it comes to software updates and plan accordingly! We know they can’t be trusted, and that’s why we love them so much!

Really? They sound like people locked in an abusive relationship making excuses for their abuser.

So if you find it unacceptable you have to do something. The only options seems to be:

1) Moving to Windows/Linux
2) Suing Apple for damages

None of those would make me happy. I don't want to use Windows, I want to use MacOS.
I don't want to be involved in a long judicial fight with a company.

So you do risk management and being a bit conservative about upgrading any software will avoid many major problems.

It's called pragmatism.

 

[hans1972]

Are you intentionally being a dumbass?
If there is an update available and I am free, I will be installing it.

And you will have a higher probability of running into (serious) bugs than people waiting a month or two.

 

[cansuds]

monterey is the most terrible mac version to date. has a lot of problems and mistakes.

 

[Flight Plan]

Ok grandma.

Well, at least the two of you stopped backbiting each other, so that's a win.

 

[pianostar9]

monterey is the most terrible mac version to date. has a lot of problems and mistakes.

Point-zero releases from Apple haven't represented its best software quality for a while now. For all we know now, by the time macOS 13 is released, Monterey will be the most stable release in years.

 

[npmacuser5]

good to see they id'd a fix, and folks, please read comments even here that it did NOT effect all Macs with T2.
As long as humans write SW, there will be bugs, and when robots are writing SW, they have been trained by humans, so there will be bugs.
I do believe that QA can be improved, and I also think that the remote working model that Apple needed to adopt has had its impacts ...

Adding to many features, to often, means less quality. More is not always a better product. Especially with software.

 

[Bandaman]

Well, at least the two of you stopped backbiting each other, so that's a win.

Are you so insecure that random people arguing online bothers you?

 

[jz0309]

Adding to many features, to often, means less quality. More is not always a better product. Especially with software.

when I see that it is a 12+GB download on my iMac (Big Sur), that is enormous, so yes, I agree there are features in the OS nowadays that me personally don't use and don't want to use (of course others feel different) ...
Last time I booted up my 2006 MacBook with 2GB RAM and a 89GB platter drive, I got to the password prompt faster than my then 2019 15 MBP Pro 16GB RAM 256 SSD ... I think it is running Leopard, that was some lean mean
OS ...

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Thanks. I guess my question was naive, but I'm surprised there isn't some known or suspected criteria for how Apple decides to go from developer beta to user beta to public. I'm not saying (like some) that Apple is intentionally shifting the burden of release testing to the public, but if, for whatever reason there's a shortfall in beta testing, the result is the same. My experience on my old iMac (2009!) through the last point release of High Sierra was problem-free. I started with High Sierra on my MBP (2015) and haven't had any serious problems (now on Big Sur), but the problems with new releases reported here on MR have made me a lot more cautious about installing them until several point releases are out.

Obviously, if one has enough technical know-how and experience dealing with software problem to be a beta tester and/or is eager to get new features (or fixes!), then a new release is welcome. As a naive user, I'm not happy with what seems to be increasing risk. But, yes, I'm free to delay until a point release appears stable.

My two cents.

What Apple should have, is a dedicated test team with a whole suite of very sophisticated automated testing that is set up to test every boundary case they can think of. They should also have an array of different models of end user machines loaded with all kinds of software, and do some final manual testing on all these machines. This process should catch pretty much every bug. I suspect it is undercooked at Apple.

Code only even makes it to the test team, of course, once the devs themselves have thoroughly tested their own code (again, using a combination of automated testing and manual testing). As a dev, I am quite embarrassed if the test specialists can actually find any bugs in my code. Clearly the Apple engineers don't share this sense of pride.

What really astounds me, is they also do have a beta testing program, and yet when they go to market with a final release, whole swathes of the community are suddenly effected by game stopping bugs. I'm left wondering, did they make code changes between the beta release, and the final release?! Or were these bugs reported, but promptly ignored?!

Whatever it is that is going on, Apple certainly do have a high number of critical bugs in their releases, which is especially astounding considering the resources they have to play with.

These 14" and 16" M-series MBPs are wonderfully engineered pieces of hardware (about bloody time, after a 4-year drought), created by a top shelf hardware team, given the mandate and budget to produce some magic. I propose that the next project this hardware team sets itself to, is to entirely re-engineer the software team, with a similar mandate and budget.

 

[bw44]

What Apple should have, is a dedicated test team with a whole suite of very sophisticated automated testing that is set up to test every boundary case they can think of. They should also have an array of different models of end user machines loaded with all kinds of software, and do some final manual testing on all these machines. This process should catch pretty much every bug. I suspect it is undercooked at Apple.

Code only even makes it to the test team, of course, once the devs themselves have thoroughly tested their own code (again, using a combination of automated testing and manual testing). As a dev, I am quite embarrassed if the test specialists can actually find any bugs in my code. Clearly the Apple engineers don't share this sense of pride.

What really astounds me, is they also do have a beta testing program, and yet when they go to market with a final release, whole swathes of the community are suddenly effected by game stopping bugs. I'm left wondering, did they make code changes between the beta release, and the final release?! Or were these bugs reported, but promptly ignored?!

Whatever it is that is going on, Apple certainly do have a high number of critical bugs in their releases, which is especially astounding considering the resources they have to play with.

These 14" and 16" M-series MBPs are wonderfully engineered pieces of hardware (about bloody time, after a 4-year drought), created by a top shelf hardware team, given the mandate and budget to produce some magic. I propose that the next project this hardware team sets itself to, is to entirely re-engineer the software team, with a similar mandate and budget.

I have to keep remembering you have a "love/hate" relation with Apple! But, seriously, I really appreciate your elaborating on what goes (or should go) into testing OS software. Never having been there, for me it's an eye-opener.

 

[loby]

What Apple should have, is a dedicated test team with a whole suite of very sophisticated automated testing that is set up to test every boundary case they can think of. They should also have an array of different models of end user machines loaded with all kinds of software, and do some final manual testing on all these machines. This process should catch pretty much every bug. I suspect it is undercooked at Apple.

Code only even makes it to the test team, of course, once the devs themselves have thoroughly tested their own code (again, using a combination of automated testing and manual testing). As a dev, I am quite embarrassed if the test specialists can actually find any bugs in my code. Clearly the Apple engineers don't share this sense of pride.

What really astounds me, is they also do have a beta testing program, and yet when they go to market with a final release, whole swathes of the community are suddenly effected by game stopping bugs. I'm left wondering, did they make code changes between the beta release, and the final release?! Or were these bugs reported, but promptly ignored?!

Whatever it is that is going on, Apple certainly do have a high number of critical bugs in their releases, which is especially astounding considering the resources they have to play with.

These 14" and 16" M-series MBPs are wonderfully engineered pieces of hardware (about bloody time, after a 4-year drought), created by a top shelf hardware team, given the mandate and budget to produce some magic. I propose that the next project this hardware team sets itself to, is to entirely re-engineer the software team, with a similar mandate and budget.

To me it a “no brain-we” to have a lab setup with at least one of each system (old and current) to run software and test to see if everything is ok before release.

I have come to learn the things now that “seem common” fact are not. Regressing is occurring when new people take over (and younger) these days. New people now in many professions believe they no more or a better way then the previous and do not learn from the previous or do not want to be taught. (More so now then previous generations). I am surprised at the next generation that I work with that do not know the “common” things that I would say are standards.

This is a problem when rewriting or changing what was (good or bad), it bleeds into everything. Yes, the OS is complicated and no one can find all bugs, but it is clear that they are not throughly going through or testing. I have seen the same issues that were once fixed, then in the next or the version after go back to the same problem: in macOS and FCP.

Anyone with a little coding experience can see why in the software’s behavior when using the software.

If Apple is creating software for “themselves” and for their usage, then they would catch these bugs. But if only Apple now is just using their software for spread sheets, social media and their News program… then it just works. But if they use their OS for real work, then they will notice the issues right away and fix it.

This might be the situation. Apple does not use their software daily for driving or demanding tasks anymore.

 

[JKAussieSkater]

Microsoft must see this and roll their eyes, muttering ’amateurs’. ?

 

[ian87w]

Way to go Apple. So to unbrick your bricked Macs, you need a second Mac. Quite an extreme nudge for consumers to buy a new Mac.

 

[MacBH928]

Its actually very good that Apple specifically has these issues because we can always rely on the Apple sheep to go out there and buy the most expensive newest adn greatest Apple products to beta purchase/test it for us.

Some other company does not have that kind of following to do the beta testing for us.