[HN Gopher] M1 Macs have another hidden boot mode
___________________________________________________________________
M1 Macs have another hidden boot mode
Author : giuliomagnifico
Score : 311 points
Date : 2021-02-20 10:39 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (eclecticlight.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (eclecticlight.co)
| LockAndLol wrote:
| > What you then get is every bit as good as regular 1TR, with one
| significant exception: you can't set the system security state
| using the Startup Security Utility. Apple explains that this is
| because "LLB [Low-Level Bootloader] doesn't lock an indication
| into the Boot Progress Register saying it is going into
| recoveryOS". But for all other purposes, this is just as good as
| 1TR, and is identical.
|
| What does this mean? Do you have more rights than you usually
| would, less rights, or the same?
| saagarjha wrote:
| Less, you cannot alter security policies.
| titzer wrote:
| And yet, when I had to return my M1 Macbook Pro 3 weeks back
| because of dead pixels, the dude at Best Buy told me that in
| order to wipe it, they had to _update the OS_ because the version
| of the OS that came installed had a bug that would make the
| machine unbootable if they tried to do a factory reset from that
| version. So it had to download ~3gb to update the OS, just to
| wipe itself.
|
| That's just bonkers.
| cbsmith wrote:
| There was a time where there'd be a discoverable button/knob to
| explicitly invoke this function.
|
| It's amazing what where the gods of UX have taken us.
| EricE wrote:
| If you never ran software update and bought it the first day it
| was available then they are correct. If you ever updated the OS
| - even just once - then you had the patch for the recovery mode
| that had the bug.
|
| But even with the bugged first version of macOS, the laptops
| are still recoverable - you just need another Mac with Apple
| Configurator 2 to get around the bug. Something you would think
| the Geek Squad should be able to handle (yes, that was
| sarcasm).
|
| All you really needed to do was boot into recovery mode, launch
| disk utility then nuke the disk. If they want to re-install the
| OS, let them. I ended up taking my Air back to Apple because it
| turned out I really do need more than 16GB for RAM for a few
| things (shoot!) and I just nuked the drive. They didn't even
| bat an eye.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| A dude at Best Buy didn't know the most efficient way to wipe
| one of the products they sell?
|
| I can't say I'm shocked.
|
| Apple's free Configurator 2 utility is much quicker than the
| Windows 10 "Reset this PC" functionality, and will factory
| reset an M1 Mac even if the system is unbootable.
| abrowne wrote:
| It would still need to download the firmware image on the
| computer running AC2 if it hadn't been downloaded before of
| course.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _the dude at Best Buy told me_
|
| Since when do technical people believe dudes at Best Buy?
| fortran77 wrote:
| I don't think Apple realizes that a lot of the "cruft" in
| legacy/Intel platforms is there for a reason. Reasons like
| this.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Do you really believe one of the most valuable companies in
| the world that just on-the-fly transitioned half their
| product line to a different CPU architecture, released their
| flagship desktop OS for the new architecture and thrown in a
| compatibility layer that works like magic for good measure,
| somehow doesn't understand how computers work? Whatever they
| did, they did on purpose. The good and the bad.
| rbanffy wrote:
| > on-the-fly transitioned half their product line to a
| different CPU architecture
|
| And did that for the third time nonetheless.
|
| Ok. For the second time, because the first one was on an
| entirely different OS.
| Larrikin wrote:
| Do you really think the engineers at Apple are gods
| incapable of mistakes? The MacOS division in particular has
| been a prime example of "don't upgrade until you have to"
| with how buggy each new update has been.
| kortilla wrote:
| > Do you really think the engineers at Apple are gods
| incapable of mistakes?
|
| Read the comment the parent is replying to. It implies
| that the cruft of legacy architectures is to support
| these scenarios and Apple didn't realize that. Both
| things are laughably wrong and the parent pointed out why
| the latter is so ridiculous.
| aprdm wrote:
| You make it sound like all of those changes weren't many
| years of effort by many engineers...
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Unfortunately I don't know everyone's names, so I'm using
| "Apple" as an umbrella term for Apple engineers.
| waheoo wrote:
| I love that in this thread we have one fanboi defending
| apple about this by saying that bugs happen and that
| they're often found in the least tested software parts
| (fucking reinstall? Not tested?)
|
| And then we also have someone complaining they just did
| this on a whim and that they did it because they're
| basically gods and how dare you question them.
| kortilla wrote:
| And then all of this conversation is based on the
| assumption of a bug someone heard about from _a Best Buy
| employee_. We're arguing about a scenario (re-install
| wasn't ever tested) based on a shitty game of telephone.
| waheoo wrote:
| AP was clearly making the link between apples "on the fly"
| transition and software rewrites by newcomers to a system
| that will often make the same mistakes that the old system
| had already figured out solutions to.
|
| Nobody claimed apple doesn't understand computers, thats
| your mischaracterization of the AP.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Indeed. Whenever you see {thing that shouldn't need to be
| there}, you should think very hard about _why_ it _could_ be
| there.
|
| Sometimes, it's because {situation that no longer happens /
| is relevant}.
|
| Sometimes, it's because {situation no one thinks would
| happen, but does with non-zero frequency in large
| deployments}. E.g. road debris forming a high force,
| sharpened spike directly into Tesla battery packs.
| stouset wrote:
| What "cruft" exactly that Apple removed do you think would
| have prevented this bug? Clearly it couldn't have been too
| big a deal as this bug was quickly fixed.
|
| Do you genuinely think "bugs might happen" is a legitimate
| reason for a computer manufacturer to leave on the table the
| absolutely massive perf and perf per watt gains Apple has
| demonstrated with the M1?
| crazygringo wrote:
| I mean, bugs are most likely to be found in rarely used
| scenarios (like wiping) and also in the version of software
| that actually gets shipped with hardware, because it's got a
| non-negotiable tight release deadline. (Which is why many
| devices force an OS update from the internet before you can
| even use it for the first time.)
|
| Of all the places for a crazy bug like this to be found, this
| seems like one of the least bonkers. :) And the excellent thing
| about Apple is that if you _did_ brick it, Apple would just
| exchange it for you for free since it 's their own defect.
| salawat wrote:
| I disagree. The most important part of a car is the brakes.
| Likewise, the most important part of a complex programmable
| device is the capability to slick and reinstall to restore a
| known good working state.
|
| Shipping something that cannot uninstall/reinstall cleanly is
| shipping a not even half functional base device. Ubiquity of
| Internet access is not a crutch that can be counted on at all
| times. The fact that modern hardware vendors are starting to
| assume that is disturbing, and likely another symptom of
| companies slowly trying to acclimate users to not really
| "owning" what it is they bought.
| lukeschlather wrote:
| It sounds like the M1 literally cannot be re-imaged from
| external media though, because the internal copy of the OS is
| so locked-down. Which fundamentally seems like a very Apple
| sort of disregard for providing tools for people to deal with
| failure modes. It also ensures the people actually solving
| the problem and the people who have the problem are never in
| the same room and never talk about what's going on.
| easton wrote:
| It can[0], it's just that the partition holding 1TR and the
| second-stage bootloader (which is almost but not quite
| macOS) isn't overwritten. Just like how PCs that store UEFI
| variables on the SSD don't overwrite those when wiping the
| OS (as OS installers are now smart enough not to wipe
| those).
|
| 1: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211983 (specifically,
| "Or use a bootable installer")
| ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
| This is incorrect; you can do so with another Mac and Apple
| Configurator, just like it was an iOS device.
| 1over137 wrote:
| These days a Mac basically _is_ an iOS device.
| oneplane wrote:
| I suppose the T1, T2 and Touch Bar are, and with the M1
| those parts are integrated on the SoC. But the runtime OS
| is still macOS and like on x86 that is not very iOS. The
| best description would be 'both', as the embedded
| platform is added instead of displacing the existing
| 'computer' platform. On M1 it is closer, and much more
| integrated, but still very distinct.
| saagarjha wrote:
| The boot and recovery process is very similar to that of
| iOS.
| cbsmith wrote:
| Again, a very Apple thing to do. ;-) You just need
| another device from their ecosystem.
| gumby wrote:
| As opposed to "you need a special piece of hardware" it's
| "you need a readily available piece of hardware with the
| right affordances".
|
| Doesn't sound particularly bad, especially when compared
| to the situation in other industries (e.g. cars and all
| the special proprietary OBD stuff they do).
| _underfl0w_ wrote:
| I bought a non-M1 Macbook a decade ago and there were
| absolutely zero issues wiping it from stock. That was one of
| the first things I did, and everything performed as expected
| each time. How did things progress so far _backwards_ in
| stability?
| tw04 wrote:
| A decade ago your MacBook didn't have drive level
| encryption with a soldered in place drive.
|
| You were trading security for "stability".
| imwillofficial wrote:
| I think "flexibility" is a more apt word choice.
| phs318u wrote:
| > How did things progress so far backwards in stability?
|
| Because they progressed so far forward in security. Design
| is an exercise in priorities and trade-offs. The ability to
| wipe your Mac is now second fiddle to the ability to secure
| your Mac.
| EricE wrote:
| It was a problem with the initial release of macOS shipped
| on the machines and was fixed within a couple of weeks.
| It's LONG past old news.
|
| Need I point out _Best Buy_ was the start of this
| kerfuffle?
| philjackson wrote:
| > How did things progress so far backwards in stability?
|
| Not a software engineer then?
| shawnz wrote:
| > I bought a non-M1 Macbook a decade ago and there were
| absolutely zero issues ... How did things progress so far
| backwards in stability?
|
| We are talking about a system which just underwent a huge
| architectural change as well as a new major release of the
| operating system. I think it is unreasonable to expect the
| same level of stability as a decades-old architecture only
| a couple months after release.
|
| You can see in this case the issue is apparently already
| patched. It seems only with the very first software to have
| ever shipped on the device would you experience a bug such
| as this.
| titzer wrote:
| On the contrary, given the huge risks being taken here,
| you would think that the recovery/reimage solution would
| be the thing that they would test _the most_!
| xxpor wrote:
| On the other hand, downloading 3 gb to wipe doesn't
| really sound that bad concidering the way to do that used
| to be to download the entire OS and format the disk
| titzer wrote:
| Why would you download anything? It seems possible to
| have a DVD/BluRay or USB disk with the golden copy on it,
| or the OS itself should be able to restore itself to
| factory settings.
| TameAntelope wrote:
| There was a bug. It was designed and now does work,
| presumably forever, as you've described.
| gogopuppygogo wrote:
| Apple leaks talked about how they maintained a "Marklar"
| x86/x64 release branch for MacOS for years leading up to
| the official launch. I was hearing about them during the
| G4 desktop era.
|
| The M1 benefits from its relation to the silicon in
| iPhone and iOS being based on MacOS but there are major
| differences. It's a revolutionary mobile computing
| platform. So far the biggest problems have been a few
| software glitches that can quickly be patched over the
| internet. This is a trivial set of issues to trade for
| the power / performance gains.
|
| I'm looking forward to the newer 16" models coming out. I
| still need Windows on my computer for my workflows though
| so if the virtualization isn't even beta quality I'll
| need to be an Intel holdout for a while longer.
| jhoechtl wrote:
| Why not AMD? Value for money seems to be good and I mean
| better value for less money...
| mathgeek wrote:
| Apple doesn't make any models with AMD chipsets. They
| went from PowerPC to Intel and now their own chips.
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| Apple employees are human, deadlines are inflexible,
| revolutionary changes are risky.
|
| It seems straightforward.
| titzer wrote:
| It's a matter of priorities. Apparently recovery and
| reimaging scenarios are not considered priorities.
| Personally, I want those to be absolutely rock solid.
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| That's a conclusion that does not follow from your
| premises. I'm sure it _was_ tested. A lot. But here's the
| thing: when you ship _anything_ of sufficient complexity
| where the quantities involved are measured in millions,
| there's no such thing as a "small problem" or "edge
| case".
|
| Apple will test and fix bugs they find, as much as
| humanly possible, within the constraints of execution.
| You don't just decide to launch on a whim, it's baked in
| 3 years previously, with tens of thousands of people
| working towards that one goal; with supply ramps for
| multiple other companies arranged and enabled; with well-
| known public launch dates that can realistically only
| give you a few days wiggle room. The fact that they do
| this _at all_ is a breathtaking success and a testament
| to the business - this applies to any such at-scale
| business, not just Apple.
|
| So they've covered 99.9% of all boot issues before
| launch. As the CEO, do you go ahead ? Or do you miss the
| launch date, possibly invite legal action from your
| supply chain or worse, a critical manufacturer folds
| because of cash flow, and do you risk the reputation and
| stock price hit of a company as large as Apple "swinging
| and missing" in the press ?
|
| I think it's pretty clear what the correct choice is, and
| even though 0.1% of those millions of devices still adds
| up to a sizable number of complaints, you're still way
| ahead of the game. And you get to keep that well-oiled
| machine moving forwards rather than stalling.
|
| Apple has priorities. They may not be _your_ priorities.
| If they differ sufficiently, you should go elsewhere, and
| if sufficient people agree with you and do the same,
| Apple will realign its priorities. I wouldn't hold your
| breath though.
| titzer wrote:
| So you're telling me they were never expecting someone to
| return a laptop and it needing to be wiped?
| EricE wrote:
| Obviously not. And it was corrected within two weeks with
| a software update long ago released.
|
| Talk about making mountains out of molehills...
| sebasvisser wrote:
| Humans set deadlines...
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| Ah, but once a deadline is _set_ , it is very hard to
| _un-set_. Apple does not exist in a vacuum, it
| communicates its schedules to others and huge efforts are
| made by many people and companies to meet that deadline;
| it is not a trivial thing to change.
| NeutronStar wrote:
| So they should be free from criticism because they set a
| deadline?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| That's a lot extrapolation from one single bug.
| the_local_host wrote:
| > How did things progress so far backwards in stability?
|
| Because they just changed the foundation that the entire
| system is built on top of.
| SXX wrote:
| It's won't be exactly briked, but bypassing the bug is messy
| process. Though no idea why they have trouble with Apple
| Configurator:
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211983
| mikewhy wrote:
| I had to do this recently and went with the terminal method.
| It's just downloading the newer install app and running it,
| really quite simple.
| mikewhy wrote:
| The version of the OS that shipped with them has an unfortunate
| bug when reinstalling. IIRC it doesn't brick them, but it won't
| get passed the final stage when you create your account.
|
| In any case, the solution would be "download a newer version of
| the OS and make some installation media like a usb".
|
| Luckily, the recovery OS can still connect to wifi, so you can
| skip the whole "make an installation media" step. You just
| download the new installer and run it.
|
| It really doesn't seem bonkers to me.
| gist wrote:
| What was the rational for Apple making the M1 Macs so difficult
| (for lack of a better way to say it) than the older macs. Example
| is currently you can't easily boot from an external drive [1] a
| feature that many people found very useful. [2]
|
| The answer to the question is not 'oh sure for security reasons'.
| I am wondering how making it so difficult for what I would call
| the majority of power or experienced or even regular users to do
| certain things on an M1 Mac. That is what is gained (so what is
| it?) vs. what is lost.
|
| Who threat is the audience protected against by doing it this
| way?
|
| Or is this just an artifact of the M1 Chip in some way and not
| something added after the fact?
|
| [1] https://www.shirt-pocket.com/blog/
|
| [2] You could travel with an external drive and boot from another
| mac in a pinch.
| sys_64738 wrote:
| Hardware Root of Trust means you have to assume an external
| boot device is compromised. Apple have their mechanisms for
| securing each step in the chain which is they enforce it out of
| the box. For 95% of users this is fine as it's only advanced
| experts who would need to use other booting technology after
| disabling HRoT chain. Apple makes it clear in big bold letters
| that you're compromising security by using alternative booting
| technology.
| gist wrote:
| > Apple makes it clear in big bold letters that you're
| compromising security by using alternative booting
| technology.
|
| Can you give an example(s) of how you are compromising
| security?
|
| If I make my own boot drive and boot from it how am I
| compromising security?
|
| I can think of scenarios like the following but the way I see
| it this would be a corner case:
|
| "I somehow social engineer making a clone of a person's (say
| my wife/coworker (not computer literate)) hard/ssd drive. I
| then figure out a way to make their machine only boot from
| that drive by simply choosing that as the startup disk. I
| have installed some malware on that external drive that grabs
| or does something nefarious". In that case though with that
| kind of access I could have done similar on their internal
| drive since I have access to it already."
|
| My point is why do we assume that the external boot drive is
| compromised if it is being created by the person who owns the
| hardware? This seems like some kind of government or large
| company protection applied to the entire apple customer base.
| Why couldn't the device ship with the ability to turn off
| this protection?
| sys_64738 wrote:
| HW RoT prevents you from being able to replace OS binaries
| with compromised versions. How are you going to prove your
| external boot drive isn't compromised without HW RoT? HW
| RoT reduces the attack surface available and gives a more
| secure baseline but sure it can be compromised. But an
| external drive is the Wild West. This is the reason black
| sites don't allow support people to bring their own tools
| onsite as you have to assume they're compromised.
| swiley wrote:
| Almost every time I hear something new about the boot loader on
| these M1 Macs it's always something that on it's own would be a
| huge deal breaker.
|
| It's not even the weird ISA that causes this, Apple's PowerPC
| macs used standardized firmware with documentation. All of the
| crap they do to prevent their users from tampering with _their
| own machines_ just makes them unusable.
| tomjen3 wrote:
| If you deem Big Sur entirely unusable, I guess so. It has a few
| quirks that I don't like (mostly related to retarded fullscreen
| handling), but it has a bash terminal, can run Goland and is
| the only computer I have had any luck using my in ear sony head
| phones on.
| swiley wrote:
| At this point windows has a "bash terminal" and also comes
| with openssh preinstalled (which is all most people I know
| use their macs for anyway.)
|
| Furthermore, Apple stopped updating the bash in OSX and at
| this point it's _crazy_ out of date. They even changed the
| default shell to zsh because of this.
| akie wrote:
| > makes them unusable
|
| Such hyperbole.
| swiley wrote:
| Not being able to quickly and easily whipe the machine when
| something goes wrong means it's practically unusable: There
| will always be accumulated state and it's much harder to
| safely get rid of.
| EricE wrote:
| You can quickly wipe the machine - it just works in a
| different way.
|
| Stating that the machine is practically unusable is indeed
| hyperbole since that statement is patently false.
| tambourine_man wrote:
| Apple made a whole infrastructure to allow you to install
| alternative OSs. All oficial and fully documented.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| For those who is struggling with booting and putting M1 Mac even
| in DFU mode, this explanation works:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5xmA3lDz3g
|
| Well almost. To make it really work in my case I had to restart
| Apple Configurator, because otherwise it would not see the other
| Mac. You can imagine how many boots and attempts you need to
| discover this.
|
| When I think about it now it could be I accidentally have entered
| to the second boot option and only this way it managed to put it
| in DFU. Hard to say now.
| meibo wrote:
| So this means modern macs essentially have 4 copies of OS X
| installed? One regular, 2 recoveries, and whatever runs on their
| management controller(Bridge OS? Does that still exist on M1
| macs?) and the touch bar.
|
| Seems to work out fine for them if it creates resilience and
| makes code-sharing/interoperability easy.
| choeger wrote:
| Maybe they had to make up for the Minix running on the Intel
| processors...
| xenadu02 wrote:
| M1 Macs do not have a T2 coprocessor like Intel Macs. The Touch
| Bar on M1 systems is run by macOS directly. macOS also handles
| talking to the Secure Enclave.
| giuliomagnifico wrote:
| >have 4 copies of OS X
|
| Probably 2, the official boot and the recovery are macOS: the
| other 2 are iOS kernel for touchbar and controller. But I
| haven't digged into it.
| messe wrote:
| > the other 2 are iOS kernel for touchbar and controller
|
| On Intel yes, as it's managed by the T2 chip which runs
| bridgeOS (which IIRC is based on watchOS rather than iOS, but
| it's XNU all the way down regardless). On M1 chips the
| controller functions have been integrated into the M1 chip,
| and I was under the impression that the touchbar was too;
| i.e. it's now controlled directly by macOS.
| adolph wrote:
| Within the M1 is a "Secure Enclave" for the stuff that was
| formerly in T1. Does that mean that there is an iOS running
| inside the macOS?
|
| https://support.apple.com/guide/security/secure-enclave-
| sec5...
| SllX wrote:
| No. From the document you cited:
|
| " The Secure Enclave Processor runs an Apple-customized
| version of the L4 microkernel. It's designed to operate
| efficiently at a lower clock speed that helps to protect
| it against clock and power attacks. The Secure Enclave
| Processor, starting with the A11 and S4, includes a
| memory-protected engine and encrypted memory with anti-
| replay capabilities, secure boot, a dedicated random
| number generator, and its own AES engine."
|
| iOS still has an XNU kernel. L4 is a different beast
| entirely and being used for a different role here.
| adolph wrote:
| Thanks! It's interesting to read about the history of L4,
| which Wikipedia claims developed out of dissatisfaction
| about XNU predecessor Mach's performance.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family
| SllX wrote:
| No problemo. :)
| terry_y_comb wrote:
| "requires you to press the Power button twice in rapid
| succession"
|
| Reminds me of video game cheat code
| kergonath wrote:
| Macs have always had tons of these (such as the command-option-
| p-r to reset the NVRAM, option to show the list of bootable
| drives, I can't remember which one to invoke OpenFirmware,
| etc).
| lovelyviking wrote:
| I would prefer one that works! How on earth they have managed to
| make this thing with 'recovery partition' to become 'not
| bootable'???
|
| They officially say it can become 'not bootable' if the interrupt
| occurs during system update. BUT I've got it 'not bootable'
| without any power interrupts during the very first day.
|
| After simple reinstall attempt without any power interrupts this
| sh..t didn't boot at all !!!
|
| It showed black screen with big exclamation mark and url to
| support which basically says ... go find another Mac to boot this
| one ... (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211868). Thanks Apple!
| Very nice advice with COVID situation
|
| The irony is I bought this one as 'another Mac' to fix the
| previous one that have fallen apart. You can dig in my comments
| how. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25809097
|
| I would really prefer simple booting from external drive at this
| point.
|
| This is the buggiest thing I EVER had. Even the screenshot
| doesn't work properly. It reacts to(CmdShift-4) after ~2!!!
| second delay while on previous Mac it was instant.
|
| "Very fast" some say? I still wish to see it, because so far it
| feels just like the one I had before or slower! I am not talking
| about benchmarks, I am talking about day to day experience.
|
| And there are bugs bugs and bugs. I have stopped counting
| honestly. Just another one as example: Playing something in
| Garage Band and going to settings gives dialog saying sound
| engine was not able to process ... I never saw something like
| that before.
|
| And of course enormous amount of useless dialogs with especially
| jumpy animation just to annoy you enough. It reminds micros..t
| more and more. I believe this particular 'dialogs feature' have
| been introduced in Vista? But Vista had another beautiful feature
| - erasing it and install something that works. Unfortunately here
| we do not have even this, because it simply would not boot !
|
| Goodness, my feeling is: Can Apple make at least something these
| days that 'just works' ?
| jamesfmilne wrote:
| I have noticed my M1 Mac Mini behaves a bit strangely when I
| have my external USB3 HDD plugged in. The mouse motion is
| stuttery, but unplug the drive and it is smooth as silk.
| There's evidently something low-level going on, probably USB
| error recovery.
|
| Might be worth checking if you have any external hardware
| causing issues?
|
| My main bug bear is my HP Z27 DisplayPort monitor disappears
| when it goes to sleep. Have to unplug/replug the cable to get
| it to come back.
| yarcob wrote:
| Is it a bluetooth mouse?
|
| Many USB 3 devices cause interference in the same frequency
| bands that Bluetooth and Wifi also use.
|
| USB 2 has lower bitrates so the interference is in a
| different band.
| blakesterz wrote:
| > My main bug bear is my HP Z27 DisplayPort monitor
| disappears when it goes to sleep. Have to unplug/replug the
| cable to get it to come back.
|
| I have some weird monitor issues on mine too, same thing,
| when it wakes up it loses a monitor.
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| I've had that problem with the bluetooth mouse and an Intel
| Mac Mini. I've also had similar problems with a DisplayPort
| monitor. Perhaps it isn't M1 specific.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >Might be worth checking if you have any external hardware
| causing issues?
|
| I have no external drives at all. Well I do but , because
| they are usb and turns out for this brand new Mac that should
| be 'everything I ever need' apparently I need to buy a huge
| adapter sizing like 'half of this Mac' to make it work with
| peripherals.
|
| It doesn't even have sd card reader, not even micro sd card
| reader. To 'save space' and for better comfort I believe.
|
| Somehow raspberry Pi manages to boot from such device. I wish
| the Apple engineers knew about such amazing feature of micro
| sd card.
|
| If they just could figure out how this hi-tech technology of
| booting from micro-sd cards works they could do amazing
| things like booting without a need for 'Another Mac'! ...
| g_p wrote:
| > I have noticed my M1 Mac Mini behaves a bit strangely when
| I have my external USB3 HDD plugged in. The mouse motion is
| stuttery, but unplug the drive and it is smooth as silk.
| There's evidently something low-level going on, probably USB
| error recovery.
|
| I've had similar sounding issues with a keyboard, mouse, a
| couple of USB audio devices plugged in via a hub to USB 3
| (nothing high bitrate like a USB drive). I need to unplug one
| of the USB sound devices to stop this if it happens. I think
| all these devices are USB 2.0 at best.
| arm wrote:
| That's an old issue (also had it with a 2012 Mac mini). It's
| interference from your USB 3.0 device/cable on the 2.4 GHz
| ISM band.
|
| Potential ways to fix the issue:
|
| * use a short USB 2.0 extension cable (like this1 6''/15cm
| one) to force the USB connection down to USB 2.0 (not ideal,
| but _guaranteed_ to solve the problem)
|
| * move the USB 3.0 HDD further away from the Mac mini and
| mouse
|
| * try swapping out the USB 3.0 cable for one with better
| shielding
|
| For more information about the issue, see Intel's white paper
| titled _USB 3.0 Radio Frequency Interference Impact on 2.4GHz
| Wireless Devices_ here2.
|
| ------------
|
| 1 -- https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000E5CYW8/
|
| 2 -- https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/io
| /uni...
| matwood wrote:
| > "Very fast" some say? I still wish to see it, because so far
| it feels just like the one I had before or slower! I am not
| talking about benchmarks, I am talking about day to day
| experience.
|
| Really sounds like you had some hardware problem. For example,
| running a java app test suite runs 2x as fast on my M1 MBA than
| the 2017 MBP it replaced. Instant on from sleep, instant new
| Safari tabs, and terminal tabs/windows, are all examples of
| things that have greatly sped up my day to day experience. Add
| that all this in a machine with no fans, and not much bigger
| than my iPad Pro.
|
| I do run into bugs here and there, but it's hard to tell if
| they are Big Sur bugs or M1 bugs. I wouldn't consider any of
| them showstoppers or occurring enough to be more than a minor
| annoyance.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >Really sounds like you had some hardware problem.
|
| Apple Diagnostic reports: no issues.
| matwood wrote:
| When Apple ran diagnostics, did they also say nothing was
| wrong?
|
| It's completely possible to have dud hardware that is not
| caught by software. I'm about to send an old MBP to get its
| battery replaced because it's bulging, yet the battery
| health tool says it's fine.
|
| As far as your m1, something is definitely wrong. It's not
| just benchmarks have shown that it's fast, but in day to
| day usage of many common programs. Your m1 experience is
| the exception, which likely means a problem with your
| machine.
| yarcob wrote:
| I don't understand why "instant on" after sleep is supposed
| to be new when my white iBook G3 already had that back in
| 2002.
|
| Or is it even more instant now?
| kergonath wrote:
| From my experience, an instant is much longer under OS X.
| My older Macs under OS 9 did indeed wake up instantly, but
| since then I've been happy if it takes a couple of seconds.
| matwood wrote:
| It's like an iPad or phone now where it doesn't seem like
| it ever actually shut off. So when you open the lid it's
| running. Small difference, but incrementally better.
| GavinMcG wrote:
| Yes, they can. My M1 Mac just works. You got a dud. Return it.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| If you open Garage Band, then record sound track then while
| your track is playing you would go to settings and you
| connect a bluetooth speaker. Then in Settings->Sound section
| you would click on tab: Input. It works?
|
| Try to stop playing track and start to play it again. All
| Works?
|
| Try to select bluetooth for input and play again. Works?
|
| The simplest scenario is when BTSpeaker is already connected,
| you just run Garage Band. Open settins->sound>input and then
| press play in Garage Band. Works?
| GavinMcG wrote:
| It sounds like you're frustrated, and it sucks being in
| that spot. I'm not going to spend my day verifying your
| bug.
|
| You've got an issue with bootability, with screenshots, and
| with audio all in the same system. Send it back. Get a
| replacement Mac, or get a PC for all anyone cares.
|
| Whatever you decide to do, your experience so far has been
| anamolous compared with lots and lots of other folks.
| ineedasername wrote:
| I've had similar issues with Windows and had to resort to
| install media, so multiple redundancy on Apple is something I'd
| love to see make it to me as a non-Apple user.
| randallsquared wrote:
| I expect there is a hardware failure on your M1.
| messe wrote:
| > This is the buggiest thing I EVER had. Even the screenshot
| doesn't work properly. It reacts to(CmdShift-4) after ~2!!!
| second delay while on previous Mac it was instant.
|
| That's not an issue I've experienced. Screenshot works
| instantly for me (both CmdShift-3 and CmdShift-4).
|
| > "Very fast" some say? I still wish to see it, because so far
| it feels just like the one I had before or slower! I am not
| talking about benchmarks, I am talking about day to day
| experience.
|
| What are you running? I'm comparing my M1 air to two a year and
| old MBP (which admittedly has half the RAM), and it flies in
| comparison; both in perceived and actual performance. The MBP
| has consistently latency in the UI animations, which makes
| using it a pain; and the fan constantly blares at the slightest
| hint of CPU activity.
|
| > Goodness, can Apple make something that 'works' these days?
|
| For most people, it seems to be working for them. So it looks
| like they can make something that 'works', but you've
| apparently run into an extreme edge case alongside some poor
| luck.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| > you've apparently run into an extreme edge case alongside
| some poor luck.
|
| 'extreme edge case'? Like Running Garage Band and going to
| sound settings? Or reinstalling OS? Which of those is
| extreme?
|
| May be it's not a 'poor luck' may be it's a poor design.
| leesalminen wrote:
| I think the parent is saying you're having bad hardware
| luck manifesting as glitches in software. I just tried what
| you described with Settings+GarageBand and was not able to
| reproduce on my M1 MBA.
| mistersquid wrote:
| > you're having bad hardware luck manifesting as glitches
| in software
|
| This was precisely my experience back in December.
|
| I purchased a stock M1 MacBook Pro as well as a
| customized M1 MacBook Pro, so I could set up the OS as I
| wanted and migrate Data and settings once the customized
| Device arrived.
|
| The first device behaved as expected: fast performance,
| responsive UI, cool operating temperature.
|
| The second device, however, had issues with UI latency,
| beachballing Finder operations, and inexplicable slow
| downs.
|
| I tried installing and reinstalling and remigrating the
| OS, eventually discovering that one or both of my users
| would be unable to even login to the system. Further
| analysis revealed that the communication between the T2
| chip and the hard drive (or some aspect of the trust a
| computer system) was not operating properly.
|
| I'm not technical enough to detail the exact problem, but
| it was most certainly a hardware issue or a hardware
| issue related to the incomplete erasing and reformatting
| of the M1 MacBook Pro's hard drive.
|
| I returned both devices, waited a couple of weeks, and
| purchased a single customized MacBook Air.
|
| This MacBook Air in my experience actually outperforms
| both previous M1 MacBook Pros. I don't have benchmarks
| nor do I have the other devices to compare directly, but
| it seems that this MacBook Air is much more ready for
| prime time then my mid-December MacBook Pros.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _Further analysis revealed that the communication
| between the T2 chip and the hard drive (or some aspect of
| the trust a computer system) was not operating properly._
|
| Well, there's no T2 chip on M1 macs...
| mistersquid wrote:
| > Well, there's no T2 chip on M1 macs...
|
| Hm. I thought Touch ID was based on T2. [0]
|
| Definitely expert-level knowledgeable about M1 security
| domain.
|
| [0] Def not T2. Apple calls the Touch ID chip (?) "Secure
| Enclave" https://support.apple.com/guide/security/secure-
| enclave-sec5...
| kergonath wrote:
| From my experience there is no point dealing with issue
| on brand new Macs. The best is to send it back if you're
| within the 14 days return window, or take it to a store
| to get it fixed. It's not as smooth as it used to be
| because there is so much in M1 devices that's different
| from previous generations, and support people are not
| necessarily used to it yet. But customer support is
| consistently great, all things considered.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Try it with bluetooth speaker connected when Garage Band
| is playing recorded track ..
| LeoNatan25 wrote:
| People seem to think that if they don't experience a bug,
| it's an "extreme edge case", or that if they don't
| experience it, it's not an important bug.
| matwood wrote:
| The reverse is also true. People think if they experience
| a bug, then everyone experiences the bug and it's the
| most important bug ever.
|
| Everyones setup and use case is unique. All the many
| interactions can lead to fairly unique bugs. Even if two
| people think they see the same bug, it could be two
| different bugs causing the same symptom.
|
| Let's take the bugs around re-installing that have been
| popping up on HN lately. How many people buy a brand new
| machine and the first thing they do is wipe it and re-
| install? I don't personally know anyone who does that,
| it's certainly not something I've ever done with any of
| my Macs over the last 20 or so odd years. So while I
| think bugs around re-installing are important and need to
| get fixed, they are not something that a majority of
| users will run into this early in the m1's life.
| bordercases wrote:
| In this case I doubt "two HN users doing daily
| development and production on a new Mac" are _so_ unique
| as to be incomparable.
|
| And arguing that certain users are in a minority such
| that they can be ignored - without hard proof mind you,
| and keeping in mind that knowledge work is squarely the
| demographic for people requiring high performance
| processors in the Apple space (or else they wouldn't push
| that angle so hard in their advertising) - when the
| functionality was stable on previous platforms much older
| than the so-called cutting edge, is justifying a
| regression in functionality by blaming user expectations.
| This is consumer hostile.
| matwood wrote:
| > In this case I doubt "two HN users doing daily
| development and production on a new Mac" are so unique as
| to be incomparable.
|
| I would have argued the opposite. Every developer I know,
| myself included, tweaks every last aspect of their
| machine to their exact liking - even on a Mac.
|
| And I didn't say they should be ignored, and said the
| opposite.
|
| > So while I think bugs around re-installing are
| important and need to get fixed
|
| The point is it's a bug impacting a subset of users and
| needs to get fixed. IMO, it's not one worthy of multiple
| HN front page posts, but here we are :)
| LeoNatan25 wrote:
| Clearly it is important to the people posting the issues,
| and people upvoting. People, which are some of the main
| target audience of "pro" dubbed machines. The truth is,
| however, that there is nothing "pro" about Apple products
| anymore. Anything outside of the most mundane happy-path
| is often broken in strange ways. And the typical Apple
| drone response is: "Who does that anyway? I certainly
| don't! So manage your expectations."
|
| Apple software is buggy and broken beyond belief.
| Hardware might be good, but that is increasingly beside
| the point, given how broken Apple software and UX are.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _The truth is, however, that there is nothing "pro"
| about Apple products anymore._
|
| The truth this is a tired of chessnut that we've been
| hearing for 15+ years...
|
| And yet, judging from their laptop choices at
| conferences, developer videos, and so on, over half of
| industry leading devs across many communities (from Node
| to Java, and from Go to Rust and whatever else) use those
| laptops.
|
| > _Apple software is buggy and broken beyond belief._
|
| Not my experience. That said, you're free to use the non-
| broken Windows and/or Linux OSes!
| LeoNatan25 wrote:
| I have not been saying that in the past. I am saying it
| now. I also use Windows increasingly more and more, and
| experience significantly less bugs, even in old Win32
| APIs which still "just work", unlike Apple's many many
| frameworks (new and old) which are broken in different
| ways. Or its system software, which keeps getting
| rewritten in half-assed ways with missing feature, and
| then never revisited or fixed.
| cesarb wrote:
| > How many people buy a brand new machine and the first
| thing they do is wipe it and re-install?
|
| I do it on every brand new machine I buy; they come with
| Windows or Ubuntu, and I use another Linux distribution.
| And for Windows users, AFAIK for a long time the
| recommendation has also been to immediately wipe it and
| reinstall, to remove any shovelware which came with the
| machine.
| bordercases wrote:
| Ah, but you are hastily justifying the validity of your
| experience, you see, so cannot be forwarding criticism
| that the OP will recognize.
| matwood wrote:
| Windows sure, b/c they tend to come preinstalled with a
| bunch of garbage, but we're talking about Macs.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| How many people buy a brand new machine and the first
| thing they do is wipe it and re-install?
|
| Well, everyone who would sell their machine could go
| through that process. And if this
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26204426) is
| correct then I would not call it an 'edge' case.
|
| Besides It's a safety feature. You need it to work when
| nothing else works. It should be extremely reliable. And
| if it's not then the only 'reliable' feature of the Mac
| you have is DFU mode and booting from another Mac.
|
| I don't personally know anyone who does that.
|
| I personally don't know anyone who dealt with failing
| computers who doesn't do that. Besides you need
| partitions for multi boot configuration.
| matwood wrote:
| All your examples are not of people buying a brand new m1
| and immediately re-installing. They are examples why it
| needs to get fixed, but right now likely has a low impact
| on the user base.
| kergonath wrote:
| > How many people buy a brand new machine and the first
| thing they do is wipe it and re-install?
|
| I do. I'm not sure why, but it's an old habit and I like
| to take care of the software myself. I won't say it's
| typical, though. So, as you say,
|
| > they are not something that a majority of users will
| run into this early in the m1's life.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >The reverse is also true. People think if they
| experience a bug, then everyone experiences the bug and
| it's the most important bug ever.
|
| The reverse is not always true, because some people have
| certain knowledge and if they experience some bug they
| could analyse it and make an educated guess about the
| quality of the product and importance of the bug.
|
| I personally have seen many bugs in Disk Utility. On my
| previous Mac I couldn't make volume to be named as I
| wanted in certain conditions no matter how hard I tried
| with diff scenarios. Disk Utility was simply renaming it
| to something else. Something unrelated. It was obviously
| a bug and it was reproducible. And this was not the only
| one. Another one I've seen that Disk Utility simply
| cannot format the drive. I've seen more and it's getting
| worse and worse. After seeng those I was wondering do
| they test it at all? Does one who tests it knew how to do
| it?
| coldtea wrote:
| > _People seem to think that if they don't experience a
| bug, it's an "extreme edge case"_
|
| And they're usually right. From millions of units sold, a
| small number usually has a bug, unless it's an OS bug
| independent of the hardware (and also not dependent on
| the use of a specific software setup, e.g. some ACE
| plugin or some app messing with some system).
|
| 1000 people having the problem and 100 reporting it and
| some news sites picking it up can make for a big fuss in
| blogs and posts, but it's still around 1 / 2000 people
| having the issue in a 2M production run.
| LeoNatan25 wrote:
| I am mostly speaking about OS bugs, not hardware. The
| hardware side of Apple is still of high quality. It's the
| software that is becoming increasing terrible.
|
| 1/2000 is still a big number, considering the Apple
| numbers. I doubt their hardware has so many issues.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| > That's not an issue I've experienced. Screenshot works
| instantly for me (both CmdShift-3 and CmdShift-4).
|
| I have seen it take a few seconds to appear on the Desktop,
| but I thought that was the new Mac OS thing: the little
| thumbnail of your screenshot appearing during that delay in
| the lower right of the screen, not a hardware-specific thing.
| messe wrote:
| Oh is that what they meant? Yeah, it takes a few seconds to
| appear on the desktop. You can click the thumbnail to edit
| it first.
| jiveturkey wrote:
| you can swipe the thumbnail to save without waiting
| lovelyviking wrote:
| No, In my case I meant, pressing Cmd-Shift-4 takes +-1-2
| secs for cross-cursor to appear before you actually take
| the screenshot. Now I've checked taking with screenshot
| of Cmd-Shift-3 and it 'Takes' it after some delay. Not
| instantly like before. It saves it with additional delay
| like you describe, but it's something else. Still dumb
| and annoying in my opinion but I believe you can turn it
| off somewhere in GUI or with the command in terminal.
|
| The next screenshot you take can be faster. But not
| always. There is some loading happening I believe before
| the first one. Than it works fast but Then it unloads
| something sometimes and sometimes not. I do not think
| it's a hardware problem like some say.
| filchermcurr wrote:
| For anybody wondering about the terminal command, you can
| disable the thumbnail and make it instantaneously save
| with: defaults write com.apple.screencapture show-
| thumbnail -bool false
|
| I can't speak to the rest of the slowness. But that
| thumbnail sure is annoying.
| fortran77 wrote:
| > _Goodness, my feeling is: Can Apple make at least something
| these days that 'just works' ?_
|
| This is absolutely true. And what do the "thought leaders" on
| Hacker News do when a person relates an earnest, first-hand
| experience? They down-vote it until it's barely visible.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Thank you. I it is really disappointing. I mean if this is
| happening on this site what we can expect from others. I see
| downvotes for even stating facts.
|
| Dang! Can we stop bullying by downvoting for facts and leave
| just upvotes? I am really getting sick of it. Some topics
| became untouchable. You say something about free software and
| you get downvoted. Ok somebody doesn't like those ideas ok.
| But shutting up those who do is not the way. Or it shouldn't
| be the way isn't it?
|
| I like to read opinions I do not like. At least I can
| consider that point of view. Make them gray ok, make them
| down ok, but let me read them at least! I'll go down to see
| the smartest people, it's fine, but can we stop deleting
| messages because of bullying?
|
| I literally have to copy thread before reading, because I
| know some good points could be deleted. Or so hard to read
| because they are almost invisible.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Macbook Air M1 doesn't have sd card reader. To 'save space' and
| for better comfort I believe.
|
| After a deep research I have found that Raspberry Pi manages to
| boot from such device.
|
| If Apple engineers only knew about such amazing feature of micro
| sd card reader.
|
| If they could just figure out how booting from micro-sd cards
| works they could do amazing things like booting Mac without a
| need for 'Another Mac' when recovery partition doesn't work!.
|
| Somebody, please tell Apple about this possibility. It's amazing
| technology !
| beervirus wrote:
| You can boot from USB.
| p_l wrote:
| The only "boot from USB" mode that actually works from USB is
| DFU, where another mac is essentially uploading OS over USB
| to M1
| beervirus wrote:
| Nope.
|
| https://www.macworld.com/article/3608433/how-to-start-up-
| you...
| p_l wrote:
| That procedure will create a boot partition on the built
| in drive and use it to jump to the partition on the TB3
| drive - because the built-in bootloader doesn't have
| support for loading or even enumerating drives other than
| the built-in one.
| [deleted]
| lovelyviking wrote:
| No you can't, when Apple silicon Mac with M1 cannot load
| Recovery options. It shows exclamation mark and url to go for
| support, where you learn that it would boot only with the
| help of 'another Mac'
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211868
| beervirus wrote:
| The comment I was replying to was about booting from an SD
| card. There's no reason to think that would work
| differently from the USB booting option that already
| exists.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >here's no reason to think that would work differently
| from the USB booting
|
| Inability to boot my previous Mac from sd-card could be
| that reason? Or am I missing something? Because it was
| not possible to boot from sd-card last time I've tried.
| beervirus wrote:
| What I'm saying is that there's already the ability to
| boot from removable media (USB). If your problem with the
| existing solution is that it has some limitations, then
| it doesn't make sense to demand SD boot, because it would
| probably have exactly the same limitations.
| m463 wrote:
| Apple has traditionally had really good boot options.
|
| I've been able to put the OS on a usb stick and boot/run from
| that. Just hold down option at boot time, and select the drive
| you like from the list.
|
| You could also boot from network boot volumes if they were
| properly set up.
|
| I think you could probably boot from an SD card if you put it
| in a usb reader.
|
| But the best - by far - is target disk mode. You boot mac #1
| hold down the T key and it turns into a disk.
|
| Then you can cable it to mac #2 and it will show up as a drive.
| Additionally you can hold down option on mac #2 and choose the
| disk from mac #1 as the boot drive, and then boot from it. This
| is really good when say #1 has no display or has a display
| problem.
|
| I don't know how well this works with the new M1 macs, and also
| with T2 and/or encrypted partitions.
| tester756 wrote:
| >I've been able to put the OS on a usb stick and boot/run
| from that.
|
| isn't it like... the standard that every computer support?
| meetups323 wrote:
| I have a MBP with a broken display that I've been reluctant
| to fix/replace due to some data I don't want to go missing on
| it ("repair" with these seems to always involve a new logic
| board..), I'll have to try this thanks! Though I'm not sure I
| even remember the password anymore...
| j16sdiz wrote:
| I think the network boot is broken in recent hardware
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| > I've been able to put the OS on a usb stick and boot/run
| from that.
|
| Wouldn't booting from an external drive like that be a gaping
| security hole for the Mac?
| titzer wrote:
| Most PC bioses have options to control all of the boot
| options, e.g. disable booting from any external media,
| network, etc. The Mac has always been "special", but I
| think you can configure those things too.
| jlokier wrote:
| > Then you can cable it to mac #2 and it will show up as a
| drive. Additionally you can hold down option on mac #2 and
| choose the disk from mac #1 as the boot drive, and then boot
| from it. This is really good when say #1 has no display or
| has a display problem.
|
| Does this work when #1's disk is encrypted (as it should be)
| on a Mac with the T2 security chip?
| mistersquid wrote:
| > Does this work when #1's disk is encrypted (as it should
| be) on a Mac with the T2 security chip?
|
| That should work.
|
| I'm pretty certain that when I attached an encrypted macOS
| drive in Target Disk mode, the Recovery System prompted me
| to provide credentials in order to decrypt the drive.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| > Just hold down option at boot time, and select the drive
| you like from the list.
|
| This would not work on M1 Macs.
|
| First: because they've changed keys .It's no longer 'option'
| key. It's 'power key' holding long enough.
|
| Second: because when M1 Mac fails to load Recovery Options it
| would also fail to load this 'boot options choice screen'.
| It's not like with previous Macs. So you stuck there until
| you connect to another Mac and use Apple Configurator and
| pray it works. Iv'e spent 3 hours making it work and I Cann't
| reproduce the steps. Those listed in official site did not
| work for me. And Apple Configurator seems to have own bugs
| I've encountered.
| [deleted]
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >This would not work on M1 Macs.
|
| This one too get downvoted??? Seriously??? It's stating
| facts what actually have happened.
|
| Dang, can we stop bullying on this site when facts are
| presented even if Apple guys do not like it? I am getting
| sick of it really.
| lwhi wrote:
| I don't understand why this should be hidden.
|
| Obfuscation leads to compromised security. If we don't know about
| this mode, how can we be sure it's not being used as an attack
| vector?
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| It's not hidden, the author of the post found out about it from
| Apple documentation.
| cbsmith wrote:
| Apple traditionally advocated _discoverable_ (without the
| documentation) features, particularly for cases where the
| user might be experiencing a problem.
|
| It is fascinating how "good UX" has evolved over time.
| jeromegv wrote:
| We seem to collectively forget a lot of things with the Mac
| experience. You know how many troubleshooting required to
| zap the pram? Option-cmd-p-r on startup. Was that good Ux
| that people could guess on their own?
| lwhi wrote:
| Ahh .. thx, in that case, the title is a bit misleading.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Sure, it's just when I've got exclamation mark screen, apple
| didn't tell me that I have another boot option. Instead it
| told me to get access to another Mac with possible 'healthy'
| supply of COVID. If that is not 'hidden' then what it is? How
| would you describe it?
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| A mistake ?
|
| I don't see how something in the documentation for the
| platform is "hidden". It's sort of the definition of "not
| hidden".
| lovelyviking wrote:
| another two mistakes? or it's described somewhere there
| and I just didn't see?
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211868
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/apple-
| configurator-2/a...
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >A mistake ?
|
| Absolutely. This is why we will see very soon detailed
| instruction about second boot option instead of a black
| screen with exclamation mark. But if not, perhaps it
| wasn't a mistake. One could only hope.
| nojito wrote:
| It's not hidden. It's literally in the documentation.
|
| All this shows is that people do NOT read docs and expects
| others to read it for them.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| So why black screen with exclamation mark sends you to the
| web page where there is no one word about other boot option
| even if you read it ?
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211868
| marcinzm wrote:
| Because it's there to filter random non-technical users
| from technical users/experts.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >"it's there to filter"
|
| So the web page mentions Apple Configurator, firmware and
| also for complete details provides link to "Revive or
| restore a Mac with Apple silicon" where the process of
| reviving and restoration is described with all details
|
| but
|
| somehow the other option of booting the Mac is not
| mentioned to filter random non-technical users from
| technical users/experts?
|
| I presume (following your logic) "Revive or restore a Mac
| with Apple silicon" doesn't mention it by the same
| reasons: To filter non-technical users.
|
| I doubt it.
| [deleted]
| saagarjha wrote:
| This was announced way back in June even before the computers
| shipped, actually. It's not particularly hidden.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| It leads me to believe there are more 'hidden' things there.
| Honestly I do not even consider it a 'personal' computer
| because of this. It's a 'terminal' at best and even in that
| role I have no idea how secure it can be.
| KirillPanov wrote:
| Also known as "NSA mode"
| atoav wrote:
| Or a "Patriot Act"-Mode?
|
| Edit: It seems downvoters know something about the patriot act
| that I don't, because last time I checked it still forced US
| companies to comply with requests from US secret services. If
| you know more please explain rather than downvote.
| bloqs wrote:
| You can downvote on HN?
| meowster wrote:
| Item #5 in the FAQ:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
| VistaBrokeMyPC wrote:
| After you meet the karma threshold, yes.
| [deleted]
| mhh__ wrote:
| I think if the NSA want in they don't need to bother with stuff
| like this, and if Apple were forced to compel they wouldn't be
| documenting anything related to it
| hackerbrother wrote:
| If we're spitballing tinfoil type stuff, I'd guess it's in
| the NSA's interest to have American OS's like MacOS be as
| secure as possible. I'm sure they have access to any of
| Apple's certificate chains, cloud data, and could decrypt a
| Macbook as well as Apple could, but I don't see known
| software backdoors being desirable.
| seniorivn wrote:
| you would think that a sane national security strategy is
| to maximize security of every citizen, but somehow nsa
| prefers to undermine everyone else's security to have a
| chance to hack anyone and everyone
| rightbyte wrote:
| Intelligence and counter-intelligence in the same org is
| not something strange really.
| mhh__ wrote:
| That and they've always been fairly strongly linked in
| the past anyway - the kind of sexy counter-intelligence
| has always greatly benefitted from a good offense.
| nojito wrote:
| >you would think that a sane national security strategy
| is to maximize security of every citizen
|
| exploiting adversaries is also a way to protect your
| citizens.
| antibuddy wrote:
| That indeed makes sense, but sometimes one hand doesn't
| know what the other does. Also not all decisions are
| rational (actually it's the other way around). A better
| example for this is the FBI tho, since they really hate
| any security mechanism that plebs can use.
|
| I'm not saying that the NSA has any involvement in this
| situation, but clearly their strategy is _sometimes_ to
| undermine security. It 's not their whole schtick,
| because of NOBUS, but still part of it.
| cookie_monsta wrote:
| Does Windows count as an American OS?
|
| https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/07/zero-
| day_vuln...
|
| Really, the NSA's history of hoarding zero days is so well
| documented by now that it's surprising to see the tinfoil
| trope get wheeled out.
| Meleagris wrote:
| Great info, thank you! I returned my first M1 Mac Mini to Apple
| because it would not boot into recovery mode.
|
| I suspect even Apple's Technical Support agents don't know this
| second recovery mode exists; they didn't attempt it at the time.
|
| Has anyone else had issues booting into recovery mode?
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Yes, during the very first day! Without any power interrupts
| during OS reinstall.( see here
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26203799)
|
| I think Disk Utility in recovery partition has some serious
| bugs and it can make it 'not bootable'
| shawnz wrote:
| I believe you could intentionally make it not bootable using
| Disk Utility if you delete the firmware partition (thus
| requiring a DFU mode recovery) but that is an expected
| behavior
| lovelyviking wrote:
| You could also delete firmware partition without such
| intent because Disk Utility will hang and do it for you,
| which is less expected I believe.
| shawnz wrote:
| Presumably there is a remote chance of the firmware being
| unintentionally destroyed by crashing software on any
| computer system.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Presumably it's a very reproducible bug during very basic
| operation but with easiness of getting 'healthy' supply
| of COVID while accessing another Mac in the repair-shop I
| would rather not play with it to find out more unless
| Apple sends me another 20 Macs and pays a lot for this
| headache.
| shawnz wrote:
| Maybe it is easily reproducible, and that would certainly
| be concerning (at least until the issues are patched).
| But there's no reason to believe that based on one
| person's singular occurrence of the bug.
|
| I hope you get a chance to repro the issue eventually so
| that we can all benefit. Eventually it will be possible
| to do the DFU restore from non-OSX systems using
| idevicerestore, so that should make the testing more
| convenient.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >without really helping anyone else to get informed about
| the true state of the product.
|
| I believe this is exactly what I am trying to do: Helping
| anyone else to get informed about the true state of the
| product. And I want it to be fixed and gladly report
| about it.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| Honestly I do not observe any 'concerning' here, I've
| just get downvoted for sharing facts. I hope I would not
| 'get a chance' to reproduce it because that would mean my
| work would stop again. I could easily reproduce it with
| another Mac but I don't have one. And my previous one
| have gracefully failed completely. (
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25809097)
|
| >But there's no reason to believe that based on one
| person's singular occurrence of the bug.
|
| Some times it depends which person it is. With all
| modesty I can observe tendencies with Apple bugs for some
| years now. There are very obvious for me reasons why
| those bugs appear and why they would appear more. I've
| got too much of bugs and I've started to talk about some
| of them because I just can't stand it. Apple should be
| Way better then this and for me it seems like no one
| really cares too much. I do care. Product should be done
| with some love for goodness sake...
| [deleted]
| shawnz wrote:
| > With all modesty I can observe tendencies with Apple
| bugs for some years now. There are very obvious for me
| reasons why those bugs appear and why they would appear
| more.
|
| So then there are really two points you are trying to
| make here: M1 has a buggy boot process, but really more
| importantly is that Apple's product quality has been
| declining as a general trend.
|
| Maybe the latter is true, I don't know (I've never owned
| an Apple computer prior to the M1). And I don't want to
| diminish that issue. But I don't think it is fair to
| assume everyone will have the bugs you had just because
| you believe their product quality is declining. Of course
| if you assume every bug you face is a typical occurrence
| then it will only reinforce your existing notions about
| the product quality, without really helping anyone else
| to get informed about the true state of the product.
| Maxious wrote:
| > Don't ever format a drive of M1 Macs from recovery mode
|
| > Because Apple doesn't put a warning alerting that it
| doesn't really format a drive and Big Sur installer is stupid
| and it doesn't see it as a "clean" drive but it see the
| "Data" Volume and it tries to find a user to authorize the
| installation, but since the drive has no users, it fails.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26177263
| xenadu02 wrote:
| While the bug is unfortunate it is also easily avoided:
| always delete a volume group together. Don't leave some
| volumes from the group laying around.
| wil421 wrote:
| No issues booting into recovery with my M1 Air. Time machine
| kept failing and I had to boot into recovery and wipe my hard
| drive a few times.
| eumoria wrote:
| I'm sure this is already known but no one else has mentioned
| it, you don't boot into recovery mode anymore with Command+R.
|
| New M1 mini you just hold down the power button.
|
| I know that's not people's issue here but just thought it
| should be said for anyone new to the new mini.
| mhh__ wrote:
| I have a theory that one of the reasons why M1 isn't
| particularly well documented (if at all) is because Apple
| themselves are still getting to grips with it.
|
| If their own tech support didn't know that does kind of support
| my theory
| ethbr0 wrote:
| I think we all know documentation lags release in everything
| not regulated.
|
| For the first X months, questions bubble to the engineer who
| wrote the thing.
|
| Add in the fact that documentation for Apple... "isn't a
| priority" (to put it charitably).
| mhh__ wrote:
| Intel's documentation isn't a charity but they still
| massively lead most of the industry.
|
| This information has to exist internally, and compiling is
| literally makework for an intern - it's just that Apple
| have a very secretive culture.
| specialist wrote:
| Wow. Far cry from the POST stuff I once kinda knew. (Power-on
| self test.)
|
| I like this presentation of the Windows system. Maybe Eclectic or
| someone can write a Mac version.
|
| "In-depth dive into the security features of the Intel/Windows
| platform secure boot process" https://igor-
| blue.github.io/2021/02/04/secure-boot.html
| candycorn wrote:
| Apple wrote one:
| https://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1902/en_US/app...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-20 23:01 UTC)