[HN Gopher] macOS Sonoma Boot Failures
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       macOS Sonoma Boot Failures
        
       Author : ColoursofOSINT
       Score  : 633 points
       Date   : 2023-10-31 18:33 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | gcr wrote:
       | TL;DR: Recent macOS Sonoma and 13.6 Ventura have upgrade bugs
       | that brick some macs and make recoveryOS unusable, causing a
       | black screen that requires a DFU revive.
       | 
       | Issues on Sonoma appear most often on dual-booting macs:
       | https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208891
       | 
       | Ventura upgrades can also bite you if your display refresh rate
       | is set to anything other than ProMotion, for unclear reasons.
       | 
       | The doc is on the Asahi Linux wiki because their developers
       | discovered this issue, but it's not unique to Asahi. In fact,
       | _running the Asahi Linux installer_ can detect whether your mac
       | will be affected by this issue, even if you ultimately choose not
       | to install Asahi Linux. See the article for details.
        
         | markmark wrote:
         | Erg, I ran into this on my mac twice when I upgraded. I have
         | two bootable OSX partitions and it hit on both upgrades. I'm
         | not really a mac guy and it took a _lot_ of messing around (and
         | learning that DFU exists and what it does) to sort out. Just
         | lucky that my daughter has a mac so that I could even use DFU
         | without having to take the thing into an apple store.
        
       | neilalexander wrote:
       | Interestingly I ran into this exact problem with my work MacBook
       | Pro M1 upgrading to Ventura 13.6 and assumed it was a totally
       | isolated incident. I don't have a dual-boot setup either, just a
       | single macOS install.
       | 
       | The computer was connected to a Thunderbolt Display during the
       | update which I assume had the same effect of changing the refresh
       | rate to something other-than-ProMotion that the linked article
       | mentions. I had to do a DFU restore from another Mac and then run
       | the macOS Sonoma installer from USB, which thankfully detected
       | the existing install and did an in-place upgrade, preserving all
       | of my data. Nothing else worked.
       | 
       | I also wasted far too much time trying to get the DFU restore to
       | work before discovering that you cannot use a Thunderbolt cable
       | -- it has to be done using a plain USB-C cable, otherwise the
       | Apple Configurator simply won't detect the other Mac.
        
         | alsetmusic wrote:
         | > I also wasted far too much time trying to get the DFU restore
         | to work before discovering that you cannot use a Thunderbolt
         | cable -- it has to be done using a plain USB-C cable, otherwise
         | the Apple Configurator simply won't detect the other Mac.
         | 
         | I would have expected a Thunderbolt cable to be required, if
         | either was. This is quite surprising to me. Usually, the more
         | capable (higher bandwidth) cable works if one isn't supported.
         | I'll hope to remember this is I ever find myself reviving a
         | bricked Mac in the future.
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | I restored my Macbook just one hour ago with crappy USB-C
           | USB-A cable, god bless the libimobiledevice creator.
        
           | spacedcowboy wrote:
           | I am currently restoring an MBP using Configurator and a
           | thunderbolt cable. You definitely can use one, perhaps your
           | TB cable is buggered ?
        
           | brigade wrote:
           | It's done over USB 2.0 largely because that's simpler than
           | involving newer and faster specs, and partly because that's
           | how the original iPhone did it.
           | 
           | My understanding is that all complaint _USB_ USB-C cables
           | should work for USB 2.0, even USB4 /TB4 cables, but active
           | TB3 cables might not hook up the USB 2.0 pins.
        
           | phillco wrote:
           | I've used a Thunderbolt cable as well successfully, but one
           | note is that they're very picky about which port you use. On
           | my Mac mini, I had to use the exact port outlined here or it
           | did not show up: https://support.apple.com/guide/apple-
           | configurator-mac/reviv...
        
             | microtherion wrote:
             | Yes, this is absolutely key. Only one of the USB ports per
             | machine supports this functionality.
        
           | nnf wrote:
           | From Apple's support page on how to revive or restore after a
           | failed upgrade [1]:
           | 
           | > A supported USB-C to USB-C charge cable, such as the one
           | sold by Apple (may not be available in all countries or
           | regions) or a supported USB-A to USB-C cable
           | 
           | > The USB-C cable must support both power and data.
           | Thunderbolt 3 cables aren't supported.
           | 
           | [1] https://support.apple.com/guide/apple-configurator-
           | mac/reviv...
        
         | JohnMakin wrote:
         | Exact same thing happened to me.
        
           | tpmx wrote:
           | What kind of HW?
        
             | JohnMakin wrote:
             | same specs as OP
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | :(
        
         | tpmx wrote:
         | This is depressing. They clearly have they ability ($$$) to do
         | the required amount of manual QA, but don't. Or there was QA
         | and someone decided that your case still wasn't enough to hold
         | up the release.
         | 
         | In my mind, when we pay that ridiculous Apple premium on RAM
         | and storage, we pay for excellent quality in SW/HW. They also
         | need to deliver that quality.
        
           | mort96 wrote:
           | Or they did QA but just happened to miss this issue. Most
           | companies would consider "the upgrade sometimes bricks the
           | device" to be a release-stopping bug, I'm betting Apple is
           | among them.
        
             | tpmx wrote:
             | That would be: not delivering while still charging a
             | premium.
        
             | krackers wrote:
             | Apple still hasn't put up any official page about the issue
             | though, nor does it appear they've pulled the update. Even
             | if it missed QA, why haven't they made any official
             | comment?
        
               | FirmwareBurner wrote:
               | You clearly don't know Apple as a company. Last most big
               | companies, they never EVER publicly admit any faults or
               | mistakes with their products (unless forced to by large
               | scale fiascos) because that would damage their perfect
               | brand image. It's why they have comments disabled on all
               | their social media accounts.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _they never EVER publicly admit any faults or mistakes
               | with their products_
               | 
               | Of course they do. They're just secretive in general, and
               | keep communications edited. Compared to the word salad of
               | modern companies on social media, I find it refreshing.
               | Just fix the problem, issue replacements for those
               | affected and move on quietly.
        
               | FirmwareBurner wrote:
               | _> Of course they do. _
               | 
               | Where? Do you have any examples?
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _Where? Do you have any examples?_
               | 
               | The whole battery gate saga. Touch Bar. The 2013 Mac Pro
               | [1].
               | 
               | [1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/4/15175994/apple-mac-
               | pro-fai...
        
               | FirmwareBurner wrote:
               | Yeah but that only proves my original point that Apple
               | only admits mistakes when the public scandals are so
               | violent it can't possibly deny them anymore as the shit
               | pile broomed under the carped has grown so large it makes
               | even them trip on it, so then they just enter damage
               | control mode and PR recovery but not out of the kindness
               | of their heart but because of media backlash.
               | 
               | But they never have the common sense to release
               | statements like "hey, the latest MacOS update might brick
               | some systems so we're pulling the updated until we can do
               | further testing and patching, if you've been affected by
               | the bug already go to a Apple store and have it fixed for
               | free".
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | They have pulled updates [1]. The one person I know who
               | was affected was given a replacement.
               | 
               | I suppose I'm failing to see the need for a public
               | statement if you've fixed the problem and provide service
               | to those affected. Nobody can pull the faulty update
               | anymore. And it's not like someone with a bricked device
               | is more likely to see a PR statement than seek out
               | support.
               | 
               | [1] https://osxdaily.com/2023/07/11/apple-pulls-rapid-
               | response-u...
        
               | pmarreck wrote:
               | methinks you're the self-victim of some confirmation bias
               | here, sir.
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | It's not "refreshing" to hide problems.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _It 's not "refreshing" to hide problems_
               | 
               | Hiding entails ignoring the problem. They're not doing
               | that. Their track record is to fix it. Not every action
               | needs an accompanying tweet and blog post.
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | Of course they are not ignoring the problem, internally.
               | The issue issue at hand is that they are not being open
               | about the problem.
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | It IS refreshing not to be insulted by the usual "You are
               | important to us and we're taking this very seriously" PR
               | fluff.
        
               | cirrus3 wrote:
               | Maybe because it isn't that big of an issue? Have you
               | heard about this anywhere besides HN? If it were a big
               | deal you know all the websites would be all over it as if
               | the Mac were doomed.
        
               | gcr wrote:
               | Google this week seems to be going through a similar bug
               | on their flagship Android 14 release, affecting users who
               | have multiple accounts set up. They also seem to be
               | favoring a "minimal" strategy when it comes to PR
               | communication surrounding this issue.
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | Okay?
        
             | codr7 wrote:
             | Used to be, while Jobs was still around.
             | 
             | These days it's just a bunch of wannabes trying too hard to
             | be him.
        
             | rainbowzootsuit wrote:
             | "You're updating it wrong." --Steve
        
           | pb7 wrote:
           | It's a bug...
        
             | tpmx wrote:
             | It's a _device bricking_ bug. For a $2.5-10k device.
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | Brick usually means unfixable without an EEPROM
               | replacement or data loss.
               | 
               | It's not possible (well, it's very difficult) to do this
               | on an Apple Silicon Mac; once there's an update you can
               | always apply it from another Mac, like the steps on this
               | page do, and your data is still there. With Intel Macs
               | it's possible.
        
               | cesarb wrote:
               | > Brick usually means unfixable without an EEPROM
               | replacement or data loss.
               | 
               | The definition of "bricked" is not set in stone; a lot of
               | what a normal person would consider "bricked" (doesn't
               | turn on, or turns on to an unresponsive black screen, and
               | no magic sequence of button presses can reset it to
               | working order) could be fixed by a power user with the
               | right equipment, software, and knowledge.
               | 
               | In this case, it requires fairly expensive equipment
               | (another $2.5-10k device), somewhat easy to acquire
               | software, and the appropriate set of instructions, to
               | _overwrite_ the device 's broken firmware with a working
               | copy; you don't have to open up the device and plug a
               | JTAG adapter, but using the DFU protocol is very similar
               | to that, since in both cases you're writing directly to
               | the firmware under control of an external device. This is
               | not like "BIOS FlashBack" and similar on non-Apple PCs,
               | in which the device can rewrite its firmware by itself
               | from a common USB stick.
               | 
               | (Also, about data loss: a device with removable storage
               | could get bricked without any data loss, and fixed also
               | without any data loss, simply because the data storage is
               | separated from the firmware and from most of the
               | hardware. It's Apple's insistence on non-removable
               | storage which risks losing data when something else makes
               | the device fail to boot.)
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | > In this case, it requires fairly expensive equipment
               | (another $2.5-10k device)
               | 
               | A few minutes of access to one, not ownership of it, and
               | hardly any system requirements on it.
               | 
               | > It's Apple's insistence on non-removable storage which
               | risks losing data when something else makes the device
               | fail to boot.
               | 
               | That's actually not the reason. All storage is removable
               | if you just desolder it. It's because the storage is
               | encrypted and you can't extract the keys.
        
           | Joeri wrote:
           | But how would they then keep up their profit margins to keep
           | shareholders happy? Their first obligation is to the
           | shareholder, not to the customer.
           | 
           | (I think it is ridiculous that the system works in that way,
           | especially for a company that hasn't needed investors in over
           | a decade, but it is what it is.)
        
         | user9163 wrote:
         | ya - I cant update my m1 macbook air without going into DFU
         | mode and using configurator to "revive" my macbook. Otherwise
         | it just tells me "Failed to personalize the software update".
         | Made the mistake of going to the Apple Store where they
         | promptly restored my machine deleting all my data - only to
         | encounter the exact same issue when the next update is shipped.
         | This way you cant even show them that their fix did not
         | actually fixed it permanently.
        
         | atregir wrote:
         | Also what's with the magic trick of entering DFU mode by
         | pressing the buttons at a very specific time for a very
         | specific number of seconds? Felt like singing a song to some
         | fictional Mac OS gods and hoping for the stars to align for the
         | laptop to show up in the second Mac. Ah, also the port you use
         | for the USB-C cable matters!! Has to be the first from the
         | left? But why?
         | 
         | Anw, I followed a video by Mr. Macintosh and managed to get
         | mine up and running, whew.
        
           | adamomada wrote:
           | Well it's a mode you really don't want users going into if
           | they didn't intend to, so it kind of makes sense to only
           | activate if the user has deliberately done an action that
           | would not happen randomly.
           | 
           | See Also: entering bootloader mode in android devices
        
         | samcat116 wrote:
         | I've done this several times with a TB3 cable. Has to be the
         | right port for DFU.
        
         | magicpointer wrote:
         | Also with the M1 Pro MacBook, my LG USB-C monitor broke during
         | the upgrade. Black screen, same on another connected USB-C
         | laptop. Tried different cables, unplugging power from the
         | monitor and factory reset on the monitor, no luck. Other inputs
         | like HDMI and DisplayPort still work. I don't think the
         | breakage during the upgrade is a coincidence.
         | 
         | I would really advise against having anything connected to the
         | Macbook during upgrades, except the charger...
        
       | racl101 wrote:
       | I am so terrified of this upgrade that I think I'll wait a whole
       | year. That's not a good thing.
        
         | hbn wrote:
         | I pretty much always wait 6 months or so for Mac upgrades on
         | whatever machine is important to me. There seems to pretty
         | consistently be regular bugfix updates for the few months
         | following a release.
        
         | cramjabsyn wrote:
         | Its realistically what you should be doing unless your machine
         | is a test host itself.
        
         | teaearlgraycold wrote:
         | Unless you aren't doing anything important on your Mac that's
         | always good advice.
        
         | rangestransform wrote:
         | this happened to my work macbook while I was trying to upgrade
         | to ventura, a 1 year old macos version
        
         | shever73 wrote:
         | That's probably wise. I wish I had waited. Since upgrading to
         | Sonoma, I have recurring issues with the system file dialog.
         | Sometimes the dialog will open, but not allow me to save, other
         | times it will just fail to open altogether.
         | 
         | Any time I start a new video project now, I save it instantly
         | because Command+S still works, but if it opens the Save As
         | dialog then it frequently won't.
        
       | krackers wrote:
       | See also his twitter for some speculation as to how on earth
       | simply changing refresh rate would cause boot corruption:
       | https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/111329614147717090
       | 
       | >Why? I can tell you why: because Apple _hates_ display modeset
       | flicker, and switching modes between ProMotion on /off causes a
       | modeset flicker, so of _course_ they made it so that is stored in
       | nvram somewhere and applied when the screen is turned on during
       | early boot, so when macOS boots it doesn 't have to flicker
       | again.
       | 
       | >And they didn't test it with older OS bootloaders, so display
       | handoff/init just fails catastrophically with those when this
       | mode is enabled.
        
         | NavinF wrote:
         | Interesting. I wonder why anyone would turn ProMotion off
         | considering that 120Hz massively improves responsiveness. I've
         | only encountered one app that doesn't work with variable
         | refresh rate and that's Genshin on Windows. Even that's
         | probably not an issue with newer monitors that can handle VRR
         | down to 60Hz without my monitor's frame-doubling flicker as it
         | keeps switching been 60Hz and 120Hz
        
           | Wowfunhappy wrote:
           | > I wonder why anyone would turn ProMotion off considering
           | that 120Hz massively improves responsiveness.
           | 
           | The first reason that comes to mind is battery life. That's
           | probably the most broadly applicable use case.
           | 
           | But also, if I was still doing e.g. frontend web development,
           | I would want to confirm that my css animations looked nice at
           | 60 hz.
           | 
           | Edit: My first use case is likely wrong, thank you to replies
           | for reminding me Apple uses adaptive refresh down to 1 hz.
        
             | vvillena wrote:
             | Isn't battery life a reason to keep it on? The refresh rate
             | will be down to 24hz most of the time.
        
             | jwells89 wrote:
             | macOS is very good at adaptively reducing refresh rate when
             | nothing is happening on screen, with the panel reportedly
             | supporting the full range of 1-120hz so barring badly
             | engineered apps that are permanently pinned at max refresh,
             | the battery impact of keeping ProMotion on is minimal for
             | most use cases.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | Oops, thank you, I completely forgot they were doing the
               | adaptive refresh thing!
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | Which raises the question even more why the refresh rate
               | matters during early bootup - surely you could just start
               | with an apple logo and a 1 Hz refresh rate, and then up
               | the rate later during boot when it's time to do some
               | animation...
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | Changing the refresh rate makes the screen go blank for a
               | second or so.
               | 
               | GP of this thread links to a post arguing that Apple is
               | going out of their way to avoid just that during the boot
               | sequence.
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | Except it doesn't... because during use the dynamic
               | refresh rate changes between 1Hz and 120Hz...
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | Well, I can only tell you what happens when you manually
               | change the resolution from 60 Hz to "ProMotion" in macOS.
               | 
               | Presumably ProMotion is a specific mode that the
               | display/display controller/... first needs to be set to.
               | If you start out in anything other than that and then
               | switch to it later in the boot process, you'd get that
               | blank screen for a second, and Apple avoids that by
               | writing the startup mode to non-volatile memory.
               | 
               | Otherwise they could also just always start out in
               | ProMotion mode - but then you'd get flicker every time
               | you (re)boot into any other mode, like 60 Hz for people
               | who prefer that.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | ...so this is where I'm confused, and where I think GP is
               | confused. Why is there a separate 60 Hz mode that
               | requires blanking the display? Why not just keep dynamic
               | refresh enabled on the panel, and then lock it to
               | updating 60 times per second (which it can do, since it's
               | dynamic) for people who prefer that for whatever reason?
               | What is the difference?
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | No idea, but if I'd had to speculate: Probably ProMotion
               | activates a quite different internal rendering mode, and
               | fixed 60 Hz mode offers a way to opt out of that?
               | 
               | Many applications have a way of synchronizing their
               | drawing loop to the monitor refresh rate, for example;
               | ProMotion must be doing something clever to support them,
               | or they'd just force the refresh rate to 120 Hz.
               | 
               | macOS also supports variable refresh rate external
               | monitors these days (via both DisplayPort and HDMI); I'm
               | not sure if that would be labeled "ProMotion" in the
               | display settings, but in any case there are things that
               | can go wrong there, and having a way to opt out of that
               | at the HDMI/DisplayPort signal level (and not just fixing
               | the frame rate at the GPU level while driving the
               | external link under VRR) seems like a good idea.
        
               | pmarreck wrote:
               | > Why is there a separate 60 Hz mode that requires
               | blanking the display?
               | 
               | I'm guessing it probably has to do with compliance with
               | the original VESA standard, or whatever the completely
               | basic support of multiple resolutions and refresh rates
               | in all monitors is called.
               | 
               | The bootstrap of booting a system always ends up relying
               | on the most basic supported things to start with (such as
               | 640x480@60Hz using the VESA standard) and then upping it
               | from there.
        
               | bscphil wrote:
               | If I understand correctly, ProMotion is the feature that
               | allows dynamically changing the refresh rate without
               | screen blanking. So the reason refresh rate matters in
               | early bootup is that if ProMotion is _not_ enabled, you
               | get brief screen blanking. Setting the screen to 1 Hz in
               | early bootup and then changing it to the user setting
               | later would require screen blanking.
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | That's not a modeset though, that's just the display
               | working as intended. Basically a VSYNC that runs at a
               | variable clock rather than a fixed refresh.
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | Pretty sure VRR is a mode as far as the display
               | (controller) is concerned.
               | 
               | There's very likely still a scan out rate determined by
               | the maximum refresh rate, just that the source can delay
               | the next frame if it's not ready yet.
               | 
               | In other words, e.g. 120 Hz and 144 Hz of VRR aren't the
               | same even when displaying a 60 Hz signal at the moment -
               | the faster signal would have more pauses and a higher
               | signal rate.
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | VRR is a property, node a mode. A VRR display showing
               | 60hz will be running at 60hz. They can typically clock
               | down in 1hz intervals.
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | As far as I understand it, nothing "clocks down"; rather,
               | frames are delayed as required to achieve the frame rate
               | desired (or reachable, in the case of gaming) by the
               | source, down to 1 Hz.
               | 
               | So, yes, fixed 120 Hz and 120 Hz with VRR and without any
               | skipped frames might well be the same mode to a GPU, but
               | it also might be a different one, requiring a mode
               | switch. I don't know how Apple has implemented it.
               | 
               | But in any case, for the bug at hand it's irrelevant:
               | Apple's ProMotion uses a refresh rate of 120 Hz, so
               | switching between that and 60 Hz is definitely a mode
               | switch.
        
             | beebeepka wrote:
             | Why would 60 FPS CSS animations look bad on high refresh
             | displays?
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | Well the CSS transition wouldn't run at 60 fps, it would
               | run at 120 fps, no?
               | 
               | An animation that looks slick at 120 fps might look too
               | fast/slow/complex/whatever on a common 60 hz screen. So
               | if I was still doing this sort of development, I'd prefer
               | to be working on a 60 hz monitor.
        
               | beebeepka wrote:
               | Aren't CSS animations capped at 60, same as
               | requestAnimationFrame?
               | 
               | I've been advocating (and using) high refresh displays
               | for over two decades and I find your reasoning
               | preposterous. Downgrading to crappy 60 Hz monitor for
               | nothing.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | > Aren't CSS animations capped at 60, same as
               | requestAnimationFrame?
               | 
               | Did some quick Googling to make sure I wasn't just out of
               | the loop on this, as far as I can tell they are not the
               | same: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5025
        
               | beebeepka wrote:
               | Can you point me to the part confirming your claim? If
               | anything, it's confirming mine that they both are stuck
               | at 60 Hz.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | The link says:
               | 
               | > As such, on their 120hz devices, requestAnimationFrame
               | is throttled to 60hz, whereas CSS animations run at
               | 120hz.
               | 
               | Please let me know if I am misunderstanding, it has been
               | a few years since I've done this type of work.
        
               | fulafel wrote:
               | CSS transitions and animations seem to be declared using
               | expressions that are continuous over time so it would
               | make sense that they are just quantized down to whatever
               | refresh rate the system supports.
        
               | mmis1000 wrote:
               | I am pretty sure they are synchronized to refresh rate
               | (at least on windows).
               | 
               | I made a small experiment about raf
               | https://codepen.io/mmis1000/pen/qBxqgLr and it always
               | looks uniform regardless I am on a 60, 120, 160 fps
               | screen. (It would blink crazily if you put it in the
               | middle of two screen with different refresh rate, because
               | it can't be in two refresh rate at same time)
               | 
               | Erit: okay, it looks non uniform only in safari. Clap,
               | clap, clap, Apple...
        
               | c-hendricks wrote:
               | I'm not even sure CSS animations can go above 60fps, and
               | am unsure why you'd think it would be faster / slower on
               | a different refresh rate screen: CSS transitions are
               | defined by time, not frames.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | Sorry, I meant the animation might _look_ too fast,
               | psychologically. The frame rate changes how we perceive
               | movement.
        
           | MagerValp wrote:
           | To run x64sc at a buttery smooth 50 fps.
           | 
           | Admittedly rather niche use case.
        
           | zippergz wrote:
           | I turn it off because I can't tell the difference and if it
           | doesn't improve anything for me, I might as well not have the
           | system wasting battery and other resources on it.
        
             | pb7 wrote:
             | It does the opposite: it goes well below 60Hz when there is
             | no motion on screen.
        
             | NavinF wrote:
             | VRR displays run at 1Hz to save battery when the display is
             | static. Reasoning like yours is why every OS's settings
             | page gets neutered with every update.
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | _I wonder why anyone would turn ProMotion off considering
           | that 120Hz massively improves responsiveness._
           | 
           | ...and I bet that 's exactly the attitude Apple had when
           | implementing things, which lead to this mess.
        
             | stcg wrote:
             | Well then don't allow turning it off in the first place.
        
           | apwoefjwepoo wrote:
           | I turned it off. The primary reason is that I use ctrl+arrow
           | keys to move between workspaces frequently.
           | 
           | These might seem unrelated, but:
           | 
           | * There's a `defaults set` setting that allows you to speed
           | up the transition animation length from 1 second to 0.5
           | second, which is huge because that transition is extremely
           | poorly implemented (it leaves the windows on the workspace
           | that you're leaving activated until the transition is
           | complete, so you start typing and it's on the other screen
           | you can't even see any more) and VERY SLOW
           | 
           | * That setting only works if the refresh rate is 60Hz, and it
           | completely fails to do anything if ProMotion is on, because
           | for some reason the animation length isn't programmed to
           | handle the different refresh rates.
           | 
           | So having ProMotion off relieves frustration.
        
             | gassi wrote:
             | This is exactly the reason why I disabled it when I
             | upgraded to my current M1, and I'm relieved to hear I'm not
             | the only one experiencing this.
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | Surely I'm not the only one that simply cannot perceive any
           | difference between 60Hz and 120Hz?
        
             | NavinF wrote:
             | Have you done an eye exam recently? With 20/20 vision and
             | no practice you should be able to see input lag up to
             | 1000Hz by dragging any UI element around like the presenter
             | does in this video: https://youtu.be/vOvQCPLkPt4
        
               | kccqzy wrote:
               | I definitely see it in the video. But no my computer
               | (like all Macs) does not have a touch screen. So without
               | the aid of directly comparing my finger and the object
               | being manipulated on the screen, I cannot perceive the
               | difference.
        
           | bluescrn wrote:
           | Emulation is one case where specific refresh rates are
           | desirable.
           | 
           | Would be nice if I could force my MBP to run at 100Hz for PAL
           | Amiga/C64 emulation - or even better if emulators could/would
           | change the refresh rate at least when running full-screen.
           | 
           | (Actually, since Sonoma, I can manually set it to 50Hz, but
           | there's no fixed refresh rate options above 60Hz, just 'Pro
           | Motion'. Previously, the refresh rate setting seemed missing
           | entirely on my M1 MBP)
        
             | Audiophilip wrote:
             | Interesting, that could be a limitation to the internal
             | screen of the MBP.
             | 
             | On Sonoma I can select 24, 25, 30, 50, 60, 100, 120 Hz, in
             | addition to "Variable (40-120 Hz) refresh rates for my LG
             | C2 display. When selecting 50 or 100 Hz, scrolling in (PAL)
             | C64 emulation in VICE becomes much smoother, but not
             | perfect. However, when I enable variable refresh rate and
             | switch to fullscreen mode, VICE can perfectly synchronize
             | the refresh rate and scrolling/animations become butter
             | smooth.
        
         | jwells89 wrote:
         | The messiness of resolutions during boot always annoyed me on
         | PCs. It was understandable back in the days of BIOS, but ith
         | the advent of UEFI it seems like it should be possible to run
         | EFI config screens and the like at monitor native rez (or at
         | minimum, native aspect ratio) but I've never seen this... it's
         | always 1024x768 or somesuch stretched to fit a 16:9 monitor
         | which looks awful.
        
           | wmf wrote:
           | Good UEFI like Surface devices is native resolution so you
           | can have flicker-free boot. My Gigabyte motherboard recently
           | got native resolution with a UEFI update.
        
             | jwells89 wrote:
             | Nice to hear that good implementations exist somewhere out
             | in the wild. I hope my AM4 and LGA1700 boards by Asus get
             | similar updates at some point.
        
             | ddalex wrote:
             | I don't understand why modeset causes flicker - fade to
             | black, turn off screen, change resolution, turn on screen,
             | fade to image.
        
               | beebeepka wrote:
               | Fancy fade in/out effects this early?
        
               | mjg59 wrote:
               | "Fade to black, turn off screen, turn on screen, fade to
               | image" is just slower flicker.
        
               | kelnos wrote:
               | True, but that does look nicer than normal-speed flicker?
        
               | mjg59 wrote:
               | And slows boot down by a couple of seconds. As long as
               | the firmware sets a native mode, modern OSes can just
               | inherit that rather than performing a modeset and we just
               | ignore the entire problem anyway.
        
               | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
               | This summer I went into an apple store, and there was
               | this 2019 Intel Mac Pro tower hooked up to the shiny 6k
               | XDR display. I brought up the System Settings, and set
               | the resolution one notch towards "More Space". It faded
               | to black and never came back.
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | Because most modeset protocols/implementations aren't
               | atomic, so some frames are drawn halfway through setting
               | the mode.
               | 
               | Turning off the screen can take a long time, but it is
               | possible that putting up a "hot black" screen would be
               | better than flicker if you had to do it.
        
           | wannacboatmovie wrote:
           | EFI config screens should be text mode only, full-stop. So
           | they can easily be used over serial console redirection.
           | 
           | Ran into one recently that was high-rez graphical. It needed
           | a USB mouse to change critical settings because the tab order
           | for the onscreen widgets didn't work.
           | 
           | Anyone responsible for creating graphical EFI config screens
           | should stop writing software for the good of humanity.
        
             | jwells89 wrote:
             | Even for text-only I'd prefer native rez if possible to
             | reduce scrolling, label truncation, etc.
             | 
             | That said yes, there's no reason why there shouldn't be a
             | low rez textual fallback.
        
               | secondcoming wrote:
               | Then you'd need scaling and all that. Seems a bit
               | overkill for something people rarely use.
        
               | xp84 wrote:
               | scaling? nah, I'd say to just choose at runtime a sane
               | text size (only to avoid using the same pixel size on a
               | 1024x768 as a 5k screen) and set the number of rows and
               | columns to fit the screen. Even if there isn't enough to
               | fill the screen that's fine.
               | 
               | > Seems a bit overkill for something people rarely use.
               | 
               | Okay, but a _lot_ less so than a full GUI with mouse and
               | thousands of colors, like many motherboards have gone to.
        
               | userbinator wrote:
               | The "sane text size" is naturally going to be the 80x25
               | text mode (720x400) which is what those config screens
               | were originally defined for. Monitors will usually
               | upscale lower resolutions anyway.
        
             | userbinator wrote:
             | Text-only BIOS setup was the norm for a long time before
             | the stupidly bloated EFI graphical stuff became common.
             | Even then, there were the better full-featured TUIs:
             | 
             | https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Award_B
             | I...
             | 
             | https://liveusb.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/awardbios-
             | firstb...
             | 
             | And the simplified crap with tabs that often came with
             | prebuilt PCs but later seems to have spread to others too:
             | 
             | https://cdn.staticneo.com/a/Intel_Sandy_Bridge_Z68_P67/S%20
             | B...
        
               | AshamedCaptain wrote:
               | > Text-only BIOS setup was the norm for a long time
               | 
               | Long-time Thinkpad users scoff at that ... while the
               | figure of a duck suddenly enters their minds..
               | 
               | (Yes: I clearly remember my pre-USB thinkpad having a
               | graphical BIOS with windows, icons, and a duck-shaped
               | mouse cursor).
        
               | userbinator wrote:
               | For those who haven't seen it:
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTaNi6uL41s
               | 
               | BIOSes of the time were all written in highly-optimised
               | Asm, and I suspect those little "easter eggs" they added
               | were because the programmers knew they had enough space
               | left over to put some more fun stuff in.
               | 
               | There was also AMI WinBIOS that provided a GUI, but I
               | remember it being much less featureful than other BIOSes
               | of the time with a TUI and didn't like mobos that used
               | it, so in that case they may have sacrificed
               | functionality for appearance.
        
               | doublerabbit wrote:
               | A 90's TUI that will forever be more productive than
               | Windows 11.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | As someone with experience in Turbo Vision and Clipper, I
               | don't miss them, beyond some nostalgia from simpler
               | times.
        
               | ojbyrne wrote:
               | Somebody missed the memo:
               | https://bwiggs.com/notebook/queens-duck/
        
               | dsm9000 wrote:
               | I miss Openboot firmware that was on SunOS servers and
               | workstations. It was IIRC mostly written in FORTH and we
               | could write forth snippets at the serial console to make
               | mods / query the pre boot environment. I also found the
               | SGI boot firmware similarly functional. Both allowed
               | changing boot settings and allowed to boot from network
               | without any trouble at all. Graphical BIOS that came with
               | the x86 systems was such a downgrade for us especially
               | since you could not interact over serial/remotely with a
               | simple terminal connection. IMHO
        
               | larvaetron wrote:
               | > Text-only BIOS setup was the norm for a long time
               | 
               | I've had a GUI BIOS setup on almost every PC I've owned
               | since the first 486 I built back in 1993.
        
               | xcv123 wrote:
               | The GUI was rendered in text mode. It's called a TUI
               | (Text-based User Interface)
        
               | mratsim wrote:
               | TIL, I thought TUI meant Terminal UI
        
               | einr wrote:
               | Plenty of 486 era machines had the AMI "WinBIOS" whose
               | setup utility kinda-sorta emulated a Win 3.x look and ran
               | in (EGA 640x350 4bpp?) graphics mode, with mouse support:
               | 
               | https://media.moddb.com/images/groups/1/4/3107/winbios.gi
               | f
        
               | jasonjayr wrote:
               | To my horror, I recently had to visit the UEFI firmware
               | setup of a Lenovo tablet.... That was touch enabled.
        
               | lights0123 wrote:
               | I did enjoy my Dell touchscreen-supported firmware setup
               | when there was a menu 15 items long and an incredibly
               | slow mouse speed.
        
               | Ayesh wrote:
               | Most gaming laptops' UEFI screens are so "gamer" it's
               | cringe. Dell XPS series have UEFI GUIs that are quite
               | neat and absolutely an improvement over the text screens.
        
               | minedwiz wrote:
               | I'm also partial to the Surface devices'. MS put a
               | surprising amount of effort into making them look
               | Windows-y.
        
               | alexvoda wrote:
               | And it is to be expected to be able to configure a
               | touchscreen device using the touchscreen.
        
             | postmodest wrote:
             | Real boot loaders have embedded Forth interpreters!
        
               | pmarreck wrote:
               | Do Macs still have this?
        
               | MBCook wrote:
               | No, it stopped for the Intel switch, I believe.
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | Yeah, the Open Firmware preboot Forth console was a
               | PowerPC only thing.
               | 
               | Now Apple's bootloader is actually a tiny macOS. As much
               | as I don't like the complexity this brings, I do strongly
               | approve of a boot environment that supports proper input
               | devices and video. My iMac Pro's (intel, non-macOS-based
               | bootloader) bootloader drops keyboard inputs when typing
               | my long passphrase because I type too fast for it. The Mx
               | macs no longer have this problem.
        
             | jyrkesh wrote:
             | Upside though? I was helping a more software-oriented buddy
             | get a PC build up and running that'd been half-finished by
             | some kid he paid to put it together. The GUI on the EFI
             | config was so intense, it was slowing down and completely
             | locking up.
             | 
             | Got into the temps, realized that the CPU fan had been
             | plugged into an AUX fan header instead of the CPU header.
             | 
             | Fan was spinning, wouldn't have thought to check if the EFI
             | wasn't crashing.
             | 
             | I'm completely joking of course. I completely agree with
             | you, I miss text-only mode. The modern Dell one stinks, the
             | Asus one stinks...I have no data, but I'd be shocked if
             | Gigabyte or ASRock were any good... :(
        
             | Reason077 wrote:
             | Text UIs don't actually require different resolution and
             | refresh rates. Even Macs can boot into a text mode, but
             | there's no jarring mode-change flicker when it switches in
             | and out of it!
             | 
             | Besides, there's nothing to prevent you having a nice
             | graphical boot configuration while still having a text
             | version as a fallback (which is exactly what Intel Macs do)
        
             | p_l wrote:
             | You know what's funny?
             | 
             | UEFI actually lets you provide both touchscreen-capable
             | bells&whistles gui, and a text UI for the frankenstein VT-
             | UTF8 standard (essentially, VT-220 compatible with UTF-8,
             | kinda like linux console) - all in mostly one codebase.
             | 
             | There's a standard UI description language which is used to
             | specify menus, options and values (and how they are written
             | into nvram), which is then interpreted by text mode
             | interface driver (enabled when you connect over serial
             | port) and graphic mode interface driver (where you can drop
             | all sorts of graphical bells & whistles).
             | 
             | It's also how you can integrate menus from add-on cards
             | into firmware setup.
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | Text mode on my 8K monitor at any time, even in boot, is
             | dumb and annoying and anachronistic. It's 2023.
        
           | tripdout wrote:
           | My old AM3+ motherboard has an option for full screen boot
           | logo, and it starts in full HD, continuing with systemd boot,
           | all in 1080p.
           | 
           | I thought this wasn't really a problem anymore.
        
             | JasonSage wrote:
             | This is fine if you have a 1080p monitor. I was impressed
             | when this first happened to me, now on an ultrawide monitor
             | it's back to being not great.
             | 
             | I do recall my last motherboard had an option for a splash
             | which was centered in a black screen, so you could
             | basically display it at native resolution with no
             | stretching and it would look great and seamless. I wish
             | every motherboard had that splash option now.
        
             | vondur wrote:
             | Ha, back in the day when I was a student assistant in a
             | campus computer lab, we flashed the BIOS boot screen with a
             | full screen image of Darth Maul. The staff person who
             | oversaw us was not amused. (This was in the Pentium 3 era
             | IIRC)
        
           | AshamedCaptain wrote:
           | By the time my Dell monitor finally wakes from sleep,
           | finishes negotiating whatever crap DisplayPort has to
           | negotiate these days, and starts actually displaying frames,
           | the computer has long since finished booting and is already
           | idling at the desktop.
        
           | dm319 wrote:
           | My Amiga in the 1990s seemed to do a pretty good job at boot.
        
             | tpmx wrote:
             | As did pretty much any PC motherboard/CPU/GPU combination
             | from the past 25 years.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | At least it works. I find low-res bios screens reassuring...
           | something I can depend on.
        
             | shawnz wrote:
             | Maybe instead of spending effort providing low res fallback
             | options, we should be spending more effort making high res
             | GUI-based options more dependable?
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | No effort was spent.
        
             | doubloon wrote:
             | i heard these new fangled jibjabs don't even have audible
             | POST beeps.
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | Ah yes, I almost forgot about the POST bleep bloops, and
               | the clickedy click of the HDD actuator... or if you go
               | back far enough the crunching of a 3.5in floppy - though
               | to be fair that was sometimes more anxiety inducing (not
               | the most reliable medium).
        
           | m463 wrote:
           | There's a lot going on there. To prevent flicker, you not
           | only have to preserve the screen resolution, but also all the
           | graphics card memory and state and hand it off through stages
           | of boot from efi to the os.
           | 
           | As an analogy this would be sort of like rebooting the OS in
           | place while preserving all the running apps, network state
           | and USB connections without resetting anything.
           | 
           | These kinds of things are possible, but have lots of corner
           | cases.
        
         | lvncelot wrote:
         | It's somewhat endearing that a trillion dollar company goes
         | through something similar as I did - fiddling around with
         | rEFInd, my BIOS splash image, plymouth-git & plymout-sddm,
         | "quiet splash" and god knows what else to get a "smooth" boot
         | experience - not only adding several seconds to the boot
         | process but also having to rescue the system multiple times
         | with a boot stick.
         | 
         | I've come to embrace the flicker and the systemd messages. It's
         | just a boot, it's in the order of seconds in this day and age,
         | I can't even tell you what the initial reason for my obsession
         | was.
        
         | whywhywhywhy wrote:
         | >Why? I can tell you why: because Apple hates display modeset
         | flicker,
         | 
         | Thank god someone does. Hate how jank plugging monitors in just
         | because some engineers thought "meh, good enough".
         | 
         | Don't think I should be seeing things flicker anywhere in my
         | life with the computing power we have today and yet many
         | consider visual nails on a chalkboard as acceptable.
        
       | mattchamb wrote:
       | Not sure if related, but my 2020 M1 macbook air bricked a week or
       | so after upgrading to Sonoma. I was suspicious if this was
       | related to the update. Luckily the logic board was replaced for
       | free under warranty laws here, though it put me off switching to
       | iphone which I was a day away from doing.
        
         | bscphil wrote:
         | Upgrades bricking hardware seems to be a common failure mode
         | for macOS. For example Big Sur bricked a bunch of 2013 and 2014
         | MBPs: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/15/macos-big-sur-
         | update-br...
         | 
         | I was affected by this and like many users the problem was
         | fixed after replacing the I/O board. In my case, I did it
         | myself using a $10 part from Ebay since the machine was well
         | out of warranty at that point.
        
           | miles wrote:
           | From comments #736 and #747 attached to the forum post you
           | kindly shared, it sounds like simply disconnecting and
           | reconnecting the I/O board may be sufficient (found those
           | comments linked in #831):
           | 
           | https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macos-big-sur-update-
           | br...
           | 
           | https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macos-big-sur-update-
           | br...
           | 
           | https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macos-big-sur-update-
           | br...
        
             | fifteen1506 wrote:
             | And this is why there will never be a Year of the Linux
             | Desktop -- no-one wants to have to depend on forum posts to
             | fix these kind of issues.
             | 
             | /troll
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | Why the "/troll"? You're 100% right non-ironically: the
               | problem being that on Linux the need to consult forum
               | posts to fix these kind of issues is way more frequent
               | than in macOS.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | On Linux it's as rare as on MacOS, _if you buy
               | preinstalled_.
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | As long as you don't do anything with it on your own.
        
               | kelnos wrote:
               | So essentially, the situation you'd have if you'd bought
               | a Mac?
               | 
               | If we want to compare apples to apples, then we compare:
               | 
               | Mac with macOS updates installed regularly, and only
               | those provided by Apple. Non-Apple apps get dropped in
               | /Applications like they should be. If there's an
               | installer that asks for root access, you might get boned.
               | 
               | Linux preinstalled with OS updates installed regularly,
               | and only those provided by the vendor. Apps that don't
               | come with the OS's package manager should be installed
               | somewhere under $HOME, and never installed systemwide as
               | root.
               | 
               | Sure, if you have a Mac and disable SIP (or whatever it's
               | called nowadays) and start mucking around with files in
               | /System or whatever, because you want to install some mod
               | that does something cool, you might have a bad time. Same
               | as if you decide that screwing around in /lib on a Linux
               | machine is a good idea.
               | 
               | But if we actually compare these two apples, I suspect
               | the Linux one would have fewer problems.
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | > _So essentially, the situation you 'd have if you'd
               | bought a Mac?_
               | 
               | No, worse, with more device incompatibilities, manual
               | fiddling, arcane settings, and so on to make things work.
               | 
               | > _Sure, if you have a Mac and disable SIP (or whatever
               | it 's called nowadays) and start mucking around with
               | files in /System or whatever, because you want to install
               | some mod that does something cool, you might have a bad
               | time._
               | 
               | Sure, but I'm not talking about that. With Linux you
               | often have a bad time trying to make basic, but not
               | distro configured, functionality to work.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > with more device incompatibilities, manual fiddling
               | 
               | Did you read what I wrote above? " _if you buy
               | preinstalled_ "
               | 
               | If you install Linux on an ordinary "Windows-certified"
               | computer, you will have problems. If you install an
               | alternative OS on a Macbook, you will have exactly the
               | same problems.
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | > _Did you read what I wrote above? "if you buy
               | preinstalled"_
               | 
               | And did you understand my point? Buying preinstalled
               | isn't a cure-all, only ensures that the bundled hardware
               | drivers are compatible and configured. That's a pretty
               | low bar.
               | 
               | It doesn't cover doing stuff with third party devices
               | (which on the Mac 99% of the time it works every time).
               | 
               | Not to mention even the bundled-hardware doesn't always
               | work even if you buy pre-installed (like the laptop not
               | sleeping properly for example).
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > Not to mention even the bundled-hardware doesn't always
               | work even if you buy pre-installed (like the laptop not
               | sleeping properly for example).
               | 
               | I agree that this is not tolerable. However my devices
               | from Purism have a reliable sleep and other functionality
               | out of the box.
               | 
               | > third party devices
               | 
               | Check Linux compatibility before buying and they will
               | work reliably. Works for me.
        
               | bscphil wrote:
               | By the standard of "do you ever need to consult forum
               | posts to solve a problem", sure, Linux is worse than
               | macOS. By the standard of "do you ever need to consult
               | forum posts to fix hardware that has apparently been
               | bricked by a software update", macOS seems to be
               | considerably worse. At least, that's my experience. I've
               | never had hardware damaged by Linux, which I've run
               | almost exclusively. On the other hand the one Apple
               | device I've ever owned got bricked by their software
               | update.
               | 
               | I can't say I've heard of that happening to people on
               | Linux at all other than maybe early days of Xorg. Damage
               | (reversible or otherwise) to hardware is extraordinarily
               | rare on Linux, I can only think of it happening during
               | the very early days of EFI and only under very specific
               | conditions.
        
               | cesarb wrote:
               | > I've never had hardware damaged by Linux, which I've
               | run almost exclusively. [...] I can't say I've heard of
               | that happening to people on Linux at all other than maybe
               | early days of Xorg.
               | 
               | There was that LG CD-ROM drive which treated a CD-RW
               | command (which it should ignore or reject since it's not
               | a CD-RW drive) as a firmware upload command. When a newer
               | Linux kernel started using that command, these drives got
               | bricked (source: https://lwn.net/Articles/55537/ and http
               | s://web.archive.org/web/20041204072839/http://www.mandra.
               | ..).
        
               | gpm wrote:
               | More recently there was "rm -rf /" wiping efivars and
               | bricking some motherboards with shitty uefi
               | implementations thanks to systemd mounting efivars rw by
               | default (and shitty motherboard firmware). The kernel
               | "fixed" this by mounting unknown efivars as (mostly)
               | immutable.
               | 
               | https://www.phoronix.com/news/UEFI-rm-root-directory
               | 
               | https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/efivar
               | fs....
        
               | cesarb wrote:
               | There were also some motherboards with shitty UEFI
               | implementations which got bricked when the efivars
               | storage did not have enough free space to do the garbage
               | collection. The kernel "fixed" this by not allowing more
               | than half of the efivars storage to be used (https://git.
               | kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...).
        
               | bscphil wrote:
               | Right, this is what I meant by the EFI brick in my
               | comment. And in my comment "I can't say I've heard of
               | that happening", I meant bricking a device on a system
               | update. That's the specific thing which seems to happen
               | on occasion with macOS, but that I've not seen with
               | Linux. I do grant that there have been some (very rare)
               | instances like this where hardware can be bricked by a
               | command run on a Linux system.
        
               | umanwizard wrote:
               | > macOS seems to be considerably worse
               | 
               | Most users will just take their machine in to the Apple
               | Store when this kind of thing happens, rather than try to
               | fix it themselves.
        
               | m45t3r wrote:
               | Sure, doesn't make this any less inconvenient though. I
               | would much prefer to finish whatever I want to finish
               | today (even if I spend a few hours trying to fix an
               | issue) than wait whatever amount of days waiting until my
               | hardware is fixed.
        
               | umanwizard wrote:
               | > doesn't make this any less inconvenient though
               | 
               | You're right that it's not ideal, but it certainly makes
               | it a lot _less_ inconvenient than being completely stuck
               | forever (as most non-highly-technical people would be if
               | they had to follow instructions on forums to fix Linux).
        
               | bscphil wrote:
               | Sure, but that's when they get told "you need to replace
               | the logic board, that'll be $500 since it's out of
               | warranty". That's not a theoretical problem either,
               | people were literally told to do this back when the Big
               | Sur brick happened to my model (2014 MBP). Eventually
               | users figured out _on their own_ that you could just
               | replace the I /O board (not the mainboard / "logic
               | board"). Apparently (going by that forum thread)
               | disconnecting and then reconnecting the I/O board fixes
               | it as well for some people (I don't remember whether I
               | tested this), but this isn't something that Apple happily
               | figured out and did for everyone who walked into one of
               | their stores. We had to fix it ourselves.
        
               | jonhohle wrote:
               | This is anecdotal, but my last "corporate job" was the
               | closest to thing to shrink-wrapped software, even though
               | it was a SaaS. Every release was meticulously documented.
               | Any public facing UI or API change was approved the
               | appropriate teams.
               | 
               | This is similar to macOS, Windows, or even FreeBSD
               | releases. I haven't seen any Linux distribution that has
               | such comprehensively coordinated releases. Between
               | systemd and the Linux kernel, I'm not sure it would be
               | possible.
               | 
               | Many distros have good documentation, but, in my
               | experience, far too often the bulk of it is in out of
               | date wikis or forums. Perhaps this is out of date
               | thinking and I've missed the train in the past 10 years.
               | 
               | As a counterpoint, OpenWRT has been good, but their main
               | "product", imho, is LuCI. Lower level issues often
               | require vendor specific forums.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | This issue in GP is unrelated to Linux, it happens on
               | single-boot macOS.
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | That's the point, I think - Linux gets derided because
               | people say it just breaks at random and you have to wade
               | through forums to find arcane incantations to fix it,
               | either implying or outright stating that their favorite
               | proprietary OS would _never_ just blow up in your face
               | and force you to resort to exotic troubleshooting steps.
               | So when macos, the poster child for  "user friendly",
               | proceeds to brick the machine and require elaborate
               | rituals to fix, it invites a certain level of snark from
               | users pointing out that the high and mighty proprietary
               | OSs might be just as bad as Linux after all.
               | 
               | Of course, whether that's _valid_ is at minimum a
               | question of actual frequency of problems and relative
               | impact and effort to fix, but from a perspective of
               | optics and emotions I understand the reaction.
        
               | m45t3r wrote:
               | I concur, the amount of times I had to Google dozens of
               | minutes for issues happening in my work-issued Macbook
               | Pro, and never finding answers because things are
               | supposed to "just work" is maddening.
               | 
               | For one example on top of my head, sometimes I can't
               | adjust the brightness of the monitor in the Macbook using
               | the Notification Center (it is grayed out), but if I open
               | the "Settings -> Displays" I can do it. Never found a
               | solution for it after searching for a while, so I just
               | gave up.
               | 
               | Or the fact that I can't enable retina or font smoothing
               | in my 1440p monitor, so the fonts looks ugly (I got used
               | eventually, but they still looks worse than Windows or
               | Linux in the same monitor). I used a workaround in the
               | past using "Better Display" to create a 4k framebuffer
               | that was downscaled to 1440p, but this was so slow and
               | also prone of other issues so eventually I just got used
               | to the ugly fonts.
               | 
               | Another one: I have a TouchBar Macbook (again, this is a
               | work-issued laptop), but I just want it to work as a
               | normal keyboard: show the Function keys, if I press Fn
               | show the shortcuts. Yep, doesn't work: while you can do
               | this, pressing Fn while pressing some of the shortcuts in
               | the TouchBar doesn't work. This is especially infuriating
               | because one of the shortcuts that doesn't work is the
               | brightness one. Go back to the first issue and you can
               | see why this drive me mad sometimes.
        
         | teaearlgraycold wrote:
         | Seems like a weird rationale. Any manufacturer is going to have
         | its share of software and hardware issues.
        
         | windowsrookie wrote:
         | The logic Board failed in my 2020 M1 Air as well. Opened the
         | lid one day, and it wouldn't power on. I have AppleCare on it,
         | otherwise it would have been a $500 repair.
         | 
         | About two weeks ago I'm sitting in a hotel room with the air on
         | bed with the lid open. I grab it by the screen to slide it
         | closer to me and the screen shatters from the light pressure of
         | my finger.
         | 
         | There are instances of both these things happening to the Air
         | all over the internet. At first I really liked the M1 Air, but
         | it has now proven too unreliable for me.
        
           | theodric wrote:
           | My 2020 M1 Air generally requires a hard reboot if left
           | closed and on a charger overnight, but that's been the worst
           | of it until now (besides the rapidly degrading battery that
           | seems calibrated to hit 79% a month after my AppleCare+
           | expires, while my 2015 Air's is still going strong).
           | 
           | Premium(tm)
        
           | VagabundoP wrote:
           | My wife is still rocking a 2012 Mac air and uses it
           | regularly. Apart from never rebooting it - WHAT ABUT MY TABS
           | - its a sturdy little fellow.
           | 
           | Shame to hear the build quality in the latest is so poor.
        
         | aetherspawn wrote:
         | FWIW I have been using iPhones for 10+ years and not once has
         | an update ever failed or had any issues.
         | 
         | But my Google Pixel phone used to brick itself all the time, I
         | think twice in the two years I had it.
        
           | Kuinox wrote:
           | In the same period, 10-12 years ago, both androids and
           | iPhones bricked themselves if there was no storage left on
           | the device. Both needed somes bytes on boot and if they
           | couldn't write on disk, they failed to boot.
        
           | kelnos wrote:
           | I've never had an Android phone brick itself in 13 years of
           | owning them. I have friends whose iPhones have gotten bad
           | updates. Not sure if they were bricked, though, or if they
           | "only" needed a factory reset to get things going again.
        
           | dehrmann wrote:
           | Phones are Apple's main business. At this point, Macs are
           | second-tier. With Google, I suspect it's their engineering
           | practice. Google doesn't like to make engineering mistakes.
        
       | bitigchi wrote:
       | I am somewhat glad that there is a 3rd party that actively helps
       | finding macOS issues.
        
       | jiripospisil wrote:
       | > Do not let them charge you any money for it. This is a problem
       | Apple caused, and purely a software issue. If the technicians
       | claim there is hardware damage, they are wrong.
       | 
       | Good luck with that.
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | The Apple Store is usually great with this stuff.
         | 
         | If there's a documented problem that affects your hardware
         | model and the given software versions, they're extremely
         | unlikely to try to charge you for anything.
        
           | baz00 wrote:
           | If it's not documented and you have a problem then you are
           | usually shit out of luck. The early days of butterfly
           | keyboards was hell for a lot of people. I managed to get mine
           | back to them for a full refund 3 days after I got it thank
           | fuck.
        
             | somehnguy wrote:
             | I got a full MacBook Pro replacement when my MBP had
             | something wrong causing it to charge extremely slowly -
             | completely on Apple's dime. They first sent me an overnight
             | shipping box to send in my MBP, where they then replaced
             | the top case assembly. After that didn't work they
             | overnighted me a brand new in box MBP.
             | 
             | I had to spend 6+ hours on the phone over multiple days
             | with a senior tech support staff to make it happen, but at
             | least it was eventually resolved and I didn't pay anything
             | for it. Obviously it wasn't a documented problem because we
             | troubleshooted _everything_ possible before replacement.
        
           | saagarjha wrote:
           | Documented by whom? Are you going to show a marcan post to
           | them and claim it's an Apple issue?
        
             | gpm wrote:
             | Marcan's post contains apple ticket numbers... presumably
             | you show them those.
        
               | krackers wrote:
               | Apple store employees probably may not have access to bug
               | reports that their engineers would be able to access?
        
               | p_l wrote:
               | In many countries Apple stores aren't run by Apple and
               | won't have access to bug reports.
        
               | throwaway290 wrote:
               | Uh, what? You mean the _actual_ Apple Stores (which are
               | only available in select countries) are _not run by
               | Apple_? That would be new.
               | 
               | If you mean various third party resellers then of course,
               | it's just a run of the mill shop that happens to sell
               | Apple products, a completely different experience.
        
               | p_l wrote:
               | These are licensed shops that serve as effectively local
               | Apple Store (as they are primary contact with Apple for
               | majority of clientele) and then completely 3rd party
               | stores which do not carry Apple branding.
        
               | throwaway290 wrote:
               | Authorized resellers aren't your "contact with Apple",
               | you can simply buy genuine apple products there.
               | Authorized repair centers can do repair and have access
               | to genuine parts. That's all it is.
               | 
               | Apple Store is a totally different shebang, if those are
               | not owned by Apple it would be a major news story for
               | lots of people.
               | 
               | And if they are owned by apple I don't see why their
               | employees can not see bug reports.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | If you are familiar with Apple, you may have heard about
               | their obsession with secrecy. If you haven't, they are
               | obsessive about secrecy. Apple store employees don't get
               | unrestricted access to Radar, their bug tracker, because
               | they don't want their secrets getting out. The text in a
               | bug could accidentally hint at a new feature on there
               | next iphone, and Apple can't have that happening.
        
           | rollcat wrote:
           | Yep, my experience has usually been the opposite. "We
           | normally charge for fixing this, but we're a little
           | embarrassed that this happened so it's free".
        
         | SpaceManNabs wrote:
         | I didn't have much trouble. When MacbooksAir 2011 version had
         | those SSD hardware failures, I told multiple classmates of mine
         | about the hardware failure page and they got the repairs for
         | free instead of spending $800.
        
       | asylteltine wrote:
       | I'm an apple fanboy and let me be the first to say their SDLC
       | since the pandemic has been AWFUL. I have never had so many bugs
       | with apple devices. And I'm not talking about giant catastrophic
       | bugs you would expect with windows or Linux. I mean little
       | things, like random phone reboots, overheating, my mac restarting
       | when I wake up from sleep, internet issues, etc. They need a
       | shake up and to stop focusing on all these features NO ONE uses.
       | Can one person tell me they use the features they just announced?
       | Nobody even knows you can edit an iMessage still.
        
         | aetherspawn wrote:
         | I agree, I started buying some Macbooks for work and was
         | horrified when the Launchpad just wouldn't open on a brand new
         | Mac.
         | 
         | Like, you press Launchpad, and it just ... doesn't open.
         | sometimes. This kind of rancid stuff you would expect on
         | Windows (i.e. after upgrade to Windows 11, half our laptops
         | can't right click on the desktop sometimes) but it never used
         | to happen on OS X.
        
         | doubloon wrote:
         | " . . . The new version - it's not there to fix bugs. That's
         | not the reason we come up with a new version. " - Bill Gates
         | 
         | http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html
        
       | vbezhenar wrote:
       | Today I had to DFU restore my macbook because I wanted to
       | reinstall it, but built-in restore over the web did not work. My
       | base system was 13.2, it downloads all the files for 13.6, it
       | filled bar to 100% and then spewed error.
       | 
       | It's obvious that it's some incompatibility between 13.2 base
       | system and 13.6 install. Apple quality is atrocious these days.
       | One would have thought they would test the most basic scenarios
       | before releasing their x.6 software.
       | 
       | And worse of all, there's no official (or even unofficial, at
       | least I wasn't able to find one) way to create USB boot installer
       | without another Mac or to DFU restore Mac without another Mac. Do
       | they think I live in Apple Store? I don't have other Mac. I was
       | able to DFU restore with libimobiledevice, god bless its creator,
       | but it really should not happen. Windows or Linux are so much
       | more transparent compared to macOS.
        
         | baz00 wrote:
         | Yeah the Apple bootloader and restore stuff scares the shit out
         | of me. The network access requirement, firmware on SSD and
         | hardware lock are always lurking waiting for the most
         | inconvenient time to go wonky when I hose something.
         | 
         | Conversely windows, just got a USB stick in the drawer I can
         | boot off.
        
           | EstesPark wrote:
           | As a lifelong Mac user, it just now hit me how inconvenient
           | locked down the restore process is.
        
           | cesarb wrote:
           | > Conversely windows, just got a USB stick in the drawer I
           | can boot off.
           | 
           | It goes further than that, on many motherboards even a failed
           | firmware update can be fixed through a random USB stick from
           | the drawer, you just need the right BIOS file to put in it.
        
             | Clamchop wrote:
             | And some motherboards even have a backup BIOS if one of
             | them becomes deranged. Now that's luxury.
        
           | acheong08 wrote:
           | > Conversely windows, just got a USB stick in the drawer I
           | can boot off.
           | 
           | Linux as well. Will probably work better than windows on
           | older hardware
        
           | jonhohle wrote:
           | In the FireWire days, you could firmware boot a Mac into
           | target disk mode and plug it into another mac where it would
           | show up as a disk.
           | 
           | How far we've fallen.
        
         | jamesfmilne wrote:
         | Yes same here. I did install then uninstall Avahi Linux a year
         | or so ago, but now I can't upgrade past 12.6.
         | 
         | I'll need to get an external drive, back everything up, then do
         | a DFU restore on my M1 Max MBP to get it upgraded to Sonoma.
        
           | acheong08 wrote:
           | I deleted the MacOS installation on my (older) Mac. Linux
           | works well enough
        
       | alberth wrote:
       | Abstraction Layers.
       | 
       | We've gotten to point with the huge number of abstraction layers
       | (and now AI as well) that troubleshooting what causes system to
       | do what it did, has become so unwieldily difficult to diagnosis.
        
         | jahewson wrote:
         | This doesn't seem to be the problem here? It's an issue of
         | having a combinatorial number of versions to test when
         | upgrading software and firmware.
        
       | mstep wrote:
       | does anyone have info if this is fixed in ventura 13.6.1?
       | https://support.apple.com/de-at/HT213985
        
         | kppullin wrote:
         | I just installed 13.6.1 on an M1 MacBook Pro and am now facing
         | the boot issue, so I'm guessing it's not fixed :). To make
         | matters worse, the specific USB port required for the DFU
         | revive fix is broken as well, which was never an issue as the
         | other two worked... oof.
        
       | cramjabsyn wrote:
       | This is exactly why I lag one major version behind the latest.
        
         | als0 wrote:
         | Well, this also affects the previous major version, macOS
         | Ventura 13.6
        
           | supportengineer wrote:
           | This is exactly why I lag two or three versions behind the
           | latest.
        
             | formerly_proven wrote:
             | This is why I'm still using RHEL 7.
        
           | silverwind wrote:
           | Just don't upgrade to any version ending in 0.
        
             | lynguist wrote:
             | 13.6.1 is also affected.
        
               | cromka wrote:
               | Need to wait for 13.6.1.1
        
           | cirrus3 wrote:
           | If that is the case, why does the OP label it as a Sonoma
           | issue?
        
         | theodric wrote:
         | This is why I'm still on Big Sur-- it mostly works!
        
           | Apocryphon wrote:
           | One of my machines is still on Mojave- my 32-bit games still
           | work!
        
             | pseingatl wrote:
             | Picasa will only run on 32 bit as well.
        
       | nusaru wrote:
       | > macOS Ventura 13.6
       | 
       | Well dang, I just upgraded yesterday, too. Fingers crossed that
       | nothing breaks...
        
       | cleansingfire wrote:
       | Only affects Apple silicon chips (intel unaffected) with
       | ProMotion display. Just a quick Exit clause for people with older
       | machines.
        
         | meithecatte wrote:
         | Only one of the two bugs listed requires a ProMotion display.
         | The other one can occur on all Apple silicon machines.
        
       | JohnMakin wrote:
       | Lost a workstation to this last week. infuriating.
        
       | KingLancelot wrote:
       | I think my 2014 MacBook on MacOS 12.5 was affected by this too.
       | 
       | I had Ubuntu installed in a second partition and it refuses to
       | boot ever since I installed 12.5.1 on it.
        
       | tempodox wrote:
       | Holy fuck, thanks for the warning! I'm just glad I didn't upgrade
       | to 13.6 yet. And installing Sonoma on a second volume to try it
       | out is also out of the picture for the foreseeable future.
       | Apple's OSs seem to get worse with every turn. Maybe I shouldn't
       | touch Sonoma at all. What's the point on an Intel Mac anyway?
        
       | SpaceManNabs wrote:
       | This seems like a very unusual bug by Apple standards. Makes me
       | consider upgrading to new macbooks...
        
         | dgellow wrote:
         | At this point it's kind of common knowledge to wait a while
         | before upgrading macOS to latest major version. I don't
         | remember a major update that didn't come with its own set of
         | problems.
        
         | cromka wrote:
         | I don't know, it's pretty high there on the list of their
         | complete fuckups, like allowing anyone to log in as root from
         | the login dialog...
        
       | da768 wrote:
       | Can something be done using VoiceOver boot mode? I've already
       | recovered macs stuck on 0 brightness after an upgrade with
       | that... Can't find the documentation now, but it definitely
       | exists.
        
       | jug wrote:
       | I wonder if this is behind a failed Sonoma upgrade I saw on eBay
       | today; Mac Mini M2 Pro sold as-is for a very decent price, about
       | $300-$400 off despite from this year. :) Seller didn't know what
       | was wrong with the Mac, only that it happened during Sonoma
       | upgrade and this sounds mighty suspicious for such a new machine
       | if it's widespread.
        
       | dharma1 wrote:
       | Had another weird refresh rate bug with 14.1 - external display
       | doesn't have a HDR option in settings at 120hz anymore - only
       | works with HDR if I change the refresh rate 100hz or lower. Was
       | fine in earlier MacOS
        
       | doubloon wrote:
       | in 30 years we have gone from the idea that your computer could
       | accidentally brick your monitor, to the idea that your monitor
       | could accidentally brick your computer.
       | 
       | https://trixter.oldskool.org/2006/02/02/computing-myth-1-sof...
        
       | iudqnolq wrote:
       | On a much more minor note the .0 version of the upgrade also has
       | a big that pops up a contacts window every few minutes and steals
       | keyboard focus.
        
       | sameg14 wrote:
       | I had this exact thing happen to me when I tried to reset a Mac
       | and wipe it clean. Would not start up and went into this doom
       | loop when booting with the apple logo and a black screen. No
       | amount of key combinations worked. I had to drop into DFU, which
       | is a huge pain to get into to begin with and then use another Mac
       | to recover.
        
       | cirrus3 wrote:
       | First I've heard of any issues.. I have done a couple upgrades
       | already with no issue. I'm sure there are some scenarios where it
       | fails, but Sonoma has been out a while with millions of users
       | being prompted constantly to upgrade. Feels like less than a
       | "you're holding it wrong" problem. HN is obv going to bring out
       | the edge cases, but it doesn't seem like the world is on fire
       | with "Sonoma Bricks" by any means.
        
         | markmark wrote:
         | Do you dual boot? I've got two bootable OSX partitions on my
         | mac and this hit me when I updated.
        
         | bigDinosaur wrote:
         | I use a lot of Apple products but this attitude you're
         | expressing has always annoyed me (because I see it most
         | frequently when it comes to Apple's software and hardware
         | quality). These bugs affect people all the time and are
         | indicative of poor QA. 5 users at a company we provide some
         | software support for (note: we don't control their machines)
         | decided to upgrade their machines and somehow became unbootable
         | just yesterday. Please don't be in denial about Apple's
         | increasingly worse QA. An intern with a checklist could have
         | uncovered these issues.
        
         | codingpanic wrote:
         | We have a fleet of several hundred Macs, most are M1/2 at this
         | point. I heard reports of several Macs coming in for support
         | that booted to a black screen after Sonoma's .0 landed. So many
         | that the JAMF team blocked Sonoma until the .1 landed.
         | 
         | Definitely shoddy QA on Apple's part. Also, your sample size is
         | too small. Everyone works differently and it takes a certain
         | set of settings/workflows to trigger this compatibility issue.
        
       | keepamovin wrote:
       | When I saw the upgrade to Sonoma appear in my Settings I had a
       | feeling the first version of this new OS would be buggy so I held
       | off on it. Now extra glad I did! Gonna stick with Ventura for a
       | while! Haha ! :)
        
         | ch13_ wrote:
         | Agreed
        
       | ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
       | The Sonoma update bricked my M1 MBP and Apple had to wipe the
       | whole thing.
       | 
       | Something stinks in this thing.
        
       | dclowd9901 wrote:
       | Man, I had a rough week last week. Shipped two regressions.
       | Seeing this story, as awful as it must be for the responsible
       | eng, has really made me feel much better. Not schadenfreude. Just
       | commiseration.
        
       | RadixDLT wrote:
       | there's something fundamentally wrong at apple theses days, macos
       | just doesn't work like it used to
        
       | wizzard0 wrote:
       | FYI the Asahi Linux installer says "please upgrade that should
       | help" but bumping 13.6 -> Sonoma 14.1 did not help, the
       | SystemRecovery still shows up as 13.5
       | 
       | Or does that mean wait for 14.2?
        
       | Alifatisk wrote:
       | This is why I am not so quick with upgrading to next major
       | version anymore.
        
       | benreesman wrote:
       | I don't know what's going on with Apple lately. They've built one
       | of the world's best brands after a near-death experience via a
       | ruthless focus on and fanatical commitment to providing a
       | holistically premium experience (for the people who want their
       | version of that) to justify their premium pricing and huge
       | margins. If you like what they do, it Just Works from purchase
       | on. Or did until recently.
       | 
       | Just today I had an experience that was so Kafkaesque it felt
       | like a mean spirited prank, and because they never fuck up this
       | badly, I had no contingency plan for one of the times it matters
       | a lot.
       | 
       | Any advice on how to get the "we fix things for loyal customers
       | by doing what's required" people on the phone would be
       | appreciated, but based on the runaround, infinite hold Ferris
       | wheel the primary support line apparently is now, I'm not getting
       | my hopes up.
        
         | SamuelAdams wrote:
         | The Apple today is very different from the Apple of 20 years
         | ago. The brand is the same, yes, but the people are all largely
         | different. You see this all the time in the video game
         | industry, ie Blizzard, Bungie, 343 industries.
         | 
         | Maybe the newest group of programmers and engineers are dealing
         | with a very complicated code base? Maybe no one fully
         | understands everything involved until something breaks?
        
           | benreesman wrote:
           | Just my N=1 anectdote, but I've been having almost
           | universally great experiences until maybe 2 or 3 months ago.
           | 
           | On the software side, I tend to tolerate more security risk
           | (within reason) to delay updates until a consensus emerges
           | that they're robust, because I'm not a high value target to
           | anyone north of "script kiddy" and run a tight ship on the
           | easy stuff, so the EV of an abruptly unusable work machine
           | vs. getting pwned weighs heavily relative to winding up in
           | the crosshairs of anyone sophisticated enough to exploit a
           | recent CVE. My online banking is properly 2-fac'd, if anyone
           | wants to read my browser history or email and cares enough to
           | go ti that trouble, I'll want them that I'm not important
           | enough for it to be worth the trouble.
           | 
           | This would clearly change if my work went back to having
           | demanding security requirements, but it doesn't just now.
           | 
           | It's really the customer service, fulfillment, Apple Store
           | experience (it used to feel like stepping into the least
           | stressful room in the mall and now it's a zoo).
        
           | MichaelZuo wrote:
           | It's likely not a single person understands the entire MacOS
           | stack anymore, at least since Mavericks, all the pre-1985 old
           | guard engineers having retired by then.
        
             | Clamchop wrote:
             | Interesting take given that a Mac today has virtually
             | nothing in common with a Mac of the late 1990s, let alone
             | 1984.
        
               | MichaelZuo wrote:
               | Says who?
        
               | Kwpolska wrote:
               | Mac OS X is a descendant of NeXTStep. It shares no code
               | in common with classic Mac OS.
        
               | MichaelZuo wrote:
               | How is Mac OS Classic sharing lines of code, or not, even
               | relevant to the question?
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | Tangentially related, ever since upgrading to Sonoma my computer
       | reboots when I put it to sleep. I've heard the same from other
       | users.
        
       | ehutch79 wrote:
       | Reading many of the comments here... I wonder if a lot of hacker
       | news commenters have actually met real, everyday users of
       | technology. Not other nerds and grognards, but like, the lady
       | sitting over in a cubical, who only knows enough about computers
       | to do their job.
       | 
       | Do you really think users want graphic mode selection on boot?
       | What percent of Mac users have alternate bootloaders or even know
       | what that means.
       | 
       | A lot of commenters need to do some time in the proverbial
       | trenches and support a fleet of devices at a large company. See
       | if users really care about the things you think they do.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | From the submission:
         | 
         | > Once System Firmware is updated to the macOS Sonoma version,
         | if the display is configured to a refresh rate other than
         | ProMotion, that system will no longer be able to boot into
         | older macOS installs nor Asahi Linux correctly. This includes
         | recovery mode when those systems are set as the default boot
         | OS, and also System Recovery at least until the next subsequent
         | OS upgrade.
         | 
         | That can and will absolutely affect regular users, even if they
         | don't 'care' about it or 'know what it means'.
        
           | eddieroger wrote:
           | > that system will no longer be able to boot into older macOS
           | installs
           | 
           | No, that seems pretty super-user to me. The average user goes
           | forward in versions, not back, and rarely has two at the same
           | time.
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | On the contrary _all_ normal users have two at the same
             | time, that 's the system recovery one mentioned.
             | 
             | Normal people don't care about it, talk about it, or think
             | about it, but may come to rely on it - or have it used by a
             | 'Genius' when something stops working. It affects them.
        
         | throwaway290 wrote:
         | If you met an everyday user of technology you'd see that he/she
         | is completely fine simply remembering what to click on a
         | cryptic screen which no one understands or has time to spend
         | looking up. Just think of all the notifications and alerts
         | about various security stuff while you need to get things done.
         | Muscle memory. Except unlike security warnings, dismissing
         | which can pwn you, in this case it could one day save your
         | system/work so I don't see how it's not worthwhile.
         | 
         | This issue can occur to any user who wants to have two macOS
         | versions for whatever reason. Not that extraordinary especially
         | between creative professionals
        
       | jcul wrote:
       | I'm not a Mac or Asahi user (though I think it is an amazing
       | project).
       | 
       | However, this is such a great write up, very thorough with root
       | cause, mitigations etc.
       | 
       | Keep up the good work!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-01 23:02 UTC)