Finger-pointing over Leopard blue screens heats up

The creators of APE on Saturday denied that their application-enhancement framework is responsible for blue-screening Macs being upgraded to Leopard. Apple Inc., however, blamed the software in a support document advising users to delete APE from their machines. Within hours of Leopard's Friday debut, users began reporting a "blue screen of death" that appeared after running the default Upgrade option. On affected Macs, the blue screen stymied the required restart after the install, locking users out of their computers.

The Installation and Setup forum on Apple's support site was quickly flooded with messages, including one that fingered Unsanity LLC's APE (Application Enhancer), software required to run Mac customizing haxies such as ShapeShifter, as the culprit. A user identified as Chris Mcculloh posted instructions on manually deleting APE using the Unix command line to kick the Mac through the restart. Others spread Mcculloh's instructions to new threads on the Apple forum, and reports of success poured in. "This fix seemed to work perfectly for me," said TuHolmes.

View: Full Story @ ComputerWorld

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Free Download Manager 2.5 Build 724

Next Story

FREE Dr.WEB CureIt! 4.44

64 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Let the flame wars begin!
I love the "you can't expect Apple to test their OS on every piece of hardware..."
Sounds like the same people who laugh and holler when MS releases an OS and it blue screens.
Apple "should" be able to test it on everything......they have a more tighter control on the hardware
side.
Personally, I'm amazed OS upgrades work as well as they do, no matter which company you
buy/borrow/steal it from.

What is it with people? We find one flaw in Leopard and the world explodes! Neowin is under attack for being pro-windows and anti-mac. Mac fanboys are flipping out and Windows people are attacking this little problem like there is no tomorrow.

Let me address a couple of things here.

1) Neowin, in my opinion, tries to be unbiased. Look how many Windows flaws and lawsuits and what-not they have posted over time. I'm in a personal war, kinda, with Daniel Fleshborne for having an anti-windows attitude. (He is much better now, keep up the good work Dan!) Now, with one Mac flaw you flip out? When viewing the front page, there are like 3 iPhone articles around this article. Is it so wrong that a news sites has a couple more articles about something that is used by millions of more people?

2) TO ALL FANBOYS! SHUT THE F&$K UP! WINDOWS IS NOT PERFECT! VISTA IS NOT PERFECT! MAC IS NOT PERFECT! OS X IS NOT PERFECT! THEY ALL HAVE FLAWS! NOTHING EVER IS OR EVER WILL BE PERFECT! Pick your OS and use it and be happy! Please, stop the bashing, admit that each OS has something that makes it good and move on!

I have a good friend who switched to Mac a while ago. Thats cool, I said, Mac is cool. However, I can barely talk to him now. All he does is bash Vista over and over and say how great Mac is. I still have a great amount of respect fo him though. I've used OS X, I've used Macs. They are excellent computers. However, I prefer Windows and will stick with it for a while. OS X just does not have what I need. Vista is not perfect, I will most eagerly conceed, but it is far from broken or bad. It may have a few flaws, but give it time, it will mature like XP did and become a great OS. OS X did not start perfect, it took time to get where it is today. I'll still never understand why people compare Vista (A newborn OS) to XP (A battle hardened OS) to Leopard (A Service Pack in essence). If you want a fair comparison, compare OS X to XP, they've been around about the same amount of time and have had the same chance to fix problems, but remember your still comparing oranges to well, apples.

People just chill. Seriously. Whine about something else for a change, like why we are in a war where thousands of people have died. Or why people aren't doing anything to stop the killing in Darfur. There is more to life than your OS and how uptight you want to be about it.

sorry but i have to comment, 'thousands americans have died in the war', just wanted to make sure you realise people from other countries also died in that war that "america" started in the first place.

The answer to stop the wars is to stop starting them. (George - hope your listening)

If you go to the APE website, they do say that their product isn't compatible with Leopard.

Some people need to do their homework before "upgrading" any OS. Mac OS X is no exception when it comes to having a possibility of bricking your OS when you upgrade. Same goes for Windows Vista, though it does seems like people are generally much more hesitant to "upgrade" their installation of Windows than "upgrade" their installation of Mac OS X.


so now mac's copy windows, get your won critical error, blue screens are for windwos. i just love how MAC are getting more and more problems with all it's crap, at least windows is improving, Mac seems to be goign the opposite direction, getting worse and worse each week, just wait for the fanboys to come in on apples defence, it's a third party app, it's not apples fault, it is exactly the same as most of the bluescreens windows has ever had, third party app crashes.

What exactly is getting "worse and worse each week"?

Leopard is fine. There is an issue with this "bluescreen" thing - but only with upgrades, and only under certain circumstances. Seems to be happening to only a minority of users.

All in all, Leopard has been praised as a fine OS. No major complaints. Most upgrades have been incredibly smooth and easy. There really isn't any uproar of any kind. Most apps work fine under Leopard.

Leopard isn't the kind of OS that has users running back to the previous (and supposedly inferior) OS. I really don't know of anyone who wants to go back to Tiger, or who doesn't want to upgrade to Leopard.

It's worthy to note, however, that you're happy on the rare occasion that something goes seriously wrong with OS X. It's like you drive a GM or Ford and you celebrate when you see a Lexus on the roadside with its hood open.

Xilo said,
If Windows is improving, how come there is still a very high demand for Windows XP compared to Windows Vista?

Because when you buy computer retailer advise you to stick with XP. Will work on 3rd laptop this week and they all got XP from the shop because they told them to use it instead of Vista.

XP is mature and works well with current software/hardware. It's more of bugs and performance issues that are highly hyped that makes everyone hesitatant to upgrade.

LTD said,
What exactly is getting "worse and worse each week"?

Leopard is fine. There is an issue with this "bluescreen" thing - but only with upgrades, and only under certain circumstances. Seems to be happening to only a minority of users.

All in all, Leopard has been praised as a fine OS. No major complaints. Most upgrades have been incredibly smooth and easy. There really isn't any uproar of any kind. Most apps work fine under Leopard.

Leopard isn't the kind of OS that has users running back to the previous (and supposedly inferior) OS. I really don't know of anyone who wants to go back to Tiger, or who doesn't want to upgrade to Leopard.

It's worthy to note, however, that you're happy on the rare occasion that something goes seriously wrong with OS X. It's like you drive a GM or Ford and you celebrate when you see a Lexus on the roadside with its hood open.

As i said wait for the excuses.

Apple couldn't even come up with their own colour for a critical error, hell as long as i can remember mac people have complained that windows stole everything from MAC, well heres one thing MAC STOLE from windows. BSOD's

i know of a lot of vista users that upgraded without issue, good luck to them i say, yet there are a lot of people not happy with vitsa and rightly so, it has problems. all the windows users i know understand this and are waiting for SP1. and upgrading from osx to osx is nothgin like redesigning the entire OS from XP to vista so of course there arent goign to be as many issues. the fact there was one is bad enough for apple, as 'it just works' is real hard to say when you haev a bluescreen of any sort, as i said before, most MS bluescreens arent actually MS fault either but mac users seem to think it is all MS fault.

it seems from all the news lately those rare occasions are getting more and more frequent. and i am an aussie so it's holden (GM) vs ford and i wouldn't care if i saw a lexus with it's hood open, however if i see a ford with it's hood open i'd laugh my ass off adn probably yell somethign like "get a holden" out the window, especially if it is someone i know like my dad in his crappy old ford (but thats the aussie way)

This parent post didn't deserve this many replies. :rolleyes:

He/She even thinks we're talking about something akin to the Windows BSOD, when this isn't about kernel panics at all.

Is Neowin the only site that hasn't posted a story about Leopard been released? Is it?

Neowin, you should be ashamed. Instead you post about an update/blue screen issue affecting some Mac owners when they upgrade to Leopard.

Shame.

Sort yourselves out.

So of all the reported BSOD
They all had APE?
Be interesting to find out?
Think it would be cut and dry if only APED Macs had the BSOD

I tested the BSOD problem out on a spare Mac Mini. It's 100% true. When I first updated the box to 10.5, I didn't have a problem.

After hearing about all the ruckus, I formated it, installed tiger, loaded up APE and upgraded to leopard, and was hit with the BSOD.

Seems pretty clean cut to me.

Never had a problem cause my mac had so mach crap on it that I decided a clean install was the only to go and start fresh without having legacy darwin ports, php5, ror, mono, cpans modules etc.

Start from I thought :-)

I like how the blue-screening of Leopard has made Neowin's Front Page but the actual release of Leopard itself didn't. Typical Neowin.

what ? you mean the release of the Leopard version of the Apple Mac OSX wasn't automatically posted on the front page of NeoWin?

HawkMan said,
what ? you mean the release of the Leopard version of the Apple Mac OSX wasn't automatically posted on the front page of NeoWin? :p

Errm. It wasn't on the Apple section of the Front Page either.

So if this is NeoWIN as you emphasise so much, why was the blue-screening posted. We shouldn't really talk about Linux or UNIX either then.

I agree, what's this news doing here anyway, on the front page? It's a third party hack applied to OS X that breaks things when applying a major upgrade? So? If the system files have been tampered with, what is to be expected?

And obviously Neowin cares for OS X. They did in this case.

They did test it properly. You can't expect them to go out and test every single app and every single unsupported hack for OS X on Leopard. I'm sure it had been tested at one point, but there's a lot of apps for OS X that they'd have to test; this may have only come about in the last build. They've been testing Leopard publicly since June of 2006, and even delayed it 4 months so that it could come out and be a solid operating system. Sure, it has its bugs, but I'm more than happy with its stability.

Apple specifically tells all developers not to use that section of the OS, as it is restricted to Apple use only. Unsanity continue to disregard this. Also, the APE is notorious for causing problems since it was first created.

simon360 said,
They did test it properly. You can't expect them to go out and test every single app and every single unsupported hack for OS X on Leopard. I'm sure it had been tested at one point, but there's a lot of apps for OS X that they'd have to test; this may have only come about in the last build. They've been testing Leopard publicly since June of 2006, and even delayed it 4 months so that it could come out and be a solid operating system. Sure, it has its bugs, but I'm more than happy with its stability.

well then people can't expect Microsoft to go out and test every single device driver for every single piece of hardware configuration which causes Windows BSOD... but people still bitch about that.

nemo said,

well then people can't expect Microsoft to go out and test every single device driver for every single piece of hardware configuration which causes Windows BSOD... but people still bitch about that.

Isn't that the truth, don't worry though - everyone will ignore your comment since Microsoft are a big bad company!

osirisX said,
Apple specifically tells all developers not to use that section of the OS, as it is restricted to Apple use only. Unsanity continue to disregard this. Also, the APE is notorious for causing problems since it was first created.

This is the best comment ever. Apple says "this is ours" so you shouldn't do this, only we should do this.

Microsoft says "this is OUR API, not yours, only we can use this" and they get a $330m lawsuit in the EU.

Ledward said,

This is the best comment ever. Apple says "this is ours" so you shouldn't do this, only we should do this.

Microsoft says "this is OUR API, not yours, only we can use this" and they get a $330m lawsuit in the EU.

1. This is not about Microsoft.
2. The section of OS X that the Application Enhancer modifies is not to be used by 3rd party developers as it can cause major instabilities.
3. Point 2 has been shown many times in the past.
4. The Application Enhancer is not an API created by Apple. It is a framework created by Unsanity that modifies applications via a Daemon.

Gibwar said,
Isn't that the truth, don't worry though - everyone will ignore your comment since Microsoft are a big bad company!

it amazes me how apple users can be "happy with stability" when they get bluescreens, i hate bluescreens, although i never get them on windows XP, in fact can't even remember the last time i had one, and yeah everyone seesm to be real keen to blame MS if they get a bluescreen on windwos, but when it's mac then hey it's the third party developers :).


2. The section of OS X that the Application Enhancer modifies is not to be used by 3rd party developers as it can cause major instabilities.

and if MS did this a law suit would very quickly follow, but it's ok for apple, hell MS WAS REQUIRED to release a whole bunch of their API's by the government, they wanted to have as MS only API's,

al this sounds like to me is, this bit is buggy as hell so don't use it please. common think about what you woudl say if this was MS

whocares78 said,
2. The section of OS X that the Application Enhancer modifies is not to be used by 3rd party developers as it can cause major instabilities.

and if MS did this a law suit would very quickly follow, but it's ok for apple, hell MS WAS REQUIRED to release a whole bunch of their API's by the government, they wanted to have as MS only API's,

al this sounds like to me is, this bit is buggy as hell so don't use it please. common think about what you woudl say if this was MS

1. The APIs Microsoft were required to release by the EU are completely different to the part of OS X that the Application Enhancer shouldn't be using.
2. Microsoft were required to release those APIs for interoperability with other platforms.
3. The section of OS X that the Application Enhancer uses has nothing to do with interoperability with other platforms. It's a Cocoa only thing.
4. If I was a Windows developer and Microsoft told me to stay the **** out of a section of Windows, then I would stay the **** out of there.
5. How is something that was not intended for developers to use "buggy as hell"? It's the same thing as when the iPhone update broke 3rd party apps and bricked some iPhones.

osirisX said,

1. The APIs Microsoft were required to release by the EU are completely different to the part of OS X that the Application Enhancer shouldn't be using.
2. Microsoft were required to release those APIs for interoperability with other platforms.
3. The section of OS X that the Application Enhancer uses has nothing to do with interoperability with other platforms. It's a Cocoa only thing.
4. If I was a Windows developer and Microsoft told me to stay the **** out of a section of Windows, then I would stay the **** out of there.
5. How is something that was not intended for developers to use "buggy as hell"? It's the same thing as when the iPhone update broke 3rd party apps and bricked some iPhones.

why would apple not want developers writing code that uses a certian 'part' of the OS, why write part of an OS to never get used (or only get used by apple). Most windwos developers that get told by MS to stay 'out' of something will most likley go straight in there to see what MS doesn't want them playing with did you not forget about the AV companies complaints when vista was released about them not having access to certain things MS didn't think they needed access to.

whocares78 said,
why would apple not want developers writing code that uses a certian 'part' of the OS, why write part of an OS to never get used (or only get used by apple). Most windwos developers that get told by MS to stay 'out' of something will most likley go straight in there to see what MS doesn't want them playing with did you not forget about the AV companies complaints when vista was released about them not having access to certain things MS didn't think they needed access to.

Well look at what has happened because Unsanity played in the part of the sandbox they were told not to.

This explains it much better: http://rixstep.com/2/20071028,00.shtml

If Apple and Steve Jobs thought it was OK for Unsanity software to run on their systems they'd have made it easier. If Apple and Steve wanted users to be able to do the weird things Unsanity attempt to do they'd have exposed APIs for that purpose. But Apple and Steve do not want you running Unsanity products - for your own good.

Unsanity bridge several layers of the system and do so in a promiscuous way. They have code at the application layer, the kernel layer, and the driver layer. They have ordinary framework code supporting their 'enhancers' and then they have a daemon running at system level. Bridging things in this fashion is never good and inserting code into a system at those low levels is strictly verboten - for reasons any qualified system engineer understands intuitively. You keep your hands off the drivers.

If you don't get it after reading that article, then you're never going to get it

whocares78 said,
why would apple not want developers writing code that uses a certian 'part' of the OS, why write part of an OS to never get used (or only get used by apple). Most windwos developers that get told by MS to stay 'out' of something will most likley go straight in there to see what MS doesn't want them playing with did you not forget about the AV companies complaints when vista was released about them not having access to certain things MS didn't think they needed access to.

Microsoft has in the past had undocumented APIs that they told developers to not use. Why? Because they were more than likely going to be deprecated or change frequently. Did everyone listen? No. Plenty of developers used these APIs and ended up getting broken software later.

If a company says, "Don't use these APIs.", don't use them. They usually have very good reasons to tell you to not do so. If any developer values the stability of his or her code, they won't use it.

Neo-Lenin said,
Apple will blame anyone but themselves. If they tested this properly, then there wouldnt be this problem.

Quoted for truth. (unfortunately)

One only needs to recall the whole viruses getting into iPods incident to see why.

LOL I like this part:

If you have an earlier version of APE installed before you install 10.5, you may exhibit one of the following symptoms upon booting into Mac OS X 10.5:

- Your goldfish may die.
- A strange dog might bite you on the street.
- A friend may punch you.
- Your computer may catch fire.
- Your loved one may leave you.