Apple Seeds Build 12E40 of OS X Beta 10.8.4 Developers

What if 10.3 was just a placebo. I mean, 10.3 and 10.4 have exactly the same 'focus', wifi, safari, graphics.

Maybe 10.4 was supposed to be 10.3, but they were taking forever with 10.3 so they decided to actually release half baked thing.

10.3 & 10.4? Panther and Tiger? ;)

Where do I get one of these magic seeds?

Pay $100. You get all the magic seeds.

What if 10.3 was just a placebo. I mean, 10.3 and 10.4 have exactly the same 'focus', wifi, safari, graphics.

Maybe 10.4 was supposed to be 10.3, but they were taking forever with 10.3 so they decided to actually release half baked thing.

It seems like it's a bit late to be complaining about Panther and Tiger if you ask me.

If you use Google you will probably find guidance that you can use to go through the system events that take place during shutdown.

Another newbie to the shut down "bug". Take your own advice and search the MR threads about it.

If you raised a help call with Apple, they would probably ask you to provide the event log.

We've been doing this for months. :eek:

You are funny. You really are. Tell me why, exactly, is it a "problem" for computers to take as long as they need to in order to shutdown properly? You have intimate knowledge, I suppose, as to what the shutdown code is doing in the operating system. Well, do you?

Why does Apple kill the processes at 20 seconds rather than let them "take as long as they need in order to shutdown properly"? Here's a hint, because if a process or app has hung, it might never shut down properly without the OS force quitting it. Apple figures 20 seconds is a reasonable time to wait for a response before killing it.

Now, if your console log shows that every single time you shutdown certain tasks are crashing and requiring them to be killed, then waiting 19 extra seconds is useless since the records show they will not respond within the given time interval anyway.

I'm all for letting systems take as long as they need to shut down properly, and that is exactly why I'd like Apple to fix things so when I open up my console there are no error logs. Then we wouldn't have cause to complain about slow shutdowns because the system is doing whatever it is supposed to do. But when there are error logs pointing to specific tasks that are not shutting down properly, and the slow response has been shown to be caused by those specific tasks, you can't tell me there isn't something wrong with them and that everything is normal. Error logs are not "normal" behavior, they are there to help diagnose a problem.

Careful, now...

Once upon a time, a man put some toast in his toaster. It took a minute to do its thing. And it provided lovely nice crunchy toast.

But the man got impatient with all the hanging about and decided it would be a great idea to hit the toaster with a sledgehammer after 30 seconds, so he could get his toast out a bit sooner. Heck, if the toaster could switch itself off after 1 minute, why couldn't he?

Success! The toaster even 'worked' on a few occasions after that.

The man didn't really understand why the toaster was taking so long. He knew it was something to do with heat, or network connectivity, or iCloud synchronisation, or the type of bread, or maybe even something else far too technical to worry about. But he hit it anyway, because he really was a very impatient man. And the toast looked and tasted sort of OK. Toast version 10.8 should be exactly like Toast version 10.6, shouldn't it? I mean, heaven forbid, the toaster wouldn't be doing things all day long that make life a bit quicker, that need a bit of extra sorting out when the Toast button is hit, would it?

But one day, a piece of toast shot out and hit him in the eye with a message on it saying that 'file permissions on toast/donotbashme' were incorrect, and the filing system needed to be repaired.

"Oh, bugger!" said the man. "I need to hit it a bit sooner next time."

Nice parable. We who have slow shut down times (and boot up times too)with 10.8 want our new toaster to make the same quality toast, in the same amount of time, as our old toaster, preferably without having to rewire the outlet.

I don't think that is expecting too much, is it?

Read the bit about "not understanding what's going on" again. It's not the same toast.

Actually, I went back and reread it, just to amuse myself.

It's the same hardware, apps, and files (let's call that the toast). My old toaster (SL) makes perfectly browned, yummy toast in 2-3 seconds (with a 7200RPM HDD, by the way, not a SDD); the new toaster (ML) takes 30+ seconds to make the same brown, yummy toast.

Now, my new toaster (ML) has some cool new features on it, including interconnectivity with my microwave (iPhone) and oven (iPad) that allows me to follow how my toast is coming along, by looking at these other devices and let's me see on my toaster how the roast is progessing in the oven, but I still want my toast to be ready in the same amount of time (perfectly brown and yummy, too).

Not only that, but I don't want my new toaster to go to sleep partially through the toasting cycle because it incorrectly thinks there is no toast in the slot (I'm referring to ML's propensity to sleep, even during critical operations like transcoding a file, or burning a disk); my old toaster (SL, if you're still following along) wouldn't sleep until after the toast was finished and browned to perfection.

Unless you mean that the hardware, apps and files are the TOASTER and the OS is the TOAST; or is SL BREAD and ML is a BAGEL, or is it a WAFFLE?!

The point being that, all other things being equal, many of us (not you, so it is not universal) have issues with the boot and shut down times of ML vs SL, along with some other quirks. I don't understand why you are so adamant in telling everyone that it is not ML, it's something else.

No, I don't believe anyone has suggested that. What has been suggested is that it is a 'universal' problem. Which it clearly isn't.

OK, you win. "Universal" means it happens on 100% of machines, which may not be the case. It's probably not literally "universal", more like extremely widespread. Still definitely a problem with the OS and not user specific though.

Yes the slow shut down does occur but there is a reason for that - it isn't a bug, it is operating as it was designed.

People have actually tracked what the system is doing during shutdown, and things are just hanging and the system gives them time to end before finally killing them off. Nothing useful is happening during that time, it most certainly is a bug. And by your logic, when 10.6 shuts down dramatically faster, are you saying there's something wrong with that? Or somehow both a 4 second and a 20 second shutdown are both "as designed" even though there's no advantage to the slower one?

Read the post from johndoe above.

Once upon a time, a man put some toast in his toaster. It took a minute to do its thing. And it provided lovely nice crunchy toast.

But then all of a sudden it took two minutes to make toast with the exact same result. And the man was a toaster sycophant and insisted that that was how it was designed to work. The end.

Fixed that for you.

Actually, I went back and reread it, just to amuse myself.

I love you for this post. Thank you so much for a clever and well written point! :)

----------

You are funny. You really are. Tell me why, exactly, is it a "problem" for computers to take as long as they need to in order to shutdown properly? You have intimate knowledge, I suppose, as to what the shutdown code is doing in the operating system. Well, do you?[COLOR="#808080"]

Read the bit about "not understanding what's going on" again. It's not the same toast.

The general community may appreciate your comments if you would show some mutual respect and decency. Insulting others invalidates any points you may attempt to convey. It irks me when a perfectly informative and civil thread is derailed by immature and disrespectful individuals who use the anonymity of the internet as a shield to deflect personal integrity. The idiom "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" rings especially true in these instances, with all due respect.

Easier still is to assert that because you don't have a problem that one doesn't exist and act like a raging jackwagon while doing so.

BTW Raging Jackwagon = another great band name....:D

----------

Sorry, but when people have done exactly what you just said and you have been too ignorant and lazy to find that out before spouting off, you need to take stock of your own arrogance.

He's just PO'd that his toaster went beserk and provided nothing but burnt muffins and prune jelly this morning........

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But, to go back to the earlier question, has anyone who has experienced slow shut downs with 10.8.1-10.8.3 applied the new beta and noticed any difference?