Haxie, haxie, haxie
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: Pascal recommendation?
Next: The iPad Is Here
From: Steven Fisher on 27 Jan 2010 22:30 In article <jollyroger-3E05D4.11301727012010(a)news.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > The key word in their statement is "system". They are saying APE is not > known to have ever caused a *system* crash. System crashes (kernel > panics or hard lock-ups are significantly different from application > crashes and malfunctions. Quite true, although I certainly wouldn't expect APE to be able to cause a kernel panic or other *system* crash. You can't really say they're lying, but you could probably argue pretty successfully that they're intentionally misleading. Steve
From: David Empson on 27 Jan 2010 23:14 Steven Fisher <sdfisher(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > In article <jollyroger-3E05D4.11301727012010(a)news.individual.net>, > Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > > > The key word in their statement is "system". They are saying APE is not > > known to have ever caused a *system* crash. System crashes (kernel > > panics or hard lock-ups are significantly different from application > > crashes and malfunctions. > > Quite true, although I certainly wouldn't expect APE to be able to cause > a kernel panic or other *system* crash. Some may recall the debacle after the release of Leopard, where it was dicovered that having an old version of APE installed caused Leopard to hang during startup after doing the default "Upgrade" installation. (I don't know whether the lockup was triggered by the mere presence of the old version of APE, or old APE plus certain haxies.) The remedy was to either: (a) Do an Archive & Install, which excluded APE from the new system; or (b) Before trying to install Leopard, update APE to a more recent version which at least knew not to try mucking around with a system version it didn't understand. Some people caught by this probably didn't know they had APE installed, because it came as part of some third party software. A common example was old versions of the Logitech Control Center, supplied with Logitech mice. I expect this is the primary reason that Apple established its policy of ignoring crash reports and similar from computers with APE installed, and implemented a "remove known bad software" mechanism in the Snow Leopard installation. -- David Empson dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz
From: Steven Fisher on 27 Jan 2010 23:19 In article <1jd1ggn.10bz42vvrtplgN%dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz>, dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote: > Some may recall the debacle after the release of Leopard, where it was > dicovered that having an old version of APE installed caused Leopard to > hang during startup after doing the default "Upgrade" installation. Didn't it inject code into the Finder that caused it to hang? Same effect, but not as disturbing on a technical level. Steve
From: nospam on 27 Jan 2010 23:41 In article <lije-D2B1E8.18053427012010(a)news.giganews.com>, Elijah Baley <lije(a)foundation.org> wrote: > I have been troubleshooting Macs for many years and I have seen numerous > cases of APE being the root cause of many issues. But it's not only APE. > These types of extras typically use non-documented entry points into > Apple's API's to work their magic. Some even use absolute byte > references. you've got to be kidding. it's even skankier than i thought.
From: nospam on 27 Jan 2010 23:41
In article <1jd1ggn.10bz42vvrtplgN%dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz>, David Empson <dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > I expect this is the primary reason that Apple established its policy of > ignoring crash reports and similar from computers with APE installed, > and implemented a "remove known bad software" mechanism in the Snow > Leopard installation. apple has been ignoring crash reports where there's evidence of haxies since haxies came out. it's nothing new and has nothing to do with the leopard debacle. the worst part is unsanity even went out of their way to hide themselves so it could not be detected. sleaze doesn't even begin to describe it. |