
Apple Core Rot: Introduction - mikecane
http://macperformanceguide.com/AppleCoreRot-intro.html
======
X-Istence
There is a lot to complain about in OS X, but as a programmer I am not sure I
would have picked the points he did.

Things like kqueue() support not being up to par with the other kqueue()
providers, notably FreeBSD. kqueue() is considered so broken by libev for
example that it just doesn't use it. The deprecation of OpenSSL (although I'm
happy about that, but installing a secondary OpenSSL alongside the OS provided
one can break things, so you have to install to a separate path and use
include directives in your compile line, and or an alternate pkg-config path).
The fact that a replacement libc++ now exists, but parts are still using the
old stdlibc++ and the two can't be linked together if you use std::string for
example, thus making it harder to use C++11 features. This is going to be an
issue for a little bit, but hopefully that gets better. Outdated utilities or
libraries make life more difficult, however a lot of that can be fixed with
homebrew. Debugging USB issues is more difficult than it should be, this is
especially an issue when attempting to figure out why a driver from a vendor
crashes when you use certain USB to serial devices.

The new sandboxing requirement for apps while making everything a little more
secure makes it more difficult to make certain types of apps ... slowly but
surely new API's or permissions are being made available to fix those issues,
or at least improve the pain points.

~~~
paddy_m
Do you have some links with information about kqueue being broken? I know that
the python integration doesn't work well. We started using polling on OS X
instead of watchdog's kqueue driver.

<http://pypi.python.org/pypi/watchdog>

~~~
X-Istence
[http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod#code_kq...](http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod#code_kqueue_code_is_buggy)

kqueue()'s support of process monitoring on OS X doesn't allow for tracking of
new processes that are created, and automatically attaching to them.

There are also differences that make it more difficult to port various
kqueue() features from one platform to another. I'm not sure how much of a
difference that makes to you.

The documentation on OS X is also lacking, for example EVFILT_USER is
supported on Darwin/XNU but it is not documented in the man page for kqueue.

------
stcredzero
_> Time Machine Silently Excludes Critical Data_

Sorry, but you simply didn't read the docs when setting up backup of your
critical data. It's explicit that Time Machine does not back up removable
drives. Try: <http://www.bombich.com/>

EDIT: Apparently, this runs deeper. Time Machine mistakenly marks his internal
drives as removables. However, he also states that he's done lots of system
modding and that he has 10 internal drives. I don't think he's the target user
TM was designed for. I'm not either. I have also had some TM problems and now
use CCC as my primary backup, with TM as a convenience and secondary backup.

 _> Finder Refuses to Delete 'Backup Items'_

Author states he uses OS X for serious work, and implies he has the technical
wherewithal to evaluate OS X's stability and coding excellence. Apparently,
he's not a programmer, or not one competent enough to use lsof and kill.

 _> Bottom line: Fusion as-is and as supplied by Apple is OK (maybe, hard to
say for sure in multi-drive systems). Other than that, messing around carries
some ugly risks._

Sorry, but if you mod your setup, then you should look in the mirror when you
complain. For what you want to do there, you should be using diskutil
corestorage on the command line. However, the diskutil GUI doesn't tell end
users everything about corestorage yet, and I agree that this is bad. It
contravenes expectations established by Disk Utility and OS X in the past --
without sufficiently warning users.

~~~
kenko
"I don't think he's the target user TM was designed for."

Because he has a lot of drives? What?

~~~
Zarathust
In the Apple ecosystem, "modding" includes adding drives and is not
recommended

~~~
stcredzero
Adding drives is fine. Adding drives, plus multiple esoteric volume manager
gymnastics is not. (You know what that is?)

------
Osmium
There's a lot of misinformation and half-truths in this article. To pick one
example, the filesystem: yes, we're sadly not using ZFS but that's in all
likelihood due to licensing restrictions, not because Apple thinks HFS+
doesn't need replacing. What Apple has done is introduce CoreStorage, a
"storage virtualisation system" (see link below), which beyond allowing new
features to be added now (e.g. full disk encryption), will presumably allow
easier migration to a new filesystem in future. And this was added in Lion.

[http://blog.fosketts.net/2011/08/04/mac-osx-lion-
corestorage...](http://blog.fosketts.net/2011/08/04/mac-osx-lion-corestorage-
volume-manager/)

As a self-described power user, I've found 10.8 to be a nice upgrade on 10.7
and worlds better than 10.6. That's not to say there aren't issues -- there
are many, as there are with any OS -- but Apple currently isn't showing any
sign of slowing down, with many of the issues I've experienced having been
fixed in 10.8, while any power user is quite capable of disabling new
consumer-facing features that don't benefit them (e.g. Launchpad, iCloud).

Edit: reading further, there's a better example -- the author's criticism of
Fusion Drives. I quote "Bottom line: Fusion as-is and as supplied by Apple is
OK (maybe, hard to say for sure in multi-drive systems). Other than that,
messing around carries some ugly risks."

Not only are Apple's Fusion drives a _new_ technology (and it's a relatively
pioneering one at that, at least in the consumer space -- they're not HDDs
with an SSD cache, but rather SSD/HDD hybrids that intelligently move data
from one to the other), thus disproving the point that Apple isn't innovating
on OS X anymore, but his criticisms apply when you're making _your own_ Fusion
drive, rather than buying a computer with a Fusion drive installed. This is
something unsupported right now, especially since Fusion drives have only
existed for several months, so although of course it should be fixed I don't
think Apple deserves too much criticism for this.

Second edit: this is perhaps controversial, but I think it comes down to the
difference between a _power user_ and a _dangerous user_. Power users who have
to get work done will generally stick to supported system configurations, or
will be damn careful (and with full knowledge of what might happen if things
go wrong) if doing anything unsupported. I don't think any "power user" would
have a custom Fusion drive setup and then complain about Apple when something
goes wrong. That's not to say all of the criticisms in the article are wrong,
because they're not, and some are quite serious. But some things are
definitely disingenuous too.

~~~
VonGuard
I agree some things here aren't backed up, and there are half-truths. The guy
says he's going to list bugs, then he really doesn't, he just bitches in
bulletpoint form.

HOWEVER: He's totally right about everything behind all this. Apple is really
fucking up OS X, and clearly it has no desire to keep any users that don't see
their iMac as a giant iPhone.

My wife just got a brand new MacBook, and I was disgusted by the way the OS
behaves now. There's NO way to get to the hard drive: they just hide
everything and give you Documents, Pictures, etc.... The OS itself has removed
hot keys and functionality in favor of "ease of use" but really, it's just
being dumbed down.

The Mac OS was always for casuals, but when they added Unix, it changed and
both casual and hardcore could love the same OS. But clearly the hardcore are
no longer of any interest to Apple. It's a real shame because the Mac OS was
very stable and useable for many years. Now, it's just a toy.

Oh, and Apple changed it so you need an Appstore account to update software.
Real pain in the dick.

And finally, Apple doesn't need ZFS, necessarily. They need a standardized FS
though. HFS+ is ghetto, and a drive formatted HFS+ is essentially useless to
any other type of machine.

~~~
Osmium
I completely agree with some of what you're saying but it's criticisms like
"There's NO way to get to the hard drive: they just hide everything and give
you Documents, Pictures, etc...." that seem misguided: of course you should
hide the inner workings of the OS from the average user, but it's absolutely
trivial for anybody to see their hard drive if they want to (including hidden
files). The easiest of which doesn't require any advanced knowledge, but is
just a matter of going into Finder preferences and checking "Show these items
on the desktop: [] Hard disks"

Criticising Apple for hiding things that the average user _shouldn't know
about_ seems to be getting in the way of completely valid criticisms like what
you say about OS X needing a more modern FS.

~~~
VonGuard
I agree, Apple can hide things to make the OS less complex. But what irritates
me is that, as a user, I upgrade to the new OS, and the most basic of
functionalities is hidden from me. They've literally taken something away. You
cannot put a link to your compputer or hard drive on the desktop anymore. Is
it not unreasonable to think that your users might want to be able to do this
as you've had this hard-drive-on-desktop paradigm for well over 30 years now?
I'm glad there's a check box to show the computer on the desktop now. I would
never have found that. I mean, 30 years of interface paradigms teaching me to
make an alias or simlink there was obviously just some mental retardation on
my part...

~~~
epochwolf
> You cannot put a link to your compputer or hard drive on the desktop
> anymore.

Open finder. Hit Cmd + , to bring up the preferences. Click the Hard Disks
checkbox.

------
SeanLuke
Wow, that list of problematic Apple products doesn't even include the
buggiest, unrecoverable-crashiest, worst-interface-with-a-bullet Apple product
I have ever had the misfortune to be forced to use: Final Cut Pro X. With
near-zero documentation and essentially required additional-cost "options"
like Compressor. The reviews and feedback on this thing are absolutely dismal.

Of course, you could use iMovie. Which has a posterization bug so big you can
drive a truck though it, making it of little value for HD. Still unfixed after
at least three years. <http://www.aibal.com/imovie-banding-posterization/>

------
nikcub
The biggest bug for me in OS X is the lack of emphasis on backward
compatibility. I can pick up a copy of Windows 8 today and it will still run
SIMCITY.EXE from 1992. A month ago I had to upgrade my entire operating system
(and lose a ton of customizations I had made) because the new XCode wouldn't
run on my two year old Macbook.

~~~
stephencanon
That's forward compatibility, not backwards compatibility. Will the SimCity
being released next month run on Windows 3.1? (Of course not, that's an
intentionally extreme example, but you're fundamentally talking about two
different things -- new app on old OS vs. old app on new OS).

~~~
nikcub
You're right, bad example. A better example is that I spent a decade on VC++
6.0 without upgrading and could still build software and use SDK's for and
from future versions of Windows.

On OS X it started with wanting to test an iOS 6 feature, which required the
new simulator, which required the new SDK, which required the new XCode, and
before I knew it I was upgrading the entire operating system.

~~~
veemjeem
I'm not sure if you're aware of it, but Apple isn't on the PowerPC or MC68k
arch anymore. Would you expect them to continue supporting apps that were made
to run on the PowerPC & Motorola 68k chips too?

~~~
nikcub
i'm not asking for 10 years, just more than ~2

there is no technical reason why the latest iPhone SDK cannot run on Snow
Leopard[0].

this is purely apple forcing users into the upgrade cycle and everything that
comes with it - the App Store, code signing, etc.

[0] it has been backported and works. see:
[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9613565/is-it-possible-
to...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9613565/is-it-possible-to-get-the-
ios-5-1-sdk-for-xcode-4-2-on-snow-leopard) amongst others. It is as easy as
copying the library over.

~~~
pooriaazimi
> _there is no technical reason why the latest iPhone SDK cannot run on Snow
> Leopard._

How exactly you know that?! Maybe new SDKs (that are compiled to run on x86
for iOS Simulator) use ARC exclusively which doesn't work properly on Snow
Leopard. It makes sense to do so now that ARC's been out for a couple years...

------
jpxxx
The execution is spastic but the intent is correct: substantial portions of
the Apple codebase are lipsticked pigs.

Mail.app is, to my mind, the single most flagrant troublemaker in small-biz
use. But there are thousands of little cockroaches found all over the place
and I can't stop seeing them anymore.

~~~
revscat
What's the matter with Mail.app? I've used it quite successfully in various
office settings with no problems.

~~~
jpxxx
here we go! \-- Doesn't (officially) support HTML signatures. \-- Requires a
lengthy reindex on any internal database change, which can happen multiple
times a year. \-- Severe, egregious issues with corrupted or blanked out
Keychain entries \-- Easily works itself into a lather where it cannot
properly authenticate with anything until the entire system is restarted \--
GMail IMAP sync-thrashing and message corruption that can render some accounts
unusable \-- Crashes on queueing massive message previews \-- Customers almost
uniformly loathe the recent UI changes \-- The new search UI is nearly
unusable for most, requires frequent spotlight rebuilds \-- Drafts-on-server
duping \-- Plugin hassles and failures, especially as regards Archive Utility
and PDF handling \-- Evaporating local folders \-- New rules about Archiving
that don't play nicely with grandfathered Archives \-- Auto-setup of new
accounts that gets hung so badly you have to back in a patently entry just to
get the chance to hand-edit settings

It is unreliable and unfit for heavy duty use. I've lost a third of my
customers to Outlook.

------
alimoeeny
I would not have believed the "Finder can't copy files reliably" if it had not
happend to me more than once, (lost parts of the code + .git directory)

~~~
weiran
I wonder if this is more to do with HFS+ rather than Finder.

~~~
alimoeeny
Yes, I don't know if it is the Finder itself, or so other part of the
OS/kernel that is in fault, and NO, I don't know how to reproduce it because
it is such a scary experience (happend two or three times if I remember
correctly) that I don't even want to go explore it, since I never even
received an automated acknowledgment email from apple for bug reports or dump
posts or anything like that. One time, there was a directory deep inside the
one that was beeng moved that had the same name as the top level (I don't know
if this was related to the error though) and midway there was a useless error
saying some error happened and half the files could not be found not in the
source not destination.

------
minikites
> This problem is only an issue for those doing certain types of upgrades; it
> won’t occur with as-shipped Fusion setups. But it shows an inattention to
> detail with severe consequences— many users do modify their systems.

So if you go way out of your way to DIY a Fusion Drive and set up all of the
pieces required, it becomes Apple's fault when Disk Utility fails to
acknowledge your heavy modifications?

I wonder if the author gets mad that you can't move files out of /System and
still expect the Mac to boot. After all, many users do move files.

~~~
STRML
Even with a DIY Fusion setup, Disk Utility unhelpfully offering to wipe all
your drives to fix a filesystem error points to a pretty major bug in Disk
Utility's decision-making capabilities.

------
nvarsj
I think part of the problem w/ performance issues is that Apple doesn't seem
to give a crap about older hardware. The upgrade from snow leopard to lion
pretty much left my mid 2009 macbook pro unusable. After many miserable months
I gave up and switched over to a linux desktop for full time development work.

However, my brand new shiny 2012 macbook air _flies_. It's about as fast
(build times, and what not), as my 2009 era desktop running linux. I have had
similar experiences with my iphone hardware. You have to keep upgrading
hardware if you want to keep up with the latest software.

Given that, there are still some awful bugs in later incarnations of OS X that
remain unfixed. For example, lion's retina support broke external 30" displays
in landscape mode. This is still not fixed 2 years later, despite bug reports
and a very easy to reproduce problem. Apple just doesn't give a f*ck about
power users anymore.

~~~
oeufsaujambon
> I think part of the problem w/ performance issues is that Apple doesn't seem
> to give a crap about older hardware. The upgrade from snow leopard to lion
> pretty much left my mid 2009 macbook pro unusable.

Just curious, in what way did the upgrade make you MacBook Pro unusable? I had
a 2007 MBP that used up until August 2012 running Mountain Lion and never had
performance issues. Eventually the keyboard died and rather than repair it, I
sold the laptop and replaced it with an 11" MacBook Air (which has been great
thus far).

------
vor_
This is a very subjective and vague list of criticisms. It reminds me of the
iPod haters around 2003 who didn't like that Apple was spending so much time
on its music player.

I mean, what exactly is he talking about when he says OS X is becoming more of
an entertainment platform or that features are getting "dumbed down"? No
examples are given, so apparently it's just a general feeling he has.

Due to its lack of details, the article isn't persuasive.

~~~
mikecane
>>>an entertainment platform or that features are getting "dumbed down"? No
examples are given

One thing he mentioned was keyboard shortcuts removed from iPhoto.

"iPhoto — arbitrary removal of keyboard shortcuts and similar made a slightly
useful program into a useless toy."

~~~
simonh
If only it had an alternate user interface, like a GUI or something.

~~~
mikecane
Heh. Mac OS had keyboard shortcuts from the beginning, tho.

------
darkxanthos
I personally have been feeling the quality bar slipping but this article goes
way too far. For me things aren't that bad but I can see where it's heading.
Hoping to get another 5-10 years out of the Apple ecosystem.

~~~
nodata
Hardware support should be better. I've had at least four firmware updates
since the Air was released, which seems extraordinarily high for a product in
a closed ecosystem.

------
Someone
Lots of opinion, but extremely few facts. I'll limit myself to one example:
Mac OS X gets worse and worse because of its _continued_ use of HFS Plus?

~~~
wmf
Perhaps the author's expectations are increasing over time. If HFS+ stays the
same, that means it is worse and worse compared to the state of the art.

------
morty16
>Deprecation with threat of removal of robust long-standing threading APIs
with rewrite required.

What's he referring to here?

~~~
Ixiaus
Grand Central probably? They might be enforcing its use and deprecating other
API's.

~~~
jevinskie
pthreads isn't going anywhere. Grand Central Dispatch uses it!

------
lucian1900
This is a more general trend in computing. iOS and similar are much too
popular with "normal" people for anyone to still care about having a real
general purpose machine.

It worries me.

------
headShrinker
This article is dribble. Some of these are issues some are not. All of this is
hyperbole and has little to with reality. Phrases like "can't copy" are a red
herring, as copying is easy and reliable, HFS vs. ZFS, Etc etc. Very few, if
any facts or evidence.

~~~
jff
The word is "drivel".

------
jeffehobbs
This essay starts strong and goes down fast. It would have been improved by
fewer examples and a greater depth on each one. C-

~~~
untog
Yeah, it's a little bit of a 'turd in the punchbowl' with regards to OS X
criticism. I stand by my opinion that Snow Leopard was the last version of OS
X that I felt truly enhanced my experience, but a lot of what he says in the
article is nonsense.

~~~
rsync
Snow Leopard was indeed the high water mark for OSX, and probably will be. It
will be a real shame when SL is end of lifed and 3rd parties no longer target
it, etc.

~~~
zwass
Even Apple doesn't target it anymore... XCode.

------
chaostheory
> Outright removal of an API in a minor release. Deprecation with threat of
> removal of robust long-standing threading APIs with rewrite required.

Hasn't Apple always done this even before OSX? I could be wrong, but I vaguely
remember Joel Spolsky writing about this as a core difference between MS and
Apple.

------
rayiner
He says the platform is going downhill and becoming entertainment only, then
mentions a bunch of stuff that is either a new addition or media-related. E.g.
iTunes doesn't suck any more now than it ever has, nor does the Finder.

Relative to OS X 10.2, 10.8 has: 1) full screen support, which is a huge
advantage to coding on a constrained laptop screen; the newest Emacs supports
it, so you can easily swipe between your editor, your browser, etc. 2) much
better and more complete POSIX support; 3) an entirely new tool-chain in
Clang/LLVM; XCode sucks, but it has always sucked; 4) fleshing out of little
low-level features (improved Obj-C runtime, thread local storage, etc)

I just don't see anything non-trivial that OS X 10.8 can't do that say 10.2
could do, and a lot that's the opposite.

~~~
wmf
OTOH, full screen works worse on large monitors, spaces is worse, save as was
removed, etc.

------
logn
"OS X is degrading into a base for an entertainment platform. As it stands,
the trend is entirely downhill for serious work..."

->Interesting. I see more and more developers switching to Mac and taking it seriously. My last office switched completely from Ubuntu to Mac.

"OS updates are fast and furious— a lot of hype but little of real value..."

->The real value is stability. I don't care for a 100% revamped UI every 4 years like Microsoft pushes. I like a familiar platform that is steadily improved.

"Core operating system quality is declining as resources are diverted to
software development in more profitable lines"

->The core OS is Unix. Unix has had decades to get it right and I doubt Apple is somehow ruining it in the last few years. Yes, Apple focuses attention to the consumer appliances, but I feel that's mostly because investors and press are obsessed with that so that's just what it appears to us. I suspect they fund Mac OS pretty well.

"We begin to tread in dangerous territory: potential data loss"

->I agree here 100%. I've seen too many Time Machine problems.

"Developers are forced without recourse (by API changes and Apple Store
requirements) into costly and arbitrary updates which themselves carry the
risk of new bugs."

->I wouldn't know. The great thing about Mac is that it's a good OS for webapp development which I focus on. So I encounter none of these issues.

"Useful functionality is prohibited in the name of security."

->Have you been around in that last 20 years? Do you like ActiveX and Applet plugins in browsers too?

"Outright removal of an API in a minor release."

->Well, if you know that, isn't that half the battle? Pay attention to minor releases then. Maybe since they can't really upgrade beyond the major version of 10...

"Apple’s iron hand over what constitutes a 'right and proper' application
leaves no room for disagreement."

->Agreed this is a step backwards. But the blame is partly on users for accepting this.

"Hardware for professional use is released in 3-6 year cycles (Mac Pro), or is
dropped entirely (XServe and related)."

->All the professionals I know like the MacBook Airs increasingly. Hardware has stagnated overall in the industry. Apple has pushed forward with thinner cases, NAND drives, and Retina displays: much more innovation than competitors.

"The trend to a new breed of 'shallow' features: those useful only for
beginners and entertainment"

->Bells and whistles sell. So sue them. They got the core, essential features done on the first OSX release.

"The general dumbing-down of features in every Apple OS X program."

->I like this. The default OS X software is more about managing your life. I don't need a fancy shortcut to sync my camera to iPhoto (no idea if this exists). I need shortcuts for development where it actually saves time since I rebuild 50 times a day, and Xcode for instance has configurable shortcuts.

"The general trend to introducing stupidly inappropriate iOS-isms into OS X
(e.g., Mission Control)."

->Really?

"The OS X donkey cart is getting loaded with ribbons and flyers and
decorations and marching band"

->Did you run out of ideas for the article at this point?

"So-called OS X 'upgrades' now consist largely of ill-conceived dilettante
eye-candy features that reduce usability, clutter the user interface and
introduce scads of new bugs."

->Apple QA could improve. But I think their UI's have steadily improved which is important. Look at the first release of OSX to now: much better.

"The real talent at Apple has probably been diverted away from OS X to iP*
development"

->[citation needed]

~~~
mrich

      All the professionals I know like the MacBook Airs
      increasingly.
    

I cannot imagine working with an Air for a prolonged period doing anything
requiring the keyboard, since it is not ergonomic at all.

~~~
rayiner
You can type quite fast and accurately on the Air keyboard.

~~~
nvarsj
Not in my experience. Air keyboards are horrible. The older (pre 2009)
keyboards were way, way better. It's easy to accidentally press a nearby key
if typing fast, so I have to type more deliberately (and slower). Maybe I just
have fat fingers. Thinkpad keyboards get it right (for a laptop). I prefer
everything else about apple hardware, though.

------
khitchdee
Apple's product design philosophy is getting diluted:

[http://nextbigwhat.com/forum/discussion/1677/apple039s-produ...](http://nextbigwhat.com/forum/discussion/1677/apple039s-product-
design-philosophy-is-getting-diluted#Item_1)

------
urlwolf
I'm sort of happy that these things (bitching about your OS) happen for OSX
too.

I'd recommend to have a look at gnome shell. I was pleasantly surprised, many
good UX decisions there. I switched to it from awesomewm.

------
blowski
When I was young OSX, was so much better. It used to read my mind and produce
everything I needed even before I'd thought of it. Including coffee, and sweet
blueberry muffins. Without even plugging it in or turning it on. It was so
much better than Windows.

These days, it is merely an operating system.

I may switch to Arch Linux, which I hear has a voice-activated Cappuccino
machine and dry cleans shirts.

------
peterevans
> OS X is degrading into a base for an entertainment platform. As it stands,
> the trend is entirely downhill for serious work (albeit a mild grade so far,
> but steadily downhill nonetheless).

When was OS X not an entertainment platform? iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes -- these
applications have been around for a long time.

~~~
X-Istence
OS X is less of an entertainment platform than Windows ... when you look at
the fact that games are still almost always released for Windows only/first.

OS X was and still is a platform for creating, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iWeb, and
I would even go so far as putting iWork into that same category. Windows has
Windows Movie Maker but it doesn't compare to iMovie in terms of output and
the kinds of things the average user can accomplish with it.

~~~
rednukleus
I think you are both missing the point. The author is trying to argue that
Apple are removing features and "dumbing down" the OS, to make it easier for
casual users to use it as an entertainment hub.

------
CletusTSJY
Don't the bullet points all repeat themselves. It could have been just: *
Software products are being dumbed down for novices at the expense of power
users * OSX isn't getting enough attention because the iPhone and iPad are so
big now

------
mergy
Just excellent.

