[_underfl0w_]

I bought a non-M1 Macbook a decade ago and there were absolutely zero issues wiping it from stock. That was one of the first things I did, and everything performed as expected each time. How did things progress so far backwards in stability?

[shawnz]

> I bought a non-M1 Macbook a decade ago and there were absolutely zero issues ... How did things progress so far backwards in stability?

We are talking about a system which just underwent a huge architectural change as well as a new major release of the operating system. I think it is unreasonable to expect the same level of stability as a decades-old architecture only a couple months after release.

You can see in this case the issue is apparently already patched. It seems only with the very first software to have ever shipped on the device would you experience a bug such as this.

[titzer]

On the contrary, given the huge risks being taken here, you would think that the recovery/reimage solution would be the thing that they would test the most!

[xxpor]

On the other hand, downloading 3 gb to wipe doesn't really sound that bad concidering the way to do that used to be to download the entire OS and format the disk

[titzer]

Why would you download anything? It seems possible to have a DVD/BluRay or USB disk with the golden copy on it, or the OS itself should be able to restore itself to factory settings.

[TameAntelope]

There was a bug. It was designed and now does work, presumably forever, as you’ve described.

[xxpor]

You had to have created that DVD at some point. Either you downloaded it or bought it.

[gogopuppygogo]

Apple leaks talked about how they maintained a “Marklar” x86/x64 release branch for MacOS for years leading up to the official launch. I was hearing about them during the G4 desktop era.

The M1 benefits from its relation to the silicon in iPhone and iOS being based on MacOS but there are major differences. It’s a revolutionary mobile computing platform. So far the biggest problems have been a few software glitches that can quickly be patched over the internet. This is a trivial set of issues to trade for the power / performance gains.

I’m looking forward to the newer 16” models coming out. I still need Windows on my computer for my workflows though so if the virtualization isn’t even beta quality I’ll need to be an Intel holdout for a while longer.

[alsetmusic]

> I still need Windows on my computer for my workflows though so if the virtualization isn’t even beta quality I’ll need to be an Intel holdout for a while longer.

I’m running the beta of Parallels on M1. Windows works fine, though Parallels itself is still a work in progress. The issue is only licensing with MS, who currently don’t license Win for ARM independently. Then it’s just a question of whether you’re willing to enter a licensing grey area, similar to when you want to pay for content but it isn’t available in a legal format (thus, a person turns to a torrent). This is not an endorsement, just an observation.

[shawnz]

There are some issues, like ARM32 Windows store apps not working.

[Kwpolska]

Apple mentioned the secret x86 build of OS X during the keynote when they announced that transition [1], I think they alluded to it in one of last year’s keynotes too. That said, you would expect them to have booting, installation, and wiping as one of the first things built in the macOS-on-ARM porting process.

[1]: https://youtu.be/ghdTqnYnFyg?t=265

[jhoechtl]

Why not AMD? Value for money seems to be good and I mean better value for less money...

[mathgeek]

Apple doesn’t make any models with AMD chipsets. They went from PowerPC to Intel and now their own chips.

[tshanmu]

So, is it any cheaper given that I am effectivity beta testing hardware?

[the_local_host]

> How did things progress so far backwards in stability?

Because they just changed the foundation that the entire system is built on top of.

[spacedcowboy]

Apple employees are human, deadlines are inflexible, revolutionary changes are risky.

It seems straightforward.

[sebasvisser]

Humans set deadlines...

[spacedcowboy]

Ah, but once a deadline is set, it is very hard to un-set. Apple does not exist in a vacuum, it communicates its schedules to others and huge efforts are made by many people and companies to meet that deadline; it is not a trivial thing to change.

[titzer]

It's a matter of priorities. Apparently recovery and reimaging scenarios are not considered priorities. Personally, I want those to be absolutely rock solid.

[spacedcowboy]

That’s a conclusion that does not follow from your premises. I’m sure it was tested. A lot. But here’s the thing: when you ship anything of sufficient complexity where the quantities involved are measured in millions, there’s no such thing as a “small problem” or “edge case”.

Apple will test and fix bugs they find, as much as humanly possible, within the constraints of execution. You don’t just decide to launch on a whim, it’s baked in 3 years previously, with tens of thousands of people working towards that one goal; with supply ramps for multiple other companies arranged and enabled; with well-known public launch dates that can realistically only give you a few days wiggle room. The fact that they do this at all is a breathtaking success and a testament to the business - this applies to any such at-scale business, not just Apple.

So they’ve covered 99.9% of all boot issues before launch. As the CEO, do you go ahead ? Or do you miss the launch date, possibly invite legal action from your supply chain or worse, a critical manufacturer folds because of cash flow, and do you risk the reputation and stock price hit of a company as large as Apple “swinging and missing” in the press ?

I think it’s pretty clear what the correct choice is, and even though 0.1% of those millions of devices still adds up to a sizable number of complaints, you’re still way ahead of the game. And you get to keep that well-oiled machine moving forwards rather than stalling.

Apple has priorities. They may not be your priorities. If they differ sufficiently, you should go elsewhere, and if sufficient people agree with you and do the same, Apple will realign its priorities. I wouldn’t hold your breath though.

[titzer]

So you're telling me they were never expecting someone to return a laptop and it needing to be wiped?

[EricE]

Obviously not. And it was corrected within two weeks with a software update long ago released.

Talk about making mountains out of molehills...

[philjackson]

> How did things progress so far backwards in stability?

Not a software engineer then?

[grishka]

I am a software engineer and I don't understand it either.

[BurningFrog]

That's a lot extrapolation from one single bug.

[EricE]

It was a problem with the initial release of macOS shipped on the machines and was fixed within a couple of weeks. It's LONG past old news.

Need I point out Best Buy was the start of this kerfuffle?

[zxcvbn4038]

Good point, why is Best Buy even open during a pandemic?

[phs318u]

> How did things progress so far backwards in stability?

Because they progressed so far forward in security. Design is an exercise in priorities and trade-offs. The ability to wipe your Mac is now second fiddle to the ability to secure your Mac.

[tw04]

A decade ago your MacBook didn’t have drive level encryption with a soldered in place drive.

You were trading security for “stability”.

[imwillofficial]

I think “flexibility” is a more apt word choice.