MacOS X Leopard Blue Screen of Death spotted!

[Raffaele the Amigan]

Some users have expereienced this strange BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) with frozen machine when installing their brand new copy of MAC OS X (10.5) Leopard...

The screen appears at first restart after the installation and, unlike Microsoft  Windows BSOD, this one gives no clues to users...



http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306857


It seems it appears when OS X Leopard finds third party software that is not compatible with it...

Here some instructions to solve it:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306857

And for your fun, here it is another Screen of Death of OS X...

It is a sort of Unix/Linux Kernel Panic...



(You know it... Inside MacOS X it is hidden FreeBSD clone, so it could share same errors than any Unix/Linux compatible OS... even situations of Kernel Panic)

Well... if you are a mac user hope that your internal FSCHECK or similar Apple recover toolkit could solve the situation at next reboot, and if not... Well, you are DOOMED:..  ;012

And don't expect any clue of what was the error occurred... Because Apple threatens its users as stupid bimbos.

Apple users are always obliged to follow instructions and never know what it is happening inside the machine... UGH!  ;026  ;015

[Tsubashi]

Raffaele-san, as much as I respect your opinion, please think before you say things. I greatly resent you comments. This is merely a frozen graphical bootup, much like problems caused by incorrect modifications to the boot.ini file in windows, or bad daemon. Dealing with the graphical end on most computers will not tell you much. No, this is not a kernel panic, it a boot error. I am sure the problem would be revealed using a verbose bootup.

Inside MacOS X it is hidden FreeBSD clone, so it could share same errors than any Unix/Linux compatible OS...

No, this is not "hidden," nor a new revelation. In fact, they rather flaunt their UNIX heritage.

I do not believe that I, nor my colleagues are "bimbos" following Apple blindly, without knowledge of our systems. I am deeply offended and request a formal retraction of said statements

[Raffaele the Amigan]

It started as a joke and nothing offensive...

But really I think (and it is not me alone, but many thinking it), that Apple leaves too much hidden in deep, deep, very very deep menu preferences the requesters to hide/show too many features of the OS and leave the users as childs in a cradle...

And only the Mac users who have the guts to leave behind all these safety features (yes, like sort of parachutes for the common users) and DEACTIVATE IT ALL, then they could reveal the real OS hidden beyond the Easy Apple Interface and all its complexity and all the thousands, literally myriads of features that make an OS its real personality and the real enjoying of using it...

I repeat myself...

Making a kernel panic so easy and simple, (just press a restart button) it is just to hide real informations with a SAFETY LOCK, and keeps the user in a cage...

The real Apple user must learn by manuals, or navigating internet, that he could choose a VERBOSE feature for Kernel Panic screens...

But if Apple was really honest then they had to show the user a message like this:

«Hey this is a kernel Panic!» Don't worry and just restart the machine...»

And some lines below, a remainder in little fonts should say:

«If you are an experienced user, then press this button to show Verbose Mode, and find what was wrong with the System!»

And this fact it is valid for any discussion regarding MacOS X and which implies that the users need to remove by themselves any safety fom MacOS, and change any preferences to feel really free and responsible
of his actions.

And IMHO keeping precious informations (that must being standard informations) aware of the common users, means just that the manufacturer has no any trust in the capabilities of the users to EVOLVE to expert users...

And unfortunately it seems to me that if Apple continuing acting in this way it means that Apple threatens its users as stupid bimbos...

If you still feel offended after this explaination about why I used these words, I could edit my previous post and let it became more correct...

[Bella]

One one hand, I agree with Tsubashi; I'm sure that first pic is not kernel panic; the second one is, but as if kernel panics are a huge problem within OS X...for goodness sake, I'm using XP I've only seen a couple on my laptop (during the time her motherboard went to hell, but I haven't seen one for more that two years), and none on my other computer or any other XPs I've worked with. Death screens aren't half as problematic as their name would make them seem, and they aren't all that prevalent on modern OSs (like newer NT-based Windows and OS X) : \


That said, I do think Raffaele is right in saying that a lot of companies want to hide the inner workings of their OSs (although I'd say M$ with Vista is the worse)...I just believe that's the nature of the business.

If one really wanted to know what makes their OS tick, they would be using some sort of open source OS.

Can't we all just get along? : |

[CaptBrenden]

I think people need to calm down... Ive noticed people taking others opinions on computers/oses and such way too personaly.   Remember, they are opinions.  Take them with a grain of salt and move on.  

that being said, Ill mention some of MY opinions on the subject. They are just opinions so please, if you feel offended, just ignore me.

I feel that the majority of people out there are below the simple "user" level.  By user level, I mean someone that can easily operate their OS but dont nessicarily tweak, debug, tinker, etc... with its insides.  I fall into this level.  I can run windows just fine. I have basic computer compitence. Dispite feeling talked down to by the "elitists" Im perfectly happy where I am.  I feel no need whatso ever to get into the inner workings and mess with them.  From my encounters with people, I still feel I am above average to the normal person when it comes to computer understanding and use.  

To this degree I feel the majority of people are below basic computer compitence.  They dont understand the differnce between ram and physical memory, or the fact that the "shared drive" isnt actually on their computer, or they can bearly check their email without help.  id say the bulk of people I know are at that level to differnt degrees but still they need to be talked through what i would concider simple functions.  

With the way the world is going, everything being done electronicly, these people like it or not need to use computers.  Microsoft and Macintosh being the bulk of the OS market are doing the smart and wise thing making computers as simple as possible without too much to confuse or throw these people off any more then they already are.  

If you know  about the inside of your OS or care to, then is it really all that much of a problem to go in and disable all the layers of simplicity?  A software developer should make his software capable of doing what the advanced users want but I whole heartedly belive that the default should be set for the average or slightly below aveage user.  Advanced users can make things more advanced, the below average users arnt able to make it more simple.  Making their system compliated to "encourage/force" users to "evolve" is bad buisness if you want to sell to the bulk of the population.

[Bella]

^

Well put, Captain.

That's what I'm kinda saying. There are a lot of OSs available for those who truly want to be in 100% control of their computer; I don't believe any proprietary OS is among them, though

[C-Chan]

Ay ya yay, guess I'll have to reciprocate and call you "Baka Raffaele-san" then.  `v'

Haven't you heard the old saying?

"It's counterproductive to fight amongst friends."  Â¯v¯