Mac OS X 10.4.8 (#8): Another fix for non-launching applications; iSight conflict with Classic; more

CNET staff

Sept. 2, 2009 12:11 a.m. PT

3 min read

Another fix for non-launching applications We continue to report on an issue where some applications fail to launch after updating to Mac OS X 10.4.8 -- a not uncommon occurrence after incremental Mac OS X updates.

Several users have reported that killing an application-related process via Activity Monitor (click the item then press the 'Quit Process' button) can allow proper application launch. This is especially applicable in situations where a restart cures problems with application launching, as the offending process(es) will, of course, be killed by the restart process.

MacFixIt reader Alan Hirshberg writes:

"Occasionally, I have problems launching non-universal applications on my MacBook Pro. The icon will bounce a few times in the dock, and then stop. In the past, I would reboot the computer, and I would then be able to launch the application. Effective but time consuming. The work around is to quit the Translated process in the Activity Monitor utility. The offending application will launch and also re-launches the Translated process as well."

iSight conflict with Classic Some users have reported an issue where built-in iSights stop working as soon as Classic is started up.

MacFixIt reade Irene Fittton writes:

"Stopping Classic does not get the iSight camera to work again. A restart of the computer is necessary. It took a long time to figure this out because most of the troubleshooting I did like resetting PRAM, running Disk Warrior and TTP from startup DVDs, required a restart. I forgot that restarting also meant that Classic was off."

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please let us know.

Universal Access processor usage Some users have also reported an issue where, even though Universal Access is turned off, the process UniversalAccessApp is still running (as evidenced by Activity Monitor, located in Applications/Utilities).

One reader writes:

"I've seen this process take as much as 4.8% of CPU on my machine and I'm not using any of it's functions."

Killing this process via Activity Monitor does not seem to have any adverse affects if you are not using Universal Access functions.

Feedback? Late-breakers@macfixit.com.

Previous coverage:

Resources

not uncommon occurrence

let us know

Late-breakers@macfixit.com

Mac OS X 10.4.8 (#7): Math...

Mac OS X 10.4.8 (#6): Coco...

Mac OS X 10.4.8 (#5): AirP...