Hidden Wi-Fi Diagnostics Application In OS X Lion 116
WankerWeasel writes "The latest version of Apple's operating system, OS X 10.7 Lion, has a hidden Wi-Fi Diagnostics application that allows the user to view information about their wireless network performance, record performance and also capture raw frames. Hidden away in the System folder the application is meant for Apple tech diagnostic use but is also very useful for any user interested in diagnosing wi-fi problems or checking network performance."
Hidden while useful? (Score:4, Insightful)
Any true admin should have a look in this "hidden" directory anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've downloaded and used a couple of Wifi diagnostics applications, but it's never occurred to me to look in System/Library/CoreServices for applications. So yes, hidden. It should be in Applications/Utilities, along with other apps that not every user would understand like Console and RAID Utility.
Re:Hidden while useful? (Score:4, Informative)
It should be in Applications/Utilities, along with other apps that not every user would understand like Console and RAID Utility.
I could not disagree more. By putting all those utilities in a folder you essentially create a clusterfuck equivalent just doing a directory listing in the system folder. None of this is hidden by the way. It doesn't occur to you to look System/Library/CoreServices? Does it occur to you to look for ping.exe in c:\windows\SysWOW64\ ?
Why should any of this be linked? It's important to you so Google would often suffice. Look at a typical Windows 7 machine. There are 300 (exactly) applications in the SysWOW64 directory, the vast majority of them powerful, and the vast majority of them no one will ever have a need to execute.
Re: (Score:2)
You wouldn't need to know where ping.exe is because the system directory is always included in PATH. It's also a console application so I'm not entirely sure how that comparison works. I have absolutely no experience with macs so I don't know how this application is launched, but can it be launched from the console without knowing its exact directory structure? If not then the only way to find this on your own is by complete chance, playing explorer in the file system hierarchy.
Given the nature of the appli
Re: (Score:1)
Given the nature of the application and its usefulness...
...which leads me to wonder what this program provides that we can't already get from Wireshark. It's a trivial matter to compile this for OS X (Macports was my preferred path while I was playing with Macs, but whatever rocks your boat).
Re: (Score:2)
Well to be fair that's kind of like saying "why use notepad when you can download notepad++"
The usefulness isn't in competing in feature sets. The usefulness is that it comes with your operating system and is available immediately without needing to download (and potentially compile) anything.
Re: (Score:2)
the packet sniffer feature makes a pcap file. wiresharek happily reads said pcap file. What does it give you that wireshark doesn't already? It's preinstalled on every mac running lion.
Re: (Score:2)
...which leads me to wonder what this program provides that we can't already get from Wireshark. It's a trivial matter to compile this for OS X
It's an even more trivial matter to download a precompiled binary from wireshark.org [wireshark.org], but, as another response already noted, one thing Wi-Fi Diagnostics provides is that you don't have to download and install it, much less compile it. It also offers a pane to get information about Wi-Fi networks your machine is seeing and a signal-and-noise graph, and to report that information to Apple for troubleshooting, and it can report various Wi-Fi network events.
In addition, if you're not the person who's going t
Re: (Score:2)
Given the nature of the application and its usefulness...
...which leads me to wonder what this program provides that we can't already get from Wireshark. It's a trivial matter to compile this for OS X (Macports was my preferred path while I was playing with Macs, but whatever rocks your boat).
"Monitor Performance displays a graph of network signal strength, noise level, transmit power, and data rate. " AFAIK that's a little bit more complicated with Wireshark: See pages 73-93 of http://www.chipps.com/5/TroubleshootingWireless.pptx [chipps.com].
Off-topic advice (Score:5, Informative)
Just a pedant's note: looking in SysWOW64 shouldn't occur to you at all. Despite the name, it's the 32-bit version of the 64-bit files, which actually live in the awkwardly-named system32. When a 32-bit program runs, SysWOW64 is mapped onto system32, just like Program Files (x86) is mapped onto Program Files, and parts of the registry are remapped (although I don't have the exact key name on hand, it's something like [HKCU|HKLM]\software\wow64node).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how would you implement transparent backwards-compatibility for 32-bit apps?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Ah... you got me there. :O
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. I did not know this, cheers.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
WOW stands for Windows-On-Windows. It's the layer for running Windows apps on a newer version of Windows. So, the name does make sense, it's the system directory for WOW64, which is an application for running Windows on Windows64.
Sounds kinky. No wonder it's hidden away.
Re: (Score:2)
Which doesn't make the naming any less confusing, of course.
First there's System32. On 32bit systems, these are the 32bit system files. On 64bit systems, these are the 64bit system files. When a 64bit system refers to System32, it gets System32. When a 32bit system refers to System32, it instead gets...
SysWOW64. When a 64bit app accesses this folder, it still gets this folder. When a 32bit app accesses this folder, it gets this folder. Neither, however, should be accessing this folder - even though a
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the other entires in that folder. It's basically entirely apps. Apparently, a good admin would have known about this.
Re: (Score:2)
I've downloaded and used a couple of Wifi diagnostics applications, but it's never occurred to me to look in System/Library/CoreServices for applications. So yes, hidden. It should be in Applications/Utilities, along with other apps that not every user would understand like Console and RAID Utility.
Is there a menu item in the menu for the Wi-Fi menu extra (either when you click on it or when you option-click on it) that starts the Wi-Fi diagnostics? If so, that might be why it's stuffed under CoreServices - the intent is to run it that way, not by double-clicking on it or running it from Launchpad.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a menu item in the menu for the Wi-Fi menu extra (either when you click on it or when you option-click on it) that starts the Wi-Fi diagnostics?
Yes. [appleinsider.com]
If so, that might be why it's stuffed under CoreServices - the intent is to run it that way, not by double-clicking on it or running it from Launchpad.
Yes.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Most of the users would not understand the signal / noise graph and data anyway ;
After all, it should just work, ain't it? (except when you keep your Mac in your hand the wrong way).
<duck>
Masterpiece (Score:1)
This article has two sentences. One of these sentences is redundant, and the other one is uninteresting. Merging them would make the whole thing uninteresting, so this is a textbook example of self-preservation through redundancy.
yawn (Score:5, Insightful)
undocumented is not hidden. There is also a bucket load of standard UNIX apps there for you to play with too.
Re: (Score:3)
"Hidden" because it's not listed in the Utilities folder.
So, about as hidden as putting something in a room and closing the door. Oh look, it's hidden!
This really isn't really front page news. It's a nice tidbit for a hints site, but it's not trail blazing news.
Re: (Score:3)
Finder.app is in the same directory so it's not exactly a hidden location to anyone who knows much about Mac OS X.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not running OS X, so this might be a stupid question, but what part of "/System/Library/CoreServices/Wi-Fi Diagnostics.app" makes this "hidden"?
Sounds more like hiding in plain sight to me.
It should be in /Applications/Utilities where all the other diagnostic tools are. This is the Mac equivalent of putting the program file somewhere inside /usr/lib/WiFi/ or c:\windows\resources\wifi (neither of which are on the path).
Re: (Score:2)
Its hidden in that normal users don't go into /System. They find apps in /Applications, certain system utilities and diag tools for advanced users in /Applications/Utilities, but /System is not a user-oriened place to go.
Its "hidden" like if Microsoft put a useful app in C:\Windows or even C:\Windows\system23 which was not accessible in he Start Menu, Control Panel, Administrative Tools, or normal places people expect to go to find things. /System is not aggressively hidden, but it is not in an reality "in
Re: (Score:2)
Aw man, I miss when Windows ran 23 bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Reseat the RAM.
Re:Hidden? (Score:4, Interesting)
That directory also houses applications that are not usually directly invoked by the user, but from another event (apps like Installer, Bluetooth Setup Assistant, Keyboard Setup Assistant, and so forth, most of which are started by taking action within the System Preferences app.)
I'm not certain how you'd invoke Wi-Fi diagnostics, but it might be part of the troubleshooting path which also contains the Network Setup Assistant.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not certain how you'd invoke Wi-Fi diagnostics
Hold down the "option" key when clicking on the Wi-Fi menu extra in the menu bar, and select "Open Wi-Fi Diagnostics..." from the menu.
"Hidden Away" (Score:1)
in the System folder? How obscure!
Ping (Score:3)
So there's an application in the System folder that isn't in the manual and this makes the news? Are we going to run an article tomorrow about this beauty that I just found: C:\Windows\SysWOW64\ping.exe, entitled "OMG we just found an application capable of sending ping request hidden deep in the directory structure of windows?
How about the 299 other Applications in the system directory in Windows that may not be as well known as ping.exe? Should we run an article on powercfg.exe, the application which is great for diagnosing a vast array of powermanagement issues in windows?
I'm waiting for tomorrow's shock article: terminal program hidden in /bin/bash, will open another bash prompt for your bash prompt, this may double your productivity!
*yawn* Slow news day.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows console applications have always been in the windows system directory since the early days, so I'm not really seeing your brilliant point here. If anything, I'd say that directory is almost the console equivalent of Applications/Utilities.
Re: (Score:2)
What he meant to say:
"I found this article to be such a waste of the time of the author, poster, server, RSS aggregator, RSS client, and (of course) me that I thought I'd waste even more of my (and their) time by posting a scathing reply condemning the tiny grain of sensationalism injected into the summary instead of just skimming over it in the index of the general news channel and then not opening it or reading it."
Some of us do find this stuff interesting. I do tech support for a large number of Mac-base
Re: (Score:3)
You seem not to get he point? You must be a windows user then.
The Mac application is at a wrong place, it is at simple as that. The /Library tree and the /Users/user/Library tree is not supposed to hold any applications (except you want to call executeables like "java" or "python" applications.
As one of the parents pointed out it belongs into /Applications/Utilities
Your analogy about the Windows System folder is completely flawed anyway. As everyone who has a clue about operation systems will tell you: you
Re: (Score:2)
Breaking news: This isnt unix, and Windows doesnt use the Unix design philosophies. Details at eleven.
Re: (Score:2)
/System/Library/CoreServices is full of little utilities that user facing GUI components will leverage to actually to do low level work, but the work they perform is abstracted out in a nice little unix-p
Re: (Score:2)
My guess (I don't have Lion) is that this new little utility is designed to be launched from some other user facing application
Well, more like from the user-facing Wi-Fi menu extra (the Wi-Fi icon in the menu bar on the right side); option-click on that and you get some additional stuff even in pre-Lion releases, such as signal information; as the AppleInsider article on this app [appleinsider.com] notes, it's launched by the "Open Wi-Fi Diagnostics..." option+menu item for that menu extra.
Re: (Score:2)
The Mac application is at a wrong place, it is at simple as that. The /Library tree and the /Users/user/Library tree is not supposed to hold any applications (except you want to call executeables like "java" or "python" applications.
Really? Says who? There's a ton of apps in the /System/Library folder. Try this:
/System/Library -name "*.app" -print | wc -l
find
I get 179 on my system...
Re: (Score:2)
And all but one or two are Apps you never want to start directly but are started via System Preferences, e.g.
Having a truely app ment for the user there makes no sense. Most apps there are services like: /System/Library//Services/ChineseTextConverterService.app
Sorry, a useful "utility" is wrongly placed there.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, a useful "utility" is wrongly placed there.
Better tell Apple about that hidden "Finder" app there, then. Anybody tried launching it to see what it does?
(And, yes, there is a way to launch the Wi-Fi Diagnostics app from the UI; option+click the Wi-Fi menu extra and select "Open Wi-Fi Diagnostics...".)
Re: (Score:2)
You know that the finder starts automatically?
Well, yo only want to nitpick it seems.
Nevertheless thanx for the hint with the option key ;D
Re: (Score:2)
You know that the finder starts automatically?
Well, yo only want to nitpick it seems.
No, I just want to point out that not all applications, in the sense of "programs that offer a UI and that are inside an app bundle", need to be in /Applications or ~/Applications, whether it's because they're launched automatically (as, yes, I knew the Finder was) or are launched from a menu item or....
Re: (Score:2)
And i wanted to point out that random (useful) programs that no one seems to know about are hard to find in /System/Library/CoreServices/bla/blub
It is only a coincidence that you can use (as you claim, I did not verify it) the program with an option click into the WiFi icon on the menu bar.
Fact is: I did not even know about it. You won't take it serious, but it pisses me off!
This is my computer, everything that is not directly obvious is "non existing" for me. And I'm tired to be treated by Apple just the s
Re: (Score:2)
It is only a coincidence that you can use (as you claim, I did not verify it) the program with an option click into the WiFi icon on the menu bar.
Actually, no, it is not even remotely a coincidence; it is entirely intentional - Apple intended that to be the way you can invoke it, they did not intend it to be invoked by browsing to /System/Library/CoreServices and double-clicking it. It's unfortunate that option+click is not as well known as it should be to the subset of the users of Mac OS X for whom it's useful, but that's a separate matter.
This is my computer, everything that is not directly obvious is "non existing" for me. And I'm tired to be treated by Apple just the same every one else is treated by MS.
Then perhaps Mac OS X is not the right operating system for you; it is, as you note, your computer, so perha
Re: (Score:2)
The OS is fine. But the attitude of Apple to make things more and more obscure is not. E.g. the firewall is on 10.6 and also was on 10.5 much worse to configure than it was under 10.4.
In fact except for standard services you can not configure ANYTHING with the GUI anymore.
Instead of letting me define a port as open I have to start the application and answer the question of the system. Which is pretty annoying as for some reason the system does not remember my decision and is asking every time again. I mean
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Uh.
And windows is different? At least the mac ships with a command line worth shit, it took microsoft until he release of powershell to even start playing the same sport on that front, let alone in the ballpark.
Its still missing an equivalent to Automator and Applescript.
Noobs who parrot the old "macs r for retards!!!" argument have clearly never used one and have no idea what tools are available to get shit done far quicker and easier than anything on Windows or Linux.
Re: (Score:3)
And windows is different? At least the mac ships with a command line worth shit, it took microsoft until he release of powershell to even start playing the same sport on that front, let alone in the ballpark.
Uh WTF? This is possibly the dumbest argument not involving cars I've ever heard on slashdot. How many years did it take the Mac to have an OS worth more than a nickel, one that actually has a command line?
You can bag on Windows all day if you like, there's lots of good reasons to do so, but this is one of the many places where Apple trailed Microsoft for over a decade.
Re: (Score:2)
If you had the developer tools installed the Macs ALWAYS had a command line. You never heared about A/UX, did you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A/UX [wikipedia.org]
As your parent puts it: the Mac haters, never used one.
Or as I put it: if you hate a Mac as a professional software developer, unix admin or other IT professional: you are in the wrong business and should do yourself and your company a favour and perhaps shift to a different occupational career. I work together with lots of software developers and IT guys at my p
Re: (Score:2)
If you had the developer tools installed the Macs ALWAYS had a command line. You never heared about A/UX, did you?
Yes, A/UX was a shitty port of SysV. And it had nothing to do with any text interface which might have been included with any debugger.
As your parent puts it: the Mac haters, never used one.
Too bad you are typically wrong. I've used and even professionally maintained macs of almost every era... except x86, actually.
I work together with lots of software developers and IT guys at my place here. A hughe percentage of them owns privately a Mac and has ditched windows years ago.
That's nice. I own privately PCs which run Windows and Linux. I run Windows when I want to play a game, or use Netflix. I guess you can do the latter (poorly) on OSX, but the former is only available if you only play games from Blizzard. I do actual
Re: (Score:2)
I an agree to run windows for games, but not for anything else ... to nightmare-ish for me ;D ;D like eve online e.g.
There are other interesting games on OS X as well
Re: (Score:2)
If you had the developer tools installed the Macs ALWAYS had a command line.
And it had nothing to do with any text interface which might have been included with any debugger.
So you know shit about the MPW - big surprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It runs poorly on XP (no vtrace sync) so why shouldn't it run poorly on the Mac? My understanding is that Silverlight for Mac is an even bigger piece of shit than it is for Windows.
Re: (Score:1)
At least the mac ships with a command line worth shit...
By default, just about any Mac I have come across ships with sh, bash, csh, ksh and (my favourite) zsh available out of the box. I don't really see how one might improve on Apple's selection of command line environments.
Re: (Score:2)
Front page news? Really? (Score:1)
I fail to see how one user's discovery of a little network utility in their proprietary operating system of choice is really worthy of being on the front page of Slashdot... If this were a Mac-centric blog, then I suppose I could understand it, but not here...
Uhm. (Score:2)
The Apple section of Slashdot -which is where this was posted- as a Mac-centric blog.
But yeah it's such a trivial piece of information that I agree with your basic point.
Slashdot is far from being 'news for nerds, stuff that matters' anymore. It's more 'anything that will get the clicks or get the trolls trolling'.
Re: (Score:2)
Now that CT is no longer editing, the only thing that makes it to the frontpage through my filter is Unknown Lamer. Frankly, that's been rather helpful since it really makes /. look like the wasteland that it has become.
Re: (Score:3)
The information might be trivial. But I appreciate to know about it know. Very likely I had not discovered it on my own when I upgrade my OS in a few weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
Does Slashdot have anything other than a front page? I thought all articles were listed in chronological order.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it is apparently interesting enough to slashdot the TFA's server.
Plus, they mentioned Apple, so the fanbois vs. haters flamewar will be starting in 3, 2, 1...
Re: (Score:1)
Correct - but as an owner of a new Macbook Pro with Lion I find the news interesting because it single biggest problem is related to wifi performance.
My Macbook regularly drops (Apple Airport) connections, will not connect when resuming and refuse point blanc to connect to some public hotspots.
Re: (Score:2)
My Macbook regularly drops (Apple Airport) connections, will not connect when resuming and refuse point blanc to connect to some public hotspots.
You should get a newer MacBook. They haven't been white for ages....
capture network packets means not legal in DE (Score:1)
so you can capture network packets in iOS does that mean no more Apples for the germans ?
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/07/05/31/1629259/Germany-Declares-Hacking-Tools-Illegal
Re: (Score:2)
iOS?
Re: (Score:2)
so you can capture network packets in iOS
This article is about Mac OS X, not iOS.
does that mean no more Apples for the germans ? http://politics.slashdot.org/story/07/05/31/1629259/Germany-Declares-Hacking-Tools-Illegal [slashdot.org]
OS X has had tcpdump since, I think, 10.0, so, no, nothing changes here.
Finder (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
It certainly is useless for finding things.
Wow, that's truely useful! (Score:3)
It amazes me how many sourpusses are logged in right now whining about how this isn't news, doesn't belong on the front page, etc etc. If you see an article that you are not interested in then, and I accidentally stumbled upon this amazing technique after much trial an error, you can SKIP over that article! I know I know, I'm sure you're as shocked as I was when I discovered this!
Meanwhile in the real world, those of us who work in a moderately noisy EMF environment now have a fantastic way of diagnosing exactly why the Wifi suddenly cut out during a download when it was Working Fine Before(tm). I'm glad someone made this discovery because it wouldn't have occurred to me to look for it myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh of course, you're absolutely right! It should have occurred to me that I could have just bought 10.7 and then gone back in time and used it to troubleshoot all the wifi problems I had before 10.7 was released!
Slashdotted (Score:2)
With all the complaining here about this being useless info not worthy of the front page, the site is slashdotted. Can someone please post the path to the application?
Re: (Score:1)
Go under System/Library/Core Services/Wi-fi Diagnostics.app (or something similar to that-- not in front of it right now).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's like those are core services or something.
Re: (Score:1)
Assist Me... (Score:2)
So, not really hidden.
I found it useful *shrugs* (Score:2)
Having a quick way to determine signal/noise ratios in a wifi-impacted building is a useful trick for those of us building out wifi :)
Option-click on the Wi-Fi menu extra (Score:2)
As the AppleInsider article [appleinsider.com] says, you launch it by holding down the "option" key and clicking on the Wi-Fi "menu extra" and selecting the "Open Wi-Fi Diagnostics..." menu item. It's "hidden" because it's in an option-click menu, not because it's in /System/Library/CoreServices (it's in /System/Library/CoreServices because it's intended to be launched from the aforementioned menu).
In a number of cases, option+click will bring up a menu with more items than the menu you get by just clicking has. I'm not su
A lot of hidden apps in /System (Score:3)
Many Mac/Win sysadmin may not know that you can control just about any Mac application using LDAP or Active Directory.
You can add /System/Library/CoreServices/Managed Client.app to WGM and you'll gain access to a lot of the MCX which you can then modify and apply to your groups. A lot of other Applications can be added as well and the settings managed like AD's Group Policy but a bit easier to use.
There are also Kerberos Ticket viewers, you can run security on command line to manage SSL Certificates.
Also install the Developer Tools for some nifty utilities, BlueTooth sniffers, Audio Lab which with you can fairly simple create a little application that can capture and send system audio over the network to another computer.
Yes. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Who Cares? (Score:4, Informative)
Some do, most don't. Same as Windows, really.
Re: (Score:3)
Never used a Mac and never will if I can help it, however, I doubt Mac users care about or understand such stuff.
You won't be missed.
Who cares? Sounds like you do. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd suggest someone who reads a thread and then posts to it. They care.
I'm guessing you're a closet apple 'fanboi' who just lacks the money to indulge.
Re: (Score:1)
This is the lamest insult I have ever seen on /., and my UID is much lower than yours.
That was also an insult. :)
I assume. (Score:3)
You must have bought your lower UID on ebay.
Now that was an insult ;)
In any case, six digit and six digit. Not that much lower. And mines only six digits because I binned my original /. account as the user name was my real name and didn't fancy being stalked.
Re: (Score:2)
Mine is five digits only because this is my second slashdot account.
Re: (Score:2)
If you were more nice, perhaps you could use your real name without fear.
Re: (Score:2)
On a separate note, this could make wireless hacking much easier if someone could figure out how it works.
How which part of it works? The "capture raw frames" part works by opening one of the deep dark secret "BPF devices" [apple.com], performing the appropriate ioctls on it, and reading from it, or maybe letting the deep dark secret "libpcap library" [apple.com] do that for you, sort of like the deep dark secret "tcpdump program" [apple.com] does.