How to resolve “Unable to start status bar server. Failed to check into com.apple.UIKit.statusbarserver: unknown error code” exception

Ever wondered how to resolve the following error while executing GHUnitTest by Command Line?

*** Assertion failure in -[UIStatusBarServerThread main], /SourceCache/UIKit_Sim/UIKit-2372/UIStatusBarServer.m:96
*** Terminating app due to uncaught exception ‘NSInternalInconsistencyException’, reason: ‘Unable to start status bar server. Failed to check into com.apple.UIKit.statusbarserver: unknown error code’

Well, I did.

In my situation, the exception was caused by having an iPhone Simulator session opened while executing the CLI tests. So, in order to resolve the issue, I simply had to add

killall -s "iPhone Simulator" &> /dev/null
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
killall -m -KILL "iPhone Simulator"
fi

on top of the run script file (RunTests.sh) which is executed as last “build phase” of the build process.

EDIT: I wrote another post explaining how to solve the error after migrating to XCode 5.

La merditude des choses

‘Contrairement à la voiture, le train passe par les coulisses du monde, les belles maisons classées du quartier de la gare s’avèrent en réalité être des taudis.
Mais ces ruines ne se voient que depuis la voie ferrée.
Rien ne vous donnera une vue plus sincère de notre pays que le train.
regardez nos jardinets, nos pigeonniers et nos cabanes, admirez nos sous-vêtements qui sèchent dehors, contemplez nos nains de jardin, nos céleris, nos poireaux, nos vérandas et nos barbecues maçonnés, regardez comment dans les prairies les vaches font place à des monstres de brique bâtis par des gens sans goût, avec la complicité des banques, des monstres qui défigurent le paysage belge, prenez le train et regardez comment, immobiles, le long des voies, le marbre et le granit s’ennuient sous la poussière, offrant une dernière demeure à nos morts.’

Come non essere d’accordo? – 3D TV falls flat for me

It’s generally a bad idea to extrapolate larger consumer behavior from personal experience and say “if I like it, surely everyone else will as well.” It’s a mistake that happens all the time, but there’s is one case where I will use my personal behavior to at least start the foundation for analysis — when I don’t want a new gadget or technology. Granted, sometimes I’m just not the target audience, but even then I’m usually able to remove myself from the process and say it might not be for me but others will love this. In the case of 3D TV, however, I think my lack of interest doesn’t bode well for the market.

I’m surprised by figures, forecasts, predictions and prophecies all showing a rosy outlook for 3D TV beginning as early as this year, because I’ve seen most of the 3D offerings available and I have no plans to buy — not now and not anytime soon. I should be a part of the core demographic for 3D: I like TV, movies and video games. I’m am early adopter. I have reasonable disposable income. I’m not afraid of betting on the wrong standard. And yet, I’m not buying. Here’s why.

Cost: I’m fortunate that cost isn’t the biggest inhibitor for me when I buy things, but I still do a cost/benefit analysis before I make a purchase. To really embrace 3D, I need a new TV, even though my current 1080p set is only a few years old and is wonderful. I’d need a new media player. I’d need glasses — lots of them, as there can often be five or six people sitting around my set. I’d probably want a new digital camera to take 3D shots. And of course, I’d need some compelling 3D content from somewhere. That’s already starting up to add into a significant cost proposition that takes it far out of impulse purchase territory.

Hassle: It’s not just the cost to move to 3D. It’s the hassle. Moving to HD was a breeze — you just plugged in a new TV and were wowed by immediately available content. My upscaling DVD player made existing SD content look better than ever. By contrast, just viewing 3D content is a hassle due to the glasses. They’re not cheap. They are gadgets in and of themselves, which means they require care and feeding, and everyone in the room needs a pair. Worse, I find 3D glasses very uncomfortable to wear for long periods over my regular glasses. The hassle alone of acquiring and viewing 3D content is enough to put me off.

Benefit: The cost and hassle of 3D could easily be justified and rationalized if there was a superb benefit on par with the move to HD. For me, 3D is cool but at best gratuitous. It doesn’t change the visceral viewing experience for most of the content I’ve seen. I just don’t see the value or wow factor that 3D brings to the table in its current format.

Someday technology will advance and 3D will be integrated into every screen. Standards will be deployed and the bulky and costly glasses will disappear. Content providers will figure out how to tell better stories with 3D that wouldn’t have been possible before. And if that happens before I do my holiday shopping this year, I’ll be on board. Given the low probability of that scenario, I’m going to pass for now. I expect many other consumers will as well.

Maurizio Mosca

Calciointv04_1

 

Maurizio Mosca, i suoi pendolini, le sue bombe, la sua presenza al “Processo di Biscardi” erano antitetici alla bellezza, alla leggera consistenza del calcio giocato.
Ciononostante, lo apprezzavo, così come si apprezzano coloro che vivono del proprio estro e della propria creatività. 

Europei di calcio del 2000, al termine di Italia – Svezia, nel buio del salotto di casa ad Igea Marina, io e mia nonna guardiamo il Processo di Biscardi dove alcuni opinionisti discutono con agitazione la difficoltà dell’incontro successivo, contro la Romania; si parla di uno dei giocatori chiave della formazione balcanica, il trentacinquenne Gheorghe Hagi, descritto come uno dei più temibili giocatori della squadra avversaria. Mosca prende la parola:

Hagi? Ma Hagi è un vecchio trombone!

Aveva ragione.

Google e Adobe, la strana coppia

Chrome brings Flash Player into the fold, trains it to kill iPads?

If Apple had its way, we expect that the iPad would go down in history as the device that nearly single-handedly destroyed Adobe’s empire of Flash. While HTML5 has been in development for years, content providers like the Wall Street Journal, NPR, CBS and more have only begun transitioning video services to the new standard (and subsequently, away from Flash) now that it’s time for Cupertino’s big release. But this week, Adobe has found an ally in Google, which has just announced that the Chrome browser — and more importantly, Chrome OS — will not merely support but natively integrate the technology. In the short run, what this means is that the Chrome browser won’t require you to download Adobe Flash Player or spend time updating it before back-to-back YouTube viewings and marathon Newgrounds sessions. In the long run, Google explains that it intends Flash to become an integral, seamless part of web design up there with HTML and Javascript — and if we extrapolate, an integral part of its new Chrome OS as well. Pardon us for thinking out loud, but it sounds like Google’s found an exclusive feature to highly tout, when it inevitably brings a Chrome OS tablet to market.