9to5Mac⁠58%

Apple @ Work: As Apple grows in the enterprise, these are the kind of update bugs it has to squash immediately ⁠63%

By Bradley C⁠54%

7/4/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Unattributed Quote, and Indoctrination, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 51.9% saturation with 240 hits. Analysis detected 1,856 faulty-reasoning hits from 462 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠63% (8,256 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.30% of the article peer group.

Apple @ Work: As Apple grows in the enterprise, these are the kind of update bugs it has to squash immediately 
Apple has had incredible success in the corporate world over the last decade. 
With Apple Business and modern device management tools, Macs are easier to deploy and manage than ever before. 
However, as Apple continues to grow its position as an enterprise vendor of choice for IT teams, it must recognize that enterprise customers demands greater operational stability. 
You simply cannot break core office functionality in a security patch, and if you do, you have to fix it ASAP. 
About Apple @ Work: Bradley Chambers has been an Apple IT admin since 2009. 
Through his experience deploying and managing firewalls, switches, a mobile device management system, enterprise grade WiFi, 1000s of Macs, and 1000s of iPads, Bradley will highlight ways in which Apple IT managers deploy Apple devices, build networks to support them, train users, share stories from the trenches of IT management, and ways Apple could improve its products for IT departments. 
The March security update mess 
A perfect example of this happened recently with the March 2026 security updates. 
Apple released patches for macOS 26.4, macOS 15.7.5, and macOS 14.8.5. 
Almost immediately, IT admins started noticing a massive issue with enterprise printing with a company called PaperCut. 
Specifically, users relying on PaperCut Mobility Print are now being prompted for authentication on every single print job, with no known fixes. 
However, users who are using Mobility Print queues deployed via Print Deploy are completely unaffected by this bug. 
The bug impacts all discovery modes, including Known host, mDNS, and DNS discovery. macOS simply ignores credentials stored in the keychain and forces the user to manually enter their username and password every time they want to print a document. 
For a school or a large corporate office, this translates into an absolute flood of help desk tickets for a problem IT can’t fix right away. 
PaperCut has stated an open support request with Apple to investigate the issue. 
Fortunately, there is a workaround if you are currently drowning in support requests. 
9to5Mac’s take 
While I am glad there is a workaround for PaperCut customers, IT departments should not have to scramble to completely redeploy their print queues because of a routine security update. 
It was working fine. 
When Apple ships a patch that breaks something core, such as secure printing, it disrupts business operations and costs organizations money. 
If Apple truly wants to be the ultimate enterprise vendor, it needs to squash bugs like these. 
Bugs do happen, but when they impact enterprise customers, they have to be fixed immediately. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.8%Bradley C: 6.0%9to5Mac: 2.7%Confirmation Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 2.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Bradley C: 4.0%9to5Mac: 2.8%Availability Heuristic4.8%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Bradley C: 4.2%9to5Mac: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias3.9%This article: 14.3%Bradley C: 12.8%9to5Mac: 5.3%Framing Effect14.3%This article: 22.7%Bradley C: 6.2%9to5Mac: 1.3%Loss Aversion22.7%This article: 0.9%Bradley C: 0.4%9to5Mac: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.9%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.0%Bradley C: 3.1%9to5Mac: 3.4%Optimism Bias10.0%This article: 9.1%Bradley C: 1.4%9to5Mac: 1.9%Pessimism Bias9.1%This article: 49.8%Bradley C: 13.3%9to5Mac: 4.6%Negativity Bias49.8%This article: 3.7%Bradley C: 1.5%9to5Mac: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias3.7%This article: 4.5%Bradley C: 0.7%9to5Mac: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error4.5%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 19.5%Bradley C: 5.0%9to5Mac: 3.5%Halo Effect19.5%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.0%Bradley C: 1.7%9to5Mac: 1.8%Recency Bias11.0%This article: 5.8%Bradley C: 0.9%9to5Mac: 0.4%Primacy Effect5.8%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.7%Bradley C: 8.1%9to5Mac: 3.6%Appeal to Authority22.7%This article: 14.7%Bradley C: 5.6%9to5Mac: 1.4%False Dilemma14.7%This article: 9.1%Bradley C: 1.4%9to5Mac: 0.6%Slippery Slope9.1%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.9%Bradley C: 5.3%9to5Mac: 4.8%Hasty Generalization11.9%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 20.1%Bradley C: 7.1%9to5Mac: 2.2%Appeal to Emotion20.1%This article: 9.5%Bradley C: 3.3%9to5Mac: 0.6%Begging the Question9.5%This article: 15.8%Bradley C: 2.5%9to5Mac: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.8%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.3%Bradley C: 1.8%9to5Mac: 0.4%Burden of Proof11.3%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 8.2%Bradley C: 3.4%9to5Mac: 2.4%Anecdotal8.2%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.8%Bradley C: 1.5%9to5Mac: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.8%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 24.7%Bradley C: 3.9%9to5Mac: 2.4%Unattributed Quote24.7%This article: 1.1%Bradley C: 0.2%9to5Mac: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection1.1%This article: 51.9%Bradley C: 23.4%9to5Mac: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice51.9%This article: 24.2%Bradley C: 9.3%9to5Mac: 2.1%Indoctrination24.2%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bradley C: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Bradley C: 1.5%9to5Mac: 15.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.9%

462 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers16%attributed speech389writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageBradley Chambers • 60 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coveragePaperCut • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Bradley Chambers

100%flagged-word coverage
60 attributed words82% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+53.7 ptsWriter: 46.3%Bradley Chambers: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-28.8 ptsWriter: 28.8%Bradley Chambers: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-26.0 ptsWriter: 26.0%Bradley Chambers: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -4.6 ptsWriter: 4.6%Bradley Chambers: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.3 ptsWriter: 1.3%Bradley Chambers: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.