You can power on a Mac remotely
jeffgeerling.com
jeffgeerling.com
Back in the 1990s, a Mac sysadmin showed me a clever trick for this.
Get one specific Apple Desktop Bus keyboard that has a soft power key on it, I believe the Apple Extended Keyboard[1]. Then get a Bic pen[2]. Push down the power key on the keyboard, and while it's still down, wedge the pen cap between the key and the keyboard case.
The pen cap is the perfect size and shape to hold the key down, and Bic pens are easy to find. There are no ill effects from having the power key down all the time, and the Mac will boot up after a power failure. So you don't have to drive to work just to push the power button.
This was especially handy considering you sometimes needed to use Macs as servers (file server, printing, certain Mac-only applications, etc.), but Apple did not make servers.
---
You could even do it with your fingernail; just push in and twist the power button, and it would stay in forever, and the Mac would automatically boot when you plug it in.
That would obviously not be compatible with a server, maybe if soft power was just constantly held down starting from boot that dialog wouldn't show up?
I didn't have one so made a few stacks of pennies I taped together.
for example shift at boot, cmd+s, etc...
LOM enables power management even if the Xserve is off, and even if it lacks an installed operating system.
Edit: Xserve was an Apple rack mounted server that ran a special version of Mac OS X
I managed a bunch of XServes for a while, they were incredibly good hardware. The Mac Server software kinda sucked (not the LOM stuff, it was as good as any of the LOM from Dell, which is to say, not amazing, but workable).
Apple FINALLY lets you turn on your Mac remotely, without having to press the power button.
The title is: "Apple FINALLY lets you do this!"
The thumbnail shows someone plugging in (or unplugging) the power cable from a Mac Mini.
Neither is relevant to the video. Neither tells you what it's about. I'm sure this kind of clickbait works, because otherwise it wouldn't exist, but I am never going to click on that kind of slop. Never.
I give Jeff a pass though, and make sure I send alternate goodness signals like liking his YT videos after I watch them. He’s one of us.
And unfortunately, I and all the other YT creators I've talked to have experienced the same thing: a more technical title will give you half or worse in terms of views. You have to play YouTube's game if you want to have any kind of audience.
I find a ton of channels that are buried not because they don't have great content, but more because they don't 'package' it well.
It's something I learned in my programming career: no matter how much I despise marketing, marketing is necessary. And on YouTube marketing is almost entirely the thumbnail and title.
I always take real pictures, show the exact subject and topic covered in the video, etc. — but I stretch the title a bit because that's an immediate way to get 2x-3x the views (and they're not click-away views, either, it's a large portion of the audience who would simply not click at all otherwise).
Or do you only care about eyeballs, and not who is behind the eyeballs?
Again, my blog is made for the more technical audience.
With Google diverting search traffic away, there's about a 1:1,000 ratio of blog visitor to YouTube viewer now.
If you don't like my YT channel, please subscribe to the blog. I write a separate and more detailed blog post for almost every video, and the titles are more technically accurate. (I also post videos on Floatplane with the more accurate titles, for direct channel supporters.)
And I care about all eyeballs, not just technical ones :)
It makes a noticeable financial difference for creators and almost everyone seems to have accepted it.
Unfortunately, I agree.
For the unknown clickbaits that show up for me on YouTube, I put hard "Don't recommend this channel" feedback into the algorithm.
We are heading to a similar state as internet advertisements - they became so obnoxious that the average person installed an adblocker if they cared. DeArrow is next
It hurts even more to see the "turn power on whenever power is detected" feature is locked to Mac hardware from 2024 or newer. I don't see a reason why not all Apple Silicon machines can support this feature.
Of course, it didn't work if you set your Mac to shut down if the UPS is running out of power, which was always quite annoying. You want a clean shutdown, but you also want it to come back up. I think I got around this by using shutdown hook scripts to unmount everything then just stop.
I might be wrong.
The AirPort would take over for your Mac and respond to mDNS queries on behalf of its hostname. (I believe it would also repeat the service records.) So your lookup of `mymac.local` would resolve to your Mac’s last IP address, and the AirPort would send the WoL packet to your Mac’s MAC, hopefully in time for your TCP connection to succeed.