PDA

View Full Version : Software Slowing Some Wi-Fi File Transfers on New MacBook Air




MacRumors
Jun 24, 2013, 05:09 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/06/24/software-slowing-some-wi-fi-file-transfers-on-new-macbook-air/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2013/06/airportextreme.jpgNetworking code in OS X Mountain Lion is slowing down file transfers over the Apple Filing Protocol (AFP) and Microsoft's Server Message Block (SMB), according to examinations done by both Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/06/os-x-is-holding-back-the-2013-macbook-airs-802-11ac-wi-fi-speeds/) and AnandTech (http://anandtech.com/show/7085/the-2013-macbook-air-review-13inch/10).

The issue affects the new MacBook Air models that come equipped with the 802.11ac Wi-Fi technology. The new MacBook Air and Apple's new AirPort Extreme base station are the first Apple products to use the new Wi-Fi technology.

Anandtech discovered (http://anandtech.com/show/7085/the-2013-macbook-air-review-13inch/10) that the TCP window size for file transfers in OS X was too small to reach the potential throughput on many file transfers, slowing data transfers from a potential 533Mbps down to 170Mbps.
The bad news is that in its shipping configuration, the new MacBook Air is capable of some amazing transfer rates over 802.11ac but you won't see them when copying files between Macs or PCs. The good news is the issue seems entirely confined to software. I've already passed along my findings to Apple. If I had to guess, I would expect that we'll see a software update addressing this.Ars Technica confirmed (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/06/os-x-is-holding-back-the-2013-macbook-airs-802-11ac-wi-fi-speeds/) AnandTech's findings, and went a bit further. The site discovered that when running Windows 8 in Boot Camp, the new MacBook Air saw file transfer speeds significantly higher than under a comparable setup in OS X Mountain Lion.
Some variation between the two operating systems is to be expected. They're very different under the hood, after all, and Microsoft's strong commitment to the enterprise (and the file servers therein) makes it unsurprising that Windows' file transfer speeds are generally a bit faster than OS X's. However, the discrepancy between the Windows 802.11ac speeds and OS X speeds is too large to be explained away by networking optimizations alone. Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, but it's 218 percent faster over 802.11ac.Ars' OS X wireless setup saw transfer speeds of 21.71MB/s on SMB, and 47.26MB/s on a comparable Windows 8 setup under Boot Camp.

The issues also exist under the developer beta of OS X Mavericks, but both sites expect Apple to release a software fix for OS X that will solve the file transfer issues.

Article Link: Software Slowing Some Wi-Fi File Transfers on New MacBook Air (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/06/24/software-slowing-some-wi-fi-file-transfers-on-new-macbook-air/)



komodrone
Jun 24, 2013, 05:13 PM
some people are feeling this:
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1247/6lua.png

locoboi187
Jun 24, 2013, 05:31 PM
Darn I still want an ac device for my new time capsule! I wanna see what the fuss is about when its put to its proper power!

ValSalva
Jun 24, 2013, 05:33 PM
Not a big surprise. New hardware often has driver/software problems. No need to return new MacBook Airs. They will be fixed in a software update ;)

thejadedmonkey
Jun 24, 2013, 05:40 PM
In other words, a typical 1st revision Apple product.

star-affinity
Jun 24, 2013, 05:53 PM
Not a big surprise. New hardware often has driver/software problems. No need to return new MacBook Airs. They will be fixed in a software update ;)

One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

parapup
Jun 24, 2013, 06:03 PM
One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release. The Windows part gotta hurt the fanboys real bad :)

Prodo123
Jun 24, 2013, 06:14 PM
some people are feeling this:
Image (http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1247/6lua.png)

Nothing beats good ol' GigE. :p

Plutonius
Jun 24, 2013, 06:18 PM
People must be holding it wrong :D.

bedifferent
Jun 24, 2013, 06:19 PM
Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release. The Windows part gotta hurt the fanboys real bad :)

How quickly things change (sigh) :o

macs4nw
Jun 24, 2013, 06:28 PM
One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

Disappointing, but no need to panic. Now that awareness has been raised, it'll be addressed in a future software update.

CWallace
Jun 24, 2013, 06:49 PM
One would think these would have been caught in testing and development, however...

Unless they were all on a special "802.11ac" build of 10.8.4 that was meant to be released with the MBA, but for some reason was not (or perhaps testing was done on 10.8.5)?

As noted, I expect 10.8.5 will fix it or there will be a special patch of 10.8.4 for MBA users.

NewbieCanada
Jun 24, 2013, 06:52 PM
Not a big surprise. New hardware often has driver/software problems. No need to return new MacBook Airs. They will be fixed in a software update ;)

For all we know, it's already been taken care of in Mavericks.

dakwar
Jun 24, 2013, 07:06 PM
Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, ...

Wow. I do a lot of Mac-to-Mac, Mac-to-Windows, and Windows-to-Windows transfers. Mac-to-anything transfered always seemed slower to me but I always thought I was imagining it. Am feeling disappointed now with the Mac's performance here. 30% over 802.11n is a large difference.

ValSalva
Jun 24, 2013, 07:29 PM
One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

Yes, one would think that. Despite owning the stack Apple still has its share of problems.

For all we know, it's already been taken care of in Mavericks.

Unfortunately the problem also is in the Mavericks developer preview :eek:

Cubert
Jun 24, 2013, 08:17 PM
"Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, but it's 218 percent faster over 802.11ac."

Unacceptable for any protocol. Apple needs to correct this. There is no reason that a Unix based OS should be slower than Winblows in file transfer speeds.

kd5jos
Jun 24, 2013, 08:44 PM
Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release. The Windows part gotta hurt the fanboys real bad :)

One case = delusions of integration
Hundreds of cases of fail because of lack of integration = ???

I think you need to return your logic unit, it appears to be the old Pentium 100 type with the math error in it.

NewbieCanada
Jun 24, 2013, 08:47 PM
Unfortunately the problem also is in the Mavericks developer preview :eek:

OK, how about "For all we know, it's already been taken care of in Mavericks Preview 2"? :o

MrNomNoms
Jun 25, 2013, 12:09 AM
Nothing beats good ol' GigE. :p

But dude, you don't understand - wires are old fashioned and wireless is high tech and modern! /s

In all seriousness, did they benchmark Thunderbolt -> Ethernet connector on the MacBook Air?

MikhailT
Jun 25, 2013, 12:36 AM
One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release. The Windows part gotta hurt the fanboys real bad :)

Integration doesn't mean there wouldn't be bugs. This is a software issue that can be fixed in a future update. It only affects SMB/AFP. The rest works fine.

For all we know, it's already been taken care of in Mavericks.

It hasn't been fixed in Mavericks according to Anand.

"Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, but it's 218 percent faster over 802.11ac."

Unacceptable for any protocol. Apple needs to correct this. There is no reason that a Unix based OS should be slower than Winblows in file transfer speeds.

It's just a bug in the TCP window sizing system for both AFP/SMB stacks. It's not resized to 256KB properly. Once they fix the bug, it'll just be normal fast.

Jibbajabba
Jun 25, 2013, 01:13 AM
Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release. The Windows part gotta hurt the fanboys real bad :)

Don't be silly. Ever read the non-iOS cell forum? True fanboys will defend it no matter what ... Watch this space :p

Mr. Retrofire
Jun 25, 2013, 01:33 AM
In other words, a typical 1st revision Apple product.
Replace “product” with “driver”. :D

Pakaku
Jun 25, 2013, 05:01 AM
One would still think these issues should be more uncommon on Macs than they are since ”Apple makes both the hardware and the software”, no?

I'd think one would think that, since Apple makes both, they can deal with the problem quicker than if they didn't have that control...

phoenixsan
Jun 25, 2013, 10:40 AM
being a software issue, that can be fixed via a Software Update. Dont like a shinny piece of software with network bottlenecks......:mad::eek:


:):apple:

WordMasterRice
Jun 25, 2013, 10:50 AM
It's just a bug in the TCP window sizing system for both AFP/SMB stacks. It's not resized to 256KB properly. Once they fix the bug, it'll just be as fast as Windows.

No it won't it says right in the article that transfers are slower on OSX and that isn't the particular issue here. Resizing the window is only going to get it up to normal levels of slower than Windows, not up to Windows speed.

MikhailT
Jun 25, 2013, 11:23 AM
No it won't it says right in the article that transfers are slower on OSX and that isn't the particular issue here. Resizing the window is only going to get it up to normal levels of slower than Windows, not up to Windows speed.

Yea, I corrected my post to reflect "normal fast." Beside that it is the primary issue since everything else worked fine.

portishead
Jun 25, 2013, 11:45 AM
If it works in Windows, it's obviously just a software/driver issue. It will get fixed. 50MB/s that Anand saw is great. I hope I can get that from my NAS! I'm currently only getting about 15MB/s.

Nightarchaon
Jun 25, 2013, 01:25 PM
Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release.

Isnt that how apple do all the testing,

Apples process is something like this

step one, J.Ive design a case nothing with a reasonable performance can fit into.

Step Two, the hardware engineers go out and shoehorn whatever they can find that can kind of fit into that case.

Step Three, Apples marketing team has to spin the reason you can get a PC for a tenth the price with 4x the power almost solely on the J.Ive designed case and a load of specs that don't work yet and might be patched in later.

Step four, build a giant ring shaped building to put all the money in the middle of and swim about like Scrooge McDuck.

Now im not an apple hater, i love the OS, i just wish they would u-turn from this sealed unit lockdown, all our products are disposable, kick they are on , when its easier to replace the Harddisk in my PS3 when it fails than my iMac, something is seriously out of whack.

slothrob
Jun 25, 2013, 07:12 PM
Step Three, Apples marketing team has to spin the reason you can get a PC for a tenth the price with 4x the power
I'd love to fins one of those $100 Windows Ultrabooks that are 4x faster than an Air! Anything comparable that I've seen has been about the same price or more and usually slower.

CWallace
Jun 26, 2013, 11:32 AM
Nightarchaon, you forgot to add:

Step Five - PC manufacturers copy J.Ive design because that is the only way they can secure a premium price and make money on the device (witness products like HP's iMac and MacBook family clones).

;)

burne
Jun 26, 2013, 11:35 AM
Nothing beats good ol' GigE. :p

Uhm.. Prodo123? I've got a Thunderbolt-cable on line three, wanting a word with you. Can I put him through?

Prodo123
Jun 26, 2013, 09:56 PM
Uhm.. Prodo123? I've got a Thunderbolt-cable on line three, wanting a word with you. Can I put him through?

Thunderbolt is the absolute worst cable to use for networking since it's limited to 3 meters of copper, whereas Cat-6 cables can go up to 100 meters.
Try wiring a home with either stiff optical fibers or just 3 meters of cabling and you'll quickly see why it's so impractical.

Nightarchaon
Jun 27, 2013, 03:56 AM
Nightarchaon, you forgot to add:

Step Five - PC manufacturers copy J.Ive design because that is the only way they can secure a premium price and make money on the device (witness products like HP's iMac and MacBook family clones).

;)

i have to give you that one , its a pity though, because some (and it was a rare thing) PCs and laptops had a much nicer feel and look and than the apple "slab of aluminium"

burne
Jul 2, 2013, 03:19 AM
Thunderbolt is the absolute worst cable to use for networking since it's limited to 3 meters of copper, whereas Cat-6 cables can go up to 100 meters.

CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.

WordMasterRice
Jul 2, 2013, 08:54 AM
CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.

Ya no, Cat6 is capable of 10 Gbit/s with a standard RJ45.

Prodo123
Jul 2, 2013, 12:50 PM
CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.

Quickly scanning Wikipedia, eh? I think you missed something:
Category 6 cables can carry 10GBASE-T for shorter distances when qualified according to the guidelines in ISO TR 24750 or TIA-155-A.

Not to mention that the new category of cables capable of sending 10Gbit signals (the signal itself is known as 10GBASE-T) is called a Category 6a cable (Cat6a for short).

Even with Cat6 cables running 10Gbit Ethernet, the cable can go up to 55 meters. Compare that to the abysmal 3 meters of Thunderbolt.

Your NAS tops out at 550MB/s? You must be either running an SSD-based NAS, which is very dumb because NAS tends to corrupt very easily and don't support TRIM, or a multi-drive RAID 0 setup, in which case assuming that you are attempting to use a Thunderbolt-only wired network your bandwidth will be limited by the wireless connection speed since a Thunderbolt cable will not be long enough to reach your desktop. Are you sure you're not confusing 550Mbit/s for 550MB/s?

It's also very simple if you look at the connectors. Twisted pair ethernet cables have 4 twisted pairs for a total of 8 contacts. Thunderbolt has 20 contacts. Do you really need 12 extra contacts to deliver the same amount of data at the same speeds?

In any way you look at it, Thunderbolt is too impractical for networking. The closest thing to internet that you could make from a Thunderbolt network would be a Beowulf cluster.

star-affinity
Sep 12, 2013, 05:17 PM
Integration doesn't mean there wouldn't be bugs. This is a software issue that can be fixed in a future update. It only affects SMB/AFP. The rest works fine.

I'm not expecting it to mean there won't be bugs, ever. But I do think it's a bit strange that issues like this aren't noticed before the product is released. One would think file transfer is one of the things that would be tested heavily.

And there are/has been other issues in OS X that I would't expect to find since Apple is behind both the hardware and the software.

MikhailT
Sep 13, 2013, 05:58 PM
I'm not expecting it to mean there won't be bugs, ever. But I do think it's a bit strange that issues like this aren't noticed before the product is released. One would think file transfer is one of the things that would be tested heavily.

And there are/has been other issues in OS X that I would't expect to find since Apple is behind both the hardware and the software.

From Ars, when they tested 10.8.5:

http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/10.8.5-802.001.png

They've fixed the AFP speed in 10.8.5 update, nearly as fast as Window's SMB. Mavericks have SMB2, we'll see if they fixed it when Mavericks is released late next month.

kingtj
Sep 17, 2013, 10:39 AM
#!, quite a few Linux based projects have slower disk and/or network performance than Windows too. The idea that performance is automatically faster just because it's Unix-based isn't always true. And conversely, recent versions of Windows have come a long way in trying to optimize network and disk performance. (Windows XP has no idea what an SSD drive is, for example, so won't properly support TRIM with one. Windows 7 or 8 will.)

#2, I suspect Apple just *did* make some improvements to AFP that significantly improve transfer speed. Right after I upgraded my Mac Pro to 10.8.5 the other night, I noticed copying large video files to my NAS at home suddenly went FAR quicker than I ever saw it move them before. At first I thought I had a corrupt partial file, or the copy aborted, because it seemed to finish too quickly.


"Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, but it's 218 percent faster over 802.11ac."

Unacceptable for any protocol. Apple needs to correct this. There is no reason that a Unix based OS should be slower than Winblows in file transfer speeds.

star-affinity
Sep 18, 2013, 04:40 AM
From Ars, when they tested 10.8.5:

Image (http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/10.8.5-802.001.png)

They've fixed the AFP speed in 10.8.5 update, nearly as fast as Window's SMB. Mavericks have SMB2, we'll see if they fixed it when Mavericks is released late next month.

Yup. SMB2 seems pretty quick in Mavericks compared to AFP (I heard from a reliable source who has tested it…).