Apple Releases MacBook Pro Firmware Update to Address SATA Interface Speeds

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/22/apple-releases-macbook-pro-firmware-update-to-address-sata-interface-speeds/)

Last week, we reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/14/13-and-15-macbook-pros-have-a-slower-sata-interface/) on a discussion in our forums regarding Apple's apparent downgrade of the SATA hard drive interface to 1.5 Gbps in the latest 13" and 15" MacBook Pros when compared to previous-generation MacBook Pros running at 3.0 Gbps. While users were unlikely to max out the 1.5 Gbps transfer rate unless they had installed an aftermarket fast solid state drive (SSD), concern remained about Apple's decision to scale back the interface speed.

Apple today addressed the issue with the release of MacBook Pro EFI Firmware Update 1.7 (http://support.apple.com/downloads/MacBook_Pro_EFI_Firmware_Update_1_7_), which allows the new MacBook Pros to utilize the full 3.0 Gbps interface.MacBook Pro EFI Firmware Update 1.7 addresses an issue reported by a small number of customers using drives based on the SATA 3Gbps specification with the June 2009 MacBook Pro. While this update allows drives to use transfer rates greater than 1.5Gbps, Apple has not qualified or offered these drives for Mac notebooks and their use is unsupported.Full details on the update are located in the associated support document (http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3561), and instructions for installing the update are included in the update application package. The update weighs in at 3.35 MB and requires OS X 10.5.7.

Article Link: Apple Releases MacBook Pro Firmware Update to Address SATA Interface Speeds (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/22/apple-releases-macbook-pro-firmware-update-to-address-sata-interface-speeds/)

[smileyborg]

There, now y'all stop your complaining ;)

[cult hero]

Well, glad this was addressed. This was an absurd problem.

[TwinCities Dan]

Awesome! All those complaints just went "Poof"! :p :cool:

[Eidorian]

Glad to see a solution.

[MacDawg]

Awesome! All those complaints just went "Poof"! :p :cool:

There will be something new to complain about

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

[Peace]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

[aa521490]

Now I can pass on my umb to the wife and get the 13" pro for me ;)!

[Kilamite]

I'm sure this was a mistake to begin with - something that was overlooked. At least I hope it was..

Good that it is resolved now.

[Eidorian]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.

[NinjaHERO]

Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back. :D

[aaron.lee2006]

Pheww. Apple had me scared there for a second :p

[brop52]

Bring on the next string of complaints.

[dagamer34]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

That's odd though, as I am sure even the optional SSD upgrades that Apple sells could saturate a 1.5Gbps SATA I connection.

Oh well, that situation is resolved. I wonder how fast the Wikipedia page will change to reflect that...

[Lucky736]

Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.

Or just goto a warehouse of a few million they already have.

[nos]

Bring on the next string of complaints.

An express slot via firmware? :D

[Peace]

Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.

Sounds like the opposite according to Apple :

"While this update allows drives to use transfer rates greater than 1.5Gbps, Apple has not qualified or offered these drives for Mac notebooks and their use is unsupported."

[parapup]

Could not come at a more appropriate time! (Off to updating - I had an intuition they would fix it when I bought my wife the new MBP 2 days ago :) )

[miket019]

that's a good news, was a little worry

[Mintin8]

Thank you apple!

[eldivino]

There will be something new to complain about

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

There is always something new to complain about.

[Eidorian]

Sounds like the opposite according to Apple :

"While this update allows drives to use transfer rates greater than 1.5Gbps, Apple has not qualified or offered these drives for Mac notebooks and their use is unsupported."So we've never gotten SATA II drives with Apple branding on them?

[Sky Blue]

Congrats, whiners.

[xlii]

This is good news. Apple listened to the end users. Those with new SSDs can now run unfettered. Those of use who might someday upgrade to a SSD can now buy knowing the MBPs will run at the SATA current Spec.

[Jayomat]

Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back. :D :D

there you go!!

[GodWhomIsMike]

Glad to see a solution.

I'm happy they addressed in a fairly quick amount of time.

Now, here's to hoping Apple addresses the "professional modles graphics complaints, and upgrades the graphics capibilities in the next 13" MBP.

[Peace]

So we've never gotten SATA II drives with Apple branding on them?

Hey I didn't write the press release. Ask Apple,Inc. :p

[Diode]

That should make that 1400+ thread happy!

[xyz01]

So we've never gotten SATA II drives with Apple branding on them?

Sata II ran just fine, you just wouldn't get speed in excess of 1.5 Gbps. Which Apple hasn't offered.... very few drives (the most common one being the fastest Intel SSDs) can do that. And none that Apple has sold yet.

[GimmeSlack12]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

These things will never end. I love hearing about complaints and arguments from people who have NO IDEA what they're talking about.

I think I'll start the next uproar: *Ahem* WHY ARE MY USB PORTS ON THE LEFT AND NOT THE RIGHT!!!!!! GAWD!

[schalkse]

Good thing they released this. But the way the release note is constructed says it all. It sounds like "Damn, they discovered that we downgraded it. Let's make it appear that we listen to our customers and we want to give them what they ask...but we don't want to support it. Pfew, we dodged that ball good huh Phil"

[iSee]

Wow, that was fast.
Seems like it was just a small mistake, and easily fixed.

I can now continue to fantasize about getting a new MBP, sticking an X-25 or two in it, and rest assured that my large sequential reads will be as fast as possible! Oh goody goody! (Not that I was actually going to do that, but I could). ;)

[Eidorian]

Sata II ran just fine, you just wouldn't get speed in excess of 1.5 Gbps. Which Apple hasn't offered.... very few drives (the most common one being the fastest Intel SSDs) can do that. And none that Apple has sold yet.I know there's a difference between offering SATA II support and a drive that can saturate that connection.

There's no need to patronize me or anyone else.

[NewtonsNemesis]

Where is my Powerbook G5!?

[ammonialime]

WOOOOOO

Itunes in one bounce hahaha !!!!!!!

[Lone Deranger]

Aah.. nothing like a bit of bad publicity to keep a company from slacking off.
Glad to see the complaints from "a small number of customers" managed to keep Apple on their toes. (Interesting choice of words there by Apple :rolleyes:)
Now let's pick up the pace of lack of matte screen related complaints et al! :D

[schalkse]

Where is my Powerbook G5!?

That got cancelled together with SATA II. :D

[*LTD*]

Done and done!

Someone post this on www.neowin.net for all the poor Windows sufferers to see. They've been quite curious about the whole SATA issue.

[illegalprelude]

Bring on the next string of complaints.

if the speed has been bumped back up to 3, that means its going to drain more battery. wtf apple, fix problem now, please downgrade to 1.5!

[Phil A.]

Whilst this is good news for those affected, I can't help wondering now what the next batch of complaints will be about. ;)

[xlii]

These things will never end. I love hearing about complaints and arguments from people who have NO IDEA what they're talking about.

I think I'll start the next uproar: *Ahem* WHY ARE MY USB PORTS ON THE LEFT AND NOT THE RIGHT!!!!!! GAWD!

Believe it or not the "why are all my ports on the left and not the right?" thread is already out there.

[Grimace]

Finally, a solution to a problem that never existed!!!

[nagromme]

Whilst this is good news for those affected, I can't help wondering now what the next batch of complaints will be about. ;)

And for that vast majority of complainers that was NEVER truly affected, but lost sleep/hair/marriages over it anyway ;)

That should make that 1400+ thread happy!

If Apple is evil then Apple is evil. This is not good news, this is just them covering UP their evil, so they can go about... eating babies? Or whatever their dark plan is? :p

[MBP09]

Now the complainers will move on to "Bring back the Express ports":D

[wizard]

This is good news. Apple listened to the end users. Those with new SSDs can now run unfettered. Those of use who might someday upgrade to a SSD can now buy knowing the MBPs will run at the SATA current Spec.

It isn't a question of listening to end users, it is most likely about correcting something that was over looked. What is incredibly sad about this whole event is that people seem to think that Apple regressed here on purpose. I don't think Apple ever wants to be seen as going backwards thus the thought that this is a mistake.


Dave

[immaculate]

Addressing SATA interface speeds is all well and good, but does Safari feel snappier?

[Razeus]

wow. apple can get that update out within a week, but takes 3 years to get us MMS.:D

[nos]

double post

[Low]

OM*G!!11one

my mpb just became so much faster!! :apple:

[nos]

If Apple is evil then Apple is evil. This is not good news, this is just them covering UP their evil, so they can go about... eating babies? Or whatever their dark plan is? :p

SATA II is evil, if you don't type the space before "II" and don't look close enough! :eek:

[*LTD*]

Where is my Powerbook G5!?

It's called the Sony PS3 now.

[ksgant]

Just a quick question about the "ratings" to stories here at MacRumors. Why on earth would 5 people (so far) rate this story as negative? What would be negative about them putting the SATA interface speed back to where it was?

Honestly, I can see some stories here getting negative ratings, but sometimes I just don't get some people rating a story like this as negative. :cool:

[echoout]

Exactly. The reason I can't get the 15".

An express slot via firmware? :D

[NewMacbookPlz]

Addressing SATA interface speeds is all well and good, but does Safari feel snappier?

THIS is the question that NEEDS to be answered!!!!

:D:D:D

[macinsanity]

Awesome! All those complaints just went "Poof"! :p :cool:

I'm waiting for new benchmarks before I go to repurchase the Macbook I just returned on Saturday. :cool:

[Luke1robb]

Will this negatively affect the new Pro's battery life?

[angemon89]

Hallelujah! This is very good news. :)

[guzhogi]

I know there's a difference between offering SATA II support and a drive that can saturate that connection.

I agree. Also, did the press release actually say the firmware will upgrade it to the full SATA II speed, or does did Apple upgrade it from 1.5 Gbps to some weird number like 1.55 Gbps? Just curious. I wonder why Apple would take all the time & effort to dumb the interface down? While most drives probably wouldn't come close to saturating the 1.5 Gbps, much less 3, no need to dumb it down. Plus, what happens when we get drives that ARE fast enough? (Yes, I know there are some out there, just not most drives). Can't Apple future proof their computers just a little?

[manu chao]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense.
No, Apple does not support SSD drives other than those it sells itself. SSD drives still vary a lot in their internal implementation, it is thus possible that some might under some circumstances have isolated issues inside these Macs. Apple is just covering their back with this statement.

[nos]

Will this negatively affect the new Pro's battery life?

Only when the powercord is not connected! :D

Good question though!

[GimmeSlack12]

Believe it or not the "why are all my ports on the left and not the right?" thread is already out there.

Really? Damn, they really have thought of everything haven't they?
Ok, how about... Why can't I use my MacBook underwater?? Ugh, SO DISAPPOINTED!

[guzhogi]

An express slot via firmware? :D

I remember hearing from somewhere that Apple said that only like 1% of MBP owners actually used the ExpressCard slot. How true that is, I don't know. I use mine. While the card I mainly use IS a card reader, I also have an eSATA card I sometimes use, too. Fortunately my home computer is a 17" MBP & my work laptop is a 15" uMBP pre-SD card slot.

[rushmere]

My life is now complete. :rolleyes:

[errol]

WOW!!!! I can't believe this. Thank you Apple! I won't return/sell my 13" MBP now :)

[nos]

Ok, how about... Why can't I use my MacBook underwater?? Ugh, SO DISAPPOINTED!

You can use it under water, just prepare for very limited functionality.
Also, it MIGHT void your warranty.

[nagromme]

SATA II is evil, if you don't type the space before "II" and don't look close enough! :eek:

You're right!

SATAИ :eek:

[norsemen]

Thanks Apple, as a result I ordered a 13" MacBook Pro.

Now if just those SSD would fall in prices...

[QCassidy352]

Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.

Yeah, but just because I drive is called SATA II doesn't mean it will, in real use, exceed the limits of a SATA I interface. I think what apple was saying is that the drives they sell won't actually see a performance jump with this update regardless of what they're labled.

Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back. :D

haha, same as 90% of the people complaing - glad you can admit it! ;)

[jav6454]

Now all Apple has to do is allow previous Gen MacBook users 8GB Ram as by what we can see, this is an firmware issue

[BRLawyer]

There, now y'all stop your complaining ;)

Now tell me: WHICH COMPANY IN THE WORLD provides such a quick feedback to customers' demands? Apple is SUPREME again in quality of service...it's just amazing!

PC pundits, have you eaten some crow already?

MS IS DEAD. DELL IS DEAD.

[iMacDragon]

Now if they could just get round to fixing the broken express card implementation under windows on the first 15" unibodies..

[zw-gator]

LOL @ everyone who returned their MBP's after jumping to conclusions over this ;)

[iSee]

if the speed has been bumped back up to 3, that means its going to drain more battery. wtf apple, fix problem now, please downgrade to 1.5!

Nice! :D

[gt1948]

Wonder if there is a way to get the british lady's voice on my Toyota Nav system......:cool:

[BRLawyer]

Just a quick question about the "ratings" to stories here at MacRumors. Why on earth would 5 people (so far) rate this story as negative? What would be negative about them putting the SATA interface speed back to where it was?

Honestly, I can see some stories here getting negative ratings, but sometimes I just don't get some people rating a story like this as negative. :cool:

Those who rate this news as negative are PC users and PC fanboys, simple as that...they get all angry when Apple fixes stuff, because this way they have a little less to troll about...:rolleyes:

[macinsanity]

LOL @ everyone who returned their MBP's after jumping to conclusions over this ;)

Better safe than sorry. I'm one that returned. My wife told me to wait and yes she is eating this up now. I hope someone posts new benchmarks soon. I'm still hesitant. There has to be some reason it was disabled to begin with.

[slapppy]

Someone will complain that its too fast. :p

[applecultvictim]

Those who rate this news as negative are PC users and PC fanboys, simple as that...they get all angry when Apple fixes stuff, so that they have a little less to troll about...:rolleyes:

exactly, but macrumors made it very easy for them to troll here and ban legit members by inciting and stirring up fuss.


Someone will complain that its too fast. :p

Ah, well said...why does apple supply the interface when they cant match it with ssd speed....:rolleyes:

[Eidorian]

I agree. Also, did the press release actually say the firmware will upgrade it to the full SATA II speed, or does did Apple upgrade it from 1.5 Gbps to some weird number like 1.55 Gbps? Just curious. I wonder why Apple would take all the time & effort to dumb the interface down? While most drives probably wouldn't come close to saturating the 1.5 Gbps, much less 3, no need to dumb it down. Plus, what happens when we get drives that ARE fast enough? (Yes, I know there are some out there, just not most drives). Can't Apple future proof their computers just a little?

Yeah, but just because I drive is called SATA II doesn't mean it will, in real use, exceed the limits of a SATA I interface. I think what apple was saying is that the drives they sell won't actually see a performance jump with this update regardless of what they're labled.
It is true that you'll need a drive to push the limits of SATA II but the full speed was there only to be disabled down to 1.5 Gbps in this latest revision.

I can understand why Apple wanted to cover themselves in their statement but why even change the EFI code for the SATA controller in the first place? We haven't seen any new hardware in Apple since last year. We're still on Core 2 Duo and the 9400M G.

[GodWhomIsMike]

You folks do realize there are many of us who ordered, or waiting to order SSD drives, who were affected by this, right? There were several people with SSD drives posting benchmark results from their new MBPs that clearly showed the drives were running at 1/2 speed compared to their older Macs with SATAII interface.

[czeluff]

wow. apple can get that update out within a week, but takes 3 years to get us MMS.:D

Just goes to show how well Apple does when they are in full control, and how awful they can be when they partner with a company whose network couldn't possibly handle THAT much MMS data, even 2 full years later.

[BRLawyer]

exactly, but macrumors made it very easy for them to troll here and ban legit members by inciting and stirring up fuss.

It's ok, we are all used to the dictatorship of minorities nowadays...let'em troll, it's amusing to see their desperation in defending other platforms on a Mac forum...:rolleyes:

[stainlessliquid]

A year from now people will see how important this is. Upgrading to SSD in the future when prices become cheaper is going to do a lot more than upgrading from 4gbs of ram. A true SATA 2 SSD will make that upgrade a hell of a lot more worthwhile.

Limiting it to SATA 1 because theyre HDD's suck is like if they limited the old macbook pros to 2gb of ram because none of them came with more than 2gbs. Thats not an excuse, they probably just couldnt get SATA 2 working correctly by release.

[applecultvictim]

It's ok, we are all used to the dictatorship of minorities nowadays...let'em troll, it's amusing to see their desperation in defending other platforms on a Mac forum...:rolleyes:

true, it is indeed amusing in a way, no one of us is trolling the pc forums. :)

[Icaras]

A victory for Apple customers for sure! Time for a party now :D

[Eidorian]

Those who rate this news as negative are PC users and PC fanboys, simple as that...they get all angry when Apple fixes stuff, because this way they have a little less to troll about...:rolleyes:Plenty of stories get negative votes. I don't think it's indicative of anything.

[GodWhomIsMike]

I honestly feel like some members on this site do not care at all about technological innovation. For these members, they feel that whatever hardware or software Apple releases in its 1.0 form is absolutely perfect and without flaws.

Seriously, nothing is perfect.

[BRLawyer]

true, it is indeed amusing in a way, no one of us is trolling the pc forums. :)

I would never waste my time posting messages on forums that don't concern the platform I use...it's just ridiculous.

[Mac 13]

LOL @ everyone who returned their MBP's after jumping to conclusions over this ;)
What's funnier is the ones that panic and didn't even ordered "SSD" with their MBP 13 :D

[BRLawyer]

Plenty of stories get negative votes. I don't think it's indicative of anything.

You're actually right. I would vote negative just to get it off the zero mark...:p

[stainlessliquid]

Those who rate this news as negative are PC users and PC fanboys, simple as that...they get all angry when Apple fixes stuff, because this way they have a little less to troll about...:rolleyes:

Seems more like its the people who think its stupid for apple to waste their time on the "complainers", looking through the comments there seems to be a lot of people that would vote negative.

Theres also search engine spiders which click on every link.

[dwsolberg]

Just a quick question about the "ratings" to stories here at MacRumors. Why on earth would 5 people (so far) rate this story as negative? What would be negative about them putting the SATA interface speed back to where it was?

Honestly, I can see some stories here getting negative ratings, but sometimes I just don't get some people rating a story like this as negative. :cool:

I've wondered about this, too, but I think that people are seeing the story as something different than you and I see it. For example, maybe they are viewing the story as, "Apple screwed up the SATA port, which was a stupid screw-up, and it took them too long to fix it" while most people view the story as, "Apple made a mistake, and quickly fixed it."

[mathcolo]

I'm glad Apple fixed this bug. Yes, most people are probably right in that it doesn’t matter. But really, anything that previous models had should be in the new ones... mostly. :p

[Muncher]

EDIT: Not needed.

[Eidorian]

You're actually right. I would vote negative just to get it off the zero mark...:pWhy bring it up in the first place then? :confused:

[BRLawyer]

Why bring it up in the first place then? :confused:

I didn't.:o

[Eidorian]

I didn't.:oTrue but I don't see a need exacerbate the situation with generalizations and labels.

The same goes for applecultvictim. Articles get negative votes all the time. There's nothing to really gain from that fact.

[sam10685]

Those evil evil people. I want the slowest machine possible.

[BRLawyer]

True but I don't see a need exacerbate the situation with generalizations and labels.

The same goes for applecultvictim.

Exacerbate what? Relax, man, we're just breaking some balls here...I couldn't care less if we have 500 negative votes to an article...whatever people prefer.

[vestigo74]

Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.
All previous and current Apple portables with a SATA drive interface include a SATA 1.5Gbps hard drive.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3561


Congrats, whiners.
Hopefully, you're going to put your money where your mouth is by not downloading this update. I'd hate to see you become one of "those" people.

[Eidorian]

Exacerbate what?The intentions and reasoning behind negative votes on articles.


Relax, man, we're just breaking some balls here...I don't follow you. Would you please elaborate?

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3561Now that's something more concrete. I wonder what the reasoning is behind that fact. Oh well it's Apple. :rolleyes:

[drjsway]

I would not install this update unless you have an SSD that takes advantage of SATAII (Intel, maybe Vertex).

Apple limited it to 1.5 to conserve battery life. If you don't have an SSD, you would gain no advantages and would only shorten your battery life.

[sam10685]

Now I can pass on my umb to the wife and get the 13" pro for me ;)!

If this site wasn't moderated...

[fuzzielitlpanda]

woohoo my 13" mbp is now perfect. looking forward to testing my x25-m when i get home.

[sadatkarim]

I would not install this update unless you have an SSD that takes advantage of SATAII (Intel, maybe Vertex).

Apple limited it to 1.5 to conserve battery life. If you don't have an SSD, you would gain no advantages and would only shorten your battery life.
Lol! Poor 17" Macbook Pro huh?

[Capt Crunch]

Now tell me: WHICH COMPANY IN THE WORLD provides such a quick feedback to customers' demands? Apple is SUPREME again in quality of service...it's just amazing!

PC pundits, have you eaten some crow already?

MS IS DEAD. DELL IS DEAD.

Easy, killer.

[Eidorian]

Now tell me: WHICH COMPANY IN THE WORLD provides such a quick feedback to customers' demands? Apple is SUPREME again in quality of service...it's just amazing!I guess the Unibody MacBooks never happened. :D

PC pundits, have you eaten some crow already?

MS IS DEAD. DELL IS DEAD.Oh you. There's more than enough consumers out there for everyone. I don't see a reason to beat your chest with such misguided end all statements.

[Icaras]

Why do people still rate this article a negative? :confused:

Are these people who just want to be capped at 1.5? Please someone help me understand.

[BRLawyer]

I guess the Unibody MacBooks never happened. :D


The unibody MBs are the main reason for my statement; otherwise, Apple wouldn't have released the 13" ones now.

[tdream]

VICTORY!!! :o

[iAlex]

Thank You Apple!!!!! :d

[applecultvictim]

Why do people still rate this article a negative? :confused:

Are these people who just want to be capped at 1.5? Please someone help me understand.

Because apple has denied them their favorite pastime of projecting and venting out by criticising apple. And they feel extra sore after managing to lock that last thread that apple managed to
prove them wrong and be so quick with an update.

Sorry boys.

[Eidorian]

The unibody MBs are the main reason for my statement; otherwise, Apple wouldn't have released the 13" ones now.Can you elaborate?

It's strange that they'd pretty much go as far as to say FireWire is dead only to bring it back.

[alecgold]

This was the first time in 4 years that an update gave me sweat on my forehead: after the efi update, it didn't restart again, it kept circling at the Apple logo. AFter an hour (that should be enough "some minutes") I gave a reset. No boot. another reset, no boot. reset with pram reset, and now it started normal again. pfooeeiiie!
and the firmware has updated Sata to 3Gbps

[harshw]

One way to settle the debate would be to take a 13" / 15" uMBP with CTO SSD and run Xbench before and after the firmware update

If the performance doesnt improve then Apple is true - their SSDs have a 1.5 Gbit/s interface. If the performance DOES improve then Apple is telling porkies ;)

[yetanotherdave]

I would not install this update unless you have an SSD that takes advantage of SATAII (Intel, maybe Vertex).

Apple limited it to 1.5 to conserve battery life. If you don't have an SSD, you would gain no advantages and would only shorten your battery life.

That's quite an assumption, got any figures to back that up?

I've just installed it, wont be using it for a while, but in a year or so I'm maxing this bad boy out to 8gb RAM and 256Gb 250Mb r/w SSD for about £100 :D

[salesguy]

I would not install this update unless you have an SSD that takes advantage of SATAII (Intel, maybe Vertex).

Apple limited it to 1.5 to conserve battery life. If you don't have an SSD, you would gain no advantages and would only shorten your battery life.

That is what I figured.

I think I will hold off for now.

[tdream]

One way to settle the debate would be to take a 13" / 15" uMBP with CTO SSD and run Xbench before and after the firmware update

If the performance doesnt improve then Apple is true - their SSDs have a 1.5 Gbit/s interface. If the performance DOES improve then Apple is telling porkies ;)

That is the next question. Where are the benchies. :apple:

[mac jones]

So now that thread is done.....


thank God. :D

[bryanzak]

Now tell me: WHICH COMPANY IN THE WORLD provides such a quick feedback to customers' demands? Apple is SUPREME again in quality of service...it's just amazing!

PC pundits, have you eaten some crow already?

MS IS DEAD. DELL IS DEAD.

This is sarcasm right?

Apple rarely caves to customer demands. Their entire history is one of forging ahead and dealing with the flack that results.

Microsoft tries accommodates every wish and whim of everyone and that's one of their problems - they are so worried about upsetting some market segment that they end up creating mediocre products with 10 bazillion customization options.

[Amdahl]

Congrats, whiners.

Apple doesn't respond, and the fanboys praise Apple and attack the complainers. Apple does respond, and the fanboys attack the people who pointed out the issue for being 'whiners.'

What is up with that?

The argument that Apple hasn't sold a SATA II laptop hard drive is irrelevant. Are we to expect that any accessory can not be trusted to work with an Apple product if Apple doesn't sell it? Is Apple allowed to cripple the hardware to help that happen? Of course not.

It seems this is another point for Hackintosh. Don't be an Apple customer; they get screwed. And like it.

[Jelite]

Yeeesss!! 3.0 giggawatts!!

Im not sure i actually care, but obviously there's lots of you that do so, err, thanks apple.

Why do people still rate this article a negative? :confused:

Are these people who just want to be capped at 1.5? Please someone help me understand.

If you fill a room with monkeys and computers eventually one of them will rate a Macrumors story negative.;)

[reallynotnick]

I do have to wonder if this will reduce my battery, even 2 mins because I have a 500GB WD scorpio blue HDD so I won't benefit from the added speed. Unless of course it increases my battery life by magic. :eek:

[applecultvictim]

This is sarcasm right?

Apple rarely caves to customer demands. Their entire history is one of forging ahead and dealing with the flack that results.

Microsoft tries accommodates every wish and whim of everyone and that's one of their problems - they are so worried about upsetting some market segment that they end up creating mediocre products with 10 bazillion customization options.

ha, ha, ha. What an argument! So it's the markets fault for demanding too much and confusing ms!!! That's the real reason their products are never innovative and almost always mediocre at best!!! Way to scew logic.

[salesguy]

I do have to wonder if this will reduce my battery, even 2 mins because I have a 500GB WD scorpio blue HDD so I won't benefit from the added speed. Unless of course it increases my battery life by magic. :eek:

I know a guy named Jack, he sell beans......

[3NV7]

Now tell me: WHICH COMPANY IN THE WORLD provides such a quick feedback to customers' demands? Apple is SUPREME again in quality of service...it's just amazing!

PC pundits, have you eaten some crow already?

MS IS DEAD. DELL IS DEAD.

Lighten up, Francis.

[jimthegreek]

What? No update for my recently purchased uMBP 17"? Oh wait, its already at 3.0. Looks like I didnt miss anything but a bunch of whining.

[Strigoi]

12 'negatives', what negative about this news? Glad they fixed it!

[andiwm2003]

ha, ha, ha. What an argument! So it's the markets fault for demanding too much and confusing ms!!! That's the real reason their products are never innovative and almost always mediocre at best!!! Way to scew logic.

actually, he's spot on.

[Saladinos]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

Nope. The fact it was addressed by a firmware update indicates that it was a bug. The hardware supports it, but since they only ship SATA1 drives, they didn't pick it up in testing (its not uncommon to only test with the BTO options and not other stuff).

Also, despite being unrelated to this topic, I agree with Bryanzak: PC products are often a mess of compromise. Apple products typically have some focus. That means they leave out features which exclude many types of customers, but to the customers they focus on, they're fantastic machines.

[mikethebigo]

Awesome! Thanks apple!

[applecultvictim]

actually, he's spot on.

Sure he is, for not implementing a dock interface until 7, it's the markets fault, for implementing a global search soo badly in vista, the market again, for not realizing the power of music and not implementing a decent media jukebox guilty market here too, for pushing copyrighted crap like ie 8 and completely ignoring open source, market again, for charging ridiculous ammounts for their software, the market, for coming up with an iPod clone two years after the market, an iPod touch clone, the market, for breaking a gazionth anti trust laws the market there too... I could go on for pages...

[Eidorian]

Sure he is, for not implementing a dock interface until 7, it's the markets fault, for implementing a global search soo badly in vista, the market again, for not realizing the power of music and not implementing a decent media jukebox guilty market here too, for pushing copyrighted crap like ie 8 and completely ignoring open source, market again, for charging ridiculous ammounts for their software, the market... I could go on for pages...It sounds like you should give Microsoft some feedback.

Not that they can do much on the hardware side of things.

[applecultvictim]

It sounds like you should give Microsoft some feedback.

Not that they can do much on the hardware side of things.

Well I stupidly stayed on the pc side for far too long to know all these by painful experience. No need to mention that switching has been nothing short of a revelation to this jaded 15+ years pc guy.

[chipmonkey]

Awesome. Thanks Apple and thanks "whiners."

Something nobody mentions about this problem is multiple devices hitting a bottleneck due to the SATA restriction. Glad I don't have to worry about it now the next time I'm pushing video around with three drives hooked up, etc, etc.

Macrumors rules, btw.

[Eidorian]

Well I stupidly stayed on the pc side for far too long to know all these by painful experience. No need to mention that switching has been nothing short of a revelation to this jaded 15+ years pc guy.I regret to say that my experience with Apple over the years has made me jaded.

There's nothing wrong with what either company provides. We're getting quality software with Snow Leopard and Windows 7.

It might not be for you but that doesn't mean it's not there for others or that it doesn't have good points.

[Full of Win]

Does this mean that the ransacking and pillaging of Apple HQ is on hold? We had a meet-up planned at the DQ before we lit our torches and heated up the oil to boil the executives in.

Damn you Apple.

[Drag'nGT]

That was fast.

Let's continue to raise hell about blu-ray while we're at it. :p

[michael.lauden]

umm.. can you release this update for my 06 Mac mini running at 1.5GB/s?

please

[Master Chief]

Does this mean that the ransacking and pillaging of Apple HQ is on hold? We had a meet-up planned at the DQ before we lit our torches and heated up the oil to boil the executives in.

Damn you Apple.
LOL Hold you horses please. That can still be of help... we've still not seen any benchmarks so far. Right?

[Eidorian]

umm.. can you release this update for my 06 Mac mini running at 1.5GB/s?

pleaseYou don't have ICHM-8. I supposed the Santa Rosa hardware owners should start a petition/thread.

[skottichan]

umm.. can you release this update for my 06 Mac mini running at 1.5GB/s?

please

I believe the chipset in the 06 Mini only supports SATA I, I could be terribly wrong tho.

[Master Chief]

umm.. can you release this update for my 06 Mac mini running at 1.5GB/s?

please
You can get it here (http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_mini?mco=MTE3MDM) for a mere $599 :D

[bceverly]

In case you are interested in the before and after numbers:

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=377106&doc2=377103

As you can see, the disk access was accelerated by approx. 17.4% so it looks like it works as advertised!

Thanks Apple!

[bruinsrme]

wow. apple can get that update out within a week, but takes 3 years to get us MMS.:D

Well, they probably fixed the issue quickly because they couldn't pin this on AT&T

[applecultvictim]

I regret to say that my experience with Apple over the years has made me jaded.

There's nothing wrong with what either company provides. We're getting quality software with Snow Leopard and Windows 7.

It might not be for you but that doesn't mean it's not there for others or that it doesn't have good points.

I can see what you mean e. Maybe if I had had different experiences I might even agree. But for the time being I haven't even bothered turning on my last pc for months now.

[mrkitty]

That's odd though, as I am sure even the optional SSD upgrades that Apple sells could saturate a 1.5Gbps SATA I connection.

Oh well, that situation is resolved. I wonder how fast the Wikipedia page will change to reflect that...

You'd think so, but actually no. I bought the 13" MacBook Pro with the stock 250GB HDD this weekend (act of faith that this issue would be patched... whew!) to replace my Unibody MacBook that has a 128GB Apple SSD. I ran benchmarks on each machine with both drives and the new 250GB OCZ SSD I just got from Amazon for the MBP.

The Apple drives never come close to the estimated 150 MB/sec of SATA 1.5:

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / Hitachi HTS545025B9SA02
Xbench Results 49.633450

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 73.56 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 75.60 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 24.52 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 20.72 MB/sec

------------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / Hitachi HTS545025B9SA02
Xbench Results 48.946800

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 72.60 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 74.64 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 23.03 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 20.46 MB/sec

---------

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / APPLE SSD SM128
Xbench Results 89.102165

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 42.59 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 94.34 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 20.39 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 88.12 MB/sec

--------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / APPLE SSD SM128
Xbench Results 80.782715

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 36.78 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 94.87 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 20.43 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 90.07 MB/sec

----------

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / OCZ-VERTEX v1.10
Xbench Results 234.562485

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 104.18 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 205.20 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 108.65 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 154.77 MB/sec

------------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / OCZ-VERTEX v1.10
Xbench Results 193.787308

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 94.55 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 118.21 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 98.45 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 108.76 MB/sec

These numbers are pre-patch, of course.... :)

[MattInOz]

ha, ha, ha. What an argument! So it's the markets fault for demanding too much and confusing ms!!! That's the real reason their products are never innovative and almost always mediocre at best!!! Way to scew logic.

No still Microsoft's fault for trying to get every customer into their Monopoly.
They choose to target everyone and not miss out on anyones money.
The flip side is they can't let any customer go, they have to pleas everyone.

The other option is they pick part of the market they can service well to target, plus support anyone outside the target who sees value in the targeted profit.

Leaving room for others to target the profitable niches.
Competition is good after all.
How different the market place would be with 4-5 compatible products each targeting a niche (apple - visual people, another for word smiths like lawyers,....) there would be more than enough crossover and overlap to keep them all on their toes and interesting.

[wessto]

How about all of us new 15" MBP owners with 7200 rpm 500 GB drives that are experiencing clicks + beeps?

See:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=727453
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2049659
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2042490
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gOhgaIMpPI

[GodWhomIsMike]

You'd think so, but actually no. I bought the 13" MacBook Pro with the stock 250GB HDD this weekend (act of faith that this issue would be patched... whew!) to replace my Unibody MacBook that has a 128GB Apple SSD. I ran benchmarks on each machine with both drives and the new 250GB OCZ SSD I just got from Amazon for the MBP.

The Apple drives never come close to the estimated 150 MB/sec of SATA 1.5:

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / Hitachi HTS545025B9SA02
Xbench Results 49.633450

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 73.56 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 75.60 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 24.52 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 20.72 MB/sec

------------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / Hitachi HTS545025B9SA02
Xbench Results 48.946800

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 72.60 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 74.64 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 23.03 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 20.46 MB/sec

---------

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / APPLE SSD SM128
Xbench Results 89.102165

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 42.59 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 94.34 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 20.39 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 88.12 MB/sec

--------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / APPLE SSD SM128
Xbench Results 80.782715

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 36.78 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 94.87 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 20.43 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 90.07 MB/sec

----------

MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / OCZ-VERTEX v1.10
Xbench Results 234.562485

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 104.18 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 205.20 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 108.65 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 154.77 MB/sec

------------

MacBookPro5,5 (2.53 GHz MacBook Pro 13") / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / OCZ-VERTEX v1.10
Xbench Results 193.787308

Uncached Sequential Write [256K blocks] 94.55 MB/sec
Uncached Sequential Read [256K blocks] 118.21 MB/sec
Uncached Random Write [256K blocks] 98.45 MB/sec
Uncached Random Read [256K blocks] 108.76 MB/sec

These numbers are pre-patch, of course.... :)

Thanks for the numbers, can you post the numbers after you run the update?

[ltldrummerboy]

Hooray for good sense. Now I won't be capped in a year when I actually have an SSD in this computer.

[GodWhomIsMike]

In case you are interested in the before and after numbers:

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=377106&doc2=377103

As you can see, the disk access was accelerated by approx. 17.4% so it looks like it works as advertised!

Thanks Apple!

I am jealous. I'd love a 2.53 GHz 13" MBP w/ 8GB ram and a lightning fast 256GB SSD drive. 8GB is just too restrictively expensive at this point.

[applecultvictim]

@Matt great points and great sig!

[osxtasy]

Now.....if we could just get some intake vents on the side like the old powerbooks had (so we don't have to depend on the keyboard for cooling air intake), imagine the temperature cooling effects that could have. I guarantee a 5-10degrees temp drop EASILY!!!

Hmmm.....:apple::apple::apple::(

[bryanzak]

ha, ha, ha. What an argument! So it's the markets fault for demanding too much and confusing ms!!! That's the real reason their products are never innovative and almost always mediocre at best!!! Way to scew logic.

Huh?

Just saying that trying to design something efficient, elegent and intuitive is much easier with one or two people calling the shots, making final decisions and having a willingness to break with the past.

Whereas MS tends to take feedback from thousands and tries to accommodate them. Design by Committee doesn't have a very good track record so far in any industry.

[bryanzak]

Sure he is, for not implementing a dock interface until 7, it's the markets fault, for implementing a global search soo badly in vista, the market again, for not realizing the power of music and not implementing a decent media jukebox guilty market here too, for pushing copyrighted crap like ie 8 and completely ignoring open source, market again, for charging ridiculous ammounts for their software, the market, for coming up with an iPod clone two years after the market, an iPod touch clone, the market, for breaking a gazionth anti trust laws the market there too... I could go on for pages...

hyperbole much?

[twoodcc]

yeah i saw this today on my 15" mbp. haven't installed yet though. was waiting to see how the install went for others first

[sxdev]

Wow, this change helps at all levels. Yesterday I typed an email to a friend w/ improvements made switching from MacBook SATA 1.5 with modern 250GB drive to MacBook Pro 1.5 with lowest end X25. Now I added the X25 numbers measured with the SATA 3.0 patch. It helped in all eight cases in xbench!

The computer is running 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and not much more on it. 2nd column is X25 with 1.5, 3rd column is X25 with 3.0

But note:
xbench absolute values shouldn't be trusted. Drive specs are up to 250MB/s read and 70MB/s write and xbench claims slower read max and faster than specs write max speed. The values are first run after boot.

Sequential
Write 4k blocks 44.78 -> 74.59 -> 80.51
Write 256k blocks 38.94 -> 62.85 -> 72.78
Read 4k blocks 19.97 -> 36.28 -> 40.29
Read 256k blocks 48.70 -> 120.10 -> 212.05

Random
Write 4k blocks 0.58 -> 59.16 -> 68.89
Write 256k blocks 22.50 -> 64.54 -> 74.87
Read 4k blocks 0.47 -> 9.74 -> 10.08
Read 256k blocks 18.16 -> 111.62 -> 180.25

[Hugh]

Better safe than sorry. I'm one that returned. My wife told me to wait and yes she is eating this up now. I hope someone posts new benchmarks soon. I'm still hesitant. There has to be some reason it was disabled to begin with.

Correct me if I am wrong.... But if there isn't a drive that will take full advantage of 3. Not to mention 1.5. So what benchmarks are you waiting for. Aren't they going to be the same?

Hugh

[mrkitty]

if the speed has been bumped back up to 3, that means its going to drain more battery. wtf apple, fix problem now, please downgrade to 1.5!

Doooood! It never had anything to do with battery life. 1.5 Gbps vs 3.0 Gbps is about the bandwidth of the channel on the controller, it requires the same amount of power to run the controller, regardless of the throughput speed.

Apple explains rather explicitly on their site how they managed to improve the life and capacity of their batteries by reshaping the cells.

[HLdan]

Just a quick question about the "ratings" to stories here at MacRumors. Why on earth would 5 people (so far) rate this story as negative? What would be negative about them putting the SATA interface speed back to where it was?

Honestly, I can see some stories here getting negative ratings, but sometimes I just don't get some people rating a story like this as negative. :cool:

The negative posters are what's referred to in the english language as idio.....ts. :)

This is such great news. My 13" MBP with 128 SSD is arriving this week.:)

[Mackan]

Reading what Apple says in that statemet is ridiculous. Am I the only one who sees that, I guess so.

[mugu]

Sorry for the drive by posting, this thread blew up quick. Here is my pre and post EFI update xbenchs with 2x Intel X25-M's in RAID0 (yes, I have a reliable backup solution). Optical drive replaced with MCE optibay.

Before:

Disk Test 280.74
Sequential 177.19
Uncached Write 236.98 145.51 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 190.53 107.80 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 93.39 27.33 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 416.87 209.52 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 675.51
Uncached Write 926.32 98.06 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 330.79 105.90 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 1217.80 8.63 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 1002.29 185.98 MB/sec [256K blocks]


After:

Disk Test 311.43
Sequential 197.98
Uncached Write 264.63 162.48 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 181.88 102.91 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 107.10 31.34 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 629.04 316.15 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 729.38
Uncached Write 944.46 99.98 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 349.28 111.82 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 1207.91 8.56 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 1361.64 252.66 MB/sec [256K blocks]

[Stevamundo]

There, now y'all stop your complaining ;)

No! People always need to bitch about something. :rolleyes: Besides, this update isn't supported by Apple drivers. I'm sure that some people will bitch about this. :D

[dernhelm]

Well based on all the moaning and complaining from when this was first reported, apple's sales figures should skyrocket now that this huge deficiency has finally been fixed!

[rockonchen]

The Firmware update is a timely and welcome release.
But, the statement is poorly drafted and annoying.
We give you back Sata 3.0G but we don't support it,
it sounds like that we give you back FireWire 800, but
we don't support it because Apple never produces FireWire 800
products. In fact, Apple never produced any hard drives or SSD
drives either.
It seems like Apple made a reluctant decision because "a single digit percent" of people wants it. I would give this article a negative comment not because of the article itself, but on the phrasing of the statement from Apple.

[zorinlynx]

My theory is that the driver developers simply introduced a bug into their code, and Apple is trying to save face by saying they "don't sell SATA 3.0 drives."

When I bet the larger drives they sell the laptops with probably support SATA 3.0; it's been out for a while now.

Bad Apple, no cupcake!

[daneoni]

Good news for UMBP users. Tone seemed kinda arrogant. Classic Apple I suppose.

Still happy I went with the prev gen model

[Stevamundo]

Good thing they released this. But the way the release note is constructed says it all. It sounds like "Damn, they discovered that we downgraded it. Let's make it appear that we listen to our customers and we want to give them what they ask...but we don't want to support it. Pfew, we dodged that ball good huh Phil"

See, I called it! :rolleyes:

[synth3tik]

Wouldn't it have been easier for them to have just left it at 3?

It's things like this that are of concern to me. Apple seems to be doing this a lot.

[Muncher]

Wouldn't it have been easier for them to have just left it at 3?

It's things like this that are of concern to me. Apple seems to be doing this a lot.

Well, yes. They certainly don't want the bad press, so I assume it was a mistake.

[Nistilian]

There will be something new to complain about

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Well since you asked... Here's my complaint...

I have to wait until mid-July to get my MBP 13" and I want it NOW! ;)

I'm SO glad Apple fixed this. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :D

[Tompkinson]

just skimming these pages on this thread it strikes me that if the complainers and whiners who are complaining and whining about other complainers and whiners would stop whining and complaining... threads on macrumors' forums would be cut by half.

To those gloating nowafter the firmware fix is announced: people were concerned that they were spending a lot of money on a device which would fail them when they went to upgrade to fast SSD in the future. I am sure everybody here has something they might potentially "get vocal" about if conditions changed. (Expresscards, glossiness, SD cards, cut/paste in iphoneOS 2, replaceable battery, bluray, etc, etc) And to those saying that apple always takes care of everything real fast: don't forget how long it took to get the Java Security update which finally arrived last week, many months after others had fixed it.

[orrelse44]

Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back. :D

+1

Good on Apple though. I never thought I'd see them own up to this.

[Bubba Satori]

Congrats, whiners.

Really juvenile. You don't admit there was a problem and that it took complaints from users to get it fixed ? :rolleyes:

[tm.chen]

Now at least the SSDs can run at max speed rather than capped at 1.5

[jnguyen4]

I don't have a MBP but how could anyone rate this negative? This is an improvement makes it better.

[TEBnewyork]

Thank You Apple ! Here is my xbench disk test before and after :) and to all those posters who said there is no difference stop whining - you were wrong.

I have a 13" 2.53GHz, 4gb, X25 160gb drive

http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p136121509.png


http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p336217268.png

[phillyeagles615]

Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back. :D

haha. my thoughts exactly

[iAlex]

Thank You Apple ! Here is my xbench disk test before and after :) and to all those posters who said there is no difference stop whining - you were wrong.

I have a 13" 2.53GHz, 4gb, X25 160gb drive

http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p136121509.png


http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p336217268.png

MORE BENCHMARKS!!!! MORE BENCHMARKS!!!

[tm.chen]

hmm I wonder if this update can uncap my non unibody MBP?

[Markov]

Yay, something no one will ever notice is back! :p I have a 2007 SR 2.2 GHZ mbp, and it has a 1.5 g/s interface... so I can't imagine they have been using 3 g/s for "many years" as posted in another news article.

[guzhogi]

Thank You Apple ! Here is my xbench disk test before and after :) and to all those posters who said there is no difference stop whining - you were wrong.

I have a 13" 2.53GHz, 4gb, X25 160gb drive

http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p136121509.png


http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p336217268.png

(In the style of McGee from NCIS) Sweet.

Anyways, I still don't get why Apple capped it. Sure, many current hard drives can't saturate the bus, but that doesn't mean hard drives will never be able to do it. Just look at the benchmarks.

[GreggM3]

I have a new 13inch MBP and I upgraded the HD to a 500Gig 7200 Seagate Momentous that has a SATA 3Gb/s and 16MB Cache. Will I see any difference? I don't know crap about HD's.

[darijoe]

Good job, Apple! Sure that people who waited just that little bit longer for these updated models will be feeling slightly better (unlike me who had to get one in April). Glad that all that whining shall be put to bed. ;)

[jbernie]

Good thing they released this. But the way the release note is constructed says it all. It sounds like "Damn, they discovered that we downgraded it. Let's make it appear that we listen to our customers and we want to give them what they ask...but we don't want to support it. Pfew, we dodged that ball good huh Phil"

That or the the quality control was having a party the day they were meant to be checking this portion of the system :). I don't think they would be daft enough to make the assumption that no one would check the speeds and they could quietly patch it later? These days the devices are pulled apart with in hours of getting in the hands of some testers.

It would seem... odd... to deliberately cripple the system like this, you would think it would be more work/potential for issues to cripple it than to just leave it as is.

[winterspan]

Congrats, whiners.

Finally, a solution to a problem that never existed!!!

Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

A problem that never existed? Whiners? "unneeded uproar" ?

Is that what it is called when Apple introduces new versions of their "pro" laptops that quietly remove a feature that has been standard on most PCs for years that leads to a 50% performance reduction for non-Apple SSD users without even mentioning it?

I'm sick of all the Apple apologists that bend over backwards to make excuses for their mistakes and denigrate those who are seeking solutions. You are the ones who give Apple enthusiasts a bad name!

This was a legitimate issue, and that is why Apple fixed it. It was a completely unacceptable move, but thankfully it looks like it was a simple mistake. Kudos to Apple for resolving it so quickly.

That's odd though, as I am sure even the optional SSD upgrades that Apple sells could saturate a 1.5Gbps SATA I connection....

Apparently, Apple is admitting how slow their OEM SSDs are. Last I looked, they were using older Samsung drives with the old controller that don't do much over 100MB/sec maximum in read or write speeds. Anyone wanting an SSD should steer clear of the rip-off drives Apple sells BTO.


if the speed has been bumped back up to 3, that means its going to drain more battery. wtf apple, fix problem now, please downgrade to 1.5!

The power usage of a SATA controller is negligible. We are talking a change of a few hundreds milliwatts here.

Sata II ran just fine, you just wouldn't get speed in excess of 1.5 Gbps. Which Apple hasn't offered.... very few drives (the most common one being the fastest Intel SSDs) can do that. And none that Apple has sold yet.

You know your stuff, huh? here are some of the "very few" drives that have a sequential read and/or write speed of over 150MB/sec. This list is not complete.


Corsair P256
OCZ Summit
Samsung PB22-J
SuperTalent Masterdrive SX
OCZ Vertex
OCZ Vertex EX (SLC)
OCZ Agility
SuperTalent Ultradrive ME
SuperTalent Ultradrive LE (SLC)
G.Skill Falcon
Patriot Torqx
RunCore Pro IV
Solidata K5 (SLC)
Solidata K6
Intel X25M
Intel X25E (SLC)
Kingston SSDNow M
PQI X25M
OCZ Apex
G.Skill Titan
Patriot Warp v3
Solidata X1 (SLC)
Solidata X2
SuperTalent MasterDrive RX

[Kyle23]

Well now that this is all over with and I can calm down and breath again.. Whats next?

[fixmdude]

In case you are interested in the before and after numbers:

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=377106&doc2=377103

As you can see, the disk access was accelerated by approx. 17.4% so it looks like it works as advertised!

Thanks Apple!


I see that the drive is faster, but, why did your RAM slow down after the update??

[LAS.mac]

Well now that this is all over with and I can calm down and breath again.. Whats next?

Mmh...lines in the MBA screen? :D

[pcmike]

This is just freaking great! I applied the update from software update and followed the directions after and now my machine won't boot!!

When it boots it just flashes between apple logo, folder with a question mark and a circle with a line through it! This is just freaking fantastic!! And of course there is no AppleCare after 10pm. I'm so damn upset right now!!

[nictan]

sorry just a simple question. after downloading and installing the firmware update? can i delete it from my utilities folder? will deleting it 'undo' the update? sorry. just switched to mac, know nuts about mac system. i know its just 9MB, but yea with only 160GB plus a windows partition, i need all the space i can get. thanks in advance :)

[bytethese]

Figured I'd throw this in for comparison. The SSD's are getting WAY better scores however the EFI update seems to have given my machine (2.53GHz 13" Macbook Pro) a modest performance bump.

[pcmike]

Does anyone know how to recover from this so I can at least boot the computer! I'm out of town for school for a week with no other computer with a presentation due Friday! There is no Apple store here and I have no Apple CDs. I'm stuck to posting o. My iPhone and trying to find a solution on google. I also work during the day and AppleCare isn't even open now! Help please!

This is just freaking great! I applied the update from software update and followed the directions after and now my machine won't boot!!

When it boots it just flashes between apple logo, folder with a question mark and a circle with a line through it! This is just freaking fantastic!! And of course there is no AppleCare after 10pm. I'm so damn upset right now!!

[Val-kyrie]

Awesome! All those complaints just went "Poof"! :p :cool:
Nope. All those with complaints are vindicated!

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.
Unneeded? Perhaps it is the uproar that caused Apple to act.

Congrats, whiners.
Thank you. BTW, petitioning is not whining. The complaint was legitimate. Again, thank you.

[Tompkinson]

Does anyone know how to recover from this so I can at least boot the computer! I'm out of town for school for a week with no other computer with a presentation due Friday! There is no Apple store here and I have no Apple CDs. I'm stuck to posting o. My iPhone and trying to find a solution on google. I also work during the day and AppleCare isn't even open now! Help please!

didn't somebody on this thread report a similar problem? S/He solved it by resetting the PRAM

from apple's website:

Resetting PRAM and NVRAM
Shut down the computer.
Locate the following keys on the keyboard: Command, Option, P, and R. You will need to hold these keys down simultaneously in step 4.
Turn on the computer.
Press and hold the Command-Option-P-R keys. You must press this key combination before the gray screen appears.
Hold the keys down until the computer restarts and you hear the startup sound for the second time.
Release the keys.
Your computer's PRAM and the NVRAM are reset to the default values. The clock settings may be reset to a default date on some models.

[matticus008]

My theory is that the driver developers simply introduced a bug into their code, and Apple is trying to save face by saying they "don't sell SATA 3.0 drives."
More likely that they just didn't get around to certifying the 3Gbps modes by shipping time, and pushed it out the door with just the 1.5Gbps mode functional, since all the stock hardware would be unaffected by it and could sit it out until an update could be released.
hmm I wonder if this update can uncap my non unibody MBP?
No.
Is that what it is called when Apple introduces new versions of their "pro" laptops that quietly remove a feature that has been standard on most PCs for years that leads to a 50% performance reduction for non-Apple SSD users without even mentioning it?
To be accurate, it's about a 33% performance penalty, worst-case with the modern crop of SSDs (typically peaking in the 220MB range), and there's no evidence that it was a planned, permanent crippling. It was an issue; it's been corrected.

I agree that it was a noteworthy problem, but neither the biggest whiners nor the biggest defenders are entirely correct.

It's much like the inclusion of the SD slot. I'm annoyed by it, since I use exactly nothing with SD cards, but since almost no one used the ExpressCard slot on the 15" models, I can see why it would be attractive to remove, and why SD might win out over CF, which is slowly dying as even DSLRs move to other, newer formats like SDHC. But there are people who applaud the move with no personal stake (which makes no sense), and people who kick and scream over the lost slot they most likely didn't use, either.

Any change is going to inconvenience someone. In this case, it was a tiny number of people using aftermarket SSDs. With EC, it's people using it for a Firewire bus that can't be replaced with a USB EC adapter.

[pcmike]

After doing this... Waiting for the second tone to release I get the same flashing logo and then finally a screen with some text (like singler user mode) then it gets an overlay with the.., "you need to restart your computer." if I restart I just get the flashing logo again and the machine never boots. Any other help??!

didn't somebody on this thread report a similar problem? S/He solved it by resetting the PRAM

from apple's website:

Resetting PRAM and NVRAM
Shut down the computer.
Locate the following keys on the keyboard: Command, Option, P, and R. You will need to hold these keys down simultaneously in step 4.
Turn on the computer.
Press and hold the Command-Option-P-R keys. You must press this key combination before the gray screen appears.
Hold the keys down until the computer restarts and you hear the startup sound for the second time.
Release the keys.
Your computer's PRAM and the NVRAM are reset to the default values. The clock settings may be reset to a default date on some models.

[Tompkinson]

After doing this... Waiting for the second tone to release I get the same flashing logo and then finally a screen with some text (like singler user mode) then it gets an overlay with the.., "you need to restart your computer." if I restart I just get the flashing logo again and the machine never boots. Any other help??!

sorry, I have no advice, other than taking you problem to the apple forum dedicated to this issue: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2036732&start=105&tstart=0

good luck!

[heisetax]

Sounds like the opposite according to Apple :

"While this update allows drives to use transfer rates greater than 1.5Gbps, Apple has not qualified or offered these drives for Mac notebooks and their use is unsupported."

If it works who cares & if it didn't then we can get our help from our normal non Apple sources.

[ucsbalum96]

Just had the same problem as you PCMIKE and the PRAM reset instructions from Tompkinson are exactly correct.

Here is also a link to the instructions I used from Apple website:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1379

Here is what you will see if it works correctly:

Since the combination of keys is a bit awkward to press while trying to hit the power key with your pinkie, you may need to try a couple times. If you still get the blank gray screen, just power off the Mac and try the sequence over. It took me a couple of tries to get all the keys pressed at the same time.

Also, once you get the black screen release the keys and you should launch right into the apple logo grey screen. After that OSX will launch and you will see a notice saying your firmware has been updated.


I guess if you never boot to the OSX screen, then you may have a deeper problem than I had.

Good luck



After doing this... Waiting for the second tone to release I get the same flashing logo and then finally a screen with some text (like singler user mode) then it gets an overlay with the.., "you need to restart your computer." if I restart I just get the flashing logo again and the machine never boots. Any other help??!

[David29]

deleted

[David29]

I can't understand the big "mystery" and the conspiracy theories being spewed forth about this. What's next?

Who or what was behind the original downgrade of the speed....?


It was Dick Cheney
It was a bunch of Liberals from UC Berkeley
It was Fox News.
This "bug" was the real WMD that Saddam was hiding all along.
This was an as-of-yet-unknown part of the Da Vinci Code
It was Jean-Louis Gasse's revenge for Apple not picking the BeOS from which to build Mac OS X.
It was a date-triggered time bomb planted by Gil Amelio.
It was a date-triggered time bomb planted by Jef Raskin.
They found out that Noah Wyle was going to buy a new UB-MBPro. Since Steve didn't authorize his final comment/question at the 1999 Macworld Expo (the one where Noah asked if Steve was still a virgin), this was Steve's way of "getting back" at Noah.
The entire debacle was organized by a bunch of Apple engineers who were working 80+ hours a week getting the new MBPro ready for launch. As if they didn't have enough to do ... one night ... while taking a 2 minute break and dining on Mountain Dew and Doritos, one of them said "Hey, why don't we cripple the SATA interface. That will REALLY annoy the guys who (no matter how awesome this new Mac is) will whine about some obscure feature or interface that is missing and only used by 0.15% of our customers".
A guy who works deep within Foxconn's secret manufacturing facility sabotaged the new machines right before they were to be loaded onto the aircraft and sent to the U.S. The original firmware has now made it into North Korea's latest "LongDong" missile that is pointed towards Hawaii, but will no doubt end up dropping into the ocean like 60 miles due east of its launch point.

I'll put my money on the following:

The development and testing schedule was challenging. Apple engineering knew they had the basic SATA interface working and they were running out of time. They knew that there was always the option of providing a firmware upgrade later. But at the moment, they had to get the final firmware code over to manufacturing to get the initial units built. So they released the firmware as it was. It worked, it was just hindered a bit. Once they got caught up on their sleep (in fact, just a few days after the announcement of the new models) they tweaked the firmware and sent it out via Software Update.

The bottom line:

They did what they could to hit the manufacturing deadline and product announcement dates. They provided a firmware upgrade within like 2 weeks.

If you work in Engineering or have worked on a product that had a manufacturing deadline, you can recognize that this was actually a good decision on Apple's part.

If you are looking for drama and conspiracy theories, may I suggest you tune into the old Art Bell program.

Meanwhile, I will relinquish control of this thread back to everyone else. I am sure someone is P.O.'d that an ADB port was not included ... LOL

[nictan]

sorry just a simple question. after downloading and installing the firmware update? can i delete it from my utilities folder? will deleting it 'undo' the update? sorry. just switched to mac, know nuts about mac system. i know its just 9MB, but yea with only 160GB plus a windows partition, i need all the space i can get. thanks in advance :)

any help? thanks

[Muncher]

any help? thanks

Don't delete it. You could probably get away with it, but you never know whether future updates will require that file. As a general rule, if you do not know what will happen, do not mess with system files. If you need more space, clean up what you have in your User folder, desktop, etc.

[deconstruct60]

The Firmware update is a timely and welcome release.
But, the statement is poorly drafted and annoying.
We give you back Sata 3.0G but we don't support it,


Not supporting it makes sense if they never tested it. Nobody creditable is going to offer official support on a configuration they haven't tested.


So if there are higher than usual data integrity errors running at 3.0 Gbps than there are at 1.5 Gbps Apple has the option of saying it is your problem, not theirs. There may not be any, but if there are (perhaps if you crank up the internal temperature and run for long periods of time) you are on your own with your untested solution. Can't go to Apple and demand a motherboard replacement because the problem. (or Apple doesn't "have to" cough one up in that case. )

That is very likely different from Firewire which is likely tested with several devices on the ports ( like the other Mac platforms. )

[pcmike]

Well my brand new MBP 15" WILL NOT BOOT. I'm tempted to go return this damn thing on Saturday and go back to my pre-unibody MBP that I never had any problems with.

[nictan]

Don't delete it. You could probably get away with it, but you never know whether future updates will require that file. As a general rule, if you do not know what will happen, do not mess with system files. If you need more space, clean up what you have in your User folder, desktop, etc.

okay great. i just did, before reading your reply. how do i get it back???

[Sehnsucht]

I can't understand the big "mystery" and the conspiracy theories being spewed forth about this. What's next?

Who or what was behind the original downgrade of the speed....?


It was Dick Cheney



It was definitely Dick Cheney. :D

[Eidorian]

I'll put my money on the following:

The development and testing schedule was challenging. Apple engineering knew they had the basic SATA interface working and they were running out of time. They knew that there was always the option of providing a firmware upgrade later. But at the moment, they had to get the final firmware code over to manufacturing to get the initial units built. So they released the firmware as it was. It worked, it was just hindered a bit. Once they got caught up on their sleep (in fact, just a few days after the announcement of the new models) they tweaked the firmware and sent it out via Software Update.

The bottom line:

They did what they could to hit the manufacturing deadline and product announcement dates. They provided a firmware upgrade within like 2 weeks.

If you work in Engineering or have worked on a product that had a manufacturing deadline, you can recognize that this was actually a good decision on Apple's part.

If you are looking for drama and conspiracy theories, may I suggest you tune into the old Art Bell program.

Meanwhile, I will relinquish control of this thread back to everyone else. I am sure someone is P.O.'d that an ADB port was not included ... LOLHow is this 9400M different from the previous one? :confused:

[DELLsFan]

I feel the need ... the need for speed! All hail MBP SSD owners! :D

[empezar]

I'm so happy by this news.

[ddTaylor]

Apple would have to go out of their way to get SATA I drives.

I believe it is called sarcasm and not an actual post of record...

D

[AidenShaw]

Well my brand new MBP 15" WILL NOT BOOT. I'm tempted to go return this damn thing on Saturday and go back to my pre-unibody MBP that I never had any problems with.

But, it doesn't boot so much faster with 3 Gbps SATA than it didn't boot with 1.5 Gbps SATA.

You should be happy for the performance boost.

[johninaustin]

Before the update, my 13" w/ 160GB X25-M worked very well.

After the update, boot went from 5 to 6 "spins" to anywhere between 30 and 90 "spins".

I tested the drive in a windows box & installed Windows - the drive appears to be fine. I reinstalled Mac OS X 10.5.7. I zapped the PRAM. I reset the SMC. Nothing helped.

I turned it off, waited a while & tried again - the machine was working fine.

I figure it may be heat related.

I started up some youtube & hulu windows in safari & let them run for a while, then ran a disk intensive command like:
sudo find / 2> /dev/null | xargs cat > /dev/null 2> /dev/null

I could see all IO just freeze for 20-30 seconds at a time once it got nice and warm.

Does anyone else note performance / IO problems when the laptop gets warm?

[Tompkinson]

Well my brand new MBP 15" WILL NOT BOOT. I'm tempted to go return this damn thing on Saturday and go back to my pre-unibody MBP that I never had any problems with.

I have not had this problem, so am not the right guy to advise you, but here's a few thoughts: if it was working before you applied the update, the device is almost certainly in good shape, -> just a little problem needs to be fixed. no need to return it and go back to using an older device.

if you get a chance to connect it (firewire target mode) to another mac running disk warrior -> give that a try, has worked wonders for me.

if you're thinking to "returning it" -> get the person you are intending to return it to, to take a look at it. (apple store etc)

and try searching the apple forums, post your problem there -> this is a rumour site, posters here are no experts, just users musing, exchanging and ranting.

good luck,

[deconstruct60]

More likely that they just didn't get around to certifying the 3Gbps modes by shipping time,


they aren't certifying 3Gbps now. Unless that is one weird certification. "OK it is certified, but not supported". What support organization does that?
It is turned on. It isn't certified.

[Tompkinson]

I can't understand the big "mystery" and the conspiracy theories being spewed forth about this. What's next?


I haven't seen that many conspiracy theories about this, but I have seen people concerned that their investment might not deliver when they want to upgrade to faster SSD in the next months or years.

For some of us a MBP costs a lot of money, one worries when facts are revealed that the product one bought might by short in some dept.

and when do conspiracy theories usually arise & thrive? when facts are missing and not provided by the company that can provide them.


you can recognize that this was actually a good decision on Apple's part.


a good decision would have been to announce: "the product you are giving us your money for is slightly lacking in the sata dept., but there'll be a firmware update in a couple of weeks"

wouldn't have been any conspiracy theories if they'd announced this when they sold it.

on an aside: looking at a few people having problems with the update on this and other forums: might have made even more sense to actually get the product working in top form before releasing it and then putting inexperienced users through EFI firmware updates. but i guess that is dick cheney's fault.

[Eidorian]

I haven't seen that many conspiracy theories about this, but I have seen people concerned that their investment might not deliver when they want to upgrade to faster SSD in the next months or years.

For some of us a MBP costs a lot of money, one worries when facts are revealed that the product one bought might by short in some dept.

and when do conspiracy theories usually arise & thrive? when facts are missing and not provided by the company that can provide them.



a good decision would have been to announce: "the product you are giving us your money for is slightly lacking in the sata dept., but there'll be a firmware update in a couple of weeks"

wouldn't have been any conspiracy theories if they'd announced this when they sold it.

on an aside: looking at a few people having problems with the update on this and other forums: might have made even more sense to actually get the product working in top form before releasing it and then putting inexperienced users through EFI firmware updates. but i guess that is dick cheney's fault.Well, at least they didn't charge $4.99 on Apple.com to turn on something which already existed, this time.

[iamcheerful]

Well, at least they didn't charge $4.99 on Apple.com to turn on something which already existed, this time.

indeed!

[matticus008]

they aren't certifying 3Gbps now.
Huh? It's been delivered. That means that internal development has signed off on it and it's been reviewed and approved by someone in charge. Apple doesn't ship anything they haven't certified for release. That would be the definition of a leak.
Unless that is one weird certification. "OK it is certified, but not supported". What support organization does that?
It's standard Apple boilerplate for third-party components; Apple does not support them. Since they don't ship any 3Gbps hardware, they don't support any 3Gbps hardware. It has nothing to do with their level of support for their own hardware interface.
It is turned on. It isn't certified.
You can't have one without the other unless it's prerelease software.

[deconstruct60]

[SIZE="2"]MacBook5,1 (2.4 GHz MacBook) / 10.5.7 / 4096 MB / Hitachi HTS545025B9SA02


Ah. Was looking at the front of the drive code before.
http://www.hitachigst.com/portal/site/en/menuitem.f5f6a619d01b27127d807c90eac4f0a0/

the suffix "SA02" (more precisely the 'SA' ) says this is a 1.5 Gps version of a drive that also comes in 3.0. ( 'A3' ). [ from the data sheet.] So they are shipping 1.5 drives.

[deconstruct60]

Huh? It's been delivered. That means that internal development has signed off on it and it's been reviewed and approved by someone in charge. Apple doesn't ship anything they haven't certified for release. That would be the definition of a leak.


Are you talking about certification as a getting the signatures. Or certification as actually taking system configuration and testing with it?
Or a someone sticking a probe in and check marking ("yes reaches 3 Gbps")?



It's standard Apple boilerplate for third-party components; Apple does not support them. Since they don't ship any 3Gbps hardware, they don't support any 3Gbps hardware. It has nothing to do with their level of support for their own hardware interface.


What is the need for the disjunction between 'qualified' and 'offered' then, if 'ships' is the only one that matters?


... however Apple has not qualified or offered these drives for Mac portable computers, ...


Or Apple pragmatically qualifies drives, but just doesn't tell folks because doesn't want to do it for everyone?

[rockonchen]

interested to know when Apple will certify and support SATA 3.0G?
- When they start using SATA 3.0G drives
- When the newly shipped MPB with SATA 3.0G enabled
- When HD manufacturers stop shipping SATA 1.5G drives

[tibi08]

I want to meet the 33 people who voted this story negative....

[matticus008]

Are you talking about certification as a getting the signatures. Or certification as actually taking system configuration and testing with it?
Or a someone sticking a probe in and check marking ("yes reaches 3 Gbps")?
All of the above are steps in the release process at any large corporation.
What is the need for the disjunction between 'qualified' and 'offered' then, if 'ships' is the only one that matters?
Qualified, meaning third party products known to work and approved by Apple, and offered, meaning products sold directly by Apple.

Again, it's just boilerplate liability language. They're simply saying that they've fixed the driver issues and fully enabled the transfer mode, but they do not qualify (advise, endorse, recommend, support, or sanction) the installation of third party drives in their computers (regardless of speed--this applies equally to 1.5Gbps drives) and they do not offer (currently sell) any products that require this update to function normally.

If they offered one of the faster SSDs in the MBP, they would have said something along the lines of "this update addresses a performance issue in MacBook Pros ordered with the XXX SSD option. Apple has not qualified other drives and their use is unsupported."

Both words, though, are necessary to encapsulate the two distinct disclaimers they're making.
Or Apple pragmatically qualifies drives, but just doesn't tell folks because doesn't want to do it for everyone?
I don't think I understand the question.

They, like most companies, categorically refuse to vouch for drives they don't use in OEM builds, if that's what you're asking. The legal consequences of them saying, "the Intel XXX SSD is qualified for use in Macs" are significant.

[djellison]

There, now y'all stop your complaining ;)

What we learn here is that Apple were not ready to release these products and rushed them out.

What else will come up as a problem.

[consoleboi]

Bring on the next string of complaints.

How about lack of mini E-Sata connection?

[Evangelion]

Thank You Apple ! Here is my xbench disk test before and after :) and to all those posters who said there is no difference stop whining - you were wrong.

I think the point was that there isn't much difference in real-life usage. So instead of staring at Xbench-results (or did you buy your computer to just run Xbench?), how about some real-life results? Do apps start and run faster for example?

[SPUY767]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

I think it was to save power. 3.0 uses more power. That's a fact, and when data doesn't need to be shuffled around that fast, it's a waste. Of course, as I predicted, Apple has released the firmware update, and now people will install it and gain no appreciable amount of performance at the expense of a percent or two of battery life.

[Knguyen2009]

"So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense " this is not entirely true. Apple has been shipping similar hard drives as the other major PC OEMs and they all support 3.0Gbps. Why Apple decided to use 1.5Gbps instead of the faster one? Anyone care to comment???

[izibo]

Seems to make a difference for me (at least on the benchmark side) with an 80GB Intel X-25M

Before the update:
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/830/picture3rdc.png
And after:
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/6650/picture2y.png

Oh, and considering I am one of the few that this made a "substantial difference" I can safely say that I feel no difference. I don't know what all the bitching was about.

[asimovs]

this didnt work for my 17" early 08 wich is capped at 1.5gbit aswell too bad. pretty silly that this top of the line macbook is capped at 1.5 aswell(yea i know its older but still chipset supports it).

hope they make an fw update for this aswell!

[AboveTheChaos]

I think the point was that there isn't much difference in real-life usage. So instead of staring at Xbench-results (or did you buy your computer to just run Xbench?), how about some real-life results? Do apps start and run faster for example?

Too funny. If you post anything without links, screenshots and proof, you get dismissed. Then you post with proof and you get snarky comments like did you buy your computer just to run test and it's about how it feels. :rolleyes:

[Slogan]

Well done to the MacRumorers and thanks to Apple. :)

[cash4chaos]

I am the one who had lunch in apple cafeteria with my engineer Frieda those who doubted me it's your turn buy breakfast at bucks !!!
Mike

[Mattie Num Nums]

All these people saying congrats whiners etc. are just ignorant. You pay for the hardware capabilities and having them disabled whether beneficial out of the gate or not is a let down. I am glad Apple sees the bigger picture unike some of you and has addressed the issue. At some point people will elect to upgrade there drives and may take advantage of this. As pointed above to I am sure this will positively effect bandwidth. Good job Apple addressing this faster than the Java exploit!

"So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense " this is not entirely true. Apple has been shipping similar hard drives as the other major PC OEMs and they all support 3.0Gbps. Why Apple decided to use 1.5Gbps instead of the faster one? Anyone care to comment???

Why sell the farm when you can raise sheep.

[myca]

Does the next firmware fix the glossy screen, lack of expresscard, loss of ports?

Joking, please don't flame.

But I'd like to know why this needed a firmware fix TBH, guess it's a good job they did fix it though, it stopped my b*tching for 5 minutes at least. :D

[gettin sombrero]

It is great that apple fixed this, I may still purchase a macbook pro now.

That aside, its a shame so many of you are willing to settle for less just because apple sold it to you.

[MrZebra]

this didnt work for my 17" early 08 wich is capped at 1.5gbit aswell too bad. pretty silly that this top of the line macbook is capped at 1.5 aswell(yea i know its older but still chipset supports it).

hope they make an fw update for this aswell!

I'm in the same boat but I doubt apple would fix the older models now.

[CptnJustc]

Too funny. If you post anything without links, screenshots and proof, you get dismissed. Then you post with proof and you get snarky comments like did you buy your computer just to run test and it's about how it feels. :rolleyes:

The issue is what was being proven. While the previous poster offered a cogent argument with a side of snark, all you provided was the snark.

[vitaeergo]

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

[MM123]

So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense. Too bad people got in such an un-needed uproar.

are you kidding?

[Muncher]

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

Have you tried reformatting the drive? Just a thought.

[friareunuch]

That was fast.

Let's continue to raise hell about blu-ray while we're at it. :p

you do that, while i lobby to just ditch the optical drive altogether :cool:

[Knguyen2009]

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

Perhaps this was the reason why Apple did not turn on 3.0Gbps - the drive interface connector cannot handle the faster speed potentially due to some signal integrity issue. It would be interesting to see how many other folks have the same issue.:confused:

[Master Chief]

I want to meet the 33 people who voted this story negative....
My guess is that some, if not all, of these people clicked on the wrong link by accident, simply because the links are too close to each other – do some research and you'll find this to be true as we did for Mozilla users.

[Master Chief]

Perhaps this was the reason why Apple did not turn on 3.0Gbps - the drive interface connector cannot handle the faster speed potentially due to some signal integrity issue. It would be interesting to see how many other folks have the same issue.:confused:
Who told you this? Apple won't released firmware updates to expose serious design or production errors in their hardware. No way.

[Gasu E.]

What we learn here is that Apple were not ready to release these products and rushed them out.

What else will come up as a problem.

That's not likely to have been the case here.

All products are designed to meet a specification, and because Apple never intended to ship a device above 1.5Gps, that's probably what the design spec said.

Since the spec called for nothing above 1.5Gps, probably no QE tests were run against higher speed.

Then probably some overly conservative engineer decided to put in a "safety" feature so customers would not run in some "untested configuration, with potentially unpredictable results". Just doing his job. Since he stayed within spec, there's no managerial decision needed to approve this.

Folks, unless you have worked on a major development project involving hundreds of people, you can't appreciate how important it is for people to "color within the lines" and stick to the spec. It's the only way to make sure people are on the same page.

Once the product hit the market, useful feedback, such as found at this site, led the product manager to better understand the need, and ask engineering to qualify a sample configuration, then remove the safety code.

Stuff like this happens with every product. It's not a bug, or a sign of bad quality, but a sign of good procedures that generally lead to quality products.

[fredfnord]

Something nobody mentions about this problem is multiple devices hitting a bottleneck due to the SATA restriction. Glad I don't have to worry about it now the next time I'm pushing video around with three drives hooked up, etc, etc.

The reason nobody mentions this is because it's 100% wrong. With SATA, each device is on its own bus. You're assuming that SATA worked the same way as PATA (master/slave) or SCSI (multiple drives, one bus) but it doesn't.

-fred