Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 25, 2013, 11:23 AM   #26
MikhailT
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by WordMasterRice View Post
No it won't it says right in the article that transfers are slower on OSX and that isn't the particular issue here. Resizing the window is only going to get it up to normal levels of slower than Windows, not up to Windows speed.
Yea, I corrected my post to reflect "normal fast." Beside that it is the primary issue since everything else worked fine.
MikhailT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2013, 11:45 AM   #27
portishead
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: los angeles
If it works in Windows, it's obviously just a software/driver issue. It will get fixed. 50MB/s that Anand saw is great. I hope I can get that from my NAS! I'm currently only getting about 15MB/s.
portishead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2013, 01:25 PM   #28
Nightarchaon
macrumors 65816
 
Nightarchaon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by parapup View Post
Haha the delusion of integration! It took a third party for Apple to do their testing and analysis for them after the product release.
Isnt that how apple do all the testing,

Apples process is something like this

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

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

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

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

Now im not an apple hater, i love the OS, i just wish they would u-turn from this sealed unit lockdown, all our products are disposable, kick they are on , when its easier to replace the Harddisk in my PS3 when it fails than my iMac, something is seriously out of whack.
__________________
iWatch in action http://media.joe.ie/wp-content/uploa...ael-Knight.jpg
MacBook Pro/iPad Mini/TV1/iMac/iPhone5
Nightarchaon is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2013, 07:12 PM   #29
slothrob
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightarchaon View Post
Step Three, Apples marketing team has to spin the reason you can get a PC for a tenth the price with 4x the power
I'd love to fins one of those $100 Windows Ultrabooks that are 4x faster than an Air! Anything comparable that I've seen has been about the same price or more and usually slower.
slothrob is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2013, 11:32 AM   #30
CWallace
macrumors Demi-God
 
CWallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Nightarchaon, you forgot to add:

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

CWallace is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2013, 11:35 AM   #31
burne
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Haarlem, the Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prodo123 View Post
Nothing beats good ol' GigE.
Uhm.. Prodo123? I've got a Thunderbolt-cable on line three, wanting a word with you. Can I put him through?
burne is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2013, 09:56 PM   #32
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by burne View Post
Uhm.. Prodo123? I've got a Thunderbolt-cable on line three, wanting a word with you. Can I put him through?
Thunderbolt is the absolute worst cable to use for networking since it's limited to 3 meters of copper, whereas Cat-6 cables can go up to 100 meters.
Try wiring a home with either stiff optical fibers or just 3 meters of cabling and you'll quickly see why it's so impractical.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2013, 03:56 AM   #33
Nightarchaon
macrumors 65816
 
Nightarchaon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by CWallace View Post
Nightarchaon, you forgot to add:

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

i have to give you that one , its a pity though, because some (and it was a rare thing) PCs and laptops had a much nicer feel and look and than the apple "slab of aluminium"
__________________
iWatch in action http://media.joe.ie/wp-content/uploa...ael-Knight.jpg
MacBook Pro/iPad Mini/TV1/iMac/iPhone5
Nightarchaon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2013, 03:19 AM   #34
burne
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Haarlem, the Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prodo123 View Post
Thunderbolt is the absolute worst cable to use for networking since it's limited to 3 meters of copper, whereas Cat-6 cables can go up to 100 meters.
CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.
burne is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2013, 08:54 AM   #35
WordMasterRice
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Upstate NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by burne View Post
CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.
Ya no, Cat6 is capable of 10 Gbit/s with a standard RJ45.
WordMasterRice is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 2, 2013, 12:50 PM   #36
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by burne View Post
CAT6 does 1Gbit/s, not the 10Gbit/s thunderbolt is capable of. The 'ethernet-cable' that is capable of 10GE is called 10GBASE-CX4 and if you have one and the sfp's to connect it to, you are member of a very small group of people. Also, they are even more expensive than thunderbolt cables.

My NAS tops out at roughly 550Mbyte/s. That would require 5 bonded etherchannels to connect to my Mac mini if such a thing would be possible.
Quickly scanning Wikipedia, eh? I think you missed something:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
Category 6 cables can carry 10GBASE-T for shorter distances when qualified according to the guidelines in ISO TR 24750 or TIA-155-A.
Not to mention that the new category of cables capable of sending 10Gbit signals (the signal itself is known as 10GBASE-T) is called a Category 6a cable (Cat6a for short).

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

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

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

In any way you look at it, Thunderbolt is too impractical for networking. The closest thing to internet that you could make from a Thunderbolt network would be a Beowulf cluster.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2013, 05:17 PM   #37
star-affinity
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikhailT View Post
Integration doesn't mean there wouldn't be bugs. This is a software issue that can be fixed in a future update. It only affects SMB/AFP. The rest works fine.
I'm not expecting it to mean there won't be bugs, ever. But I do think it's a bit strange that issues like this aren't noticed before the product is released. One would think file transfer is one of the things that would be tested heavily.

And there are/has been other issues in OS X that I would't expect to find since Apple is behind both the hardware and the software.
star-affinity is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2013, 05:58 PM   #38
MikhailT
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by star-affinity View Post
I'm not expecting it to mean there won't be bugs, ever. But I do think it's a bit strange that issues like this aren't noticed before the product is released. One would think file transfer is one of the things that would be tested heavily.

And there are/has been other issues in OS X that I would't expect to find since Apple is behind both the hardware and the software.
From Ars, when they tested 10.8.5:



They've fixed the AFP speed in 10.8.5 update, nearly as fast as Window's SMB. Mavericks have SMB2, we'll see if they fixed it when Mavericks is released late next month.
MikhailT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2013, 10:39 AM   #39
kingtj
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Poolesville, MD
Send a message via ICQ to kingtj
Yeah, except ....

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

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


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post
"Windows is, at best, about nine percent faster over Gigabit Ethernet and 30 percent faster over 802.11n, but it's 218 percent faster over 802.11ac."

Unacceptable for any protocol. Apple needs to correct this. There is no reason that a Unix based OS should be slower than Winblows in file transfer speeds.
kingtj is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2013, 04:40 AM   #40
star-affinity
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikhailT View Post
From Ars, when they tested 10.8.5:

Image

They've fixed the AFP speed in 10.8.5 update, nearly as fast as Window's SMB. Mavericks have SMB2, we'll see if they fixed it when Mavericks is released late next month.
Yup. SMB2 seems pretty quick in Mavericks compared to AFP (I heard from a reliable source who has tested it…).
star-affinity is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wireless file transfers VERY slow on 10.9 lwilliams OS X Mavericks (10.9) 0 Oct 18, 2013 07:11 AM
BitTorrent Sync Launches for iOS, Brings Unlimited File Backup and Encrypted File Transfers MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 21 Aug 30, 2013 10:07 AM
iPhone: File Transfers dylan873 Jailbreaks and iOS Hacks 1 Jul 20, 2013 08:24 AM
iMessage Photo Help! (File Transfers) lharmon317 Mac Basics and Help 2 Feb 25, 2013 02:23 PM
File transfers via wifi Kenneth D iPad Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 5 Jan 28, 2013 06:30 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC