Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Air

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 11, 2012, 03:44 PM   #76
53x12
macrumors 68000
 
53x12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by krravi View Post
When you have nailed down the dimensions for the part to be manufactured, I don't understand how there can be variances.

We are talking about a computer so thin and not a desktop where there is space to wiggle around.

If there are variances then an important step in QC is missing, which is

"Measure the dimensions of the SSD board to the millimeter, before giving it a okay"

Exactly. That is the most confusing part for me. I realize DOA drives is common. But a SSD specifically made and designed for ONLY the MBA? How do you screw that up? I could understand if it was a generic drive for different platforms. But not this.
53x12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 04:18 PM   #77
Mordichka
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
The non-fit aspect of the Aura Pro in your 2012 MBA was an isolated experience...we honestly have not had other reports of such.

Of those [10], upon investigation, only 2 were deemed to be too thick to fit regardless of pressure used to install.

So, first there are no reports, then 2 of 10 reports. The issue was the length of the Aura in the case of my 180 GB Aura, not circuit board thickness. Perhaps I misread the other posts?

My Aura was too long - it was not just a "tight fit". I have upgraded many Airs and Minis, and have probably purchased nearly a dozen different SSDs from OWC, so I know the difference between a "tight fit" and "no fit". I want to make it clear that this was the first problem I've had with an OWC product, and their customer service in the past has always been excellent. I was happy to vote for them in the recent customer satisfaction poll that they requested customers participate in.

That said, the 180 GB Aura I received was too long - it was not just a tight fit. I agree with the OWC poster that production tolerances vary - that's the real world. However, on the telephone with OWC I was told that they had never had a problem with the “fit” before and that I was probably just not putting the Aura in incorrectly. I sent them photographs to try and convince them that I wasn't imagining the problem. They did offer a return and said I wouldn't have to pay shipping. What dismays me is the backtracking on the original absolute statement from OWC. First none, now two, does mine make three?

I reported the problem with Aura in October and even sent photographs showing that the Aura would not fit my 2012 11" Air. Also, the assumption by customer service, after contacting their experts, was that I probably didn't know what I was doing – that left a bad taste in my mouth. A novice trying to install the Aura I received could have easily damaged their Air - not thinking that the Aura was the problem.

Perhaps my problem is trying to hold a company to too high a standard for all transactions. That said, the first quote above is the reason I'm writing this reply. Anyway, I would still recommend OWC - I only had one problematic experience and they did offer a speedy return.

Last edited by Mordichka; Dec 11, 2012 at 06:27 PM.
Mordichka is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 06:13 PM   #78
Mr. Retrofire
macrumors 601
 
Mr. Retrofire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: www.emiliana.cl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.G View Post
After reading this thread, I'm not quite clear... exactly what kind of speeds are the OWC drives supposed to provide? I just ran the test on my 11" which has the Samsung 256 gb unit, and I'm getting 450's on reads and 395's on writes. For comparison, the Samsung 840 Pro 256 in my Mac Mini is getting 550's and 500's, respectively. I even saw a peak of 586 and 530. That thing flies!
The Samsung 840 Pro has a much better processor (Tri-Core ARM, IIRC), more cache (RAM) and better flash memory chips. If you want to compare SSDs, compare the 830 with the 840 (not Pro) and with the same capacities (256 GB for example).
__________________

“Only the dead have seen the end of the war.”
-- Plato --
Mr. Retrofire is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2012, 07:16 AM   #79
Reality4711
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: scotland
Dust & Plank

Whatever the facts or otherwise of this thread it just seems (as do many threads like it) a tad "vitriolic".

Variations in service from trained/untrained persons vary as much as the individuals concerned. Even the best companies employ people. People are not perfect. QED

I understand the frustration BUT please, is it really worth the bile that some seem let out at the drop of a hat?

Speak as you find and move on.

Oh if you don't get the title (non disparaging) - Before asking someone to remove the speck from their eye, remove the plank from your own)

Yes I accept this applies to me as well
__________________
MacMini 2.66 i7, 2x120 Gb SSD raid 1, 16 gb ram. 11" MBA,2 GHz maxed out.
Reality4711 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2012, 08:07 AM   #80
iMacC2D
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
I had exactly the same issue as the OP when attempting to fit an OWC SSD to a customers MacBook Air 11" (they specifically requested the part). On attempting to fit it, the SSD simply didn't fit the machine. I haven't placed any further orders for these OWC drives at this stage, but the initial impression wasn't a great one.

I know a couple of things about installing SSDs as well (I replace about 5 each day, ACMT specialising in these MacBook Air models), rechecked fitment several times. The stock drive went in without issue.
iMacC2D is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 01:10 AM   #81
adcurtin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
just ordered one

I just ordered a 240GB drive (with Envoy) from my 11" air. I decided the extra $30 would be worth it over the factory upgrade from Apple so I could get a 128GB usb3 external drive. I ordered it as soon as the Envoy was available.

I will report back on whether or not it fits when I get it in a couple days.


Lastly, to those complaining about OWC using a sandforce controller: do some research before you make a fool of yourself. Toshiba uses a sandforce controller in the drives they make for the air as well, and those come straight from Apple. My air has a toshiba drive. I am getting between 200 and 300 MB/s writes, and between 350 and 450 MB/s reads using the blackmagic speed test utility.

However, if you read the changelog of that utility, they recently updated it to use compressed data, to measure real world throughput for compressed data (like videos, which is the whole point of the app, to test what videos you can record to your disk with the different blackmagic products…). You have to make sure you run the speed tests with the same version of the app. The ones from anandtech seem to be testing uncompressed data.

make sure you know your stuff before making a fool of yourself.

Also, I know some people have posted proof of their SSDs not fitting, but I'd say take those who haven't with a grain of salt. Some people do lie on the internet! (I will of course post pictures either way)
adcurtin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 10:34 AM   #82
docal97
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southampton
Quote:
Originally Posted by drinkjetfuel View Post
It's not as isolated of an indecent. I'm on my second Aura Pro 2012 240gb, that doesn't fit.

During my last conversation with their tech support they told me that I wasn't pressing hard enough to get the SSD to fit properly.


Image

Image
That picture dosen't even look like we are talking about the same part!
docal97 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 10:59 AM   #83
Weaselboy
macrumors G5
 
Weaselboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by adcurtin View Post
Lastly, to those complaining about OWC using a sandforce controller: do some research before you make a fool of yourself.
Maybe you should do the same before you start with the insults.

Some users shy away from Sandforce (SF) based drives for two very valid reasons.

Some versions of SF firmware have been very buggy and updates slow to arrive. This seems to be less an issue with newer SF based drives, but a year ago or so it was a real problem. Just do a forum search for SF issues with wake from hibernation and you will find entire threads on the issue.

Some vendors like Toshiba you mentioned and Intel in particular have worked with SF on custom versions of firmware and those do seem more reliable. Can you see where if a user got stung by crappy SF firmware in the past, they may be hesitant to get on board again.

Secondly, if one does a lot of work with incompressible data or uses Filevault the write performance on a SF drive will be slower than with compressible data. You can read about it here.
Weaselboy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 12:19 PM   #84
adcurtin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weaselboy View Post
Maybe you should do the same before you start with the insults.

Some users shy away from Sandforce (SF) based drives for two very valid reasons.

Some versions of SF firmware have been very buggy and updates slow to arrive. This seems to be less an issue with newer SF based drives, but a year ago or so it was a real problem. Just do a forum search for SF issues with wake from hibernation and you will find entire threads on the issue.

Some vendors like Toshiba you mentioned and Intel in particular have worked with SF on custom versions of firmware and those do seem more reliable. Can you see where if a user got stung by crappy SF firmware in the past, they may be hesitant to get on board again.

Secondly, if one does a lot of work with incompressible data or uses Filevault the write performance on a SF drive will be slower than with compressible data. You can read about it here.
not denying any of that, but someone in this thread said they wouldn't get this because it's sandforce, even though the stock drive can be sandforce as well (and they didn't mention anything about firmware issues).

Totally understand why people might not like sandforce.
adcurtin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 06:19 PM   #85
dshack
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Just had the same problem as this guy: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1500296

Bought a 240gb, started Internet Recovery, and now disk utility won't recognize the drive. RMA'ing for another one (and an Envoy, since that just came out for the 2012's), and we'll try again. Does nobody at OWC test these before putting them in boxes?
dshack is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 07:24 PM   #86
newdeal
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
...

Sandforce ssds are crap. Ihad a terrible experiance with owc ssds when they first came out. One after a week the computer froze and on reboot all i got was a folder with a question mark in it and a disk that couldnt be found with disk utility. they sent me a new one and the same thing happened after 3 weeks of use. At this point i demanded my money back and got it. My macbook pro now has a trusty x25-m and it is reliable plus the boot speed is much faster than even the macbook air with samsung ssd I used to have in spite of being limited to sata2
newdeal is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2012, 09:16 PM   #87
DJLC
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mooresville, NC
Send a message via AIM to DJLC Send a message via MSN to DJLC Send a message via Yahoo to DJLC Send a message via Skype™ to DJLC
Fwiw, my old (late '06) MacBook is still screaming with the OWC SSD I put in last year. No problems at all. And looking back, everything I've gotten has been solid. Even have an ancient external SCSI drive from OWC that continues to chug along when needed.

I wouldn't even consider upgrading my 2012 MBA at this point... don't quite see the point if the performance improvement is marginal. But to each his own, I guess.
__________________
-John Mairs
DJLC is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2012, 07:24 AM   #88
Johnny Alien
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdeal View Post
Sandforce ssds are crap. Ihad a terrible experiance with owc ssds when they first came out. One after a week the computer froze and on reboot all i got was a folder with a question mark in it and a disk that couldnt be found with disk utility. they sent me a new one and the same thing happened after 3 weeks of use. At this point i demanded my money back and got it. My macbook pro now has a trusty x25-m and it is reliable plus the boot speed is much faster than even the macbook air with samsung ssd I used to have in spite of being limited to sata2
I fail to see what that has to do with an ssd using sandforce.
Johnny Alien is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2012, 08:13 AM   #89
newdeal
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Alien View Post
I fail to see what that has to do with an ssd using sandforce.
The controllers are unreliable which is why i was having the problem. I would say its pretty clear
newdeal is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2012, 12:15 PM   #90
Johnny Alien
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdeal View Post
The controllers are unreliable which is why i was having the problem. I would say its pretty clear
I don't think it is at all. You had problem with one product from a specific vendor. That's like saying that if I have a problem with a Chevy truck that all 4WD vehicles are crap.
Johnny Alien is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 09:33 AM   #91
newdeal
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Alien View Post
I don't think it is at all. You had problem with one product from a specific vendor. That's like saying that if I have a problem with a Chevy truck that all 4WD vehicles are crap.
OWC used a stock sandforce design with stock sandforce firmware so yes it is pretty safe to say. Basically all they are is flash and a controller and the controller is what always makes or breaks it in the near term, differances in flash could affect the speed and overall reliability but this was clearly a controller issue and since it was a sandforce reference design its pretty safe to say they have issues. Of course there are also many other people with BSOD issues with sandforce drives etc
newdeal is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 10:27 AM   #92
Johnny Alien
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdeal View Post
OWC used a stock sandforce design with stock sandforce firmware so yes it is pretty safe to say. Basically all they are is flash and a controller and the controller is what always makes or breaks it in the near term, differances in flash could affect the speed and overall reliability but this was clearly a controller issue and since it was a sandforce reference design its pretty safe to say they have issues. Of course there are also many other people with BSOD issues with sandforce drives etc
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Toshiba SSD using Sandforce? The one that is stock in tons of MBA's? I have a Toshiba drive and have had no difficulties at all. Especially not full on failures such as you had.
Johnny Alien is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 10:45 AM   #93
Weaselboy
macrumors G5
 
Weaselboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Alien View Post
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Toshiba SSD using Sandforce? The one that is stock in tons of MBA's? I have a Toshiba drive and have had no difficulties at all. Especially not full on failures such as you had.
Yes it does, but Apple/Toshiba like Intel with their SSDs have developed a custom version of the Sandforce firmware that presumably has undergone additional QA testing. I believe this is why we see no problems with the Toshiba OEM SSD and no reports of Intel Sandforce SSD issues (at least I have not noticed any in the forums). OWC and others are just taking the standard Sandforce firmware handed out by Sandforce and using it.

There was a SSD article I think on Anandtech a few months or so ago showing several different brands of Sandforce based SSDs and they all had the same FW version.
Weaselboy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 10:54 AM   #94
Medic
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post
I

However, the original poster should never have had to wait almost a month for a refund of 100% of the purchase price (based on the timeline in the original message and the date of the refund that you referenced).
What do you think Apple's return policy is like? From my experience OWC are more speedy and fair in refunding than Apple itself!
__________________
MBP i7 15 inch high-rez 8GB RAM
iMac i5 27 inch 8GB RAM
iPad 3G 16GB
iPhone 4 32GB
Medic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 11:02 AM   #95
Johnny Alien
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weaselboy View Post
Yes it does, but Apple/Toshiba like Intel with their SSDs have developed a custom version of the Sandforce firmware that presumably has undergone additional QA testing. I believe this is why we see no problems with the Toshiba OEM SSD and no reports of Intel Sandforce SSD issues (at least I have not noticed any in the forums). OWC and others are just taking the standard Sandforce firmware handed out by Sandforce and using it.

There was a SSD article I think on Anandtech a few months or so ago showing several different brands of Sandforce based SSDs and they all had the same FW version.
That still sounds like it's a OWC issue.
Johnny Alien is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 11:11 AM   #96
Weaselboy
macrumors G5
 
Weaselboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Alien View Post
That still sounds like it's a OWC issue.
No disagreement here on that.
Weaselboy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 06:29 PM   #97
adcurtin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Just got mine today

I just got my SSD and envoy today. Verdict: STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM THIS PRODUCT. Both the SSD and the Envoy had / have issues, and not just QC issues, but design issues. I will update with further info when I get home and do some more diagnosis. I have also email OWC to tell them to pull the product (fat chance, but they need to).

As you can see from my previous posts, I was defending OWC, so this isn't a bias against them or anything.

Here's what happened:

First, the screwdrivers aren't labelled, so it's difficult to tell which one is torx and which one is pentalobe. Really minor, but still could be better. This has no real bearing on my opinion of the product though.

Second, the OWC SSD was too big. This is not a QC issue, it's a design issue. Apparently whatever they use to program the firmware or something uses a different connector, and they use a v-groove in the PCB to snap that connector off and have the correct connector for the air (as can be seen in another post in this thread). This extra bit of PCB from the v-groove on the end is enough to make the SSD too big to fit. This is really poor design. The older SSDs have a small cutout in the corner where this one hits as well. What OWC should do: put a slight cutout in the corner, and screw the v-groove crap, make a separate adapter PCB (you clearly have the proper connector now, as it is in the Envoy I got). I simple took a little sandpaper and sanded down the connector side (not the side that hit) very slightly, it didn't take much, and doesn't affect PCB integrity in the slightest, and now it fits alright (but still very close). (and the sanding is not really noticeable, and is just taking off a little more of the v-groove. It shouldn't affect the warranty of the device at all). This part is unacceptable, but I can live with it. It's a one time issue (per SSD), and unlikely to damage anything.

Third, and the big reason why this is a piece of **** that needs to be pulled, is the Envoy enclosure. I put my 128GB SSD in there. When I put the SSD in it, I noticed there were no screws at holding the (controller) PCB down, and none holding the SSD down either. The PCB has 2 metal nubs that hold it in place, but the SSD just has a piece of foam. I will post pictures when I get home (and can take it apart and do some more diagnosis). I think this is stupid, especially since the SSD has a mounting hole (and the PCB can easily have mounting holes / slots). But again, not a showstopper (but since they need to redesign this anyway, why not do it right?). I then put the Envoy back together. I first plugged it in to my Air and tried to boot form it, it didn't show up at all. I tried a different USB port and it worked. So I figured I was all set to install OS X on the SSD, so I went to my Grandma's to celebrate christmas with them (which is why I can't post pictures now, or do more diagnosis). When I got here, I booted from the recovery partition on my original SSD (now in the Envoy), and started downloading OS X. It started downloading, so I let it sit for a while. When I went to check on it, it was finished downloading, but stuck at 0 seconds left, and unresponsive. The LED on the Envoy was not on, so I picked it up, and it was hot. I moved the cable a little bit, and the LED lit up. So I hard powered off my Air, and moved the SSD to the other USB port. It didn't show up when I tried to boot, so I unplugged and replugged the Envoy. Know what I saw? ****ing sparks! The metal chassis of the Envoy is for some reason not ground, so the USB connector shroud was shorting to it in some positions. This is why it got hot, and why it didn't work. This is completely unacceptable, and is why the product needs to be pulled.

I still need to do further investigation, to see what is causing this exactly (I'm doing your QC for you, OWC! I shouldn't have to do this!). I will also be testing to make sure my original SSD still works and make sure both of my USB3 ports on my air still work. If either of these are broken, I fulled expect OWC to pay for replacements (this air is a month old, I don't want a repair. I am willing to go to small claims court for this). So far, I don't think anything is broken, so OWC is lucky in my case, but in other cases, maybe not so much.

At this point, I think I can probably learn how to use CAD and design a better enclosure than this, and have it 3D printed.


This is unacceptable in a consumer product, and OWC needs to fix this.

Last edited by adcurtin; Dec 30, 2012 at 06:22 PM.
adcurtin is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 10:51 PM   #98
adcurtin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
diagnosis

OK, sorry for double post, but lots of stuff.

First, here is an album of pictures of the SSD: http://imgur.com/a/prBe1

some before and after my sanding modification to make it fit. Be really careful when sanding it, if you decide to try this. I would strongly recommend sanding only the connector edge, and not the back of the ssd (the part that actually hits the plastic). I sanded moving the board along its long dimension (side to side, it left a thin line on the sandpaper the thickness of the board, if that helps you picture it more clearly). After very minimal sanding (maybe like 5-10 times back and forth on 100? grit sandpaper) it fits, just barely.

OWC doesn't have much to fix with this drive: just get rid of the v-groove and the break off piece at the connector end, route a tiny bit out of the board like they have on past Air SSDs so it clears the battery plastic a bit more, and while they're respinning the board, why not make the screw hole a plated through hole with a pad to contact the screw (pretty much just like the stock SSD). plated through holes seem more durable, and it's much better to have proper pads for contact, because if you don't, the screw could wear through the soldermask and end up contacting the traces anyway, so why not do it on purpose and make sure no issues will arise if the screw does contact it by making the screw contact it on purpose. Shouldn't take very long to fix this issue at all, but it will cost a little bit to respin the board (though probably not that much).

Second, here is a video of me showing a quick diagnosis of the Envoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV3NX2Iczzo

Also, here is an album of the Envoy diagnosis and fix: http://imgur.com/a/YU4c8

Basically the Envoy case is terrible designed. The board seems to not be too bad, but I would recommend the same plated through hole changes (to all 3 holes on this) as I did for the SSD. Also, some proper mounting screws for the PCB would be nice, and would ensure this problem doesn't happen again. Maybe even adding a 3rd (and 4th?) mounting hole and standoff (s) would be the safest way to prevent this. Also, the SSD has a screwhole, but they just put a piece of foam in there that presses the SSD against the top case. It seems like the board is touching the foam, but the part of the SSD that's touching the top case isn't the board, it's one of the flash chips. This is unnecessary stress on the chip and those solder joints (and epoxy) that connect it to the board. It really should have a proper standoff for the SSD to screw in to, and it should hold the SSD low enough to not touch the other side of the case. Some more insulation under the board would be smart as well. Lastly, making sure the case is grounded, instead of kinda leaving it floating, would be much better. EMI isn't likely to be an issue, but the case is aluminum, so you have a free faraday cage. Why not use it? (also, the shroud of the USB connector can easily come in to contact with the case, grounding it. better to make it always grounded, than only sometimes grounded. The case of the Air is grounded). Another really minor thing that almost nothing gets right: the LED is really bright. Why not use a translucent plastic instead of clear plastic? Make the plastic milky white, and make the LED white; this fits the Apple aesthetic better. (this is a really minor nitpick, but why not include it while I'm suggesting things?)

Now onto what actually cause the issue, instead of how to fix it: There are 2 bus caps on the bottom of the Envoy PCB, for the 3v3 rail. With how the PCB and the SSD currently mount, those caps touch the bottom of the case. The PCB is at a slight angle, and the side of those caps that touches the case is the 3v3 side, not the ground side. Whoops. All I did to fix mine is to insulate those caps from the case by adding a layer of electrical tape. There still may be excess pressure on those caps, and there still would be rubbing, so that may be a future failure point, even with the insulation. This is why the board mounting solution needs to be changed, and OWC can just add more insulation.

I am in contact with OWC, we will see what they choose to do.

So it's not really a QC issue at all, more of a QA and design issue.
adcurtin is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 11:21 PM   #99
Miat
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
adcurtin

Greatly appreciate your comments and pics. Been looking at getting both those products myself.

The pic in the Envoy set titled 'Underside of the PCB' is borked, only half is showing up.

Thanks.

Hope OWC can fix these problems quickly, and not damage their reputation too much.
Miat is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 11:57 PM   #100
adcurtin
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Thanks, I guess that picture didn't upload correctly. It didn't have anything the picture after it didn't have, so I just deleted it.
adcurtin is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Air

Tags
macbook air 11, macbook air 2012, owc, ssd

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help Upgrading 2012 MacBook Air 13" SSD umee1989 MacBook Air 8 Oct 26, 2012 06:12 PM
Switch SSD MacBook Air 13" 2012 MiBook84 MacBook Air 9 Jul 20, 2012 07:21 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:23 PM.

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

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