Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Releases MacBook Pro Firmware Update to Address SATA Interface Speeds

3

3NV7

macrumors member
Oct 21, 2008
78
68
BRLawyer said:
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.
Click to expand...

Lighten up, Francis.
 
J

jimthegreek

macrumors member
Nov 20, 2008
73
0
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.
 
Saladinos

Saladinos

macrumors 68000
Feb 26, 2008
1,845
4
Peace said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
A

applecultvictim

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2009
549
0
andiwm2003 said:
actually, he's spot on.
Click to expand...

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

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
applecultvictim said:
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...
Click to expand...
It sounds like you should give Microsoft some feedback.

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

applecultvictim

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2009
549
0
Eidorian said:
It sounds like you should give Microsoft some feedback.

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

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.
 
C

chipmonkey

macrumors newbie
May 21, 2009
20
0
Halifax, Canada
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

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
applecultvictim said:
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.
Click to expand...
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

Full of Win

macrumors 68030
Nov 22, 2007
2,615
1
Ask Apple
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.
 
M

Master Chief

macrumors 6502a
Mar 5, 2009
901
0
Full of Win said:
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.
Click to expand...
LOL Hold you horses please. That can still be of help... we've still not seen any benchmarks so far. Right?
 
A

applecultvictim

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2009
549
0
Eidorian said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
M

mrkitty

macrumors newbie
Aug 27, 2007
9
0
dagamer34 said:
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...
Click to expand...

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

MattInOz

macrumors 68030
Jan 19, 2006
2,760
0
Sydney
applecultvictim said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
G

GodWhomIsMike

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2007
580
2
mrkitty said:
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.... :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the numbers, can you post the numbers after you run the update?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom