SSD prices were double the price last year, and they're expected to dramatically fall in price in the next by another 50%. A 250 GB SSD should be around $250.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13" and 15" MacBook Pros Have a Slower SATA Interface
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
SSD prices were double the price last year, and they're expected to dramatically fall in price in the next by another 50%. A 250 GB SSD should be around $250.
Hybrid hard drives take me back to the Vista launch. We're finally getting around to some solutions but not on a single drive though. It feels very stillborn even today.
I am sorry I didn't mean to stop your venting, I appreciate it's important.
But I am not inciting crap either, I am just saying it like I see it, because I too have spent quite some money on apple, of course it's only a theory as you said, I could be off, but it seems (as another poster above me said) a very rational well founded theory.
If yours ssd is not performing as well as it should take it back and ask them for a better controller, I will be the first one backing you and the whole community here. But I don't think that will be the case, unless you have one of those $1500 ssds, which if you have one, just pay a good technitian a minimal compared to what you paid, to have it modded with a better controller.
Oh boy, it's one more thing to bitch about. I think you just made about 90% of the people that who is here day!
Here's where SATA speed really matters, at least to me:
I wonder if somebody has already (as far as I've read through the forum thread and this news thread) mentioned audio production, and especially sample instruments.
I've bought the new MBP 13" 2.53, which I also use for Logic Studio. I use sampler instruments with most of my projects. One I use often is a very good piano sound. These samples are often large files that are loaded every time I open a new song, and every time I change an instrument within a sample track while the song is open. From time to time I want to just check which sound fits better to the song.
Now I could only make a quick test, run activity monitor, and could see that on my new MBP with a medium speed SSD (Mushkin europe), the real transfer rate to load these samples is around 75 MB/s, which translates to a load time of around 20 seconds for just my beloved piano instument.
Earlier, with HDD, it took over 1 minute for just this piano sound.
What bothers me most, is changing the sample instruments when working in the middle of a project - it's a break that matters, because it's not 1 or 2, but 10 or 20 seconds. All in all, working on different projects an evening, I'm easily waiting many minutes for samples to load.
Now, as much as I love especially this new MBP and making music on it - and I won't give it back for that reason - I'm planning to reduce these waiting times even more, when good and big SSDs get more affordable.
This is why I feel SATA I or II matters to me: Waiting more than just seconds for big files to load while in the flow of making music.
And again, I really adore this MBP, it's simply the best notebook I've ever had as far as I can tell until now, and doing stuff, work and making music with it is just wonderful!
I just hope, well, actually expect Apple to shed light on this issue, and provide a solution to enable SATA II.
I wonder if somebody has already (as far as I've read through the forum thread and this news thread) mentioned audio production, and especially sample instruments.
I've bought the new MBP 13" 2.53, which I also use for Logic Studio. I use sampler instruments with most of my projects. One I use often is a very good piano sound. These samples are often large files that are loaded every time I open a new song, and every time I change an instrument within a sample track while the song is open. From time to time I want to just check which sound fits better to the song.
Now I could only make a quick test, run activity monitor, and could see that on my new MBP with a medium speed SSD (Mushkin europe), the real transfer rate to load these samples is around 75 MB/s, which translates to a load time of around 20 seconds for just my beloved piano instument.
Earlier, with HDD, it took over 1 minute for just this piano sound.
What bothers me most, is changing the sample instruments when working in the middle of a project - it's a break that matters, because it's not 1 or 2, but 10 or 20 seconds. All in all, working on different projects an evening, I'm easily waiting many minutes for samples to load.
Now, as much as I love especially this new MBP and making music on it - and I won't give it back for that reason - I'm planning to reduce these waiting times even more, when good and big SSDs get more affordable.
This is why I feel SATA I or II matters to me: Waiting more than just seconds for big files to load while in the flow of making music.
And again, I really adore this MBP, it's simply the best notebook I've ever had as far as I can tell until now, and doing stuff, work and making music with it is just wonderful!
I just hope, well, actually expect Apple to shed light on this issue, and provide a solution to enable SATA II.
Excellent post, I am bookmarking this page solely on the virtue of your post. You truelly honoured your decontruction name.
You have no idea what you're talking about. The problem is on Apple's end, not the SSD's.
I'll stop being a jerk after this post, I promise.
I feel like I have grown up, because I'm watching all the chaos going on in Iran or watching potential healthcare reform in America fail again...and then I check Macrumors, like I do every day, and rather than seeing joy or apathy at the new computers and their awesome batteries, I see an angry mob growing because of something that sucks for some people but doesn't really deserve the angry mob I see proportionate to other things 1: in the world or 2: that Apple has done to its "core base." If I spent $2000 on this laptop, I'd say "damn it's fast," 1.5, 3.0, or else, since in all other respects, it is.
If that's you really think, you shouldn't be on a tech forum. If people didn't complain about this stuff, Apple and other companies would screw us over time and time again.
That was me. Kinda annoying that they can't disclose something as basic as that. I could look on the box of a $400 BB laptop and get that information, but on a $1500 laptop, it can't be disclosed?
I'm really on the fence with getting the 2.53 GHz 13" Macbook Pro. I'd be upgrading from a 2.16 GHz White Macbook, with 2GB DDR2 ram, GMA950 graphics, and a 320GB hard drive (which I upgraded myself).
Oh, and this is the SATA interface on my current Macbook:
Intel ICH7-M AHCI:
Vendor: Intel
Product: ICH7-M AHCI
Speed: 1.5 Gigabit
Description: AHCI Version 1.10 Supported
WDC WD3200BEVT-00ZCT0:
Capacity: 298.09 GB
Model: WDC WD3200BEVT-00ZCT0
Oh, and this is the SATA interface on my current Macbook:
Intel ICH7-M AHCI:
Vendor: Intel
Product: ICH7-M AHCI
Speed: 1.5 Gigabit
Description: AHCI Version 1.10 Supported
WDC WD3200BEVT-00ZCT0:
Capacity: 298.09 GB
Model: WDC WD3200BEVT-00ZCT0
It may be excusable if Apple hadn't downgraded and dumbed down all kinds of other things over the past few years.
It's called a Macbook Pro. There is no logic in replacing ExpressCard with SD card. It's not as versatile. Sure, maybe and SD card on a 13 inch Macbook would make sense, but not on a $3200 MBP.
I meant that.
It's still lesser performance.
But there is no good excuse with the slower SATA.
That's true. I'd still want to option to actually have a fast hard drive work at its full potential, though.
One more thing, in Australia, we haven't got a price decrease. The Macbook Pro isn't cheaper, Apple just introduced a new model without the 9600M graphics card. With Applecare, it's still A$3750 for a Pro. After the amount of hardware failures I've had, AppleCare is definitely needed.
You are not serious, right? I went from the stock 5400RPM drive to the WD Black with 16MB cache 7200RPM and it is not only noticeably faster but it tests out at over 2.5 faster in EVERY category - period. You WILL notice a difference and not just a small one - but it comes at the expense of battery life when doing anything but web work and limited applications suck as Open Office or Word and possible iWeb and such.
D
Less than 1% of users are probably using their airbags in their cars. We should remove those too, huh?
You still don't get it. The uMBP I have right now ALREADY has 3 Gbps SATA. The new ones do not. THAT is a downgrade.
Wait, is it lower power or thermal ramifications? Make up your mind.
I'll be a jerk one more time.
It sounds like you're supposedly being screwed time and time again anyway. We don't even get the already-barebones remotes packed in laptops anymore!
But I do...I do agree that there's no reason to decrease numbers these days and shame on Apple for it. It's just...it's only by being the faux-tech-fan that I am that I get confused seeing people complain about a computer that got better to such a majority of the customers, even, in my assumptions, Mac fans and tech-lovers, compared to what Apple sold two weeks ago.
I thought there was room for both of us, but if SATA keeps you up at night, you truly are more passionate than me, and I'll let you have your forum.
Adios!
Thanks I see them. Man this is bad. I hate to say this I agree with some of you who feel that Apple shouldn't call these Macs with SATA I, a MacBook Pro they should have kept the name MacBook. This screw the users of upgradeability. I mean there is a difference from SATA 192MBps and SATA II 384MBps. Especially when need the most in reading and writing. This makes a difference when you accessing data simultaneously in situation importing RAW photos into Aperture and or importing 4GB 1080p MPEG-4 Video from a Canon 5D Mark II. I mean honestly on a day to day routine what is our typical reading and writing rates? If its under range of SATA then I guess, but if in SATA II range then it wouldn't be fair to everybody.
Not anymore. Apple would love to have a customer base consisting entirely of apologists like you.
I really don't think it's fair to criticize for being upset about this issue. I spent $2,220 on a top of the line laptop, and I expect it to at least have the same sata interface as a $400 netbook!
I also think this was a mistake, and Apple will try to rectify it.
I also think this was a mistake, and Apple will try to rectify it.
Sata Downgrade Aka: Macbook Slow
This is a FREAKING NIGHTMARE.... Everyone should be sending Apple feedback here: http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html
--
This is a FREAKING NIGHTMARE.... Everyone should be sending Apple feedback here: http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html
--
What's really warped about it is that the new SATA III 6.0Gbps spec has recently been released, and some high end motherboard manufacturers are already implementing it. Kinda a slap in the face to Apple users if Apple did indeed step back to a dead SATA I spec at the end of the SATA II's life.
If all you want to do is spew emotional rants, maybe a tech forum is not the right place for you? A tech forum ought to be a place for tech-talk, not endless drivel about being "screwed over".
So far it seems all are agreed the new MBP make use of the same chips, therefore apple have not saved any money by capping at 1,5. Right?
There are probably reasons for the capping that are as yet unknown to us, there have been some suggestions on this forum so far, nothing proven, but that apple are "screwing us over" seems the least likely so far.
And what the heck is an "apple loyalist" ???? Do you spend your $$$ loyaly? buy blindly? I would think most of us define ourselves as "consumers" or "users" (or even "pro users"
), and as such we are responsible for checking the specs before we buy. A loyalist makes you sound like a blind believer, now disappointed and angry. It's a computer, wife/husband.
It's not as if apple promised at the WWDC that the MBP were 3.0 and now we catch them out and find they're 1,5. Don't like the product? Don't buy it. Or return it. Buy something else. But have the decency to let those forum members who have some tech knowledge propose what may be behind this capping, and let prospective buyers & users read the posts without having to wade through your angry venting. it after all as you pointed out a tech forum, not a crying forum.
- Status