2011 MacBook Pros have network issues (Confirmed by Apple)

[lundh]

The 2011 MacBook Pros suffer form bad Airport performance with unstable ping and packet loss. The issue is not just affecting my computer but seems to be a general issue with the 2011 MacBook Pros. This has been confirmed by both the service center that tried to fix my computer and by Apple engineers.

The service center tried to replace the Airport card and a fresh install of the OS but the issue persisted, they also tested one of their demo computers with the same result. Apple got logs from me and tried the same experiment on one of their 2011 MBPs. That computer is also affected by the same issue.

The unstable response times are easy to see if you ping a computer on the same network. Response times vary between less then 1 ms up to and above 300 ms. Average seems to be around 100 ms on a network where other computes receive their response in less then 3 ms on average.

I also notice near 100% packet loss from time to time. (Several times a day with heavy usage.) The 5 GHz networks seems to be worst affected by this, 2.4 GHz networks are slightly more stable in my experience.

Apple has told me that the engineers are aware of the issue, that it affects all 2011 MBP (13, 15 and 17), but that there currently is no solution or timeline for a solution. “They might fix it soon but on the the hand, there might not be a solution until Lion.

 

[Al Coholic]

Sources please regarding the "Confirmed by Apple" part.

(And the testimony of a 17 year old Apple store genius with yesterday's Latte stains on his shirt doesn't count).

 

[lundh]

Apple Tier 2 Technical support.

 

[gorskiegangsta]

widespread issue = questionable

I don't know where you got your "confirmed by Apple" information from. My 2011 13MBP certainly has had absolutely no issues connecting/maintaining network connection for the past month I had it. You may have a defective unit or the issue may be with your router or ISP.
Concerning the title ofthis post: I don't want to be rude or anything but without valid link to Apple statement this looks a lot like trolling.

 

[GGJstudios]

Apple Tier 2 Technical support.

The word of any individual Apple employee isn't sufficient to declare something "confirmed by Apple", unless that employee is Steve Jobs. There have been a great number of examples posted in this forum about Apple employees, "Geniuses", etc. who had no idea what they were talking about. Unless Apple puts it in print or posts it on their website, it's not "confirmed".

A more accurate thread title would be "My 2011 MacBook Pro has network issues", since it's obvious that not all 2011 MBPs share your problem. To edit your thread title, use this tip.

 

[altecXP]

The word of any individual Apple employee isn't sufficient to declare something "confirmed by Apple", unless that employee is Steve Jobs. There have been a great number of examples posted in this forum about Apple employees, "Geniuses", etc. who had no idea what they were talking about. Unless Apple puts it in print or posts it on their website, it's not "confirmed".

A more accurate thread title would be "My 2011 MacBook Pro has network issues", since it's obvious that not all 2011 MBPs share your problem. To edit your thread title, use this tip.

Apple, the company with such great support you cant trust their Tier 2 support...

 

[lundh]

It is not just one individual at Apple, there are several people are involved. He got the confirmation from what he called "engineering" and the after sales department refuse to replace the unit because it is a known issue that wont be resolved by a replacement. I have the confirmation in writing (email).

The reseller also identified the exact same issue on their demo unit.

Why not run a test?

If you have a 2011 MacBook Pro ping a computer on the same network (when you are connected to a 11n-ntwork) for a few minutes. Note the min, max and avg values. (In terminal run ping <ip>).

 

[brentsg]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

The erratic pings have been replicated on many 2011s. I've yet to use one that didn't do it. I've never experienced the packet loss, however.

 

[altecXP]

I get .3-.8ms on my last gen i5. peaking @.9
I get .2-.5ms on my new SB i7. peaking @.6

The new macbook has both a lower average ping and is more consistent, in the high .4, middle .5 range. The older i5 is all over high .5-mid 8's.

Both pinging the same server in my office.

I also get good ping's in StarCraft 2.

 

[Tomb01]

I don't know where you got your "confirmed by Apple" information from. My 2011 13MBP certainly has had absolutely no issues connecting/maintaining network connection for the past month I had it. You may have a defective unit or the issue may be with your router or ISP.
Concerning the title ofthis post: I don't want to be rude or anything but without valid link to Apple statement this looks a lot like trolling.

You might want to check the Apple discussion forum at:

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2775868?start=0&tstart=90

Apple replaced my 2011 17" MBP, with no affect on the performance or ping issues. I did find that I could get almost the same performance as my 2009 MBP by forcing a connection to 802.11G instead of N (5 times faster with G than with N on the same network and access point). Two different Genius bar tech's had no problem replicating the issue with the erratic ping times, and were able to show that the previous generation do not have the problem, testing several systems from 2011 against the older models. All the 2011 models in the two stores had erratic pings, but on their G network were only slightly slower than the older models. There are several posters on the Apple support discussion that report replaced systems or Airport cards with no better network connectivity. I do not experience the dropouts (usually sit within 10 feet of my home network access point), but found that if set to 802.11N the best speed I could get from my 25Mbps FIOS connection was about 5.5MBPS, compared to regular speeds of 26MBPS from my 2009 Macbook pro. Will be calling Apple again this week to try to talk to engineering to determine what kind of progress they are making....

Definitely being reported by a large number of people on the Apple forums. Easily documented with ping results like this (on my local network, to my local router, should be a constant single millisecond time):

Connected to my Access Point via 802.11G:

Ping has started…

PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=1.284 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.131 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.433 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.124 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.363 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=1.434 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=1.167 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=1.399 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1.151 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=2.245 ms

--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.124/1.373/2.245/0.314 ms

Connected to my access point (identical network, only change is G to N) via 802.11N:

Ping has started…

PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=3.383 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=3.727 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=3.354 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.460 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=135.359 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 5
Request timeout for icmp_seq 6
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=2223.518 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=2680.255 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=1715.300 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=765.192 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=485.578 ms

--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.354/801.913/2680.255/973.606 ms


Try it yourself. I think the majority of Apple users probably still have 802.11G networks at home, so they are unaware of the N issues, and even many of the N users are not doing large transfers so only see slight changes in their 'surfing' behavior. (my opinion, anyway)

but this is easily repeatable, and the problem was unaffected by them replacing my laptop.

 

[Tomb01]

I get .3-.8ms on my last gen i5. peaking @.9
I get .2-.5ms on my new SB i7. peaking @.6

The new macbook has both a lower average ping and is more consistent, in the high .4, middle .5 range. The older i5 is all over high .5-mid 8's.

Both pinging the same server in my office.

I also get good ping's in StarCraft 2.

Same with me, as long as I am not using an N network... So don't upgrade your network!

 

[barkomatic]

Confirmed or not, my 2011 MBP keeps dropping my wifi connection. I believe it.

 

[adrian1480]

no range issues here, not a connection drop in the 2 months I've had it.

Not one.

Netgear WNDR3700.

 

[gorskiegangsta]

These are my results. I did the test over 15 min interval.

The Huge 23k ms ping you see here only happened when i left the computer idle for a minute or so (first erratic ping was at about 10k, second was 13k and the third was 23k). I'm thinking it could potentially be an airport power saving feature.

That being said, I haven't experienced any packet loss or performance issues.

EDIT: 2nd image is of my 30 min test.

 

[daneoni]

Can't say i've noticed anything out of the ordinary. Use an AEBS.

Ping has started…

PING www.macrumors.com (74.86.132.180): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=136.231 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=364.142 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=285.064 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=203.045 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=141.888 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=357.051 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=277.982 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=204.455 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=125.483 ms
64 bytes from 74.86.132.180: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=347.477 ms

--- www.macrumors.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 125.483/244.282/364.142/89.493 ms

 

[adrian1480]

edit: oops. it randomly connected to my 2.4GHz network instead of my 5GHz network.

5GHz stats:

for those wondering, the difference between connecting @ 5GHz vs. 2.4 for me is huge. When I'm connected to my 2.4GHz bandwidth signal (I have a dual-band router), my home networking transfer speed over wifi is around 4MB/s-5MB/s. When connected over 5GHz, that number jumps to 9MB/12MB/s.

Get yourself a dual-band router if you transfer files from computer to computer in your home network or if you watch movies on your TV that are stored on your computer (via DLNA, PS3MediaServer or similar). It's just awesome. (it doesn't matter for the internet...as your ISP likely doesn't provide upload or download speeds that exceed 4MB/s-5MB/s that a basic wireless N connection speed offers.

 

[DustinT]

Well, I just just did a few tests and I seem to be able to duplicate this issue. It hasn't interfered with normal usage of the system so I suppose I hadn't noticed. Connecting with ethernet definitely corrected it instantly. I'd imagine Apple will do a system update sooner or later that will correct it.

 

[DarwinOSX]

Apple, the company with such great support you cant trust their Tier 2 support...

If you had actually read the thread before posting you would know there is no confirmation that Apple support made a statement about this. It sounds like they are trying to solve his particular issue which does not mean OMG all 2011 MBP's have a network issue...

I just ran a test and see no dropouts. Using a 2011 MBP 15" and 2nd Gen AP Extreme using both N and G. Keep in mind N has less range than G and they are variants of N and G. If you have an issue I would be looking at you router configuration and location before jumping to conclusions about the MBP wireless.

 

[DarwinOSX]

Confirmed or not, my 2011 MBP keeps dropping my wifi connection. I believe it.

What is your router? There are many reasons wi-fi can drop off or drop packets. In fact people who post saying they do or do not have tis issue should all post their router at a minimum and even better a network utility test.

 

[DustinT]

Here's my results pinging my wifi 'N' router to which I'm connected at 160.

Ping has started…

PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=66.986 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.859 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=12.222 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=36.058 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=59.931 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=83.767 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=5.190 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=29.073 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=53.034 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=76.857 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=5.760 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=21.817 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=45.928 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=69.768 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.895 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=14.836 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=38.787 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=62.548 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.523 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=8.888 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=31.929 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=55.890 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=79.488 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=3.314 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=24.903 ms

--- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
25 packets transmitted, 25 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.523/35.570/83.767/27.425 ms

When I connect through ethernet I get this. The avg and standard deviation are so much lower here! Shesh!

Ping has started…

PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.224 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.410 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.395 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.270 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.412 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.422 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.336 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.268 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.419 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.413 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.308 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.295 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.256 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.367 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.427 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.351 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.368 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.327 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.432 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.433 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.430 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=0.296 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=0.500 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=0.291 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.351 ms

--- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
25 packets transmitted, 25 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.224/0.360/0.500/0.069 ms

I also tested with my router set to 'G' and got almost the same results as the 'N'. Looks like that solution doesn't work for all users.

 

[lundh]

My wireless numbers are about three times as bad as yours DustinT. The wired ones are spot on. I will post a log as soon as I get back home.

 

[DustinT]

My wireless numbers are about three times as bad as yours DustinT. The wired ones are spot on. I will post a log as soon as I get back home.

Thats probably why I hadn't noticed it. Its certainly bad but not as bad as yours.

 

[adrian1480]

PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=3.252 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.766 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=6.004 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=4.980 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=2.528 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=3.196 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=7.771 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=1.699 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1.549 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=4.921 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=3.153 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=1.893 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=4.254 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=4.687 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=5.272 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=5.496 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=5.801 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=4.563 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=3.079 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=3.551 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=2.597 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=3.433 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=3.342 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=1.010 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=1.036 ms

--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
25 packets transmitted, 25 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.010/3.753/7.771/1.654 ms

while running an 11.3MB/s wireless transfer...

 

[mark28]

The 2011 MacBook Pros suffer form bad Airport performance with unstable ping and packet loss. The issue is not just affecting my computer but seems to be a general issue with the 2011 MacBook Pros. This has been confirmed by both the service center that tried to fix my computer and by Apple engineers.

The service center tried to replace the Airport card and a fresh install of the OS but the issue persisted, they also tested one of their demo computers with the same result. Apple got logs from me and tried the same experiment on one of their 2011 MBPs. That computer is also affected by the same issue.

The unstable response times are easy to see if you ping a computer on the same network. Response times vary between less then 1 ms up to and above 300 ms. Average seems to be around 100 ms on a network where other computes receive their response in less then 3 ms on average.

I also notice near 100% packet loss from time to time. (Several times a day with heavy usage.) The 5 GHz networks seems to be worst affected by this, 2.4 GHz networks are slightly more stable in my experience.

Apple has told me that the engineers are aware of the issue, that it affects all 2011 MBP (13, 15 and 17), but that there currently is no solution or timeline for a solution. “They might fix it soon but on the the hand, there might not be a solution until Lion.

Weird, I thought the 2011 had better WIFI than the 2010 models from what i read in a review? ( i believe it was anandtech )

 

[DustinT]

Weird, I thought the 2011 had better WIFI than the 2010 models from what i read in a review? ( i believe it was anandtech )

Its supposed to. Looks like a bug.