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.
2011 MacBook Pros have network issues (Confirmed by Apple)
- Thread starter lundh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's obviously a wireless networking issue affecting a number of people. The guy from Apple obviously confirmed that Apple tech support is aware of the issue.
I mean I'm a fanboy, but you guys who jumped down the throat of the OP are beyond beyond. Lay of the KoolAid kids.
I mean I'm a fanboy, but you guys who jumped down the throat of the OP are beyond beyond. Lay of the KoolAid kids.
After seeing this thread I checked the 20 new MBPs we just got here at work. All are connected wirelessly via 5GHz to an Airport Extreme and none are showing any dropped packets or any issues whatsoever.
The info given on this thread as well as what we see on the Apple discussion forums certainly shows there is an issue somewhere. For whatever reason, it doesn't affect all MBPs.
Is anyone else seeing the issue connecting to an Airport Extreme?
The info given on this thread as well as what we see on the Apple discussion forums certainly shows there is an issue somewhere. For whatever reason, it doesn't affect all MBPs.
Is anyone else seeing the issue connecting to an Airport Extreme?
Regardless of the company, I'm not going to believe one guy claiming that a tech said something. Perhaps someone from Apple tech confirmed it, perhaps they didn't. Until I hear it directly from Apple or Dell or Chevrolet or whomever, there's no reason to believe any secondhand claim of confirmation.
Great news! I wonder what the difference between functional and non functional MBPs are..
Here is what I see when connected to a 11n-network:
Code:
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=48 ttl=64 time=64.912 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=49 ttl=64 time=291.782 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=50 ttl=64 time=215.012 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=51 ttl=64 time=136.190 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=52 ttl=64 time=57.513 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=53 ttl=64 time=285.964 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=54 ttl=64 time=207.537 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=55 ttl=64 time=1.044 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=56 ttl=64 time=50.196 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=57 ttl=64 time=278.814 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=58 ttl=64 time=0.936 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=59 ttl=64 time=121.596 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=60 ttl=64 time=42.954 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=61 ttl=64 time=271.795 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=62 ttl=64 time=193.230 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=63 ttl=64 time=114.259 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=64 ttl=64 time=35.398 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=65 ttl=64 time=263.948 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=66 ttl=64 time=185.361 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=67 ttl=64 time=1.097 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=68 ttl=64 time=28.438 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=69 ttl=64 time=256.774 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=70 ttl=64 time=177.896 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=71 ttl=64 time=99.404 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=72 ttl=64 time=21.690 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=73 ttl=64 time=249.251 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=74 ttl=64 time=171.792 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=75 ttl=64 time=91.922 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=76 ttl=64 time=13.723 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=77 ttl=64 time=242.140 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=78 ttl=64 time=163.271 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=79 ttl=64 time=3.439 ms
^C
--- 10.0.1.50 ping statistics ---
80 packets transmitted, 80 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.711/116.800/291.984/99.129 ms
Hmm can't say if I've had ping or packet loss, but I haven't been looking for it and don't know how. I just know SC2 and WoW have been fine with standard ping as my 2010 MBP. 80ms or so in WoW. Haven't had to shut off airport and turn back on either.
test while not doing any file transfers. That seems to fix the issue.
Some have speculated it's a with power saving.
No dropped or interrupted signals for me, overall better reception, decently fast signal acquisition, and additionally the new Airport card stays impressively cool rather than heating the computer up like a handwarmer like the old ones did.
But at times the speed of the wireless connection inexplicably drops — dramatically. Like by three quarters. I'll switch back to Ethernet and the speed comes right back again, then back to the router and it will be running at the proper speed again. This is on a one-band-or-the-other Airport Extreme set to 5GHz. I haven't yet paid close enough attention to the workplace network (mixture of 2.4 and 5) to see whether it's having the same problem.
So I'm thinking the new card is still a work in progress on firmware.
At least now I know I don't have to play any more games with avoiding getting too close to my router with the computer. That was my first suspicion.
But at times the speed of the wireless connection inexplicably drops — dramatically. Like by three quarters. I'll switch back to Ethernet and the speed comes right back again, then back to the router and it will be running at the proper speed again. This is on a one-band-or-the-other Airport Extreme set to 5GHz. I haven't yet paid close enough attention to the workplace network (mixture of 2.4 and 5) to see whether it's having the same problem.
So I'm thinking the new card is still a work in progress on firmware.
At least now I know I don't have to play any more games with avoiding getting too close to my router with the computer. That was my first suspicion.
I've experienced drops and disconnects on MBP 2011 via Airport connected to an Airport Extreme N router.
But aren't 802.11n and 802.11g standard protocols? Any variants surely cannot be called 'n' or 'g'.
Also, I thought 802.11n had a much better range as it takes advantage of multi-path signal propagation (by using MIMO).
There are several white papers on this on the www and I don't recall a single one mentioning 'g' having a longer range than 'n'. In fact, quite the opposite. Wireless 'n' has a further reach and is more likely able to transmit and receive in signal black-spots.
I've had wireless issues since the last two OSX updates. It's annoying yes but Apple will fix it, or Lion will. But to say it's a known issue is a bit far....
Me too, well at least on and off but as DarwinOSX suggested, it may have something to do with the router itself. My router uses the Atheros chipset which is widely used by the likes of Netgear, D-Link, Linksys and many other router manufacturers. The problem I was having was that the router was issuing my MBP an IP that was already reserved which basically caused an IP conflict... very bizarre! Managed to get round the problem by reserving an IP for my MBP.
Haven't really been able to put my finger on the this but my problem may have something to do with the my router's Atheros AR9285 chipset (or its firmware) not liking what my MBP's Broadcom was throwing at it. Unfortunately I haven't got another Broadcom BCM43xx laptop to test and verify this.
2011 17" MacBook Pro. Airport Extreme, 802.11n 5GHz only.
I see no issues. I'm wondering if the choice of router is part of the problem. I know from experience that the Macs work extremely well with the Airport Extreme/Express/Time Capsule. I would see erratic behavior back in 2009 when I was using my Belkin N+. Haven't had an issue since switching to Airport though.
Attachments
Hmmm, well I use an old time capsule for my macs on 5ghz, but it is running in slave mode from a Belkin play I also use for my wireless printer and iPhone etc, and my printer has a fixed IP. Then again it's only set on the printer and is only on when I use it.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
My ping to my router is < 0.1ms
Al Coholic said:
My ping to my router is < 0.1ms
I've noticed that on my school's wi-fi network (note sure about type or frequency) but my 2.2 15" MBP does drop out sometimes. I cannot go to any websites, and I get an exclamation mark over the AirPort indicator in the status bar. Meanwhile people on other laptops (mostly other MBPs) do not have any problems with network dropouts.
Many times the company WON'T admit that.
Do you think that Ford admitted that the 88-95 Taurus had a transmission that was almost guaranteed to die @ 60k miles? Hell no, thats why a lawsuit started.
If you keep expecting a company to officially admit to a problem then you are blind to how companies work, that would mean they are obligated to fix it.
I actually thought those numbers were pretty good, all things considered.
here are my numbers with a minimum of things being transferred (5GHz network).
Code:
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=0.708 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.609 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.656 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.819 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.775 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.826 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.691 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1.154 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.808 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.656 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.790 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.845 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.845 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.706 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.685 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.639 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.786 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.840 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.689 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.710 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=1.154 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=1.242 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=0.794 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.818 ms
--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
25 packets transmitted, 25 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.609/0.797/1.242/0.159 msbut whatever. my bottom line is that it's working just fine, as I said in my first post. Never had any dropouts in 2 months, including trips through various airport wifi setups and such.
home router is a WNDR3700. if you're having problems, maybe you guys should consider upgrading?
There's no reason at this point. In my case I'd be replacing a nearly new AEBS and I wouldn't consider replacing even if it would fix the problem.
But yeah, there's nowhere near enough data to suggest it's a compatibility issue with the AP. At this point it could be software, or simply luck of the draw.
yea, it could be either. perhaps the network card drivers are problematic with some routers. perhaps the network card itself is the problem for some of you. if I were a betting man, I'd put money on either (1) a software problem creating issues with some routers...or (2) some routers simply not working properly with the new MBP's.
I don't know which it is...but I can tell you with confidence that my MBP attached to a WNDR3700 pings like a computer connected via ethernet cable and runs like a dream. as such, I'd recommend trying out this router, even if you plan on returning it after our experimenting with it. at least that way, you'll know it isn't a hardware issue with your Mac.
I just did a comparison between my MBP and Sony laptop. Router is a new Cisco E3000. MBP is getting:
Whereas the Sony is getting:
I really hope this gets fixed soon...
Code:
--- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
8 packets transmitted, 8 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.483/36.065/86.188/28.549 msWhereas the Sony is getting:
Code:
Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 1ms, Average = 0msI really hope this gets fixed soon...
I know that it is an issue with ny MBP though. I have had other wireless devices connected to the same network with no issues at all. (A Dell Precision M4500, a Alu MacBook and a couple of smartphones and friends computers.)
My base station is the first dual band AEBS by the way.
This is what it looks like several times a day for me:
Code:
PING 10.0.1.50 (10.0.1.50): 56 data bytes
Request timeout for icmp_seq 0
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
Request timeout for icmp_seq 2
Request timeout for icmp_seq 3
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=240.889 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 5
Request timeout for icmp_seq 6
Request timeout for icmp_seq 7
Request timeout for icmp_seq 8
Request timeout for icmp_seq 9
Request timeout for icmp_seq 10
Request timeout for icmp_seq 11
Request timeout for icmp_seq 12
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=110.365 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.842 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=5.206 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=1.122 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=1.300 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 18
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=154.010 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=119.239 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=42.339 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=153.304 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=153.203 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 24
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=66.336 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 26
Request timeout for icmp_seq 27
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=17.470 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=29 ttl=64 time=1.168 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.1.50: icmp_seq=30 ttl=64 time=1.070 ms
^C
--- 10.0.1.50 ping statistics ---
31 packets transmitted, 15 packets received, 51.6% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.842/71.191/240.889/75.555 msAgreed. While sometimes the "mine works - so you must not know what you're doing argument holds" - I don't think so in this case. I too have erratic ping results - but have generally good overall wireless performance - including 'n' - but also have optimally located routers at home with strong signal coverage. I have noticed periodic erratic changes in performance - which I can't correlate to anything. The thread over on Apple Support is an interesting read - and some have managed to correlate real performance issues as signal strength drops - and while this is normal - it seems to be a significant performance reduction compared to other machines in the same location, windows or Mac. This is one of those little troubling 'bugs' because it's quite likely to go unnoticed by the average user - and there are so many things that people would look at first - since wireless inherently has hundreds of factors that can impact performance.. I'm glad people are looking at it - and I hope Apple looks closely at it and weighs in with what's causing it - and hopefully with a fix. All you nay sayers - head over to the Apple support site and do some reading before flaming folks with this issue.