2016 Touch Bar...DEAD SSD!!!

[Mindinversion]

With all due respect to two pages of Apple bashing, I think the O/P has a VERY important point, which is: Time machine is one of the most user friendly easy to setup backup tools in existence. There is virtually NO REASON to not have a backup in case of damage or theft, spontaneous combustion, or random run-ins with trains, tornadoes, hurricanes, snow storms, or tech hating luddites.

That said, there is a PERFECTLY GOOD REASON Apple soldered the SSD on the logic board: LATENCY.

For those who do not understand, Latency is the time it takes from the start of a command to the end of the command. For example, when you open a program and it opens instantly, that is an example of low latency. If it takes5-10 seconds to load [or more] the longer the time between execution and action, the longer the latency. If you've ever had to wait forever for a webpage to load... same concept.

By taking the interface out of the SSD entirely they can minimize latency between the SSD and the PCI-E lanes the data travels through, dramatically shortening time between action and reaction. It has the additional effect of making the overall package smaller and more energy efficient as well, so it's a bit of a no brainer to do it that way.

And as far as upgradable storage is concerned, you can EASILY buy a 20 or 40Gb thunderbolt 3 cable and a Samsung T3 [I think Sandisk makes a similar one] USB C equipped SSD and add up to a TB of external storage at INTERNAL SSD Speeds. Granted, it's not INTERNAL, but if you're working with large data projects the odds are you're probably managing external media ANYWAY. If you're just looking for more space for games. . . why did you buy a Mac? But it's fast enough to run another O/S off of at similar latency to native OS X, so the ONLY complaint is having to have an external drive....

But the Samsung T3 is the size of a credit card flat, and maybe 3 stacked together thick.

 

[SteveJUAE]

I don't follow. Customers don't think Apple should benefit from the way they design their machines? I think they do. Maybe you've got in mind a different point, that customers don't want Apple to be greedy or something? That may be true. Some customers have always complained about Apple in that regard. Not sure their complaints are well grounded, but they no doubt affect who buys.

As we were discussing specifically SSD where you noted there are likely some benefits to going this route I simply noted it's likely all were in Apples favour and possibly very few are in the consumers and some consumers may perceive the gains were out weighed by the loses

EG If Apple were perceived to have much lower costs of production that are not passed on and only offered slightly faster speeds but less options, upgrades and higher costs on some replacements due to no removable SSD

Hope this clarifies my point

 

[ZapNZs]

Spilling wine on a laptop is dumb. Not backing up data is dumber. Apple doesn't owe anyone a thing if they abuse the machine and don't employ free safety protocols.

When my son spilled milk on his old MacBook, it could not be repaired AT ALL.


R.

Agreed. Apple isnt responsible for User negligence when someone damages the machine out of their own misuse.

For that matter, no company is.

 

[CaptRB]

With all due respect to two pages of Apple bashing, I think the O/P has a VERY important point, which is: Time machine is one of the most user friendly easy to setup backup tools in existence. There is virtually NO REASON to not have a backup in case of damage or theft, spontaneous combustion, or random run-ins with trains, tornadoes, hurricanes, snow storms, or tech hating luddites.

That said, there is a PERFECTLY GOOD REASON Apple soldered the SSD on the logic board: LATENCY.

For those who do not understand, Latency is the time it takes from the start of a command to the end of the command. For example, when you open a program and it opens instantly, that is an example of low latency. If it takes5-10 seconds to load [or more] the longer the time between execution and action, the longer the latency. If you've ever had to wait forever for a webpage to load... same concept.

By taking the interface out of the SSD entirely they can minimize latency between the SSD and the PCI-E lanes the data travels through, dramatically shortening time between action and reaction. It has the additional effect of making the overall package smaller and more energy efficient as well, so it's a bit of a no brainer to do it that way.

And as far as upgradable storage is concerned, you can EASILY buy a 20 or 40Gb thunderbolt 3 cable and a Samsung T3 [I think Sandisk makes a similar one] USB C equipped SSD and add up to a TB of external storage at INTERNAL SSD Speeds. Granted, it's not INTERNAL, but if you're working with large data projects the odds are you're probably managing external media ANYWAY. If you're just looking for more space for games. . . why did you buy a Mac? But it's fast enough to run another O/S off of at similar latency to native OS X, so the ONLY complaint is having to have an external drive....

But the Samsung T3 is the size of a credit card flat, and maybe 3 stacked together thick.

VERY well said.


R.

 

[ZapNZs]

What size is your friend's SSD?

 

[CaptRB]

What size is your friend's SSD?

I believe it's a 256, base.


R.

 

[MH01]

Should be the same as with earlier models: if the damage is to the SSD, you won't be able to get your data back. If the SSD is unaffected, you should be able to. So I suspect the spill affected the SSD.

Yes and no. The 2015 and older models, you just remove the SSD from the logic board and retrieve the data, if the SSD is okay.

2016 model, SSD is solderered onto the MB, so of the MB is damaged and the SSD okay, it does matter. You cannot access the data. The apple retrieval tool still requires that the logic board be operational enough to access the SSD, the 2015 model no such dependency.

The 2016 model is far behind he 2015 in terms of getting access to the SSD data. I've had many many machines desktop and laptop die in the past, removal of the HDD meant I could get to my data, soldered is a major step backwards.

2016 SSD data retrieval process - high risk due to dependency on logic board

2015 method - much higher chance of getting data , as logic board dependency is removed . Caveat being ssd is fine

Though as you said if the SSD is dead - same result, though they are quite resilient .

 

[Sanpete]

Yes and no. The 2015 and older models, you just remove the SSD from the logic board and retrieve the data, if the SSD is okay.

2016 model, SSD is solderered onto the MB, so of the MB is damaged and the SSD okay, it does matter. You cannot access the data. The apple retrieval tool still requires that the logic board be operational enough to access the SSD, the 2015 model no such dependency.

The 2016 model is far behind he 2015 in terms of getting access to the SSD data. I've had many many machines desktop and laptop die in the past, removal of the HDD meant I could get to my data, soldered is a major step backwards.

2016 SSD data retrieval process - high risk due to dependency on logic board

2015 method - much higher chance of getting data , as logic board dependency is removed . Caveat being ssd is fine

Though as you said if the SSD is dead - same result, though they are quite resilient .

We have a poster above who says the same thing, but is unable to reveal the source. Where do you get your information that the logic board must be able to be used?

 

[MH01]

We have a poster above who says the same thing, but is unable to reveal the source. Where do you get your information that the logic board must be able to be used?

Let me walk you through the assumptions.

Retrival tool has power pack -

The location of the SSD - green

Location of the connector to SSD

There must be no damage from the connector to the SSD and the logic board must accept power . Just the distance they are apart adds extra risk.

That power pack is quite impressive. USB-C can provide enough power to run a SSD..... that's my logic

 

[ZapNZs]

I believe it's a 256, base.


R.

That's good to know for out of warranty repair costs (I tend to keep my systems longer than what AppleCare covers). I was concerned the pricing would be much higher because of the SSD, but it sounds like they really are subsidizing it strongly if they were only asking $750 for a logic board replacement...especially considering its a TB model!

Hopefully Apple gets back to me on what the out of warranty repair costs would be on the larger hard drive sizes, but this makes me optimistic.

 

[killawat]

There must be no damage from the connector to the SSD and the logic board must accept power . Just the distance they are apart adds extra risk.

The risk you outline Imo is no greater than with a removal SSD as well, i.e. a condition that renders the SSD/Flash memory itself unusable in the above recovery scenario would also destroy an m.2 or 2.5" ssd as well. (Complete submersion, physical damage etc).

It really seems that only the NAND and their controller are required to be energized.

 

[Sanpete]

Let me walk you through the assumptions.

Retrival tool has power pack -

The location of the SSD - green

Location of the connector to SSD

There must be no damage from the connector to the SSD and the logic board must accept power . Just the distance they are apart adds extra risk.

That power pack is quite impressive. USB-C can provide enough power to run a SSD..... that's my logic

I see. I don't make much of the location of the port (the SSD chips are to the left edge in that photo, by the way), but the power brick does suggest something more than just the SSD chips are being powered.

 

[tubeexperience]

We have a poster above who says the same thing, but is unable to reveal the source. Where do you get your information that the logic board must be able to be used?

Well, I can't proof it to you, but I can suggest to you a strong evidence.

In a 2015 MacBook Pro, you simply pull the SSD like this:

Then you can put it in an enclosure like this one:

Notice that it doesn't require any external power aside from those provided from the USB.

________________________________________________________________________

Now, in the 2016 MacBook Pro, Apple has to use this tool:

Notice how it is externally powered. If all that is needed is to power the SSD, USB would be able to provide sufficient power and external power would NOT be required.

 

[Sanpete]

Notice how it is externally powered. If all that is needed is to power the SSD, USB would be able to provide sufficient power and external power would NOT be required.

Yes, @MH01 was making that point too. Odd that so little information about this has reached the public.

 

[tubeexperience]

Yes, @MH01 was making that point too. Odd that so little information about this has reached the public.

That's because you are not suppose to know about it.

 

[Sanpete]

That's because you are not suppose to know about it.

Which is odd.

 

[MH01]

I see. I don't make much of the location of the port (the SSD chips are to the left edge in that photo, by the way), but the power brick does suggest something more than just the SSD chips are being powered.

You are correct. Too early in the morning and I misread MB for GB

Yeah the powerbrick is the basis for my assumption, you just don't require something that beefy to power a SSD, and if it was just USB-C powered , no need to place the logic board in that enclosure.

Guess in time we will find out more. Still would have liked a removal SSD to avoid this.

 

[kbk75]

With all due respect to two pages of Apple bashing, I think the O/P has a VERY important point, which is: Time machine is one of the most user friendly easy to setup backup tools in existence. There is virtually NO REASON to not have a backup in case of damage or theft, spontaneous combustion, or random run-ins with trains, tornadoes, hurricanes, snow storms, or tech hating luddites.

That said, there is a PERFECTLY GOOD REASON Apple soldered the SSD on the logic board: LATENCY.

For those who do not understand, Latency is the time it takes from the start of a command to the end of the command. For example, when you open a program and it opens instantly, that is an example of low latency. If it takes5-10 seconds to load [or more] the longer the time between execution and action, the longer the latency. If you've ever had to wait forever for a webpage to load... same concept.

By taking the interface out of the SSD entirely they can minimize latency between the SSD and the PCI-E lanes the data travels through, dramatically shortening time between action and reaction. It has the additional effect of making the overall package smaller and more energy efficient as well, so it's a bit of a no brainer to do it that way.

And as far as upgradable storage is concerned, you can EASILY buy a 20 or 40Gb thunderbolt 3 cable and a Samsung T3 [I think Sandisk makes a similar one] USB C equipped SSD and add up to a TB of external storage at INTERNAL SSD Speeds. Granted, it's not INTERNAL, but if you're working with large data projects the odds are you're probably managing external media ANYWAY. If you're just looking for more space for games. . . why did you buy a Mac? But it's fast enough to run another O/S off of at similar latency to native OS X, so the ONLY complaint is having to have an external drive....

But the Samsung T3 is the size of a credit card flat, and maybe 3 stacked together thick.

So you're saying that the typical 0.1ms latency that even a SATA3 SSD incurs is somehow an issue that needed to be resolved, so that is why Apple soldered the SSD to the logic board in these new machines? Likewise the 0.3 - 1.3W power draw that these SSDs pull, when idle, prompted them to solder the SSD to the logic board? Are you serious?

How much do you reckon they managed to reduce latency by going this route? Likewise with power draw, how much do you reckon they've managed to save?

I'll concede that they might have managed to make the SSD smaller but it's really not as though NVMe SSDs take up all that much space. If space were that big an issue, they could just as easily have made a smaller, custom PCB that was removable both for RAM as well as the SSD, but they chose not to, and I'm sorry it's pretty obvious they opted not to so that these machines cannot be upgraded by third parties, thereby maximising their profits by forcing customers to pay the Apple tax on any higher-than-stock spec system they may buy.

P.S. I say this as someone who has bought a maxed-out 2016 15" MBP, btw.

 

[SparkFlash]

I would love to know what a "minor" spill is? If it was enough to damage a SSD internally beyond anything I would assume it got pretty wet inside.

Either way, agreed back your stuff up!

 

[Sanpete]

it's pretty obvious they opted not to so that these machines cannot be upgraded by third parties, thereby maximising their profits by forcing customers to pay the Apple tax on any higher-than-stock spec system they may buy.

There are much simpler ways to do that. It costs extra money to integrate the SSD components into the logic board, whereas they could have simply glued them in if the goal was simply to prevent upgrades. And the Mac internal SSDs remain the fastest available. Not a coincidence, I think.

 

[CaptRB]

Don't put wet stuff near electronics.

Back stuff up.

That solves a LOT of potential problems. A soldered SSD is NOT an issue at all in a professional computer. As I said, professionals don't usually fuss about with "upgrading" inexpensive business tools. Makes about as much sense as buying an extended warranty for a 20 dollar toaster.

On the other hand, it's fine if you're a hobbyist/enthusiast who likes to mess around with computers. But Apple is not after that market presently and I'm glad for it. I want Apple to continue on this path of professional systems packaged in smaller, minimalist and practical packaging.


R.

 

[chipchen]

He needs to send it to these guys: https://www.rossmanngroup.com/

The dude has tons of YouTube videos doing Apple logic board repairs: https://www.youtube.com/user/rossmanngroup

 

[kbk75]

There are much simpler ways to do that. It costs extra money to integrate the SSD components into the logic board, whereas they could have simply glued them in if the goal was simply to prevent upgrades. And the Mac internal SSDs remain the fastest available. Not a coincidence, I think.

It's not a coincidence because they're using custom current-gen Samsung SSDs, not because they're soldered to the board. A Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSD is every bit as fast as the current MBP SSDs. Also, glue can be undone with a heat gun, which is far simpler than desoldering a component, which is irrelevant anyway because there are no third-party alternatives, since the job has become so cumbersome and expensive.

Either way, what is clear is that this is the culmination of the path they began going down with the first Retina MBP. The components have only got harder and harder to replace, to the point where now, they are nigh-on impossible to replace for the vast majority of even enthusiast users, both because of complexity and lack of alternative parts.

It's obvious this makes the notebooks' upgrade cycle shorter, especially when you combine the lack of upgrade-ability with an OS that makes hardware, that is a few years old, run pretty poorly. All this is good for Apple's financials, but it sure isn't customer-friendly, which their machines once were.

Edit: It also costs a heck of a lot less to integrate something onto the logic board than you might imagine, especially given what they make back in the Apple tax on every upgraded purchase option on a BTO system or even the higher cost associated with the high-spec stock variant.

 

[Sanpete]

It's not a coincidence because they're using custom current-gen Samsung SSDs, not because they're soldered to the board. A Samsung 950 Pro NVMe SSD is every bit as fast as the current MBP SSDs.

The measurements I've seen are faster for the MacBook Pro versions. Yes, custom controllers are part of that. Probably the most efficient way to do it is to put the controller and the other SSD chips right on the board.

I agree this has an obvious downside. Apple no doubt weighs that against the advantages, including keeping people out of the case, where they no doubt mess things up that Apple ends up having to fix. It will be interesting to see how long these SSDs are usable. Maybe the life cycle won't be as short as you fear.

 

[kbk75]

The measurements I've seen are faster for the MacBook Pro versions. Yes, custom controllers are part of that. Probably the most efficient way to do it is to put the controller and the other SSD chips right on the board.

I agree this has an obvious downside. Apple no doubt weighs that against the advantages, including keeping people out of the case, where they no doubt mess things up that Apple ends up having to fix. It will be interesting to see how long these SSDs are usable. Maybe the life cycle won't be as short as you fear.

I'm not afraid the life cycle will be short actually (I certainly hope it won't be!), but as someone who is permanently running short of drive space and who does not really like using external drives wherever possible, I'd like to know that I can upgrade my SSD to a larger one down the line and not have to buy a whole new computer or resort to using external drives or cloud based storage.

Previously, I upgraded my 512GB SSD in my 2012 rMBP to a 1TB made by Transcend. The upgrade was fairly quick, easy and cost-effective, even though the connector was a proprietary Apple connector. This extended the use of my 2012 MBP by a year and a half, at least. Part of the reason I was 'coerced' into upgrading to the 2016 model was my desire to have a larger SSD, once again. This time around, though, there will be no upgrading when I want or need a larger drive, I'll be forced to get a new machine or use externals or cloud storage, so you see how effective their planned obsolescence is.

I still remember when the MacBook Pro was one of the few notebooks around that made it quick and easy to upgrade your RAM and your hard drive (there were no SSDs back then!). This was part of the charm because you knew you could make your system somewhat more useful a few years down the road. Now...

Edit: FYI I also have a 12.9" iPad Pro. With that device it was always clear there'd be no upgrading anything from the start, but it didn't bother me as much because a $1000 device is a lot easier (on the wallet) to replace every so-often than a $4300 one.