Apple Releases MacBook Pro Firmware Update to Address SATA Interface Speeds

[matticus008]

Are you talking about certification as a getting the signatures. Or certification as actually taking system configuration and testing with it?
Or a someone sticking a probe in and check marking ("yes reaches 3 Gbps")?

All of the above are steps in the release process at any large corporation.

What is the need for the disjunction between 'qualified' and 'offered' then, if 'ships' is the only one that matters?

Qualified, meaning third party products known to work and approved by Apple, and offered, meaning products sold directly by Apple.

Again, it's just boilerplate liability language. They're simply saying that they've fixed the driver issues and fully enabled the transfer mode, but they do not qualify (advise, endorse, recommend, support, or sanction) the installation of third party drives in their computers (regardless of speed--this applies equally to 1.5Gbps drives) and they do not offer (currently sell) any products that require this update to function normally.

If they offered one of the faster SSDs in the MBP, they would have said something along the lines of "this update addresses a performance issue in MacBook Pros ordered with the XXX SSD option. Apple has not qualified other drives and their use is unsupported."

Both words, though, are necessary to encapsulate the two distinct disclaimers they're making.

Or Apple pragmatically qualifies drives, but just doesn't tell folks because doesn't want to do it for everyone?

I don't think I understand the question.

They, like most companies, categorically refuse to vouch for drives they don't use in OEM builds, if that's what you're asking. The legal consequences of them saying, "the Intel XXX SSD is qualified for use in Macs" are significant.

 

[djellison]

There, now y'all stop your complaining

What we learn here is that Apple were not ready to release these products and rushed them out.

What else will come up as a problem.

 

[consoleboi]

Bring on the next string of complaints.

How about lack of mini E-Sata connection?

 

[Evangelion]

Thank You Apple ! Here is my xbench disk test before and after and to all those posters who said there is no difference stop whining - you were wrong.

I think the point was that there isn't much difference in real-life usage. So instead of staring at Xbench-results (or did you buy your computer to just run Xbench?), how about some real-life results? Do apps start and run faster for example?

 

[SPUY767]

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.

I think it was to save power. 3.0 uses more power. That's a fact, and when data doesn't need to be shuffled around that fast, it's a waste. Of course, as I predicted, Apple has released the firmware update, and now people will install it and gain no appreciable amount of performance at the expense of a percent or two of battery life.

 

[Knguyen2009]

"So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense " this is not entirely true. Apple has been shipping similar hard drives as the other major PC OEMs and they all support 3.0Gbps. Why Apple decided to use 1.5Gbps instead of the faster one? Anyone care to comment???

 

[izibo]

Seems to make a difference for me (at least on the benchmark side) with an 80GB Intel X-25M

Before the update:

And after:

Oh, and considering I am one of the few that this made a "substantial difference" I can safely say that I feel no difference. I don't know what all the bitching was about.

 

[asimovs]

this didnt work for my 17" early 08 wich is capped at 1.5gbit aswell too bad. pretty silly that this top of the line macbook is capped at 1.5 aswell(yea i know its older but still chipset supports it).

hope they make an fw update for this aswell!

 

[AboveTheChaos]

I think the point was that there isn't much difference in real-life usage. So instead of staring at Xbench-results (or did you buy your computer to just run Xbench?), how about some real-life results? Do apps start and run faster for example?

Too funny. If you post anything without links, screenshots and proof, you get dismissed. Then you post with proof and you get snarky comments like did you buy your computer just to run test and it's about how it feels.

 

[Slogan]

Well done to the MacRumorers and thanks to Apple.

 

[cash4chaos]

Told yah so

I am the one who had lunch in apple cafeteria with my engineer Frieda those who doubted me it's your turn buy breakfast at bucks !!!
Mike

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

All these people saying congrats whiners etc. are just ignorant. You pay for the hardware capabilities and having them disabled whether beneficial out of the gate or not is a let down. I am glad Apple sees the bigger picture unike some of you and has addressed the issue. At some point people will elect to upgrade there drives and may take advantage of this. As pointed above to I am sure this will positively effect bandwidth. Good job Apple addressing this faster than the Java exploit!

"So basically Apple dumbed down the 3.0 interface because they don't sell 3.0 hard drives..Makes sense " this is not entirely true. Apple has been shipping similar hard drives as the other major PC OEMs and they all support 3.0Gbps. Why Apple decided to use 1.5Gbps instead of the faster one? Anyone care to comment???

Why sell the farm when you can raise sheep.

 

[myca]

Does the next firmware fix the glossy screen, lack of expresscard, loss of ports?

Joking, please don't flame.

But I'd like to know why this needed a firmware fix TBH, guess it's a good job they did fix it though, it stopped my b*tching for 5 minutes at least.

 

[gettin sombrero]

It is great that apple fixed this, I may still purchase a macbook pro now.

That aside, its a shame so many of you are willing to settle for less just because apple sold it to you.

 

[MrZebra]

this didnt work for my 17" early 08 wich is capped at 1.5gbit aswell too bad. pretty silly that this top of the line macbook is capped at 1.5 aswell(yea i know its older but still chipset supports it).

hope they make an fw update for this aswell!

I'm in the same boat but I doubt apple would fix the older models now.

 

[CptnJustc]

Too funny. If you post anything without links, screenshots and proof, you get dismissed. Then you post with proof and you get snarky comments like did you buy your computer just to run test and it's about how it feels.

The issue is what was being proven. While the previous poster offered a cogent argument with a side of snark, all you provided was the snark.

 

[vitaeergo]

Intel X25 80GB And Firmware Update

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

 

[MM123]

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.

are you kidding?

 

[Muncher]

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

Have you tried reformatting the drive? Just a thought.

 

[friareunuch]

That was fast.

Let's continue to raise hell about blu-ray while we're at it.

you do that, while i lobby to just ditch the optical drive altogether

 

[Knguyen2009]

Anyone else have an issues with the Macbook Pro 15" being able to see an Intel X25 80GB and after the firmware, no-see-ee.

Brand new X25 that worked in my new MBP 15 (2 days old) prior to the firmware update.

Post firmware, the unit can't see the drive. Boot off of the DVD and cannot see it in Disk Utility nor System Profiler.

Took the X25 out and put it in a Windows machine without problem. Ran Intel's firmware update and it states its already up-to-date.

PRAM flash and still no drive.

Boot off of original MBP HDD and it states the firmware is up-to-date. Profiler shows 3.0 GBS flag now.

Intel support says to call Apple. Before I do, anyone have a similar issue?

Perhaps this was the reason why Apple did not turn on 3.0Gbps - the drive interface connector cannot handle the faster speed potentially due to some signal integrity issue. It would be interesting to see how many other folks have the same issue.

 

[Master Chief]

I want to meet the 33 people who voted this story negative....

My guess is that some, if not all, of these people clicked on the wrong link by accident, simply because the links are too close to each other – do some research and you'll find this to be true as we did for Mozilla users.

 

[Master Chief]

Perhaps this was the reason why Apple did not turn on 3.0Gbps - the drive interface connector cannot handle the faster speed potentially due to some signal integrity issue. It would be interesting to see how many other folks have the same issue.

Who told you this? Apple won't released firmware updates to expose serious design or production errors in their hardware. No way.

 

[Gasu E.]

What we learn here is that Apple were not ready to release these products and rushed them out.

What else will come up as a problem.

That's not likely to have been the case here.

All products are designed to meet a specification, and because Apple never intended to ship a device above 1.5Gps, that's probably what the design spec said.

Since the spec called for nothing above 1.5Gps, probably no QE tests were run against higher speed.

Then probably some overly conservative engineer decided to put in a "safety" feature so customers would not run in some "untested configuration, with potentially unpredictable results". Just doing his job. Since he stayed within spec, there's no managerial decision needed to approve this.

Folks, unless you have worked on a major development project involving hundreds of people, you can't appreciate how important it is for people to "color within the lines" and stick to the spec. It's the only way to make sure people are on the same page.

Once the product hit the market, useful feedback, such as found at this site, led the product manager to better understand the need, and ask engineering to qualify a sample configuration, then remove the safety code.

Stuff like this happens with every product. It's not a bug, or a sign of bad quality, but a sign of good procedures that generally lead to quality products.

 

[fredfnord]

Just to correct something

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.

The reason nobody mentions this is because it's 100% wrong. With SATA, each device is on its own bus. You're assuming that SATA worked the same way as PATA (master/slave) or SCSI (multiple drives, one bus) but it doesn't.

-fred