Hooray for good sense. Now I won't be capped in a year when I actually have an SSD in this computer.
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.
Apple Releases MacBook Pro Firmware Update to Address SATA Interface Speeds
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am jealous. I'd love a 2.53 GHz 13" MBP w/ 8GB ram and a lightning fast 256GB SSD drive. 8GB is just too restrictively expensive at this point.
Now if we could get some INTAKE VENTS...
Now.....if we could just get some intake vents on the side like the old powerbooks had (so we don't have to depend on the keyboard for cooling air intake), imagine the temperature cooling effects that could have. I guarantee a 5-10degrees temp drop EASILY!!!
Hmmm.....
Now.....if we could just get some intake vents on the side like the old powerbooks had (so we don't have to depend on the keyboard for cooling air intake), imagine the temperature cooling effects that could have. I guarantee a 5-10degrees temp drop EASILY!!!
Hmmm.....
Huh?
Just saying that trying to design something efficient, elegent and intuitive is much easier with one or two people calling the shots, making final decisions and having a willingness to break with the past.
Whereas MS tends to take feedback from thousands and tries to accommodate them. Design by Committee doesn't have a very good track record so far in any industry.
yeah i saw this today on my 15" mbp. haven't installed yet though. was waiting to see how the install went for others first
X25 SSD speed change
Wow, this change helps at all levels. Yesterday I typed an email to a friend w/ improvements made switching from MacBook SATA 1.5 with modern 250GB drive to MacBook Pro 1.5 with lowest end X25. Now I added the X25 numbers measured with the SATA 3.0 patch. It helped in all eight cases in xbench!
The computer is running 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and not much more on it. 2nd column is X25 with 1.5, 3rd column is X25 with 3.0
But note:
xbench absolute values shouldn't be trusted. Drive specs are up to 250MB/s read and 70MB/s write and xbench claims slower read max and faster than specs write max speed. The values are first run after boot.
Sequential
Write 4k blocks 44.78 -> 74.59 -> 80.51
Write 256k blocks 38.94 -> 62.85 -> 72.78
Read 4k blocks 19.97 -> 36.28 -> 40.29
Read 256k blocks 48.70 -> 120.10 -> 212.05
Random
Write 4k blocks 0.58 -> 59.16 -> 68.89
Write 256k blocks 22.50 -> 64.54 -> 74.87
Read 4k blocks 0.47 -> 9.74 -> 10.08
Read 256k blocks 18.16 -> 111.62 -> 180.25
Wow, this change helps at all levels. Yesterday I typed an email to a friend w/ improvements made switching from MacBook SATA 1.5 with modern 250GB drive to MacBook Pro 1.5 with lowest end X25. Now I added the X25 numbers measured with the SATA 3.0 patch. It helped in all eight cases in xbench!
The computer is running 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and not much more on it. 2nd column is X25 with 1.5, 3rd column is X25 with 3.0
But note:
xbench absolute values shouldn't be trusted. Drive specs are up to 250MB/s read and 70MB/s write and xbench claims slower read max and faster than specs write max speed. The values are first run after boot.
Sequential
Write 4k blocks 44.78 -> 74.59 -> 80.51
Write 256k blocks 38.94 -> 62.85 -> 72.78
Read 4k blocks 19.97 -> 36.28 -> 40.29
Read 256k blocks 48.70 -> 120.10 -> 212.05
Random
Write 4k blocks 0.58 -> 59.16 -> 68.89
Write 256k blocks 22.50 -> 64.54 -> 74.87
Read 4k blocks 0.47 -> 9.74 -> 10.08
Read 256k blocks 18.16 -> 111.62 -> 180.25
Correct me if I am wrong.... But if there isn't a drive that will take full advantage of 3. Not to mention 1.5. So what benchmarks are you waiting for. Aren't they going to be the same?
Hugh
Doooood! It never had anything to do with battery life. 1.5 Gbps vs 3.0 Gbps is about the bandwidth of the channel on the controller, it requires the same amount of power to run the controller, regardless of the throughput speed.
Apple explains rather explicitly on their site how they managed to improve the life and capacity of their batteries by reshaping the cells.
Just a quick question about the "ratings" to stories here at MacRumors. Why on earth would 5 people (so far) rate this story as negative? What would be negative about them putting the SATA interface speed back to where it was?
Honestly, I can see some stories here getting negative ratings, but sometimes I just don't get some people rating a story like this as negative.
The negative posters are what's referred to in the english language as idio.....ts.
This is such great news. My 13" MBP with 128 SSD is arriving this week.
There, now y'all stop your complaining
No! People always need to bitch about something.
Besides, this update isn't supported by Apple drivers. I'm sure that some people will bitch about this. 
Well based on all the moaning and complaining from when this was first reported, apple's sales figures should skyrocket now that this huge deficiency has finally been fixed!
The Firmware update is a timely and welcome release.
But, the statement is poorly drafted and annoying.
We give you back Sata 3.0G but we don't support it,
it sounds like that we give you back FireWire 800, but
we don't support it because Apple never produces FireWire 800
products. In fact, Apple never produced any hard drives or SSD
drives either.
It seems like Apple made a reluctant decision because "a single digit percent" of people wants it. I would give this article a negative comment not because of the article itself, but on the phrasing of the statement from Apple.
But, the statement is poorly drafted and annoying.
We give you back Sata 3.0G but we don't support it,
it sounds like that we give you back FireWire 800, but
we don't support it because Apple never produces FireWire 800
products. In fact, Apple never produced any hard drives or SSD
drives either.
It seems like Apple made a reluctant decision because "a single digit percent" of people wants it. I would give this article a negative comment not because of the article itself, but on the phrasing of the statement from Apple.
My theory is that the driver developers simply introduced a bug into their code, and Apple is trying to save face by saying they "don't sell SATA 3.0 drives."
When I bet the larger drives they sell the laptops with probably support SATA 3.0; it's been out for a while now.
Bad Apple, no cupcake!
When I bet the larger drives they sell the laptops with probably support SATA 3.0; it's been out for a while now.
Bad Apple, no cupcake!
Wouldn't it have been easier for them to have just left it at 3?
It's things like this that are of concern to me. Apple seems to be doing this a lot.
It's things like this that are of concern to me. Apple seems to be doing this a lot.
Well, yes. They certainly don't want the bad press, so I assume it was a mistake.
There will be something new to complain about
Woof, Woof - Dawg
Well since you asked... Here's my complaint...
I have to wait until mid-July to get my MBP 13" and I want it NOW!
I'm SO glad Apple fixed this. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
MetaComplaining
just skimming these pages on this thread it strikes me that if the complainers and whiners who are complaining and whining about other complainers and whiners would stop whining and complaining... threads on macrumors' forums would be cut by half.
To those gloating nowafter the firmware fix is announced: people were concerned that they were spending a lot of money on a device which would fail them when they went to upgrade to fast SSD in the future. I am sure everybody here has something they might potentially "get vocal" about if conditions changed. (Expresscards, glossiness, SD cards, cut/paste in iphoneOS 2, replaceable battery, bluray, etc, etc) And to those saying that apple always takes care of everything real fast: don't forget how long it took to get the Java Security update which finally arrived last week, many months after others had fixed it.
just skimming these pages on this thread it strikes me that if the complainers and whiners who are complaining and whining about other complainers and whiners would stop whining and complaining... threads on macrumors' forums would be cut by half.
To those gloating nowafter the firmware fix is announced: people were concerned that they were spending a lot of money on a device which would fail them when they went to upgrade to fast SSD in the future. I am sure everybody here has something they might potentially "get vocal" about if conditions changed. (Expresscards, glossiness, SD cards, cut/paste in iphoneOS 2, replaceable battery, bluray, etc, etc) And to those saying that apple always takes care of everything real fast: don't forget how long it took to get the Java Security update which finally arrived last week, many months after others had fixed it.
Sweet. I have no idea what I was missing, but I am glad to have it back.
+1
Good on Apple though. I never thought I'd see them own up to this.
Really juvenile. You don't admit there was a problem and that it took complaints from users to get it fixed ?