Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's 2019 256GB MacBook Air Includes Slower SSD Than 2018 Model

I love it... All these SSD assessments taken as truth, accompanied with froth. From a report most here haven't even read, by a site called Consomac.

No need to be fussy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: michaelsviews
I’ve long said that I’d rather have cheaper storage even if it meant reduced speeds. I still prefer that compromise now that we have it.

The problem remains that storage options are STILL ridiculously expensive. A price reduction does not change this fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aston441
Wonder Warthog said:
Sure because nobody on MacBook Pros edits video… oh, wait…
Click to expand...

Last time I looked we weren't discussing the Macbook Pro.

This whole thing is overblown because people don't understand the nuance involved with actually assessing the performance of an SSD. This particular benchmark is very limited in application but nobody cares because outrage is more entertaining.
 
intelligence said:
Nah, I was looking at a MacBook Air for software development work, as it is the ONLY model without the touchbar. But the subpar cooling, cpu and now storage crushed my dream of a new laptop from Apple. Will have to go for a Mac Mini.
Click to expand...

The almost inevitable ARM MacBook is now your only hope then. Lets hope it’s out soon.
 
[AUT] Thomas said:
Completely irrelevant... the Air doesn’t have the performance to leverage the speed of the current SSD anyway.
Would be great if people here stop whining and bring a single scenario that they use on their Air in which they would notice the slower SSD. I think even archive extraction is CPU limited on the Air...

I wouldn’t generally say TLC or even QLC is bad. In fact, MLC these days lasts longer than 1st gen SLC SSDs did. And a decent TLC SSD will live longer than cheap MLC SSDs. Personally, I would prefer if the device is delivered with a 1024 GB QLC SSD, practically, that’s the same as 512GB MLC. After a while the SSD will age and have trouble operating in QLC. Then it should be possible to select MLC or even SLC Mode in the firmware, which should extend the useful life of the NAND chips well beyond the rest of the laptop at the cost of actual storage dropping to 512 or 256GB respectively. That said... you really need to be a heavy user to exhaust modern SSDs.
Click to expand...

Just my preference, I like quality.


mrat93 said:
Fair. Do MLC SSDs even cost half as much as Apple charges for them? I was more pointing out how sad it is that people are ecstatic that Apple is finally charging 2014 prices for SSDs.

An m.2 slot would be really nice and practical, but how else would Apple make insane margins on Mac upgrades?
Click to expand...

You can't really compare buying a SSD in a shop or from a brand like Apple, with Apple you get much more, like the OS.
I don't completely disagree with you, prices went up by 25% last couple of years, for instance, you could get a 15" MBP for $1799 (Or was it 1999), look at the prices now, blame greedy stockholders / Wallstreet for this.
 
Last edited:
justperry said:
Just my preference, I like quality.




You can't really compare buying a SSD in a shop or from a brand like Apple, with Apple you get much more, like the OS.
I don't completely disagree with you, prices went up by 25% last couple of years, for instance, you could get a 15" MBP for $1799 (Or was it 1999), look at the prices now, blame greedy stockholders / Wallstreet for this.
Click to expand...

You think Apple make the SSD’s. Apple make nothing. The component suppliers do all the hard work. The take the lowest bid to give them the most profit.
 
I don't think the majority of people using a MBA will notice this. Do you? If you can cut costs where the user LIKELY won't see it, why not? Do you think those users would like a "faster" SSD or $100 less expensive?
 
Halfsnap said:
I think the biggest insult is the capacity of the entry level drive, and the cost to upgrade... 128GB... $200 to upgrade to 256GB! In my eyes, this gives the base MBA a $1300 starting price.
Click to expand...

That is the usual Apple marketing technique. Unusable entry specs machines so they force you to pay Appl's obscenes RAM and SSD prices.
 
The Tim Cook School of Design:

dims
 
  • Like
Reactions: dilbert99
someone must say it ... 128GB in 2019 is courage!!!

it is like 64k is enough for anyone!

the apple fanboy sites (theverge and such) would not call out this... Apple PR websites ...

even top of the line MLC NAND prices came down heavily. assuming apple still uses MLC not TLC/QLC or 3D NAND or any cost saving mechanism, even if there is a cost savings they are not going pass it to the customer...
 
Last edited:
I was going to say that I was surprised that 256GB SSDs were still a thing, then thought ah, this is Apple...
[doublepost=1563369167][/doublepost]
BigBoy2018 said:
That's why is drives me nuts when Apple is pushing these super fast SSD's and people that buy them are bragging about their blackmagic disk scores ... when in real world use, there's little to no benefit of a 500 GB/s SSD vs a 2000 GB/s SSD.

I've used Macs with both speeds side by side and boot times, application launch times, file copying times are all virtually indistinguishable.
Click to expand...
Then you get the message that your SSD is full...
 
dilbert99 said:
I was going to say that I was surprised that 256GB SSDs were still a thing, then thought ah, this is Apple...
[doublepost=1563369167][/doublepost]
Then you get the message that your SSD is full...
Click to expand...

Umm, we're talking about speed, not size. Though you did catch my error. Meant to write 500 MB/s vs 2000 MB/s. Obviously NO drive offers speeds anywhere near 500 GB/s :)
 
BigBoy2018 said:
I don't disagree with you that the T2 chip - in that it prevents SSD upgrades - is one of the worst things Apple has done. I've upgraded the SSD at least once on every single Mac I've ever owned. Since the introduction of T2 chip saddled macs, I have not bought one with a T2 chip. I might have to break down one day and get one with a T2 inside, but I sure as hell won't be happy about it.
Click to expand...

Every currently shipping Mac, save for the lame duck cylinder Mac Pro and the non-Pro iMacs ship with the T2 chip now. If you are quick and snag one of the Function keys model 2017 13" MacBook Pro before they all disappear, that's another option. Otherwise, unless you boycott the Mac altogether, you're stuck with it.

BigBoy2018 said:
Damn good question.

If I were to guess, its so they can ‘market’ it as a superior ssd and therefore charge tons extra for it.

And charging extra wont work if its user upgradable.

As you see in this thread, theres plenty of people who are under the illusion that having faster SSD read/write speeds makes an important difference.
Click to expand...

The reason the SSDs are no longer removable is that the T-series co-processors require it. The SSD controller is now ON the T2 chip. This is to say that the SSD modules on the iMac Pro and the new Mac Pro tower, while physically removable might as well not be removable (because it's not like you'll be able to plug those SSD modules into another Mac, let alone any other computer, and have them be readable).

You have Apple's quest to make the Mac's under-the-hood functions (from hardware, software, and firmware standpoints) more like the iPad's to thank for this. Catalina's segregation of the OS into its own read-only volume is only further evidence of the continuum of said quest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob_2811 and BigBoy2018
Did anyone do speed tests on different disk sizes? Do the 256 or 512 sizes have better perf?
I'm asking if the slow speeds are particular to the 128GB size.
 
Yebubbleman said:
The reason the SSDs are no longer removable is that the T-series co-processors require it. The SSD controller is now ON the T2 chip. This is to say that the SSD modules on the iMac Pro and the new Mac Pro tower, while physically removable might as well not be removable (because it's not like you'll be able to plug those SSD modules into another Mac, let alone any other computer, and have them be readable).

You have Apple's quest to make the Mac's under-the-hood functions (from hardware, software, and firmware standpoints) more like the iPad's to thank for this. Catalina's segregation of the OS into its own read-only volume is only further evidence of the continuum of said quest.
Click to expand...

learned something new, thanks.

wow, more reasons for apple not leave the storage capacities at 2010 levels.
https://support.apple.com/kb/sp618?locale=en_US
so many improvements since then, one of the best laptop ever. needs little of bit of more storage capacity and RAM on the higher end. it is great 16GB RAM is offered but not as standard though.
 
Last edited:
What would I choose Macbook Air 2018 or the Macbook Air 2019?
[doublepost=1563607346][/doublepost]What should I choose as a student for college?
But I should choose the laptop that would up until I become a doctor.
Macbook air 2018 or Macbook air 2019?
[doublepost=1563607538][/doublepost]Please help on choosing between MBA 2018 bs MBA 2019 thank you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back