Base Model MacBook Air With M2 Chip Has Slower SSD Speeds in Benchmarks

[mrochester]

Exactly. Any time someone uses the compare feature on Apple's website, it should show that the base model M2 Air and Pro have slower storage than models with a higher quantity of storage.

I doubt you are going to see Apple putting that sort of thing in their marketing material!

 

[orl2222]

Actually, you'd be sticking it to us. Nothing that's free is actually free. We're all paying for it so please be an adult.

But go ahead and keep returning things just because it makes you feel powerful. They'll cut you off. There are people in these forums who've come complaining about being on some secret Apple blacklist.

Funny you should say that, I have a good friend of mine that got cut off from Amazon for too many returns, and this happened right before the pandemic. He was asking family members to order things for him, after a while they refused.

 

[Shirasaki]

AFAIK flash chip wear leveling is a function of capacity, not number of IC chips.

Isn’t capacity tied to chips anyways? And higher density chip means less endurance? So fewer higher density chip wears out faster than lower density many chips.

I think you can still boot Macs using external USB/TB drives

That, someone found out on Twitter or somewhere, that as soon as internal drive dies, nothing will boot. Even an externally installed macOS.

An M1 Mac Can’t Boot from an External Drive If Its Internal Drive Is Dead - TidBITS

A little-noticed fact about M1-based Macs has started to get some attention. If the Mac’s internal drive is dead or fully erased, you can’t boot from an otherwise valid external drive. Why would Apple make that choice? Security, security, security.

tidbits.com

Found an article describing the issue.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I'm not against Apple maximizing profit if you actually read my posts.
It's the Apple apologists who are in denial and trying to come up with excuses for Apple, not willing to admit that it's purely for profit strategy.

What I want is simply for Apple to be honest, and disclose the intentional bottleneck so consumers have educated decision when they buy the laptop. We are not talking about $600 commodity laptops here. These are premium $1200-$1500 laptops.

That's exactly the point.

I don't understand the whole "well, then just don't buy it" position. The higher the asking price for a product/service the more said product/service is going to get scrutinized, especially by enthusiasts who, in turn, can help less savvy consumers, as long as said consumers are willing to do some kind of very basic research before investing in a premium product.

If Apple released a MacBook SE, with older components, slower CPU, slower RAM, slower SSD and a 1080p display, priced it at around 700/800€, I don't think that laptop would get this level of analysis.

 

[mrochester]

That's exactly the point.

I don't understand the whole "well, then just don't buy it" position. The higher the asking price for a product/service the more said product/service is going to get scrutinized, especially by enthusiasts who, in turn, can help less savvy consumers, as long as said consumers are willing to do some kind of very basic research before investing in a premium product.

If Apple released a MacBook SE, with older components, slower CPU, slower RAM, slower SSD and a 1080p display, priced it at around 700/800€, I don't think that laptop would get this level of analysis.

I strongly suggest you use your wisdom to advise people who come to you for advice regarding which Mac to buy.

 

[quarkysg]

Isn’t capacity tied to chips anyways? And higher density chip means less endurance? So fewer higher density chip wears out faster than lower density many chips.

Well, one IC chip can have 128GB, 256GB, 512GB or 1TB from what apple is using. So a 2x128GB configuration vs a 1x256GB configuration have the same wear leveling performance, since both have 256GB of space to play around distributing the write cells.

Found an article describing the issue.

Thanks for the link! It's good to know this.

 

[quarkysg]

If Apple released a MacBook SE, with older components, slower CPU, slower RAM, slower SSD and a 1080p display, priced it at around 700/800€, I don't think that laptop would get this level of analysis.

I would think it would still attract the same scrutiny because it is Apple. The standard used on Apple always seems higher compared to others IMHO.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I strongly suggest you use your wisdom to advise people who come to you for advice regarding which Mac to buy.

Most of the times it's all about the money, I've never advised the people I know to buy a Mac because I always ask what their budget is and they all go too low, but I also warn them not to come to me and complain about their machine being slow, or having crappy speakers, screens, trackpads, or that it has slowed down after a couple of years, etc...

 

[mrochester]

Most of the times it's all about the money, I've never advised the people I know to buy a Mac because I always ask what their budget is and they all go too low, but I also warn them not to come to me and complain about their machine being slow, or having crappy speakers, screens, trackpads, or that it has slowed down after a couple of years, etc...

I find the same. It always amazes me how many people tolerate such low quality technology because it’s ‘good enough’. The ‘good enough’ market is the one that Apple definitely doesn’t operate in, but that’s because it is high volume, low margin and Apple is a low volume, high margin company.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I would think it would still attract the same scrutiny because it is Apple. The standard used on Apple always seems higher compared to others IMHO.

Yeah, you're probably right, or we would hear that Apple is staining their name by selling a cheap product, or that it's still too expensive.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I find the same. It always amazes me how many people tolerate such low quality technology because it’s ‘good enough’. The ‘good enough’ market is the one that Apple definitely doesn’t operate in, but that’s because it is high volume, low margin and Apple is a low volume, high margin company.

I think they tolerate it because they've never tried anything better. When you've always used Celeron/Pentium/i3/dual-core AMD plastic laptops, 300€ Lagdroid phones and tablets you have no idea what you're missing by spending more money - even if they still bought Windows and Lagdroid -, and they don't realize that spending more money is not just about performance, it's also about durability, as long as they take care of their devices.

 

[mrochester]

I think they tolerate it because they've never tried anything better. When you've always used Celeron/Pentium/i3/dual-core AMD plastic laptops, 300€ Lagdroid phones and tablets you have no idea what you're missing by spending more money - even if they still bought Windows and Lagdroid -, and they don't realize that spending more money is not just about performance, it's also about durability, as long as they take care of their devices.

I guess because they have no incentive to upgrade. If you are actually satisfied with your cheap device you have no reason to randomly spend more money. I know I certainly wouldn’t be satisfied!

I could not ever imagine being satisfied with anything less than Apple’s trackpad for instance. This effectively rules out all non-Apple laptops.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I guess because they have no incentive to upgrade. If you are actually satisfied with your cheap device you have no reason to randomly spend more money. I know I certainly wouldn’t be satisfied!

I could not ever imagine being satisfied with anything less than Apple’s trackpad for instance. This effectively rules out all non-Apple laptops.

Yet when they see my devices they're amazed by how responsive they are, and I just have a MacBook Air and a old i5 Dell laptop, yes the Air is way more expensive, but the Dell one was a little more than 700€ when I bought it, it's not like I have a Mac Studio or one of those beasts that Linus Tech Tips builds.

Many people still think that tech products are something useful but not worthy to spend too much money on.

 

[mrochester]

Yet when they see my devices they're amazed by how responsive they are, and I just have a MacBook Air and a old i5 Dell laptop, yes the Air is way more expensive, but the Dell one was a little more than 700€ when I bought it, it's not like I have a Mac Studio or one of those beasts that Linus Tech Tips builds.

Many people still think that tech products are something useful but not worthy to spend too much money on.

Same mentality as the IT department where I work 😛😂

 

[Darth Tulhu]

This is consistent with what I've always said regarding many new Apple products: 2 steps forward, one step back.

They RARELY give you something without taking something away.

Us long-term users should be used to it by now, but it stings nonetheless.

Lightness vs Power. In the config I'd want this machine, I'd rather pay a bit more, carry the extra pound, and get a 14" MBP instead.

Now, if the M2MBA had a ProMotion screen, I'd buy it.

That said, the M1 MBA is still the undisputed KING of VALUE in Apple products.

 

[leeuk321]

Still waiting for the day Apple makes 512GB/16GB standard.
256 8 has been the starting config for like a decade now.

For sure, I completely agree. I get that Apple are a business and are here to make money (and boy are they good at it), but I'm just curious how much it'd affect their profits if the $200 hard drive and memory upgrades were $100 instead. Sure, per-person their profits would be lower, but maybe:

1) More people would actually upgrade the base spec, thinking "why not"?
2) More people would actually but a Macbook to begin with (there's got to be a certain amount of users who want a laptop of a certain specification but don't choose Apple because of the cost, or don't upgrade their existing MacBook as often because of the cost).
3) Those that put so many hundred dollars into upgrading anyway might still put the same money in, but just upgrade it further than they would have, sine the upgrade cost is less prohibitive.

Or, if that's unthinkable, at least offer the basic hard drive and memory bumps for $100 each, i.e. 8GB -> 16GB and 256GB -> 512GB, since these base models are woefully low. I know this is all wishful thinking, but you can only dream eh...

 

[fanboy-ish]

Same mentality as the IT department where I work 😛😂

Where I work they gave me a 600€ budget to buy 2 laptops, years ago, best I could find were two plastic HP laptops, i3 CPU, 500GB spinning hard drive and 4GB of RAM, they were atrocious from the beginning, but they found them an improvement since they had been using Pentium laptops before; now, they come to me and ask "Can't you make them faster?", they take 10 minutes to boot, like two to three minutes to launch Word or Excel, it's a torture, I told my boss I refuse to use them and the only way to have them run faster is either a lightweight Linux distro or a new computer.

 

[mrochester]

For sure, I completely agree. I get that Apple are a business and are here to make money (and boy are they good at it), but I'm just curious how much it'd affect their profits if the $200 hard drive and memory upgrades were $100 instead. Sure, per-person their profits would be lower, but maybe:

1) More people would actually upgrade the base spec, thinking "why not"?
2) More people would actually but a Macbook to begin with (there's got to be a certain amount of users who want a laptop of a certain specification but don't choose Apple because of the cost, or don't upgrade their existing MacBook as often because of the cost).
3) Those that put so many hundred dollars into upgrading anyway might still put the same money in, but just upgrade it further than they would have, sine the upgrade cost is less prohibitive.

Or, if that's unthinkable, at least offer the basic hard drive and memory bumps for $100 each, i.e. 8GB -> 16GB and 256GB -> 512GB, since these base models are woefully low. I know this is all wishful thinking, but you can only dream eh...

I’m very certain Apple have this consideration absolutely nailed and you are unlikely to offer them any advice that allows them to make more money (because they’ll have already thought of it).

 

[tobybrut]

That, someone found out on Twitter or somewhere, that as soon as internal drive dies, nothing will boot. Even an externally installed macOS.

Macs can boot from external drives if you turn off the security setting. You have to boot into recovery mode ahead of time and turn off the security feature that stops external drives from booting. The caveat is that you must do it while the storage is still working because turning off the security feature requires having an admin account on the machine. If your drive is dead, you can’t access the admin account that was on the Mac. The feature is there to prevent a thief from using a flash stick to boot up and steal your data without your password. If you’re not concerned about that, I suggest turning it off. As a safety check if you do turn it off, encrypt your drive because someone booting from another drive can’t access the data. Just make sure you don’t lose your password or you lose access to your data, too.

I’ve made the mistake of erasing my drive in preparation for giving my Mac away to family members before removing the security restriction and then trying to install macOS from a flash drive and then having a “doh” moment when I realized I screwed up because I could no longer turn off the feature. I managed to recover from that mistake TWICE on different machines because Internet recovery works. Just make sure to use Disk Utility in recovery mode to completely partition the drive again or else Internet recovery might error out. This is more likely on older machines that came with a different OS than the one you’re trying to install.

If you ever make that mistake and forget to turn it off and your storage dies, you’re probably screwed and you’d either have to upgrade your machine or get a motherboard replacement. If you turned it off ahead of time, then you can boot from an external drive just fine.

 

[mrochester]

Where I work they gave me a 600€ budget to buy 2 laptops, years ago, best I could find were two plastic HP laptops, i3 CPU, 500GB spinning hard drive and 4GB of RAM, they were atrocious from the beginning, but they found them an improvement since they had been using Pentium laptops before; now, they come to me and ask "Can't you make them faster?", they take 10 minutes to boot, like two to three minutes to launch Word or Excel, it's a torture, I told my boss I refuse to use them and the only way to have them run faster is either a lightweight Linux distro or a new computer.

I’ve got a Dell Latitude with an 8th gen Core i7 and 16gb of RAM, but then have to remote into an Azure virtual desktop to actually access any of the databases, which then makes everything dog slow since it’s going over the internet.

 

[fanboy-ish]

I’ve got a Dell Latitude with an 8th gen Core i7 and 16gb of RAM, but then have to remote into an Azure virtual desktop to actually access any of the databases, which then makes everything dog slow since it’s going over the internet.

I'm rarely at the office, but when they ask me to do something on those computers they have I tell them I'd rather do it at home with my devices, or to tell me in advance so that I can bring one of my computers, or even the iPad with the on screen keyboard, it's less frustrating.

 

[SpotOnT]

Macs can boot from external drives if you turn off the security setting. You have to boot into recovery mode ahead of time and turn off the security feature that stops external drives from booting. The caveat is that you must do it while the storage is still working because turning off the security feature requires having an admin account on the machine. If your drive is dead, you can’t access the admin account that was on the Mac. The feature is there to prevent a thief from using a flash stick to boot up and steal your data without your password. If you’re not concerned about that, I suggest turning it off. As a safety check if you do turn it off, encrypt your drive because someone booting from another drive can’t access the data. Just make sure you don’t lose your password or you lose access to your data, too.

I’ve made the mistake of erasing my drive in preparation for giving my Mac away to family members before removing the security restriction and then trying to install macOS from a flash drive and then having a “doh” moment when I realized I screwed up because I could no longer turn off the feature. I managed to recover from that mistake TWICE on different machines because Internet recovery works. Just make sure to use Disk Utility in recovery mode to completely partition the drive again or else Internet recovery might error out. This is more likely on older machines that came with a different OS than the one you’re trying to install.

If you ever make that mistake and forget to turn it off and your storage dies, you’re probably screwed and you’d either have to upgrade your machine or get a motherboard replacement. If you turned it off ahead of time, then you can boot from an external drive just fine.

My understanding is this is no longer the case with Apple Silicon Macs. They now store device firmware on a dedicated part of the SSD (rather than on a separate chip, like with Intel Macs). So if your SSD dies, the computer can't do anything. It is completely bricked.

 

[SpotOnT]

It is total and complete trash that Apple didn't bump up the base storage to 512GB, when they could no longer source dual 128GB modules. I get that they want that SSD upgrade money, iCloud subscription money, etc., but this is just a completely unreasonable decision.

 

[ian87w]

It is total and complete trash that Apple didn't bump up the base storage to 512GB, when they could no longer source dual 128GB modules. I get that they want that SSD upgrade money, iCloud subscription money, etc., but this is just a completely unreasonable decision.

It's not unreasonable from Apple's point of view. They got to cut cost, and those who figured it out will end up spending more money by getting the higher tier models. Win win. It's a classic upselling strategy.

What's annoying is Apple's refusal to be upfront and honest about it on their marketing materials.

 

[mrochester]

It is total and complete trash that Apple didn't bump up the base storage to 512GB, when they could no longer source dual 128GB modules. I get that they want that SSD upgrade money, iCloud subscription money, etc., but this is just a completely unreasonable decision.

Send them a strong message by not buying the product.