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

Considering i9 MBP - Reinstall and Disable APFS?

zedsdeadbaby

zedsdeadbaby

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 27, 2016
145
64
Well, despite my better judgement I'm considering the i9 MBP. The reports I'm seeing from Logic users are a lot more significant than I expected...

Anyway, I've been on 10.12 for a few years now and haven't gone near 10.13.
After some reading, it would seem that there's some rationale behind wiping an APFS formatted drive and reinstalling 10.13 with HFS+ for a leaner OS. I also would be migrating from my 10.12 HFS+ volume, and one article I read suggested this could in theory cause issues, if not potentially damage my HFS+ system volume... (I don't run FileVault or any encryption, I prefer runing the OS as lean as possible...)
Can anyone confirm:

A. Is this true at all? (Should I be careful mounting an HFS+ system volume via TB?)
B. If wiping and reinstalling as HFS+ is possible with the new MBP? (Never know what Apple decides to blacklist with new models...)
C. If there's any real logic behind going to the trouble to do this? I.e. will the OS be running anymore lean than with APFS on?
D. Are there any performance gains APFS brings?

Thanks as always...
 
Not verified, but I have seen comment that 2018 will not boot an internal HFS+ volume, so APFS is only choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weaselboy
zedsdeadbaby said:
C. If there's any real logic behind going to the trouble to do this? I.e. will the OS be running anymore lean than with APFS on?
Click to expand...

No logic I can see, unless you rely on some very weird/badly coded legacy programs that can't work with APFS. Also, APFS volume uses storage in a much more efficient way, so you get more free space.

zedsdeadbaby said:
D. Are there any performance gains APFS brings?
Click to expand...

This is a complex matter and your question can't be answered generally. APFS is designed to have lower latency than HFS+, but its pure IO throughput seems to be lower, according to real-world tests. So if you are copying large amount of data between different disks, you might see worse performance with APFS. At the same time, copy-on-write nature of APFS means that many operations (like copying files) will appear nearly instantaneous. Lower latency also means that many real-word applications (e.g. databases) will run faster. And of course, APFS is more robust and secure...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lennyvalentin, Weaselboy and green86
Weaselboy wrote in #3:
"The new 2018 MBP with the T2 chip require APFS... so your decision is sort of made for you."

Interesting.
But suppose... just suppose...
... that you DISABLED the t2, or at least turned its functions off as much as possible (such as permitting booting from an external volume, etc.)

and then....
Use CarbonCopyCloner to create a cloned backup of the internal drive on an external drive formatted HFS+.

Would the external drive be bootable?
 
Weaselboy wrote:
"https://bombich.com/kb/ccc5/help-my-clone-wont-boot
From this it sounds like it may be."

OK, I read over at Bombich's page that the external HFS+ drive must be non-encrypted.
That's ok with me.

So... going further (assuming that those capabilities of the t2 that are accessible to be "turned off" WERE turned off)...
... Would it then be possible to:
- boot from the HFS+ backup
- use Disk Utility to re-initialize the internal drive to HFS+
- RE-clone from the HFS+ backup BACK TO the internal drive (remember that the t2 has previously been "by-passed and disabled" somewhat)
- Now boot from the INTERNAL drive (which is HFS+)?

I suspect that no one has tried this yet, even if such attempt ended only in failure.
If I had a t2 equipped Mac, I would try it... but don't have one.

I will take a wild guess that the version of Disk Utility that ships with Mojave may not include an option to erase an internal drive (on a t2-equipped Mac) to HFS+ ...
 
You cannot bypass the T2. It is a secure and encrypted gateway that (amongst many things) acts as an always-encrypted SSD controller running AFPS only. The iMP and 2018 MBP are designed around the T2 co-processor, there is no getting around it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: green86
Thanks again folks, admittedly some of the issues in the article I linked to are over my head... That said I depend on a ton of assets I can't risk losing without putting me out of work for at least a few days if anything went wrong..
Anyway, emailed Bombich hoping they can clarify what, if anything, I should be aware of before moving to APFS...
Will probably post a follow up with their reply. Cheers!
 
zedsdeadbaby said:
I depend on a ton of assets I can't risk losing without putting me out of work for at least a few days if anything went wrong
Click to expand...

Just a tangential bit of unsolicited advice... if your current recovery time would put you out of work for a few days, you *might* want to take a close look at your backup strategy.

I can't suggest options without any details, but there are plenty of smart folks here if you posted up a separate thread looking for advice on designing a robust backup strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sosumi99
deeddawg said:
Just a tangential bit of unsolicited advice... if your current recovery time would put you out of work for a few days, you *might* want to take a close look at your backup strategy.

I can't suggest options without any details, but there are plenty of smart folks here if you posted up a separate thread looking for advice on designing a robust backup strategy.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I totally understand... That said, the downtime specifically has to do with software I use for work... (Composition for TV/film/media).

I have 2000-3000 Audio Unit plugins I use in Logic from many developers, they have to live in your OS's plugin directories in order to function, no way around it really... Installing them manually, (including authorization), all over again easily eats two to three days.

On top of that I have about 1.75 - 2 TB of sampled orchestra and percussion instruments that would require me to manually download them again if there were an issue... Easily a few days there as well...) Most of them require fairly demanding disk bandwidth to run smoothly as well so I'm I'm kind of locked into running the most critical ones from the internal HD. (On my current machine, 2012 MBP, I can at least get away with having the samples on an SSD in my DVD bay... Apple's killed off that option...)

So basically because audio developers live in the past and Kontakt depends on a ton of space and throughput I'm kind of locked into the structure I already have. As it is I'll have to migrate files that previously live on the drive in my DVD bay to the internal drive.

I can do an external drive for samples, but that's not necessarily the most reliable solution due to some of Kontakt's limitations. That said if there are solutions I may not be aware of I'm certainly interested in hearing them.
 
Last edited:
zedsdeadbaby said:
So basically because audio developers live in the past and Kontakt depends on a ton of space and throughput I'm kind of locked into the structure I already have. As it is I'll have to migrate files that previously live on the drive in my DVD bay to the internal drive.
Click to expand...

Understood. And while not apropos for this thread, remember there are ways to minimize recovery time in the event of a system issue even with the structure/constraints you describe. Just food for thought and future discussion. I only mention this because with many years in the IT field I think in terms of what I will do *when* a system fails rather than in terms of "if" it fails.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simonsi and LogicalApex
Thanks deedawg. Appreciate the advice... One option for me would be to partition the internal SSD and move everything to it that needs bandwidth, but doesn't have to exist on the OS drive. That way I could at least make backing up the OS less painful and backup the moved files to a large 7200 RPM drive...

The question is, has 10.13, or the new MBP killed off the option to resize and partition the internal drive?
 
zedsdeadbaby said:
Thanks deedawg. Appreciate the advice... One option for me would be to partition the internal SSD and move everything to it that needs bandwidth, but doesn't have to exist on the OS drive. That way I could at least make backing up the OS less painful and backup the moved files to a large 7200 RPM drive...

The question is, has 10.13, or the new MBP killed off the option to resize and partition the internal drive?
Click to expand...

apfs actually makes having multiple data partitions easier than ever, as they're basically virtual containers within a volume now, sharing the same free space pool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: green86
zedsdeadbaby said:
Well, despite my better judgement I'm considering the i9 MBP. The reports I'm seeing from Logic users are a lot more significant than I expected...

Anyway, I've been on 10.12 for a few years now and haven't gone near 10.13.
After some reading, it would seem that there's some rationale behind wiping an APFS formatted drive and reinstalling 10.13 with HFS+ for a leaner OS. I also would be migrating from my 10.12 HFS+ volume, and one article I read suggested this could in theory cause issues, if not potentially damage my HFS+ system volume... (I don't run FileVault or any encryption, I prefer runing the OS as lean as possible...)
Can anyone confirm:

A. Is this true at all? (Should I be careful mounting an HFS+ system volume via TB?)
B. If wiping and reinstalling as HFS+ is possible with the new MBP? (Never know what Apple decides to blacklist with new models...)
C. If there's any real logic behind going to the trouble to do this? I.e. will the OS be running anymore lean than with APFS on?
D. Are there any performance gains APFS brings?

Thanks as always...
Click to expand...

In the world of hacking macOS onto Windows hardware, I have followed this guide and through a rather simple terminal command during the installation you can avoid APFS ... I don't know how well this plays out with the T2 chip which essentially forces something similar to UEFI secure boot on you. If you feel like being brave, I'm not responsible for bricked Apple hardware ;)

Code: 
AVOID APFS CONVERSION

Fresh install scenario (or update), modifying minstallconfig.xml using PlistBuddy


The process involves creating an installer USB with createinstallmedia,
then booting that USB.
You then run the installer, create an HFS+J partition suitable for macOS with
Disk Utility, then point the installer to that partition.

Even though you create a new HFS+J partition,
if the target is an SSD, the installer will still convert it to APFS.

To avoid that, after running the installer, and upon the first reboot
where you would be normally boot the next stage
of the installer by, boot the "install_osx" partition on USB again.
When that is finished booting, choose Terminal from the Utilities menu.

Now, in Terminal, navigate to your target volume:
Code (Text):

# list /Volumes to remind yourself of the name you gave it:

ls -l /Volumes

# then change your working directory to it (in my case, I used '1013')

cd /Volumes/1013

# now change to the "macOS Install Data" directory

cd "macOS Install Data"

# now fix the minstallconfig.xml with PlistBuddy

/usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "Set :ConvertToAPFS false" minstallconfig.xml
 

That's it! Now you're ready to quit Terminal, reboot, and continue the
installation process.
When you're done, you'll have a fresh install on HFS+J instead of APFS.

Before you attempt anything like this, be sure to disable security and allow external media boot so you don't get locked out...

24001-30984-DQ3t8SsUIAA68cvjpg-large-xl.jpg
 
Last edited:
chrfr said:
This is the entire crux of this whole thread.
Click to expand...
Yeah definitely. I'm all for being bold, but probably not with a $6500 machine ;)
[doublepost=1534964852][/doublepost]
iMacDragon said:
apfs actually makes having multiple data partitions easier than ever, as they're basically virtual containers within a volume now, sharing the same free space pool.
Click to expand...
Cool. This makes things somewhat easier... I can move all of my instrument's assets and most project files as well... (Something I should have done long ago...)

Sounds like in terms of moving all of my plugins and docs though I'm looking at having to use migration assistant...
Oddly, when I moved to Sierra I used M.A. and it caused a ton of permissions issues. I had a bunch of plugins that wouldn't authorize despite multiple attempts, running first aid, etc... It wasn't until I repaired permissions with OnyX before the authorizations would stick. Never experienced this before. (And the only time I didn't restore from a CCC cone. Go figure... o_O)

Anyway, assuming others who've moved from 10.12 to 10.13 using M.A. haven't experienced anything similar?
 
Last edited:
FYI, I contacted Apple last week, and according to the Applecare agent I spoke with can be installed on the newest Macbook.

A support article they sent me linked below. I'll be following up with them in a phone call shortly to confirm this is in fact possible, and how it might or might not impact the throttling issue.

Will post an update shortly... And assuming I go through with it I'll post an update on that about that as well...

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208330
 
zedsdeadbaby said:
FYI, I contacted Apple last week, and according to the Applecare agent I spoke with can be installed on the newest Macbook.

A support article they sent me linked below. I'll be following up with them in a phone call shortly to confirm this is in fact possible, and how it might or might not impact the throttling issue.

Will post an update shortly... And assuming I go through with it I'll post an update on that about that as well...

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208330
Click to expand...
What can?
 
Mr_Brightside_@ said:
What can?
Click to expand...

Oops sorry... 10.12...

I was concerned about moving to 10.13 and was hoping 10.12 could be installed. (Been on 10.13 for the past week which creates a number of permissions issues with a few programs I rely on pretty regularly... So a downgrade would be ideal if possible.)

According to the article unless you boot into recovery and specifically disable the 'trusted operating system' security setting the machine will not let you install 10.12...Searching the web, this seems to be the overall consensus... 10.12 can't be installed on the newest MBP and iMac Pro due to the security requirements of the T2 chip...

That said I haven't gone through with it yet. And since AppleCare occasionally gets things wrong I can't confirm if this is actually true until I go for it... About to call A.C. now, if they confirm it should work I'm going to clone to HFS+ tonight and attempt a downgrade tomorrow.
 
Last edited:
zedsdeadbaby said:
Also, it appears this might be the case with iMac Pro for those curious... Although I don't own one I'll probably inquire anyway since I'm assuming whenever they release a


Oops sorry... 10.12...

I was concerned about moving to 10.13 and was hoping 10.12 could be installed. (Been on 10.13 for the past week which creates a number of permissions issues with a few programs I rely on pretty regularly... So a downgrade would be ideal if possible.)

According to the article unless you boot into recovery and specifically disable the 'trusted operating system' security setting the machine will not let you install 10.12...Searching the web, this seems to be the overall consensus... 10.12 can't be installed on the newest MBP and iMac Pro due to the security requirements of the T2 chip...

That said I haven't gone through with it yet. And since AppleCare occasionally gets things wrong I can't confirm if this is actually true until I go for it... About to call A.C. now, if they confirm it should work I'm going to clone to HFS+ tonight and attempt a downgrade tomorrow.
Click to expand...
There’s absolutely no chance Sierra works on either the iMac pro or the 2018 MBP. The MBP even requires a special version of 10.13.6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weaselboy
chrfr said:
There’s absolutely no chance Sierra works on either the iMac pro or the 2018 MBP. The MBP even requires a special version of 10.13.6.
Click to expand...

Yup, the first AppleCare agent had it wrong... Spoke to a senior A.C. guy and he confirmed 10.12 will not run on the new machine. No surprise there really...
 
Last edited:
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