Considering upgrading 2009 MacBook SSD again

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by DaveTheRave, Dec 30, 2016.

  1. DaveTheRave macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    #1
    My late 2009 MacBook still runs well. Over the years I've upgraded to more RAM and a 500 gig SSD.

    Now I'm almost running out of space again (we take a ton of pics and videos) and need a bigger HD. I can't justify the ridiculous pricing of new MacBook Pros, and I don't feel comfortable with trusting Apple's iCloud Photo Library service yet. That sort of leaves me with the only option of buying a new 1TB SSD until new MacBook's start offering that as the base model (years away?).

    These days my main use for my old MacBook is storing all the pics from me and my wife's iPhones. Putting more money into a very old laptop isn't ideal but seems most cost effective given my primary use/need. Anyone else here in a similar situation? Thanks.
     
  2. C5.4 macrumors member

    C5.4

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2016
    #2
    I keep all of mine on an external drive and then a backup of that external drive on a Time Capsule. Are you worried about the dependability/longevity of an HDD or do you want the speed of SSD?
     
  3. DaveTheRave thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    #3
    I just like having everything in one place (MacBook) with separate Time Machine backups on external drives.

    I had a bad experience when I migrated from iPhoto to Photos: the process froze during the first attempt. The second attempt was successful, but I noted that sporadic pictures and videos didn't make it over from iPhoto. I know they're not deleted but clearly something went wrong. I'm reluctant to try to move / migrate my photo library again because of fear of losing stuff again.
     
  4. Gregintosh macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago
    #4
    I would go with a 1TB external SSD (if you need speed) or 2TB portable drive (if speed isn't an issue) and keep the pictures and media on that. Then get a DropBox or OneDrive account and mirror everything on there.

    The good thing about 2.5" drives is you can always get an enclosure kit and turn them into externals, so perhaps upgrading isn't such a bad idea. When the computer finally dies, you can turn it into an external drive so it will not be wasted.
     
  5. throAU macrumors 601

    throAU

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #5
    I wouldn't do it personally.

    I'd buy a NAS (or some other form of external storage), fill it with cheap hard drives and use that for archiving.

    I know you don't want a new machine, and yours is still running fine, but throwing reasonably big money (1 TB SSD money is not cheap) on an 8 year old outdated machine which (more importantly) is using an outdated SSD interface (SATA) is not IMHO sensible. If that machine was to die tomorrow you've blown that money on something a new replacement machine won't use.

    Throwing money at the NAS route will give you something that you can still use with another machine if/when your 2009 finally gives up. Also, it gets data off your laptop which is far more likely to be stolen/destroyed by accident, etc. than a machine sitting in the corner of your living room.

    Having ALL your data on one device is a bigger risk.
     
  6. gooser macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2013
    #6
    i have two suggestions. put a large capacity hard drive in there and just forget about a ssd. failing that put a large capacity hybrid drive in there. either way would be more cost effective.
     
  7. laudern macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    #7
    What this guy said.

    I've got the same laptop and would never get rid of it considering Apple's latest poor offerings.

    I simply took out the cd drive and put an extra 2TB hdd in there. Been cruising along ever since.
     
  8. DaveTheRave thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    #8
    Only problem with that is downgrading speed from a SSD back to an old fashioned HD. Decisions, decisions...
     
  9. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #9
  10. Xenophon macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
    Location:
    New Delhi, India
    #10
    Late 2008 unibody macbook here. I'd also go the NAS route for what you're trying to do for your pics.

    (incidentally, I upgraded my macbook to 8Gb RAM and tried installing an SSD twice in the past. Never worked for me. It'd start like greased lightning, then after a couple of weeks it would become corrupted and the only way to resolve the issue was to disk and restore from carbon copy, until it went bad again a couple of weeks later. Had to revert to a conventional HDD. I've been meaning to upgrade for the past 3 years but it just keeps ticking and seeing what the going rates are and what you get for it....)
     
  11. laudern macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    #11
    Honestly, for general usage of a laptop (email, internet, videos, downloads) an 09 unibody Macbook is all anyone needs. And with the ability to upgrade certain parts as you need to, it completely out does Apple's current laptop offerings.
     
  12. DaveTheRave thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    #12
    Agreed. And it can run OSX Sierra.
     
  13. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #13
    2008 MBP runs very well for a casual user. It is unacceptable that Sierra is not officially supported.
     
  14. Gregintosh macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago
    #14
    I admire people who are able to cling onto old machines. I can't stand looking at a screen that isn't retina.

    I do understand that Apple's latest offerings aren't the best but if I was coming off a 2009 or earlier machine, I'd at least upgrade to a retina one.

    You can get an adapter that lets you stick a MicroSD in the SD slot and keep it flush, so you can add basically 200GB for storage on top of whatever SSD you end up getting. You can probably buy a Retina 2012 or 2013 model with a 512GB SSD for under or around a grand.
     
  15. DaveTheRave thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    #15
    I hear ya. Retina and faster machines are nice-to-haves. Must-haves are large storage 1TB minimum). So I can spend almost $2k on a new MacBook Pro or just spend a few hundred on a new SSD (or save even more if I downgrade to larger HDD). With that kind of price disparity a new MacBook Pro is very hard for me to justify purchasing.
     
  16. throAU macrumors 601

    throAU

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #16

    For general usage, sure. But it will be utterly destroyed in terms of battery life. And once you go retina, it's very difficult to go back. Text is so much easier to read, etc.

    My original point though was that the hardware in it may well be working today, but there's zero guarantee it will be working tomorrow.

    Spending any money on 8 year old hardware is a big gamble. You're essentially making the bet that it will continue to work, and unfortunately all hardware does eventually die.

    Unless you plan to perhaps stick the SSD in a USB enclosure when its no longer usable in the macbook?

    In my experience though, SSD trim doesn't work via USB enclosure....
     
  17. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #17
    Then it's much better not to go retina as my display is 48" 4K and there are no 8K TVs I can buy yet.
     
  18. Gregintosh macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago
    #18
    The non-Retina MacBooks are not powerful enough to actually output in 4K, so it will not look very good. You need a 2013 pro to get 4K in a usable fashion. And only the most recent ones (MacBook 12, or the new Pros) to get 4K at 60hz (which is the ideal resolution).

    I had a 15 inch pro retina from 2012 and while it could do 4K at 30Hz, it was way too choppy to use in a sustainable way. I guess the processor/video card couldn't even really keep up with 30hz at that resolution. My MacBook 12 2016 base model does a much better job even at 30Hz (though its capable of 60hz).

    I am 100% certain any non-retina model will not output in anything larger than 2560x1440 which will look terrible on a large 4K screen
     
  19. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #19
    I am using my 4K TV with my 2011 MBP.

    I built an eGPU for 60Hz, but I am not using it.

    30Hz is not so bad.
     
  20. Gregintosh macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago
    #20
    Is it outputting in native 4K with HiDPI mode? Or is it outputting a lower resolution the TV scales up?

    I agree, 30Hz isn't so bad. Though my 2012 MBP retina for some reason was very choppy with it. My 2016 MacBook 12 inch runs it in a way where you can't really tell whether its 30hz or 60hz.

    Well, I guess you're all set then. :) Just curious what is your TV model? And does it do Chroma 4-4-4? I am using a 50 inch 4K TV I got on Black Friday and while its perfectly usable, I feel like the colors are a bit muted/off, and for sure its using 4-2-0 or 4-2-2 or something.
     
  21. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #21
    HDMI 2.0 is limited to something like 4:2:2 at 60Hz.

    At 30Hz, it supports 4:4:4.

    I don't use HiDPI, it's 48" (I was looking for 40" but this was a great deal, and matches 4x 24" FullHD monitors).

    It is a 2015 curved Samsung Series 8.

    I think this is as big as a monitor can be, so in a few years I will go retina with 8K.
     

Share This Page