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.
Craig Federighi Says Apple Intends to Address APFS Support for Fusion Drives 'Very Soon'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's cute, but the iMac starts at $1,099 with a 1 TB hard drive. Add Fusion Drive, and it's $100 more. Add a 1 TB SSD, and it's $800 more.
Even if Apple were to adjust the pricing on that a little — suppose they half it — that still changes the starting point to $1,499. Nobody wants that.
Just a thought ... when will they address Craig Federighi being in charge of OSX and iOS?!
- other than bringing 'nail-polish' like features to the UI of each since he's been in charge ... what has Federighi really brought to both platforms that all iOS/OSX (I refuse to call it MacOS just cause he's a marketing yes-man)??!
Files?
- it's broken with latest update by Mega.nz and Box.net doesn't work as intended, very slow cannot rename camera picture names before saving. Pure half-stepping when Apple has had 5-10yrs to just even mimic the required features wtihin Files from Android.
Forstall
- Time Machine
- Maps - which despite the loathing of it STILL does quite well for integration, speed in locking a GPS/aGPS location.
- quality icons non of this fischer price junk.
- iOS / Phone OS. Nuff said on this.
Serlet
- less installation foot print on OSX (Leopard)
- OSX pricing drop from $129 to $29
- OSX pricing drop from $29 to FREE! Like REAL FREE
- Spaces, Mission Control, more universal unix commands, effecient background process at the system core sub-routines for things like garbage management,
- etc etc etc
including MUCH better on stage jokes! And HE did this all and more at an older age, one eye less, and a french accent compared to Craig F!!
So please enlighten me what did Craig really bring to OSX other than superficial nail-polish features, big hair to the stage (like this isn't 80's Glam Rock), and some dumb on stage hand gestures to mimic Cook (you know the one)? Oh yeah he renamed OSX (just because it reminded everyone of Jobs).
PS: Let's not forget Craig LEFT Apple in the Jobs era after the turnaround was already well completed, and when that didn't work out came back. Nobody that does that SHOULD be an executive at any company unless they're bringing huge fruits to bear in the first year.
- other than bringing 'nail-polish' like features to the UI of each since he's been in charge ... what has Federighi really brought to both platforms that all iOS/OSX (I refuse to call it MacOS just cause he's a marketing yes-man)??!
Files?
- it's broken with latest update by Mega.nz and Box.net doesn't work as intended, very slow cannot rename camera picture names before saving. Pure half-stepping when Apple has had 5-10yrs to just even mimic the required features wtihin Files from Android.
Forstall
- Time Machine
- Maps - which despite the loathing of it STILL does quite well for integration, speed in locking a GPS/aGPS location.
- quality icons non of this fischer price junk.
- iOS / Phone OS. Nuff said on this.
Serlet
- less installation foot print on OSX (Leopard)
- OSX pricing drop from $129 to $29
- OSX pricing drop from $29 to FREE! Like REAL FREE
- Spaces, Mission Control, more universal unix commands, effecient background process at the system core sub-routines for things like garbage management,
- etc etc etc
including MUCH better on stage jokes! And HE did this all and more at an older age, one eye less, and a french accent compared to Craig F!!
So please enlighten me what did Craig really bring to OSX other than superficial nail-polish features, big hair to the stage (like this isn't 80's Glam Rock), and some dumb on stage hand gestures to mimic Cook (you know the one)? Oh yeah he renamed OSX (just because it reminded everyone of Jobs).
PS: Let's not forget Craig LEFT Apple in the Jobs era after the turnaround was already well completed, and when that didn't work out came back. Nobody that does that SHOULD be an executive at any company unless they're bringing huge fruits to bear in the first year.
Every week. Active files are continuously synced via iCloud Drive or Dropbox. Worst case scenario and I lose the machine or it dies, I do a restore from a week-old Time Machine backup and wait maybe an hour at most for some active files to re-sync.
Now, in the past when robust cloud sync was harder and cloud storage was way more expensive -- then I was backing up every day (at least) to Time Machine because that was the only backup I had. The fact of the matter is, if you keep your active files synced and are on wifi often enough, the question of backup becomes a bit less pressing, as described above.
You are seriously overestimating how hard it is to set up Time Machine. There are two steps: 1) plug in an external hard drive and 2) say "yes" when it asks you if you want to back up. There is no step 3.
This point you keep trying to make -- correct me if I'm wrong -- is that, somehow, most Mac laptop users who were using Time Machine were doing so through the now-discontinued Time Capsule device? And furthermore that in the absence of this niche device Apple will do away with Time Machine as a MacOS feature. I don't think anybody buys that for a minute.
I have no idea how many Mac laptop users are doing physically-connected hard drive backups via Time Machine, but it's dead simple to set up and it's surely a hell of a lot faster than any internet or local network-based solution. And since "restore your Mac from a backup" remains a core recovery strategy, what you're saying makes no sense.
Could Mac backups eventually be tackled iOS style, where your user data and settings are backed up and a reinstall means you re-download all your installed applications? Sure. But that's a lot thornier on a Mac than an iOS device because not all your software is necessarily going to be available for reinstallation from the App Store.
Last edited:
duh, sorry.
[doublepost=1527184590][/doublepost]
boy that will not work for me....I use my phones for all internet.
High Sierra bricked my 3TB Fusion Drive 2013 iMac. I lost everything, including some irreplaceable files. Planning to replace the dead HDD inside and get in running again, but Apple's terrible QC lately has me leery.
[doublepost=1527191236][/doublepost]
Thanks for this! I think when I replace the dead HDD in my iMac, I won't join it with the still functional SSD into a single Fusion Drive, but keep it separated.
Glad you found the information useful.
If it were me, and I already had the system open, I’d consider swapping the SSD portion for a larger drive as well. Then put your Operating System and Applications on the SSD and Data, documents, media, downloads, anything you don’t use daily on your spinner.
For me, 128 GB was sufficient for a SSD used that way. But really, it was tight. And that was being as conservative as I could. So I’d probably go 256 GB or better if I did it now.
But either way, you lose less of a drive fails if it’s not joined to another drive. One failure should not cause another drive to lose data. That’s poor engineering.
The idea of spanned volumes was never meant to be used in this fragile way.
APFS? Swift? watchOS? tvOS? Continuity?
I don't even begin to understand what pricing has to do with the head of software engineering, but both of those price drops happened years after Serlet had left.
He left in 1999, long before any "turnaround" was "well completed".
I used a striped RAID many years ago in an enterprise setting, and hadn't really thought of the Fusion Drive as a RAID, but you're right… that's what it is.
That's a good idea to increase the size of the SSDs once I crack the cases open (I have two iMacs with the same failed HDD issue). 128 GB hasn't been a problem for me for either machine and they seem to be running fine, but I'll definitely look into it.
Thanks again.
And when it automatically disables screen lock during calls?especially conference calls?
Swift was NOT created in any effort by Craig.
Price drops where about getting the software out to more users quickly which helps better unify support and internal coders and support staff training and support metrics when calls are more prevailing of the same OS. There where more features under the hood than what most of the while is shown off as glitz.
WatchOS and TVOS use the main core from iOS so UI changes yes but it’s still OSX and mainly IOS - no creak credits there.
Continuity yes but not too great a major feature. I really wish metrics where done by site.
Watch a few of the old WWDC’s again.
There is plenty of things to be mad about concerning Apple...no need to look hard for it..
Is Craig "in charge of OSX and iOS" or is he not?
What does any of that have to do with Bertrand Serlet vs. Craig Federighi?
Why? You're already set in your opinion that Craig can do no right and Bertrand could do no wrong.
Being in “charge of iOS/OSX does not make you a creator of the development tools. He did not create Swift, Chris Lattner did.
Craig’s been in charge only for the current 8yrs since Forstall left.
I ask about the WWDCs so you’d not mAke the mistake Craig created SWift only presented it.
Bertrand, sure name one thing he did wrong at Next or Apple? I’ll wait, seems many Apple fans, Forstall, Jobs and Tevanian all held him in very high regards.
Forstall presents a no win debate about doing several wrong things. My mind is made up based on performance, actions, proven success record with no to very little horrible end user experience.
Craig’s been in charge only for the current 8yrs since Forstall left.
I ask about the WWDCs so you’d not mAke the mistake Craig created SWift only presented it.
Bertrand, sure name one thing he did wrong at Next or Apple? I’ll wait, seems many Apple fans, Forstall, Jobs and Tevanian all held him in very high regards.
Forstall presents a no win debate about doing several wrong things. My mind is made up based on performance, actions, proven success record with no to very little horrible end user experience.
I didn’t say he did. Are you saying you think Bertrand personally created Spaces?
What on earth are you even talking about? Craig heads an organization of thousands of software engineers, just like Scott and Bertrand did before. You made the insinuation that nothing significant has been engineered since. I have some examples of recent significant engineering efforts. You don’t care about those. OK.
I can appreciate that but we're also talking about one of the richest companies in the world—not a process with clear biological constraints. I'm not saying it would be easy to fix but there's a pattern there and it looks like chronic and increasingly pervasive under resourced development. Doing many things poorly—or more specifically over-promising and under-delivering—was a hallmark of Apple in early/mid 90's. Apple needs to either refocus (AKA late 90's Steve Jobs style) or find a way to start pushing out one month babies.
Fair enough. Appreciate the clarification. No, I agree that Federighi isn't a moron... and I'm not arguing that it is secret or sensitive either. But if Craig truly intended the answer for wider distribution, he could have easily made a public response to the question in any number of forums. I'm not sure Apple always counts on private email conversations to be published as the main source of news.
If you’re referring to, say, discussing this matter with the media, Apple employees are not permitted to discuss work with journalists without going through Apple PR first (which subsequently very rarely gives permission).
I suspect any post by Craig in a forum like this one would be instantly drowned in a sea of additional questions, unneeded advice on how to run a dev organisation and hate messages.
Reading about emoticons in every thread gets kinda tedious as well. Stop that first. Ok?
... Not so going directly through Apple ... I concerned an SSD on my 2017 iMac 5k but it was a 27% premium in price for 1/3rd the storage space ...
[doublepost=1528234443][/doublepost]Apple engineering chief Craig Federighi recent comments that it would be "very soon" that we would receive the upgrade to the new Apple Filesystem APFS for those of us who use Fusion Drives on Macs. Did he announce it at WWDC as we thought he meant, NO!
Apple is planning to share news on APFS support for Fusion Drives "very soon," Apple software engineering chief Craig Federighi told MacRumors reader Jonathan in an email this afternoon.
Federighi shared the detail after Jonathan sent him an email asking whether or not APFS was still in the works for Fusion Drives, which combine a hard drive with flash storage to provide the speed of an SSD with the affordability of a standard hard drive. Fusion Drives are used in iMacs and Mac mini machines.
In response to Jonathan's question, Federighi gave a short but enticing answer, which we verified:With the launch of macOS High Sierra, Apple introduced a new Apple File System for Macs that have all-flash built-in storage. At the time macOS High Sierra was introduced, Apple said that the initial release of the software would not allow Fusion Drives to be converted to APFS, but confirmed APFS support would be coming at a later date.
Since then, iMac and Mac mini owners who have Fusion Drives have been eagerly waiting for Apple to implement support for the feature, but in update after update, no APFS support for Fusion Drives has materialized.
Federighi's statement suggests that APFS will be added as a feature in an upcoming software update, perhaps the macOS 10.14 update that's expected to be unveiled at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June.
For those unfamiliar with the new Apple File System, it's a more modern file system than HFS+ and has been optimized for solid state drives. It is safe and secure, offering crash protection, safe document saves, stable snapshots, simplified backups, strong native encryption, and more.
Article Link: Craig Federighi Says Apple Intends to Address APFS Support for Fusion Drives 'Very Soon'
To many times nowadays I feel, we hear Apple make promises which seem to last for eternity. When APFS was announced last year a WWDC, I like many others thought great a new file system, but when High Sierra was release it became apparent it was only for those who had embraced SSD's on their Macs. Those of us who use HDDs or Fusions are still waiting for this allusive (future update) we were told we are to receive. Take as another example the Mac mini "it is important to Apple", can't be that important, because it will be four years this October since it's last upgrade. I feel that Apple through it's actions like this and it inability to give me and other Mac Fusion Drive owners a clear time scale or even updates of when we also might receive the new Apple Filesystem APFS.
This I feel is a throwaway comment "it will be very soon" by Craig Federighi, is freezing us who are loyal Apple customers out of the Apple family and in the long run is making Apple look indecisive at best.
the APFS picture is still not complete ... time machine, the lone hold out, refuses to be embraced by the new kid on the block ...
and AP2 is still MIA in .14b1 despite home(kit) crosstreking
So if Apple is going to cull some 'fusionable' Macs from using Mojave that might mean they'll be unable to use APFS on Fusion drives? Most pre 2012 Macs cannot run Mojave. I have a 2011 Mac mini Server (the last of the V8s... sucks nitro... Phase 4 head...) running a fusion drive still on HFS+ but it will not be able to run Mojave. Yes I know it did not come with an Apple based fusion drive. Nevertheless, I wonder if Apple will create a fix only for Mojave Macs or those ancient Macs stuck in High Sierra?
Last edited: