*Gasp* I'm downgrading from SSD back to HDD.

[johnnj]

People get so worked up on here.

The OP made a configuration decision regarding his own machine based on his personal needs and experience. It's not a popular decision and it's not the one I'd choose, but I'm not him.

I've had all good experience with SSDs (knock wood), unlike my recent experimentation with high speed RAM. If I didn't, which could easily have been the case given complaints posted by people who have had problems with models that others have reported trouble-free.

I'm glad he started his thread because his course of action wasn't in the direction that most people go and it's probably representative of a position that other people choose silently or are considering but won't go against the "SSD is always better" thought.

 

[ender land]

This is really a ridiculous thread.

Why would you keep wanting sata III? Have you used a sata II drive? I can barely notice the difference between my older vertex 2 and crucial m4 and my friends vertex 3.

ssd arn't overrated, SATA III drives are overrated. You can BARELY tell the difference. SATA II drives can be found for pretty legit deals. Kingston 96 gb for $99 right now from newegg. $1/gb. Not too bad, and still very very fast.

OP, you never answered this question from someone earlier. The only thing you keep repeating over and over is "I must have SATA III and not SATA II."

You yourself say they are "experimental" - why not go with something less experimental?

Reliability is not the same thing as compatibility. I agree once you get an SSD functioning properly they don't seem to die often, which makes them reliable. But every day there is a new thread here about someone that installed an SSD on their Mac and they have compatibility problems such as beachballs and lockups. At this point in SSD development it would be hard to argue they don't have compatibility issues. Whether that is Apples fault or the SSD manufacturers fault is still up for debate I suppose.

This.

daneoni, you can't possibly say "this" with respect to what you quoted. Because according to what you said you had a properly functioning SSD on your computer and still chose to return it in spite of agreeing that once you get one working they are quite reliable.

Are SSDs perfect on OS:X? No, they are not. They might have issues. But acting as if regular hard drives are infinitely better and more reliable is simply foolish - unless you have done research and compared what percentage of SSDs die after 3 years for mechanical ones, and found that SSDs have a higher failure rate, etc. But given your rationale for not wanting an SSD I doubt you have even considered this sort of research.


The reason people are giving you a hard time is not that your statements are not true... but that your rationale for returning the harddrive makes no sense.

 

[Kariya]

OP, you never answered this question from someone earlier. The only thing you keep repeating over and over is "I must have SATA III and not SATA II."

He did

Yep. 13" MBA SSD. The difference between both was still tangible to me. 96GB is also too small to house my files and i can't really do optibay cause i use the optical drive quite frequently as well.

If i'm gonna buy an SSD now it has to be a SATA3 drive, SATA2 is no longer an option. If i had to settle for one, it would be the Apple ones since they are the cheapest i can get (i'm not gonna heavily invest in a SATA2 drive when i have a SATA3 port) but since i didn't BTO an SSD from them i'm left with SATA3.

daneoni, you can't possibly say "this" with respect to what you quoted. Because according to what you said you had a properly functioning SSD on your computer and still chose to return it in spite of agreeing that once you get one working they are quite reliable.

Er...i think you're putting words in his mouth. He said the drive was currently working fine for him...nothing about reliability.

Are SSDs perfect on OS:X? No, they are not. They might have issues. But acting as if regular hard drives are infinitely better and more reliable is simply foolish - unless you have done research and compared what percentage of SSDs die after 3 years for mechanical ones, and found that SSDs have a higher failure rate, etc. But given your rationale for not wanting an SSD I doubt you have even considered this sort of research.
The reason people are giving you a hard time is not that your statements are not true... but that your rationale for returning the harddrive makes no sense.

The guy never said he didn't want an SSD, he said he wants to wait a bit more before committing to an SSD. Thats all. He didn't say SSDs suck or that HDD are better. He wants either Sandforce to release an update utility for macs and/or OS X to implement universal TRIM first before migrating.

I think thats perfectly reasonable.

The reason people are giving him a hard time is because they didn't fully read the thread, think their opinion>the OPs and have the SSD>any-practical-reason mentality.

 

[ender land]

If i'm gonna buy an SSD now it has to be a SATA3 drive, SATA2 is no longer an option. If i had to settle for one, it would be the Apple ones since they are the cheapest i can get (i'm not gonna heavily invest in a SATA2 drive when i have a SATA3 port) but since i didn't BTO an SSD from them i'm left with SATA3.

This is not at all rational to me.

Does the OP have 16 gb RAM too? I mean, the hardware supports it and you can buy it (!).

If the OP wants to have the latest hardware because it's the latest - I have not seen a reason in this thread other than what you quoted - that's fine. But understand part of that is having more problems than established things.

Er...i think you're putting words in his mouth. He said the drive was working fine for him...nothing about reliability.

Considering the OP agrees that if you get an SSD working you likely will not have issues and that they are more reliable, AND that he got his drive working... I mean maybe he quoted that post and affirmed it without reading it?

 

[s.hasan546]

lol at this point OP will never get a ssd. By the time sata III drives are perfect, something faster/better will be out and he'll want that and will complain that the newer tech. has problems too.

 

[Kariya]

This is not at all rational to me. Does the OP have 16 gb RAM too? I mean, the hardware supports it and you can buy it (!).

16GB of RAM cost $1600, an OCZ Vertex 3 cost $599.

If you had to choose between these two for an upgrade what would YOU pick?

Considering the OP agrees that if you get an SSD working you likely will not have issues, and that they are more reliable AND that he got his drive working... I mean maybe he quoted that post and affirmed it without reading it?

He says arguably will work well as is...nothing about them being reliable. The drive may be working fine now but it doesn't mean there won't be problems later...problems you may have avoided if you were running the latest firmware and/or TRIM for example.

People have gotten their drives working and then suddenly experience problems later on...some of which were addressed with FW updates. Now say the OP's drive began having issues which was addressed in a future update but he couldn't access the update what would you have him do? Keep telling himself that "if you get an SSD working you likely will not have issues, and that they are more reliable"?

You can't really blame him for exercising caution. Besides there are already rumours that OWC and Sandforce are working on an OS X utility and Lion is supposedly bringing TRIM. So really why shouldn't he wait?

Just search SSD issue(s) on this forum and see for yourself. One example; a guy who bought an Intel 320 series drive had no issues initially, until the drive failed without any warning at the airport. Even someone in this thread is having problems with the same Vertex 3 model.

Not exactly confidence inspiring. Not everyone is as bleeding edge/willing to experiment and accept the niggles/risk factors like some of us on here.