I guess then they would have missed out on a great forum post. I understand everyone wants to be first to come out with an "Apple is bad" story but at least do some quick verification.
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.
Mac Studio Storage Not User-Upgradeable Due to Software Block [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
From the horse’s mouth https://www.macrumors.com/2022/03/17/apple-executives-discuss-mac-studio/
Seems weird, but it's really not a big deal, imho—one external NVME drive and you're done. I suppose maybe the internal drives are faster(?)... But it's clearly not built to be a user-upgradable machine anyway. On a side-note, I'm hoping PyTorch keeps pushing forward with their optimizations for Apple hardware as I'm curious to see what an M1 Ultra could do with full hardware optimization. Obviously Linux+CUDA will still be the standard, but it could be nice to have a music production machine that's also good for training ML models over night!
Well the entire cottage industry of Apple outrage would be down quite a few clicks. I saw this made it to slashdot.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, tech “journalism” has become a total joke. There are so many articles from the engadgets, Reuters, and Bloombergs of the world that show the authors have NO experience actually working with machines, and the editors clearly don’t either.
Nah, when Apple released the M1 Mac mini, they had plenty of marketing collateral putting the Pro Display XDR and Mac mini together. It's just with the Mac Studio that Apple's crack team of marketeers decided to redefine the phrase "modular system."
Oh cool since they’ve been doing it for awhile we should just accept anti-user behavior without question
It apparently isn't a limitation at all. There is apparently a procedure that must be done after replacing the storage module to reinitialize it.
EDIT: Turns out, no.
Last edited:
I read Hector's entire thread. And MacRumors has added an update to the front of the article now confirming it.
After replacing the storage module(s), you need to perform a DFU operation to reinitialize it. The procedure for doing so is documented here.
Of note, there is no way to access the content of one of these modules apart from having it installed in the computer in which it was paired. The controller encrypts it for your protection. This, however, does not prevent you from replacing the storage. It just means that there is no option other than a full backup and restore operation to preserve the contents. It used to be that you could replace a drive by mounting it in an external enclosure and copying it over. That won't work here.
You can crow about it until the cows come home, that’s everybody’s right here in these forums, but Apple isn’t changing course on this. It’s a good step that they’re even including slotted storage, as long as everyone remembers that Apple
holds all the keys. If you or anyone else doesn’t like it, then go build or buy a Windows PC. You have all you want on that side of the aisle. Why anyone here thinks that Apple has to bow to them is beyond me. Sun didn’t, SGI didn’t, NeXT didn’t, Apple hasn’t for the past 45 years of existence. The PC clone market is alive and vibrant and you can do almost anything you want over there, as well as deal with the headaches that that freedom of choice causes. Get over yourself.
In short: you have to DFU-restore the Mac with the new SSD. This will 1) generate a new encryption key (which is machine-specific, so moving the SSD elsewhere will render it unreadable, by design), and 2) install the bootloader.
On ARM Macs, the internal SSD must work in order for the Mac to boot. And also, it needs to be encrypted with a key the Secure Enclave knows.
That’s an issue they should resolve. It’s just not great for usability
Yes, it’s fantastic for usability. It’s not fantastic for hacking, and it makes repairs slightly more difficult ,but it doesn’t degrade usability at all.
Ars Technica has a more sober analysis of what these SSD slots are and how Apple SSDs work. Seems "software block" isn't quite accurate here.
arstechnica.com
Explaining the Mac Studio’s removable SSDs, and why you can’t simply swap them out
To upgrade the Mac’s SSDs, it helps to understand how they work.
arstechnica.com
Every manufactuer does this to some extent, it isn't just as prevalent with computers. Look at any other professional equipment say a CNC machine, or medical machines, copiers, and the list goes on. With most professional equipment it isn't expected to be user upgradable, but with computers most can be but not all. Most pro level machines the manufacturer locks you out by price. For instance they price tires for police cars so high so most consumers do not buy them all up. The manufactuer then gives huge discounts to goverment, and municipalities so the price of the tires are affordable, same goes with locksmithing tools, and many other professional level tools. I am just happy that the common folk have access to some of tools that give us creative folk the ability to do professional work for less than you could just 20 years ago.
Ars Technica has a more sober analysis of what these SSD slots are and how Apple SSDs work. Seems "software block" isn't quite accurate here.
Explaining the Mac Studio’s removable SSDs, and why you can’t simply swap them out
To upgrade the Mac’s SSDs, it helps to understand how they work.
Hardware encryption alone does not explain the need to do a DFU restore (which also requires connecting a second Mac) in order to set up the replacement SSD. Because the next question will be why can’t you boot from a MacOS installation thumbdrive and run some new version of Disk Utility to erase+pair the SSD.
Many of these articles are missing a key detail. Older Macs store boot code in a separate firmware chip which allows these Macs to boot from external drives and internet recovery even if the internal drive is replaced with a blank. M1 Macs put the boot code on the internal drive instead of a firmware chip:
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.
So with an SSD that is blank or encrypted by a different computer, the M1 Mac can’t even boot from an external drive even if boot security was previously turned off.
I doubt there is anything in ARM architecture that requires M1 Macs to behave this way. Apple chose to design M1 Macs like this and the reasons are anyone’s guess.
Last edited:
You mean like Microsoft's Surface laptop that you basically have to destroy to get inside and is generally regarded as a throwaway computer if it breaks?
Source: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Microsoft+Surface+Laptop+Teardown/92915#teardownConclusion
I serviced Apple hardware since the G4 days, with a few exceptions of early Intel Macbook, I would say their hardware are designed intentionally to be be "service hostile". Those like me who are technically capable and with the right tools, modern Mac hardware takes 2x as long to service due to the reduction, modularity of parts and calibration post-repair. I am pretty sure most tech curse at Apple at some point for the ever challenging and complicated repair process.
When you can compare how easy and simple it is to work on something like Intel NUC, I think Apple has always been over-engineering things.
When you can compare how easy and simple it is to work on something like Intel NUC, I think Apple has always been over-engineering things.
That explains why Intel NUC sells so much better than Apple products, right?
Hint: apple engineers and designs its products with an eye toward what it’s customers are actually looking for, not with an eye toward what people who hate apple products are looking for.
I don't think that there is really any doubt that Apple doesn't want everyday people servicing or upgrading their products. They have intentionally designed them this way for a while (in many of them, the PSUs are exposed, making it literally dangerous to attempt to service them). It's very much understandable on the MacBooks (they genuinely wouldn't be able to make them this thin without compromises otherwise). But on the Mac Mini and the Mac Studio, or even the iMac, it makes much less sense.
I've done some research on this for a while and watch the trend change. Some of it can be chalked up to enabling elegance of design, but I don't think that's all of it.
One of the larger overlooked reasons (as far as I can tell) is that Apple doesn't really want the underground market to be thriving in places where frankenstein iPhones and MacBooks are made and sold everyday. I had a friend who used to do this, but as much as it exists in the West, it's especially common in places like China. She made a lot of money buying aftermarket parts for old iPhones, fixing them (or even upgrading them in some cases, such as in the battery) and selling them on eBay. It's been a ridiculously huge market overseas for years, and it's something Apple has very actively tried to prevent for a while (and is part of why authorized repair centers can't stock parts ahead of time, making repair wait times much longer than official Genius Bar repairs). This market still exists today (and if I'm being honest, I don't even have a problem with it. It keeps old iPhones out of the landfills). But it's a smaller market than it used to be as Apple has understandably made it more difficult to swap logic boards and various low-level components.
The other reason is pretty obvious, in my opinion. And that's profit. Unlike Google (and even Microsoft to an extent), Apple doesn't really make their money on ad revenue. They make some money off App store commissions and services, sure, but they're not running an advertisement empire like Google. Apple makes the majority of their money through hardware sales. And henceforth, the prices are going to be higher. Likewise, it's in Apple's best interest to try to find ways to sell more new units rather than repairing or upgrading existing ones, and to make a higher profit on each new unit they sell (storage upgrades, for example).
I don't really inherently have a problem with this. I'm gladly willing to pay more for an Apple device knowing that they aren't going to be selling my data to every third party known to man for me to see creepy advertisements popping up all over Google and Facebook of everything I do on my phone. But I don't like that they have become as difficult to repair as they have become. It's much easier to understand on the more entry level products, or products designed to be ultra-thin (such as the MacBook Air or competitors like the Microsoft Surface). But anyone paying $2000+ on a computer probably is investing a fair amount of money into it, and is expecting it to last several years.
And on the point of longevity, that's been one of Mac's biggest selling points for a while. Macs are very popular in American college environments (at my university, probably about 70% of the students were using MacBook Airs or something similar). They were less powerful than comparable Windows machines at the same price point, but they were popular because people would buy them knowing they would last. I bought one used (a 2012 MacBook Pro) before I went to university, and it lasted through all four years. Was it cheap? Not for my budget at the time (like most college students, I wasn't rich), but it was a great investment. And it lasted.
With the changes in repairability over the last several years, a lot of this has changed. My 2012 needed a new screen, and it was no problem to find a friend who could repair it affordably (there is no official Apple store in my region). When the RAM went bad, I replaced it in under 10 minutes. And when the storage became a problem, I upgraded it to an SSD with no difficulties whatsoever. That computer, despite being 10 years old, still works like a charm today, and I've never gotten a Windows computer to ever last this long. I have since upgraded (M1 MacBook Pro), and had I needed to repair my M1 during those days, I wouldn't have been able to afford to pay for an official Apple repair, and I certainly wouldn't have been able to afford to outright replace it either. I would have been stuck with no other option than to switch to PC.
This is part of why I think Apple might possibly reverse course (to some extent at least) in the coming years. Certainly not yet, if anything they are still doubling down. But I wouldn't be surprised if, in five years, Apple is coming out with easily repairable computers again. And it probably won't be for regularity reasons. It will probably be a response to consumer demand, because reliability and longevity was one of Macs biggest selling points over the last decade.
Last edited:
It’s not an “issue”. It’s a purposely designed security paradigm.
It’s a classic usability vs. security (incl. privacy) trade off. Yeah, replacing the internal storage is more annoying (but it’s only possible on a fraction of Apple devices anyway). Yeah, if the internal storage breaks, your machine is basically hosed.
But, OTOH, they made it extremely hard for people to steal your data once your device is locked or off. This is huge for journalists visiting a foreign country, for example.
You are missing the point, I am simply providing a comparison on NUC being highly modular and service friendly. They are obviously made for DIY market, and you shouldn't compare the marketing budgets used between the two companies.
Let me remind you Apple engineers bad products in the pasts and bit their back end for years. These repair extensions compensated service centers like me so I am happy for the incoming works. People who complained are their customers whose devices were not working: iMac Seagate 1TB/3TB recall, Macbook Pro 15-17" GPU, butterfly top case, Macbook Pro 13" display just to name a few. The downtime, inconvenience and related costs for the customers are immeasurable.
Being able to extend the life of electronic reduces the amount of e-waste and potentially save money on the long run. I still have 10+ years old PC running Windows 10 for running common tasks like Chrome and VLC and get security updates from Microsoft. I can't say the same for the 2012 Macbook Pro which it can't even run anything past 10.15, and I gave it another few years of life by converting it to Windows 10.
Look at the old PowerMac G5, the Xserve or the Xeon Mac Pro, these were great example for service friendly computer. We know Apple can make it easy, but for whatever reason, they made a decision for everyone it's better to lock it down and keeping pushing their walled-garden corporate strategy.
At the end of the day, I am just a computer repair person; I treat all computers the same as they are being presented to me, it is just a tool and a device to get stuff done.