macOS High Sierra 10.13.0 vs 10.13.1 (Beta) Performance

Discussion in 'macOS High Sierra (10.13)' started by robert1998, Sep 30, 2017.

  1. robert1998 macrumors 6502

    robert1998

    Joined:
    May 10, 2017
    #1
    Hello guys! I heard that Apple made available the beta for the next update of High Sierra.
    Does it compare to "stable" release? Or not?
     
  2. robert1998 thread starter macrumors 6502

    robert1998

    Joined:
    May 10, 2017
  3. RumorConsumer macrumors 6502a

    RumorConsumer

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2016
    #4
    I misread your question. Its always comparable but often not quite perfect. Always a gamble and each persons mileage might be a bit different.
     
  4. torana355 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
  5. TonyAguila macrumors newbie

    TonyAguila

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #6
    No discernible difference here, compared to the public (“stable”) release, aside from the fact that Siri now has the same natural voice as in iOS 11.

    10.13.1 beta (17B25c) is rock solid on my systems (MacPro5,1 and MacBookPro11,3) but your mileage may vary depending on your apps and add-ons, some of which may be on the cusp of compatibility. As always, just make sure you have redundant, reliable back-ups before your proceed with the installation.

    All my HDD volumes, internal and external, are now APFS volumes except for Time Machine drives. Time Machine itself will not accept any APFS volume for backup. It looks like not even Apple is comfortable enough with the new format.
     
  6. ackerthehacker macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    #8
    I'm getting a bunch of apps that worked in 10.13 and not working in 10.13.1.
     
  7. dan9700 macrumors 68030

    dan9700

    Joined:
    May 28, 2015
    #9
    Like? Is it fixed with beta 2
     
  8. RumorConsumer macrumors 6502a

    RumorConsumer

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2016
    #10
    Doubtful thats the problem. I think they are plenty confident. Time Machine creates an incredibly complex directory structure. It likely will take more time to get it working or it doesnt make sense for some reason to change the file system for that purpose.
     
  9. hieubui macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2017
    #11
    10.13.1 is faster for me AND it fixes the annoying bug that freezes safari with certain input source.

    The only thing my computer crash every time it wakes up. For now, I'm shutting it down completely every time
     
  10. knguyench macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2013
    #12
    Good sound to hear. I hope next official release all problems about safari and Telex input source completely sloved.
     
  11. Cougarcat macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    #13
    APFS doesn't support hard links to directories yet, which Time Machine uses.
     
  12. ashleykaryl, Oct 18, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017

    ashleykaryl macrumors regular

    ashleykaryl

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    I also have the internal SATA drives on my Mac Pro converted to APFS and they seem to run better than ever. When I click on a drive that hasn't been used for hours it responds instantly with no delay.

    When they were HFS+ there would often be a wake up period of a couple seconds with noise, followed by another delay with occasional spinning ball while all the contents appeared. This was most noticeable when saving files to a drive that had gone to sleep, following a period of inactivity. There is a lot of talk about APFS only being intended for SSD, but for me it's working fine with the old SATA drives.
     
  13. RumorConsumer macrumors 6502a

    RumorConsumer

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2016
    #15
    Well there ya go.
     
  14. stooovie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    #16
    That probably just means your drives don't enter sleep.
     
  15. ashleykaryl macrumors regular

    ashleykaryl

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    In system preferences I have them set to sleep when possible and there are two drives that often go a day or more without being accessed, so it seems unlikely they would be awake the whole time, unless that is a bug in High Sierra. The computer is set to sleep after 10 minutes.
     
  16. OGPrince macrumors regular

    OGPrince

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #18
    Performance on my MacBook Pro 15 2015 is somewhat better than Sierra but not a huge amount, certain animations are much smoother but the beta is a beta so at times I get random lag spikes but overall it's a pretty snappy experience on my hardware.
     
  17. Martyimac macrumors 68000

    Martyimac

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Location:
    S. AZ.
    #19
    10.3.1 beta is faster on my 2011 mini than 10.3. But I don't use Safari so can't give any input on that.
     

Share This Page

18 September 30, 2017