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.
macOS Sierra Tidbits: Apple File System, RAID Support, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This. higher end models can do even more. The plus models tend to support hardware based encryption if a needed or liked feature. Means you aren't relying on the computer doing all that work. I see no loss in performance when I pass large amounts of data that needs to be encrypted on my 1515+.
3rd party stepped in here in a big way, even for other vendors and OS's. Base shell (no drives) of a NAS is approaching the price of even a barebones system build. It can be the drives that turns even the barebones into expensive gear fast imo. And at least with synology DSM (its OS for the NAS for the not familiar)....its gets as simple or complicated as you want it. Can be easier than setting up a proper windows or even linux file server with security in place.
If MacRumors think Apple File System is just a tidbit, then they hjyst don't get it. The move from HFS+ to Apple File System is a massive change. Quite a bit of time was spent in the State of the Union keynote about it.
Things like - TextEdit Icon Spotted on iOS 10 During WWDC 2016 Demo get a deticated news article here but Apple File System does not in this topic, that's just a joke.
Even Ars Techina wrote a separate article about Apple FIle System
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2016/0...ocumentation-for-apfs-apples-new-file-system/
Because Apple File System is just that important a change that it deserves it.
"So a new app icon is so important to deserves it's own dedicated topic but a new file system replacing one decades old does not." This is saying that to some people here app icons are more important than MacOS's file system.
Things like - TextEdit Icon Spotted on iOS 10 During WWDC 2016 Demo get a deticated news article here but Apple File System does not in this topic, that's just a joke.
Even Ars Techina wrote a separate article about Apple FIle System
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2016/0...ocumentation-for-apfs-apples-new-file-system/
Because Apple File System is just that important a change that it deserves it.
"So a new app icon is so important to deserves it's own dedicated topic but a new file system replacing one decades old does not." This is saying that to some people here app icons are more important than MacOS's file system.
Last edited:
There is an entire keynote dedicated to APFS Introducing Apple File System
Apple is treating APFS as huge, why MacRumors is not really confuses me. I don't get why MacRumors is not.
Apple is treating APFS as huge, why MacRumors is not really confuses me. I don't get why MacRumors is not.
Unfortunately, Macrumors is more interested in generating clicks and views. APFS is great news, but not as exiting to an average Apple user than a random artists iPhone 7 concept rendering...
The older macs which have been excluded aren't fast enough for hardware encryption on the fly, which is a main feature of APFS. It would not make any sense to have significant parts of the Sierra macOS users unable to run the new file system, and would hinder the uptake of APFS.
There will not be an ARM mac, it would be even slower than the Macbook and need a permanent translation chip just to keep up with intel only apps. Basically it would be pointless to divert the relatively underpowered iPad chips to macOS.
You can turn off the iCloud sync in the system settings for that spacesaver "feature".
I know, but this is the first step into a cloud centric environment (the music.. the photos and now your files) IF Apple really wants to help me manage my HD they should lower the insane price for the ssd so I can get a bigger one, on the other hand if they want to push people to use the cloud, giving 5 gb (is this 2016?? people complain about 16 GB on an iPhone but are fine with 5gb of storage for their file?) is not a good start, they should provide more space if the want people to start using it and get sucked into that kind of "mentality".
For the ARM Mac I think you misinterpreted me, I wasn't suggesting they will make it, I was arguing against it....
First of all, Sierra does not feature full APFS support. Full AFPS support is coming with 10.13. Second, AFPS will be supported by 10.11 and up. Third, filesystem encryption has been there for years, so I have difficulties understanding your arguments.
I used to be extremely sceptical about ARM on desktop, but then the new benchmarks are indeed very surprising. ARM is catching up! https://mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-q...risons-of-common-operations-2016-edition.html
1. AFPS features multi-key file encryption, so every file can have it's own key. The older macs aren't capable of handling that at a reasonable speed, so it would have to be crippled just for ancient macs, and would not work properly anyway.
2. The ARM benchmarks don't translate directly to performance in complex calculations in x86.
In order to have a functional mac on ARM, you need a physical translation chip that handles existing software designed for an entirely different CPU architecture that is significantly more powerful than the ARM family.
Why not? Does FileVault use some other, simpler algorithm?
I was thinking more along the lines of cross-compilation rather then emulation. Apple already has fat binary technology, so it shouldn't be a big problem compiling apps for multiple platforms at the same time. I have no doubt that most App Store apps would compile to ARM. Of course, you are absolutely correct that more complex legacy code (e.g. Photoshop) is a different beast. also, let me again stress the fact that I am not a proponent of ARM Macs. I am merely saying that ARM starts to be mature enough so that in a few year times, ARM-based desktop machines could be a viable choice. The binary code compatibility remains an issue of course, but Apple already has a lot of experience in that, as they have transitioned between instruction sets before and also support a number of different instruction sets simultaneously at the current time.
Filevault uses a simpler way to encrypt, as it is just one key. That is actually less secure than having multiple keys.
If you understand why it's best to have multiple keys locking multiple things, rather than a single master key for everything, then you have understood most of the maths involved in third year cryptography maths.
As far as ARM macs go, they would by design be slower and less capable of performance than a Macbook.
Any saving in cost for the ARM CPU would be eaten by the instruction translator chip, as performance of software translation would not be realtime.
Technically, we would be considering a reverse process of the PPC to x86 transition, as PPC was risc & x86 is cisc.
Going from cisc to risc necessarily involves increased speed of risc to catch up with cisc instructions.
ARM tops out just below the speed of Core M processors, so you would see severely underpowered desktops.
Because you feel responsible computing is some kind of oppression. This is the same mentality that being legally required to wear a seatbelt restricts your rights.
You can be as irresponsible as you like. But it should not be the default, and it should not be celebrated.
Sorry if I missed this but is it known if the resurrected RAID in 10.12 disk utilities is multi threaded? AS far as I know SoftRAID's speed gain over Apple was the fact they are using multi-threaded drivers and Apple was single.