OS X 10.11 El Capitan Runs on All Macs Capable of Running Yosemite

[ApfelKuchen]

Even so, those drives are still painfully slow for those tasks.

I've replaced those 5400rpm drives with SSDs on two MBPs in the past month. The users of those computers couldn't be happier with the resulting speed increase.

If you'd replaced those 5400rpm drives with 7200rpm, would they have noticed as substantial an improvement? Nobody here would deny the benefits of SSD. SSD over spinner, SSD over Fusion, SSD over 5.25" single-sided, single-density floppies, SSD over punch cards...

SSD is not some sort of religion, where all non-believers must be converted. The benefits are obvious, and so are the costs. And as anything else on a cost/benefit graph, at some point, price trumps performance. The day may come when SSD and HDD reach cost-per-byte parity, but considering the way HDD makers keep boosting the capacity of drives while maintaining unit price, it may still be a while.

The weight and size advantages that make solid state storage so nice for laptops is less critical in desktops, and the lure of "massive" internal storage still exists for many buyers. Fusion does a good enough job of bridging the performance gap (for most users) that it's likely to last longer than some people think.

 

[Milquetoast]

Having enjoyed the beauty of Yosemite National Park many times, I like the name. I'm looking forward to using the OS.

Agreed!!!

If you've never been there, you have no clue at all. Yosemite is (IMO) the most beautiful place in the world (where the "horizon" in the valley is 30-45° from horizontal, and El Capitan is just... 3000+ ft of sheer vertical granite cliff - amazing)! From the ground, a 200-300 foot pine tree on top is a scant few pixels tall. My wife and I have long had a Yosemite "jones" - even though we now live on the east coast of the US, we have to get our fix every 10-15 years max. It's that good.

My prediction - 10.12 will be called "Half Dome". (There... I jinxed it!)

 

[Milquetoast]

If you'd replaced those 5400rpm drives with 7200rpm, would they have noticed as substantial an improvement? Nobody here would deny the benefits of SSD. SSD over spinner, SSD over Fusion, SSD over 5.25" single-sided, single-density floppies, SSD over punch cards...

SSD is not some sort of religion, where all non-believers must be converted. The benefits are obvious, and so are the costs. And as anything else on a cost/benefit graph, at some point, price trumps performance. The day may come when SSD and HDD reach cost-per-byte parity, but considering the way HDD makers keep boosting the capacity of drives while maintaining unit price, it may still be a while.

The weight and size advantages that make solid state storage so nice for laptops is less critical in desktops, and the lure of "massive" internal storage still exists for many buyers. Fusion does a good enough job of bridging the performance gap (for most users) that it's likely to last longer than some people think.

The base configuration for all Macs should be a fusion drive. Yes, it costs a bit more, but not that much (at a 50% margin, I'd pay $100 more for a 120 or 240GB SSD as a base config). People's time and consternation in lamenting configurations is a significant issue for potential new Mac users. Like the OS, make it easy for people to take advantage of even the base config.

Oddly, in a private forum (email listserv) that I frequent, a retired (fixed income) user was lamenting about the performance of a ~7 year old MBP, and was debating between upgrading to an SSD vs. trying to get past Apple's supported RAM configuration. To me, it seems clear that an SSD or fusion drive would be the sweet spot, but some disagreed - preferring RAM.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

The base configuration for all Macs should be a fusion drive. Yes, it costs a bit more, but not that much (at a 50% margin, I'd pay $100 more for a 120 or 240GB SSD as a base config). People's time and consternation in lamenting configurations is a significant issue for potential new Mac users. Like the OS, make it easy for people to take advantage of even the base config.

Oddly, in a private forum (email listserv) that I frequent, a retired (fixed income) user was lamenting about the performance of a ~7 year old MBP, and was debating between upgrading to an SSD vs. trying to get past Apple's supported RAM configuration. To me, it seems clear that an SSD or fusion drive would be the sweet spot, but some disagreed - preferring RAM.

Agreed on Fusion and on SSD vs. RAM. I think the only sticking point is the price point. I think an $1199 entry-level price is still too high. By classic pricing rules, the entry level should be $999 rather than $1099. I can see why Apple might not want that (too much of a bargain), but $1199 may be just a bit too far away. Another year or so, I think we will see it.

 

[ikir]

Can anyone answer (or guess) the following: Will Mid 2007 iMac really perform alright with El Cap? I've got a 27" iMac from '07, with 4GB RAM. I upgraded to Yosemite but it was too slow...downgraded to Snow Leopard because it was streamlined and fast. What do you think...will my system really run okay with El Cap, or should I just stick with Snow Leopard?

Are you joking? Still on Snow leopard? You miss so many things.

 

[haddy]

Pronounciation? El Capitan is quite easy to pronounce and why should it be confusing? It's spanish for' The Captain'. Yosemite is much worse for non english native speaker. First time i read it as "Yosemeit". I felt dumb after realizing its real pronunciation. I was lucky to not speak it out loud in the first place...

Well it's not "Spanish for......."

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Capitan:

"The formation was named "El Capitan" by the Mariposa Battalion when it explored the valley in 1851. El Capitán ("the captain", "the chief") was taken to be a loose Spanish translation of the local Native American name for the cliff, variously transcribed as "To-to-kon oo-lah" or "To-tock-ah-noo-lah". It is unclear if the Native American name referred to a specific tribal chief, or simply meant "the chief" or "rock chief".[4] In modern times, the formation's name is often contracted to "El Cap", especially among rock climbers and BASE jumpers."

 

[haddy]

It makes me sad to see so many people bashing the name El Capitán.

For rock climbers, climbing El Capitán is for pure bad asses. It's so arduous that climbers climb it over several days and have to pitch tents that they connect to the side of the mountain.

Imagine sleeping in one of these...

I totally agree......I think it's a great name; in keeping with the naming of OS 10.9 after a pretty wild surf break. But you have to guess most of the kids on this board are not into Rock Climbing or BASE Jumping.

 

[zooby]

.

 

[tomtendo]

Yet people can pronounce "Los Angeles", "San Diego", "Palo Alto" (to name a few).

People need to get over it.

... those names are a lot different and are all household city names that everyone in the WORLD knows.

 

[spencers]

If you'd replaced those 5400rpm drives with 7200rpm, would they have noticed as substantial an improvement? Nobody here would deny the benefits of SSD. SSD over spinner, SSD over Fusion, SSD over 5.25" single-sided, single-density floppies, SSD over punch cards...

I'm not wasting any more of my time with spinners in an end-user device.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

MacBook: SSD only
MacBook Air: SSD only
MacBook Retina: SSD only
Mac Pro: SSD only

Only the iMac and Mac mini (and the legacy MBP 13") even have HDD options.

The person you are quoting didn't state that Apple only sells computers with mechanical drives, only that "Apple's insistence to still sell computers with spinning HDDs". You seem to be trying to contradict them, but in doing so you're proving them correct.

Sadly though the iMac is the desktop that most people buy and it having a spinning hard drive really does affect performance. The 21.5 inch iMac has a 5400rpm Hard drive, and it REALLY slows down the machine. I cannot believe they are still selling this as a default option.

Nope. The majority of Apple's Mac sales are laptops.

Again, i'm not sure that you've read/understood their post. Their assertion that "the iMac is the desktop that most people buy" is completely correct. They didn't claim that "the iMac is the Mac that most people buy", You seem to be trying to contradict something they never claimed.

Perhaps you could spend a bit more time trying to grasp the actual meaning of the posts you are quoting?

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Imagine sleeping in one of these...

That is nuts - She's awfully casual about it, just reading her book like she's back at home in bed.

 

[ShadovvMoon]

I hope you all have a lot of RAM for El Cap. My Mac Pro with 32GB just ran out with only Safari and Mail open (72 GB of Virtual RAM being used ). I'm also having battery issues with iOS9.

Perhaps a clean install will improve it

 

[strawbale]

You should really get of Snow Leopard! I know it runs like a dream but there are so many serious security holes that it simply is not worth the benefit. If you mac can take it, put in a little more RAM, although that said, 4GB is really (usually) enough - you'll notice a really big jump in performance if you upgrade the HDD to an SSD, try going for one of the lower end Samsung ones which you can put in a 2.5" to 3.5" adapter (means you can reuse it if you replace your iMac). Depending what you're actually doing with your mac, Yosemite runs pretty good with 4GB, the main bottleneck in performance is probably the HDD - you'll be surprised at how snappy Safari is if you make the upgrade!

Just out of curiosity (and, accepted, probably ignorance too), what are all these "many serious security holes"?
PS: I'm still using two mid-2007 Mac Mini's, one on Snow Leopard, the other on Leopard (where Lion is the latest possible on these), both with 2GB (where 4 GB with 3 GB useful is unofficially possible, I think). Got a mid-2007 MBP too, on SL with 4GB - I could upgrade that to El Capitán if really needed, but worried that 4GB it still not enough then. Not sure if investing in a SDD is wise for an 8-yr computer. Waiting for Apple to bring us a 4k @60Hz capable Mac Mini...

 

[zooby]

.

 

[AussieSimon]

El Capitan? No only is that going to be confusing to pronounce for most people

I'd wager that fewer people will mispronounce El Capitan than those who mispronounce Mac OS "Ecks".

 

[SaxnFlutman]

You should really get of Snow Leopard! I know it runs like a dream but there are so many serious security holes that it simply is not worth the benefit.

I've been wanting to upgrade from SL, but the posts I read of so many having problems with Yosemite, has scared me off. Should I just wait until 10.11 is released, or go for Yosemite now, and then upgrade again, when 10.11 is released? And what exactly can happen due to the "many security holes" in SL?

 

[SaxnFlutman]

People really think El Capitan will be more difficult to pronounce than Yosemite, really? And in either case, unless you are a technical support person, how often does anyone actually say the name of their current OS?
If it works well, and is faster, I don't care if they call it Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious....

 

[AkuskaUK]

My Mac is currently correcting El Capitan to Capital, quite irritating! Fixed that, btw. Appreciate the heads up.

I posted that because MacRumours made the spelling mistake, all of my Mac's also change Capitan to Capital!

 

[Marx55]

What is the minumum RAM for not degrading performance on Yosemite and on El Capitan?

 

[ApfelKuchen]

What is the minumum RAM for not degrading performance on Yosemite and on El Capitan?

It always is going to depend on how you use your computer, but I think the consensus among "average" users is 4GB, while power users feel it's 8GB.

The waters are getting muddied by expanding use of SSDs and Fusion Drive - page-outs to disk have always been a major bottleneck, but if your page-outs are running 4-5 times faster than with a conventional HDD they're not going to hurt as much.

 

[Marx55]

Apple should charge far less for SSD. Certainly, less than Amazon, because you are not buying just one SSD stick as with Amazon, but a full computer. Now, add to that the extra RAM price and the extra whatever else (including cables, adapters, etc), and you end up paying twice or more for the computer. In other words, Apple could slash the prices of all their devices to half and still make huge profits, significantly expanding global market share. But they do not get it.

Further, check this out (competition is good):

SanDisk Expands Into the External Storage Market with World’s Highest- Performing Portable SSD
New family of offerings feature world’s fastest line-up of Type C-based portable SSDs
COMPUTEX 2015 — TAIPEI, Taiwan – June 1, 2015 – SanDisk Corporation (NASDAQ: SNDK), a global leader in flash storage solutions, today entered the portable SSD market with a family of high-performance drives, including the SanDisk Extreme 900 Portable SSDs, the world’s fastest line of Type C-based portable SSDs; and the SanDisk Extreme 500 Portable SSDs, the company’s new pocket-sized, rugged drives.
These new drives come with both USB Type-C and Type-A cables to provide the ultimate flexibility when working between systems.
SSD lines feature a three-year warranty.
The SanDisk Extreme 500 Portable SSDs will be available worldwide in capacities of 120GB, 240GB and 480GB, at MSRPs of $99.99, $149.99 and $239.99 respectively. The SanDisk Extreme 900 SSDs will be available worldwide in capacities of 480GB, 960GB and 1.92TB at MSRPs of $399.99, $599.99 and $999.99, respectively.
http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandis...-with-world’s-highest-performing-portable-ssd

Details:

SanDisk Extreme 500 portable SSD
120GB and 240GB
Seq. Read: 415 MB/s
Seq. Write: 340 MB/s
http://www.sandisk.com/products/ssd/sata/extreme-500-portable-ssd

SanDisk Extreme 900 portable SSD
480GB, 960GB and 1.92TB
Seq. Read: 850 MB/s
Seq. Write: 850 MB/s
USB 3.1
http://www.sandisk.com/products/ssd/sata/extreme-900-portable-ssd

 

[Milquetoast]

Agreed!!!

If you've never been there, you have no clue at all. Yosemite is (IMO) the most beautiful place in the world (where the "horizon" in the valley is 30-45° from horizontal, and El Capitan is just... 3000+ ft of sheer vertical granite cliff - amazing)! From the ground, a 200-300 foot pine tree on top is a scant few pixels tall. My wife and I have long had a Yosemite "jones" - even though we now live on the east coast of the US, we have to get our fix every 10-15 years max. It's that good.

My prediction - 10.12 will be called "Half Dome". (There... I jinxed it!)

Perhaps it's not great form to reply to one's own posts, but note that very recently...

Google has done a vertical "street view" of El Capitan:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/vertical-street-view-of-worlds-most.html

Watch the movie near the top and be amazed at what these rock climbers do.

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-google-vertical-street-view-20150624-story.html