Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OS X El Capitan Opens Door to TRIM Support on Third-Party SSDs for Improved Performance

JustThinkin' said:
I'm still unclear - is it primarily (or only) the 840 EVO you've compared to?

I've used Samsung 470s, 830s, 840 (not Pro or EVO), and 850 Pros - they've all worked well. But I haven't had any Crucials to compare to.
Click to expand...

Only 840 EVO. Again, not a bad drive. Just not worth the extra IMO. Crucial are far better value for money & have better performance (IMO/experience). Not sure about the 850 or other Samsungs. However looking on Amazon the 850s are even more expensive than the 840s, which themselves are more expensive than the Crucials.

I'd be interested to hear more feedback from people on other Samsung/Crucial drives.
 
Weaselboy said:
If you look at the tests of this in the other thread, you only temporarily disable rootless to run the trimforce command, then enable rootless again afterward. So you have not compromised the rootless protections by doing this.
Click to expand...

This whole article is sort of misleading. This is exactly what those with third party SSDs have been doing all along - disabling kext signing allows third-party software to enable TRIM. Does El Capitan natively allow for third-party SSD TRIM support, or does it merely provide a mechanism that temporarily disables rootless to allow for third-party software to enable TRIM?

I agree that, for security purposes, having rootless security enabled is the better option, and if there is a way to re-enable rootless after enabling TRIM, then we are in fact more secure than being forced in Yosemite to disable kext signing in order for TRIM to work.

I guess my question is does Apple natively support third-party SSD TRIM support or does it still require third-party software to make this happen? If it's the latter, then the article is misleading because Apple hasn't in fact enabled native support, but merely provided a work-around to its whole kext-signing / rootless security mess.

Kext signing created a lot of problems in Yosemite. OS X continues to have difficulties reading / signing drivers for both native Apple hardware and, of course, third party hardware. I think Kext signing has a lot to do with the problems people have experienced with their ThunderBolt displays, USB drivers, optical drive / 2nd hard drive configurations, and other hardware compatibility issues.

In my view, what is being heralded as "Apple finally allows third-party TRIM support" is actually Apple recognizing that kext signing sucked and they don't want rootless to suffer the same fate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cisco_Kid, Lolito and PJL500
what a joke!
there was never a need to validate devices for the use of trim.
why should a drive accept the ata trim command if it wasn't able to handle it securely.
no, apple just wanted to prevent people buying 3rd party products instead of their own expensive ones.
now finally they gave in...
still they do it in a way that non terminal aware users get frightend.
the talk of "non validated drives" is absolute nonsense in my sight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RickInHouston
This is a step in the direction. Earlier, you had to hack into kexts, which would bring far more dangerous consequences should something go wrong. This way, we know at least the system will keep booting. Till the time they force rootless. Which may be a good thing. I am all for secure systems at the slight cost of manual maintenance of SSDs vs having TRIM. Leaving SSDs overnight is as good a way to declutter them as a TRIM command, if I am not wrong.
 
keysofanxiety said:
Only 840 EVO. Again, not a bad drive. Just not worth the extra IMO. Crucial are far better value for money & have better performance (IMO/experience). Not sure about the 850 or other Samsungs. However looking on Amazon the 850s are even more expensive than the 840s, which themselves are more expensive than the Crucials.

I'd be interested to hear more feedback from people on other Samsung/Crucial drives.
Click to expand...
The 840 EVO is infamous on its own. Other Samsung drives shouldn't be judged by it. I think I realized I would stay away from it early on, because of the particulars of its new design.

I think you should expect smoother performance from Crucial (or many other drives) compared to it, but not necessarily compared to other Samsungs. If you already have an 840 EVO, then fine, but few people should seek one out now - new or used. Better to go with the 850 EVO or Pro (or even an 840 Pro).
 
macsmurf said:
Apple has actively sabotaged the long-term performance of non-Apple branded SSDs for years. Now they might finally provide a standard (though somewhat convoluted) way to enable TRIM without hacking the kernel extensions.

To thank Apple profusely for this move is classic Stockholm syndrome.
Click to expand...

exactly, thanking for this is extremely stupid, but you discribed it so much better. Thanks for that!!
 
shaocaholica said:
Ha! Apple sure isn't liable for data loss using trim but don't worry, they've got you covered with their crappy HFS+ filesystem regardless of trim or 3rd party drives.
Click to expand...
Whether or not HFS+ is relatively "crappy," it's much better than suffering eventual corruption/data loss at the hands of the Paragon NTFS driver, or slow performance through the Tuxera one. At least HFS+ generally works well for nearly everyone in everyday use.


I'm not using either Tuxera or Paragon NTFS drivers for now. I hope their latest releases are improved, but they've had these characteristics for multiple generations. I've found (so far) the Paragon HFS+ driver for Windows to be quite stable, unlike their NTFS for OS X driver. So HFS+ is a good solution for me right now.
 
Last edited:
Tucom said:
That's kinda what I was thinking after I posted this, as I all I read was the main article. That makes sense, given that I guess trim force activates at a system level, requiring Rootless to be temporarily disabled?

It'd be killer if it didn't, but I guess with it being re-enabled this is good news.

I personally have been running a Crucial MX100 256GB SSD in my 5,1 Mac Pro for months with zero performance degradation, so I personally don't see what the big deal is. Still cool none the less.
Click to expand...
'Been running a Crucial 128GB tied to a 750GB hybrid in a DIY Fusion setup in(side) a 5,1 MBP and response is degrading after 3 years. (Tho not sure of the cause.)
 
Last edited:
darcyf said:
Is yours an early or late 2011? I have the late 2011 15" MBP and have been wanting to go SSD for a while but have read some about some issues surrounding this particular model. Can you offer me any insight based on your experience?

EDIT: I can see from your sig it's a late 2011 :)
Click to expand...
I put an 850 Evo in my late 2011 15" MBP and the only thing I noticed was a feeling of, "why didn't I do this sooner?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadow puppet, darcyf, Lolito and 1 other person
I put a 1TB 850 Pro in my mid 2012 15" cMBP and it's been amazing. It will be great to not have to disable kext signing to allow Trim.
 
hfuhruhurr said:
I put an 850 Evo in my late 2011 15" MBP and the only thing I noticed was a feeling of, "why didn't I do this sooner?"
Click to expand...

Me too, but i had an 840evo before, and that one lost performance after a year. I had problems when i used trim enabler, so i decided to never use it again, it just wasn't worthy.

850evo working great now, but for how long? who knows. I was thinking about making a ssd raid, but now i think i should better invest in 16gb of ram, as the ssd world seems not be there yet, unfortunately.
 
tgd85 said:
This whole article is sort of misleading. This is exactly what those with third party SSDs have been doing all along - disabling kext signing allows third-party software to enable TRIM. Does El Capitan natively allow for third-party SSD TRIM support, or does it merely provide a mechanism that temporarily disables rootless to allow for third-party software to enable TRIM?

I agree that, for security purposes, having rootless security enabled is the better option, and if there is a way to re-enable rootless after enabling TRIM, then we are in fact more secure than being forced in Yosemite to disable kext signing in order for TRIM to work.

I guess my question is does Apple natively support third-party SSD TRIM support or does it still require third-party software to make this happen? If it's the latter, then the article is misleading because Apple hasn't in fact enabled native support, but merely provided a work-around to its whole kext-signing / rootless security mess.

Kext signing created a lot of problems in Yosemite. OS X continues to have difficulties reading / signing drivers for both native Apple hardware and, of course, third party hardware. I think Kext signing has a lot to do with the problems people have experienced with their ThunderBolt displays, USB drivers, optical drive / 2nd hard drive configurations, and other hardware compatibility issues.

In my view, what is being heralded as "Apple finally allows third-party TRIM support" is actually Apple recognizing that kext signing sucked and they don't want rootless to suffer the same fate.
Click to expand...

You should go back and re-read then information posted, it's all there. All the answers are there and it had nothing to do with kext signing one way or the other. Third party software is not needed to enable trim. Also, users can expect they no longer have to worry about getting gray screen / no boot scenario.
 
Last edited:
By using this tool to enable TRIM, you agree that Apple is not liable for any consequences that may result, including but not limited to data loss or corruption.
​
So, by stating the exception they prove the rule: If you don't enable TRIM, Apple must be liable for data loss or corruption. :) HFS class action, everyone! He he ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lolito
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back