SSD VS Flash

[jkcerda]

I see the price differences, BUT I have no idea which is better or why..example .

option 1
$1599

Refurbished 15.4-inch MacBook Pro 2.3GHz Quad-core Intel i7 with Retina Display
Originally released June 2012
15.4-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2880-by-1800 resolution at 220 pixels per inch
8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
256GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD Camera
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory

option 2
$1779

Refurbished 15.4-inch MacBook Pro 2.3GHz Quad-core Intel i7
Originally released June 2012
15.4-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit Hi-Res antiglare widescreen display, 1680-by-1050 resolution
4GB (2 x 2GB) of 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM
128GB Solid State Drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB of GDDR5 memory

option 2 is $200 more with less storage and less memory (4GB's) .
EDIT, even the video card is only 512 mbs.

to add a bit of confusion the NEW MBPs have Flash PCIe storage.

IS the SSD better than simple Flash storage with Flash PCIe being better than both?

are both of those options above "Ivy bridge"? ?????

 

[GGJstudios]

Flash storage and SSD in those descriptions means the same thing.

 

[jkcerda]

Flash storage and SSD in those descriptions means the same thing.

OK, but why the steep price difference between the 2? option 2 even has a 512MB video card

 

[Mike Biggen]

The first one also has a retina display.

 

[jkcerda]

The first one also has a retina display.

thanks, I did not catch that, wonder why the retina model is cheaper as well.

 

[GGJstudios]

OK, but why the steep price difference between the 2? option 2 even has a 512MB video card

SSDs contain Flash storage, but that storage is in a drive enclosure in the non-retina model, whereas the retina model has the storage directly mounted on the logic board. Also, the non-retina is a high res antiglare screen, which is an add-on option, and it also includes an optical drive, which the retina model doesn't have. The newer retina model is less expensive than a similarly-equipped non-retina model, due in part to more cost-effective manufacturing process. Higher cost doesn't always equal higher specs or higher performance or higher value.

 

[jkcerda]

SSDs contain Flash storage, but that storage is in a drive enclosure in the non-retina model, whereas the retina model has the storage directly mounted on the logic board. Also, the non-retina is a high res antiglare screen, which is an add-on option, and it also includes an optical drive, which the retina model doesn't have. The newer retina model is less expensive than a similarly-equipped non-retina model, due in part to more cost-effective manufacturing process. Higher cost doesn't always equal higher specs or higher performance or higher value.

ok, so does this mean the one with the retina model is not up-gradable? stuck with 256Gbs?

 

[GGJstudios]

ok, so does this mean the one with the retina model is not up-gradable? stuck with 256Gbs?

There has been talk about OWC making some upgrades, but doing so would void any warranty or AppleCare as the retina models have no user-serviceable parts.

 

[jkcerda]

There has been talk about OWC making some upgrades, but doing so would void any warranty or AppleCare as the retina models have no user-serviceable parts.

that is one thing I am hating about macs. if you upgrade some models you are SOL if anything goes bad.

 

[GGJstudios]

that is one thing I am hating about macs. if you upgrade some models you are SOL if anything goes bad.

The new models provide more justification for buying AppleCare, since self-service is less of an option. It also means that it makes more sense to buy a configuration that accommodates not only your current needs, but anticipated future requirements, as well.

 

[prfrma]

isn't this the Mac Pro forum not the Mac Book Pro forum?


And in that context, apple flash storage is also PCIe based storage (as opposed to SATA) so it's up to twice as fast (nMP vs MBPr)

 

[Weaselboy]

There has been talk about OWC making some upgrades, but doing so would void any warranty or AppleCare as the retina models have no user-serviceable parts.

No it won't, at least in the US. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits voiding a warranty by installing after market parts.

 

[GGJstudios]

No it won't, at least in the US. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits voiding a warranty by installing after market parts.

I'll leave it to others to decide if they want to battle it out in court with Apple as to the enforceability of their warranty. The Apple warranty clearly states:

This warranty does not apply: (g) to an Apple Product that has been modified to alter functionality or capability without the written permission of Apple;

 

[SomeGuyDude]

First option is so much better it ain't even funny.

 

[leman]

thanks, I did not catch that, wonder why the retina model is cheaper as well.

Its just Apple's pricing strategy. The retina models in 2012 used to be cheaper then non-retina ones configured the same way.

that is one thing I am hating about macs. if you upgrade some models you are SOL if anything goes bad.

Well, you can always have it repaired.

And in that context, apple flash storage is also PCIe based storage (as opposed to SATA) so it's up to twice as fast (nMP vs MBPr)

Not nessesarily. The 2012 rMBP model uses a SATA connection, the 2013 macs all use the PCIe connection.

No it won't, at least in the US. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits voiding a warranty by installing after market parts.

I guess the problem is the definition of 'aftermarket part'. I doubt that a part based on a reverse-engineered protocol qualifies here. Apple can always claim that the part was not in line with their internal specifications and they can't be responsible for any damage resulting from the stress the system received from it.

Of course, one can just keep the old part and simply swap it in when taking the laptop to service Problem is, the prices OWC asks for their drives are even more ridiculous than that of Apple.

 

[Weaselboy]

I'll leave it to others to decide if they want to battle it out in court with Apple as to the enforceability of their warranty. The Apple warranty clearly states:

That has nothing to do with replacing parts. The law is clear on this. There is even case law involving Asus trying to pull this with their EeePC line. When challenged, Asus backed down.

There is a potential downside of course. If you put in an aftermarket flash storage device and your Macbook stops working, Apple could try to say the storage device caused the problem. Although the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act places the burden of proof on Apple to prove this, some owners may not want to take the risk. But to say your Apple warranty is voided by installing an aftermarket flash storage device is incorrect.

----------

I guess the problem is the definition of 'aftermarket part'. I doubt that a part based on a reverse-engineered protocol qualifies here. Apple can always claim that the part was not in line with their internal specifications and they can't be responsible for any damage resulting from the stress the system received from it.

It does, and the act was created exactly for cases like this to prevent companies from forcing you to buy their parts. I agree, it is not without risk. Apple could try and claim your wanky OWC flash drive wrecked the logic board. My point is, under the Act, putting an aftermarket flash drive in does not automatically void the warranty on the computer.

Of course, one can just keep the old part and simply swap it in when taking the laptop to service Problem is, the prices OWC asks for their drives are even more ridiculous than that of Apple.

Believe me, I am not promoting OWC here. I am not a fan of theirs.

 

[GGJstudios]

That has nothing to do with replacing parts.

Obviously it does, as that is considered a modification. Regardless of what you or Magnuson-Moss think, Apple considers it justification for voiding the warranty, as has been reported countless times in this forum over the years. If you want to dispense legal advice, that's your call, but users should be informed as to the terms and conditions of Apple's warranty, which are clear. Then if a user wants to fight Apple, that's their choice.

 

[Weaselboy]

Obviously it does, as that is considered a modification. Regardless of what you or Magnuson-Moss think, Apple considers it justification for voiding the warranty, as has been reported countless times in this forum over the years. If you want to dispense legal advice, that's your call, but users should be informed as to the terms and conditions of Apple's warranty, which are clear. Then if a user wants to fight Apple, that's their choice.

Primarily by people like you who are misinformed. Go read the law. It is not a matter of what Magnuson-Moss "thinks"... it is the law and it applies.

Let's just agree to disagree. I linked the wiki on the Act and people can read it and decide for themselves.

 

[GGJstudios]

Primarily by people like you who are misinformed. Go read the law.

I'm not misinformed. I've read it long ago. It's not a matter of being misinformed when people report that Apple refused warranty service on a Mac that had been modified in violation of the warranty. Those cases actually happened. The burden is on the consumer to fight Apple to force them to honor the Act, which many consumers have neither the time nor the resources to do. With rare exceptions, you're not going to get a manager at a Genius Bar or Apple to change their position simply by quoting the law to them.

 

[jkcerda]

First option is so much better it ain't even funny.

waiting for the 1st option with 16GBs of memory to show up in the refurbished side, things there fly QUICK,

----------

this is the model I am waiting for

MacBook Pro 15.4” Retina - Quad-Core i7 2.4Ghz
Originally released February 2013
15.4-inch (diagonal) Retina display; 2880-by-1800 resolution at 220 pixels per inch
16GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
256GB Flash Storage
720p FaceTime HD Camera
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory

 

[GGJstudios]

waiting for the 1st option with 16GBs of memory to show up in the refurbished side, things there fly QUICK,

Visit refurb.me to be notified when the model you want appears on the refurb store.

 

[jkcerda]

Visit refurb.me to be notified when the model you want appears on the refurb store.

I did, model shown was there & gone within a couple of hours, I was at work when I got the notification, I did not expect it to sell that fast, you snooze you loose.

 

[leman]

Primarily by people like you who are misinformed. Go read the law. It is not a matter of what Magnuson-Moss "thinks"... it is the law and it applies.

Let's just agree to disagree. I linked the wiki on the Act and people can read it and decide for themselves.

Well, here is the text of the relevant paragraph that I was able to find:

No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer’s using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name

First of all, as a non-native speaker this is very difficult to read (but I think native speakers will have a similar problem). Secondly, its absolutely not clear on what constitutes 'product, any article or service'. Is it a clearly defined part/add-on/component or can it be anything? Basically, does it mean that I can go resoldering all the capacitors on my logic board with others and/or replacing the PSU by something I have built in my kitchen and then insist that my warranty is in effect? In case of the rMBP, Apple clearly states: 'this product does not contain any user-replaceable parts'. Isn't that 'enough' in this case? Now, the Act basically means that you can use any brand of external HDD, usb-stick or other device in combination with your Mac, but I don't see how altering the product (that is, the laptop) itself falls under the definition of the Act.

P.S. In electronics, there is often no way to easily 'prove' what caused the damage or even to identify the failed part, thats why people usually don't even bother.

 

[Weaselboy]

I'm not misinformed. I've read it long ago. It's not a matter of being misinformed when people report that Apple refused warranty service on a Mac that had been modified in violation of the warranty. Those cases actually happened. The burden is on the consumer to fight Apple to force them to honor the Act, which many consumers have neither the time nor the resources to do. With rare exceptions, you're not going to get a manager at a Genius Bar or Apple to change their position simply by quoting the law to them.

As I said, the law is clear. I had hoped to just agree to disagree like mature adults. I should shave known better.

 

[GGJstudios]

I did, model shown was there & gone within a couple of hours, I was at work when I got the notification, I did not expect it to sell that fast, you snooze you loose.

Yep, the turnover in refurb inventory is pretty brisk at times!