Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What about the fact that Apple still have not released any support for trim!!
A little late to the game on that one. I mean really I haven't seen any slow down with my SSD's but the fact is they are late to the game. If they were to start pointing out the speed of SSD's maybe competition would start stating the fact that trim support still isn't supported. Just my thoughts there. Out of sight out mind.
how do you know they havent added support? there is evidence to suggest that there is in the latest MBAs through firmware updates - and we all know how secretive Apple is.
 
Well what we do know is that 10.6.4 doesn't support Trim. So unless the new MBA have some kid of hardware supported trim function then they are not supported. So I will take my chances on the fact they are not supported as of yet. Maybe with the release of lion, but as it stands right Mac OSx 10.6.4 DOES NOT support trim.
 
Whatever it is not invented by Apple. They won't say a thing about it.
 
Well what we do know is that 10.6.4 doesn't support Trim. So unless the new MBA have some kid of hardware supported trim function then they are not supported. So I will take my chances on the fact they are not supported as of yet. Maybe with the release of lion, but as it stands right Mac OSx 10.6.4 DOES NOT support trim.
we are waiting confirmation that GC is supported by the new MBAs - i dont think its a big issue as far as Apple are concerned, especially with advances in the latest SSD SF-2000 controllres.
 
Why is the GC or TRIM support not a big deal? The SSD in the MBA is not user replaceable so if it doesn't support GC and OSX still doesn't support TRIM it is kind of a big deal.
 
Why is the GC or TRIM support not a big deal? The SSD in the MBA is not user replaceable so if it doesn't support GC and OSX still doesn't support TRIM it is kind of a big deal.
because with these types of the technologies the OS does not need to directly support them. GC can be built into the firmware of the drive/etc and the OS doesnt even need to worry about it.

given the auto-defragmenting tendencies of OSX for files under 20mb, i am surprised that you will see only a ~15% performance loss over 6 months for every day use (there are number of threads going around on this forum that indicate this). believe me when i say i am the most skeptical person of SSDs (refuse to buy one because of their very nature) - but the performance doesnt appear to be as bad as first thought, at least not with OSX.
 
Because Apple SSDs suck balls. They are the worst.

Suck compared to other SSDs...but I wasn't talking about that. I specifically said compared to 7200rpm HDD. I also wasn't asking for specific numbers but moreso just the a typical Apple statement of the device being "faster"
 
Like someone else posted earlier, Apple rarely touts specs and performance for options. You won't see them highlighting the speed improvements of an SSD until the SSD becomes standard with the MBP.
 
have a look for yourself. there are plenty of xbench and AJAX comparisons around these threads clearly showing that all aspects of SSDs will out perform that of HDDs. original SSDs suffered large amounts of degradation due to their lack of development but it is slightly starting to change and hopefully write amplification will eventually be eradicated.

as for Apple - apparently they have their own implementation of GC in the latest MBAs, apparently built into the firmware, we will see what advantages this has (which will likely be to keep degradation to a minimum). linky

thanks for the link.. apple needs to add software TRIM/GC though.. not many SSD's have built in GC through the controller etc.. like my Intel =)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.