Workaround for 256GB SSD Retina-Users with Storage problems.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Sahee, Jul 8, 2012.

  1. Sahee, Jul 8, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012

    Sahee macrumors regular

    Sahee

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Location:
    Germany
    #1
    ...yeah I know, the title is a little bit too long. Sorry for that. I've just recognized that some people think about buying the High-End Retina Model just because of the bigger SSD-Drive... well. I will explain you how you can use the Base-Retina without any Data-Space problems while using Windows 7.

    First of all, you need the following items:
    1x Base Retina-Macbook :)
    1x SSD-Hub to USB 3.0 Adapter
    1x SSD (64GB SSD should do it)
    1x External USB 3.0 "HDD" (1TB for example).

    Total Cost: ~2200-2300€ (with Education Discount).
    That's still 300€ less than the High-End Version and you will have "MORE" Space.

    After you have those items you will basically install Windows on the SSD and connect it with the Adapter to your MAC. You will be able to boot Windows without any Problems. The programs that you are planning to use get installed on the External HDD USB 3.0 Drive. There should be no worries regarding DATA writing/reading speed. I've done this myself and I can guarantee that as long as you use high quality components your system will not slow down during usage.

    Keep in mind that modern External Drives have no power plug (they get their power trough the USB 3.0 cable). Although many are build with Aluminum and are very durable and small. The SSD and the HDD will only take minimal Space in your backpack.

    Although don't waste money on 16GB, because of the fast SSD you will not notice any performance increase.

    The Adapter looks like this:
    [​IMG]

    Modern USB 3.0 HDD's look like this (just kidding:)):
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Dangerous Theory macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Location:
    UK
  3. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #3
    I think such a solution would kind of ruin the purpose of having an extremely portable laptop. And if you're running software off a USB hard drive, you'll miss out on the "zippiness" of an SSD.

    I'm personally sticking with 512GB. I do have a portable 1TB HDD that I take everywhere... But I keep things like movies and installers on there
     
  4. Sahee, Jul 8, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012

    Sahee thread starter macrumors regular

    Sahee

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Location:
    Germany
    #4
    Google: https://www.google.com/search?sugex....,cf.osb&fp=a2e370afc0354df8&biw=1920&bih=955


    I don't think so, HDD's are extremely portable these days. My USB 3.0 1TB HDD only need the USB 3.0 to get its power and it is as small as a Samsung Galaxy S3, while achieving amazing writing speeds. Regarding your issues on Data-Writing speed... the OS (Windows) should be installed on a external SSD and get plugged with a USB 3.0 Adapter. SSD's are even smaller than modern HDD's.

    Both components would really not decrease the room in your backpack. Actually you could even take them with you in your Trousers pocket :)... but if you want the "Comfortable" way, than invest in the 512GB SSD, I personally think its not worth it and I want to help those people who think the same.
     
  5. Dangerous Theory macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    Are you sure macs can boot windows from external drives? I know pcs can but I thought macs couldn't.
     
  6. Sahee, Jul 8, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012

    Sahee thread starter macrumors regular

    Sahee

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Location:
    Germany
    #6
    I don't have my mac yet (its still on delivery) but actually I am sure that it is possible.

    Some In formations on how to do it:
    http://refit.sourceforge.net/

    ...if there are still questions I will make a Video on how to do it when my Mac has arrived. Worst case scenario would be a basic 64BIT Windows installation (15-20GB) onto the integrated SSD, which would decrease the internal storage.
     
  7. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #7
    I'm not really concerned about the room in my bag. It's more just the awkwardness of using an external drive. If you're always going to be using a table, it's fine. But I actually like to use my laptop in my lap... So then having a USB drive hanging off a cable is just going to be awkward. And if you shift the wrong way, it could actually fall off and disconnect from the laptop.


    Also FWIW, my MBA refuses to boot from bootable USB drives. Idk if usb3 changes things though.
     
  8. gamerish macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    #8
    It does. USB 2.0 is abysmally slow.

    There's a few threads on this using a Seagate Thunderbolt Adapter instead of an SSD/USB 3.0 adapter for increased performance. Here are the directions:

     
  9. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #9
    I don't understand the thread, I suppose. It's always been an option to use an external drive to augment internal drive limitations. The addition of the Thunderbolt port made it even better, albeit with the obvious disadvantage that it's not nearly as portable when you have an external drive plugged in.
     
  10. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #10
    NEIN!

    First of all, at 64GB you could have bought a USB3 flash drive / SDXC / microSDXC + SD adapter instead. All three alternatives are physically smaller and cheaper.

    Second of all, if you're going to use an external SSD, 64GB is simply not enough. Try 256GB or 512GB.

    Third, the above "alternative" requires two drives. It defeats the entire purpose for having more storage on the road. Honestly I'd have either gone for a USB3 2TB portable HDD or a 512GB SSD + USB3 enclosure.
     
  11. Sahee, Jul 8, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012

    Sahee thread starter macrumors regular

    Sahee

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Location:
    Germany
    #11
    It was actually just an example on how to get rid of the storage limitations.
    64GB is enough for Windows... but your right regarding the fact that picking a bigger SSD means to get rid of the "two" external drives solution (Cheap SSD + HDD) but I wanted to keep the budget for the solution as low as possible, thats why I picked the 64GB + 1TB HDD Solution which basically only cost 150-200€ and should be affordable for everyone. I actually do already own a 126GB Samsung 830 and a 1TB USB 3.0 HDD, that's why I will do it the way that I've explained above. In the end it was just a thought for those who struggle to find a solution.
     
  12. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #12
    A single 2TB 2.5" external HDD costs the same as the 64GB+1TB setup.

    Want to really get rid of storage limitations? Buy a multi-bay enclosure. Such as a 4/5-bay NAS.
     

Share This Page