new MacBook Pros with SSD

Discussion in 'Apple' started by Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu, Jun 13, 2012.

  1. I haven't notice much (or any?) discussion of the fact that the new
    "retina display" MBP models come with an SSD (or as Apple calls it
    "Flash storage").

    The cheaper model has 256GB and the other model has either 512GB or
    768GB -- pretty decent amount of SSD storage, though of course it
    isn't cheap. They also come with a pleasant default of 8GB of memory
    and can go to 16GB.

    Martin
     
    Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu, Jun 13, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <>,
    Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu
    <> wrote:

    > I haven't notice much (or any?) discussion of the fact that the new
    > "retina display" MBP models come with an SSD (or as Apple calls it
    > "Flash storage").


    They're available (in various sizes) on the regular MacBook Pros, where
    they are called Solid State Drives.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jun 13, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    Bread Guest

    On 2012-06-13 14:36:58 +0000, Michelle Steiner said:

    > In article <>,
    > Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I haven't notice much (or any?) discussion of the fact that the new
    >> "retina display" MBP models come with an SSD (or as Apple calls it
    >> "Flash storage").

    >
    > They're available (in various sizes) on the regular MacBook Pros, where
    > they are called Solid State Drives.


    On the regular MBPs, the drive bay and connector is a standard SATA
    2.5" bay and there are a variety of standard third-party sources for
    replacement hard drives as well as SSDs.

    On the MacBookAir -- and on the new Retina MBP -- it's non-standard.
    As far as I know, the only ones making replacement SSD drives for them
    is Other World Computing.

    Here's their blog post regarding the new RetinaMBP:

    http://blog.macsales.com/14090-not-a-lot-of-options-for-macbook-pro-w-retina-display


    More distressing than the non-standard SSD/HD bay is the fact that the
    RAM is soldered onto the motherboard. Whatever amount of RAM comes in
    your MBA or RMBP, that's all the RAM that machine will ever have. If
    you're debating paying up for more RAM vs. more SSD space on one of
    those machines, get the more RAM.

    OTOH, with the speed of the SSDs, apparently the need for extra RAM is
    diminished by the speed of swapping - all Macs use some of the space on
    the boot hard drive as extra virtual memory - since the SSDs are so
    fast, the speed of that virtual memory is very much higher than the
    speed of using regular hard drive space would have been. The
    responsiveness of a Mac running off an SSD - even with less real RAM -
    is amazingly faster than similar on a Mac running off a regular HD.
    I'd still get as much RAM as possible and worry about upgrading the SSD
    later on.
     
    Bread, Jun 13, 2012
    #3
  4. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    David Empson Guest

    Bread <> wrote:

    > On 2012-06-13 14:36:58 +0000, Michelle Steiner said:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> I haven't notice much (or any?) discussion of the fact that the new
    > >> "retina display" MBP models come with an SSD (or as Apple calls it
    > >> "Flash storage").

    > >
    > > They're available (in various sizes) on the regular MacBook Pros, where
    > > they are called Solid State Drives.

    >
    > On the regular MBPs, the drive bay and connector is a standard SATA
    > 2.5" bay and there are a variety of standard third-party sources for
    > replacement hard drives as well as SSDs.
    >
    > On the MacBookAir -- and on the new Retina MBP -- it's non-standard.
    > As far as I know, the only ones making replacement SSD drives for them
    > is Other World Computing.


    The 2012 models have a different connector, so OWC's existing MacBook
    Air SSDs will only work on the 2010 and 2011 series.

    > Here's their blog post regarding the new RetinaMBP:
    >
    > http://blog.macsales.com/14090-not-a-lot-of-options-for-macbook-pro-w-reti
    > na-display
    >
    >
    > More distressing than the non-standard SSD/HD bay is the fact that the
    > RAM is soldered onto the motherboard. Whatever amount of RAM comes in
    > your MBA or RMBP, that's all the RAM that machine will ever have. If
    > you're debating paying up for more RAM vs. more SSD space on one of
    > those machines, get the more RAM.


    Agreed. A friend ordered one quickly, but I managed to warn him about
    the soldered in RAM before he placed the order, so he went with 16 GB.
    If I was getting one I'd probably go with 16 GB even though it would be
    overkill now, as I expect I would be making good use of it later in the
    lifetime of this computer. I upgraded my mid 2010 MacBook Pro from 4 to
    8 once the memory prices got cheap enough and it makes a big difference
    when using things like virtual machines.

    I'm most interested in having at least 500 GB of internal storage. At
    present that would mean getting the high end model as you can't do a
    storage upgrade in the cheaper model, so I'd be looking at the expensive
    model with the US$200 RAM upgrade.

    I'm perfectly happy with my current MacBook Pro, so I'll pass on this
    model and see how things pan out with next year's refreshes. I expect
    SSD prices will come down by then.

    The other factor holding me back is 802.11ac and 802.11ad, which are
    likely to be coming in the next year or two. The iFixit teardown of the
    Retina MacBook Pro confirms it has an 802.11n chip, so Apple hasn't
    included "yet to be revealed" draft 802.11ac in this model.

    I'd be irritated not have 802.11ac in my main computer for a few years,
    and would prefer to wait long enough to get 802.11ad as well.

    (802.11ac is the next WiFi generation after 802.11n, operating on 5 GHz
    with potential speeds exceeding 1 Gbps. 802.11ad operates on 60 GHz and
    is for short range very high speed transfers up to about 7 Gbps.)

    > OTOH, with the speed of the SSDs, apparently the need for extra RAM is
    > diminished by the speed of swapping - all Macs use some of the space on
    > the boot hard drive as extra virtual memory - since the SSDs are so
    > fast, the speed of that virtual memory is very much higher than the
    > speed of using regular hard drive space would have been. The
    > responsiveness of a Mac running off an SSD - even with less real RAM -
    > is amazingly faster than similar on a Mac running off a regular HD.
    > I'd still get as much RAM as possible and worry about upgrading the SSD
    > later on.


    The major improvement in VM performance with an SSD is due to the
    elimination of delays for head movement.

    Even with the faster SSDs, they still only read at 500 MB per second,
    probably slower for write, which is in the order of four times faster
    than a spinning hard drive. The RAM can transfer up to 12.8 GB per
    second (25 times faster again).

    --
    David Empson
     
    David Empson, Jun 14, 2012
    #4
  5. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    nospam Guest

    In article <1klodpi.1vhwe0lp98447N%>, David Empson
    <> wrote:

    > The other factor holding me back is 802.11ac and 802.11ad, which are
    > likely to be coming in the next year or two. The iFixit teardown of the
    > Retina MacBook Pro confirms it has an 802.11n chip, so Apple hasn't
    > included "yet to be revealed" draft 802.11ac in this model.
    >
    > I'd be irritated not have 802.11ac in my main computer for a few years,
    > and would prefer to wait long enough to get 802.11ad as well.


    same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    seems totally pointless.

    > (802.11ac is the next WiFi generation after 802.11n, operating on 5 GHz
    > with potential speeds exceeding 1 Gbps. 802.11ad operates on 60 GHz and
    > is for short range very high speed transfers up to about 7 Gbps.)


    that would also be good.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2012
    #5
  6. In article <130620122356467994%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    > either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    > anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    > seems totally pointless.


    It costs quite a bit less that the Extreme, which is the point.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jun 14, 2012
    #6
  7. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    nospam Guest

    In article <-september.org>,
    Michelle Steiner <> wrote:

    > > same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    > > either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    > > anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    > > seems totally pointless.

    >
    > It costs quite a bit less that the Extreme, which is the point.


    the extreme is overpriced. cut its price to match the competition. the
    main problem with the new airport express is that it lacks the built-in
    plug of the previous airport express, so now you need to bring a power
    cord rather than flip out the prongs.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2012
    #7
  8. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    David Empson Guest

    nospam <> wrote:

    > In article <1klodpi.1vhwe0lp98447N%>, David Empson
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > The other factor holding me back is 802.11ac and 802.11ad, which are
    > > likely to be coming in the next year or two. The iFixit teardown of the
    > > Retina MacBook Pro confirms it has an 802.11n chip, so Apple hasn't
    > > included "yet to be revealed" draft 802.11ac in this model.
    > >
    > > I'd be irritated not have 802.11ac in my main computer for a few years,
    > > and would prefer to wait long enough to get 802.11ad as well.

    >
    > same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    > either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    > anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    > seems totally pointless.


    I'm expecting it will be quite a good option for many people in my area
    who have a cable modem and want a wireless router, with one computer
    connected via Ethernet. The price is closer to cheap third party
    wireless routers, whereas the Airport Extreme is at the expensive end of
    the scale.

    I currently have the earlier model 802.11n Airport Express in my home
    office, which I will be replacing with the newer model so I can get dual
    band coverage at both ends of the house. My older one can then be freed
    up for portable or temporary use, or sold if I don't need it any more.

    I also have a simultaneous dual band Airport Extreme, which I intend to
    replace with an 802.11ac model when they are released. The lack of
    802.11ac coverage from the other base station won't be an issue.

    > > (802.11ac is the next WiFi generation after 802.11n, operating on 5 GHz
    > > with potential speeds exceeding 1 Gbps. 802.11ad operates on 60 GHz and
    > > is for short range very high speed transfers up to about 7 Gbps.)

    >
    > that would also be good.


    802.11ad isn't likely to be a factor for routers, so we should see new
    Airport Extreme and Time Capsule models (and yet another Airport
    Express?) with 802.11ac within about a year, along with 802.11ac support
    in new Macs and iPads (and iPhones if they have 5 GHz support by then).

    802.11ad may take a little longer, but is only needed in the computers
    (not particularly useful for something like an iPad).

    --
    David Empson
     
    David Empson, Jun 14, 2012
    #8
  9. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    David Empson Guest

    nospam <> wrote:

    > In article <-september.org>,
    > Michelle Steiner <> wrote:
    >
    > > > same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    > > > either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    > > > anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    > > > seems totally pointless.

    > >
    > > It costs quite a bit less that the Extreme, which is the point.

    >
    > the extreme is overpriced. cut its price to match the competition.


    I don't think the Extreme is overpriced, as long as you compare it to
    routers with a similar feature set, particularly Gigabit Ethernet,
    simultaneous dual-band, hard drive and printer support.

    > the main problem with the new airport express is that it lacks the
    > built-in plug of the previous airport express, so now you need to bring a
    > power cord rather than flip out the prongs.


    I assume "flip out the prongs" is a feature of the US plug used on the
    Express. International plugs don't have that luxury - the plug pokes out
    the side of the Express unless you remove the clip-on plug apapter and
    carry it separately.

    The new Express is more useful for fixed installation than the previous
    model (either two LAN ports, or WAN plus LAN for use with a separate
    modem). If you want a second WiFi device to extend a network, and don't
    need all the features of the Extreme, then paying half the price for a
    fully compatible secondary router is good.

    As for the portability question, I suspect a major reason for allowing
    the Express to be less portable is that fewer people will need to use it
    in this scenario compared to when the Express was introduced, due to the
    significant number of iPhones and now iPads out there which act as a
    WiFi hotspot, plus competing smartphones and MiFi devices.

    --
    David Empson
     
    David Empson, Jun 14, 2012
    #9
  10. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    nospam Guest

    In article <1kloyx8.153yhwe6kw4t3N%>, David Empson
    <> wrote:

    > > > > same here. i was very surprised that they didn't include 802.11ac in
    > > > > either the new macbook or the apple express, which isn't really express
    > > > > anymore with its new design. it's basically a mini apple extreme and
    > > > > seems totally pointless.
    > > >
    > > > It costs quite a bit less that the Extreme, which is the point.

    > >
    > > the extreme is overpriced. cut its price to match the competition.

    >
    > I don't think the Extreme is overpriced, as long as you compare it to
    > routers with a similar feature set, particularly Gigabit Ethernet,
    > simultaneous dual-band, hard drive and printer support.


    i do, considering that a basic 802.11n router can be had for under $50,
    versus $180 for the airport extreme. are those features worth more than
    triple?

    > > the main problem with the new airport express is that it lacks the
    > > built-in plug of the previous airport express, so now you need to bring a
    > > power cord rather than flip out the prongs.

    >
    > I assume "flip out the prongs" is a feature of the US plug used on the
    > Express. International plugs don't have that luxury - the plug pokes out
    > the side of the Express unless you remove the clip-on plug apapter and
    > carry it separately.
    >
    > The new Express is more useful for fixed installation than the previous
    > model (either two LAN ports, or WAN plus LAN for use with a separate
    > modem). If you want a second WiFi device to extend a network, and don't
    > need all the features of the Extreme, then paying half the price for a
    > fully compatible secondary router is good.


    that's the problem. it's not an express anymore. the whole advantage of
    the express was that it was small and portable. it was a great travel
    router. now it's just a miniature version of the airport extreme.

    > As for the portability question, I suspect a major reason for allowing
    > the Express to be less portable is that fewer people will need to use it
    > in this scenario compared to when the Express was introduced, due to the
    > significant number of iPhones and now iPads out there which act as a
    > WiFi hotspot, plus competing smartphones and MiFi devices.


    maybe, but other companies are coming out with travel routers,
    including ones that run on batteries, so there's obviously a demand for
    it.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2012
    #10
  11. In article <1kloyx8.153yhwe6kw4t3N%>,
    (David Empson) wrote:

    > As for the portability question, I suspect a major reason for allowing
    > the Express to be less portable is that fewer people will need to use it
    > in this scenario compared to when the Express was introduced, due to the
    > significant number of iPhones and now iPads out there which act as a
    > WiFi hotspot, plus competing smartphones and MiFi devices.


    I have two Expresses; one is used to connect my DirecTV DVR to the home
    network. Maybe it also hosts my iPad or iPhone when they're in the TV
    room, but I don't know whether there's a handoff from the main router in
    the computer room. If there is, it's transparent. Although the new model
    would work just as well for this use, it doesn't offer anything that the
    existing model doesn't, for this use.

    The other, I take on trips to use in hotel rooms that offer ethernet, but
    no WiFi. The new model would not be as convenient for this use.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jun 14, 2012
    #11
  12. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    nospam Guest

    In article <-september.org>,
    Michelle Steiner <> wrote:

    > The other, I take on trips to use in hotel rooms that offer ethernet, but
    > no WiFi. The new model would not be as convenient for this use.


    exactly my point.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2012
    #12
  13. In article <140620121310354364%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > > The other, I take on trips to use in hotel rooms that offer ethernet,
    > > but no WiFi. The new model would not be as convenient for this use.

    >
    > exactly my point.


    I know. But there is one point that makes the new model a bit more
    convenient: placement. At one hotel, I had to reroute their ethernet
    cable under the desk to get it to reach the AE, which was plugged into the
    wall under the desk. Overall, though, that bit of inconvenience is
    outweighed by the conveniences.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jun 14, 2012
    #13
  14. Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu

    nospam Guest

    In article <-september.org>,
    Michelle Steiner <> wrote:

    > > > The other, I take on trips to use in hotel rooms that offer ethernet,
    > > > but no WiFi. The new model would not be as convenient for this use.

    > >
    > > exactly my point.

    >
    > I know. But there is one point that makes the new model a bit more
    > convenient: placement. At one hotel, I had to reroute their ethernet
    > cable under the desk to get it to reach the AE, which was plugged into the
    > wall under the desk. Overall, though, that bit of inconvenience is
    > outweighed by the conveniences.


    *this* is what i would expect from apple, not d-link:

    <http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=DIR-505>

    note that it is smaller than the airport express and can share a hard
    drive or charge an ios/android device.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2012
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. rebelscum0000
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    225
    rebelscum0000
    May 19, 2007
  2. RPS
    Replies:
    41
    Views:
    563
    Michelle Steiner
    Mar 16, 2008
  3. Marcel Pagnol
    Replies:
    79
    Views:
    887
    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG
    Apr 1, 2009
  4. Marcel Pagnol
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    164
    Marcel Pagnol
    Mar 26, 2009
  5. Leachim Sredna
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,919
    DevilsPGD
    Dec 4, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page