New MacBooks have upgradable ssds - but its proprietary

[79wjd]

7 minutes ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

I think apple has gone with removable storage media this whole time because repairing a user's water damaged macbook and keeping the data would be an absolute pain if the storage wasn't removable.

The 12" Macbook's SSD is soldered down. 

 

AFAIK Apple themselves don't do data recovery, but here's there official policy on the matter: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202004. Also, it's pretty standard (for all companies) in any repair contract that the data may be lost. So I don't know if that's the reason.

 

My guess/s as to why it's still removable: 

1. There are "a lot" of configurations, so it's not added until the last minute / it can be swapped if they find some configuration not selling well
2. It's one of the more expensive and likely components to fail (and that doesn't need to be soldered down) -- the only other component that doesn't need to be soldered down is RAM, but there is a finite amount of space and RAM is far less likely to fail (so prioritize the more expensive and more error prone part).

[SansVarnic]

LOL!!!

I am not in the least bit surprised by this. Apple's entire history is plagued by proprietary implementation this why the pc was more widely adopted over the mac. Only reason Apple controls the phone industry is because they actually allowed other developers to make apps for the device. ?

[Dackzy]

what did you expect?

[Stefan1024]

It's not designed to be user upgradeable. The only reason to solder it was to reduce the number of SKUs and to sell expensive upgrades down the road.

[jagdtigger]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Now, let's look at the price of the Samsung 950 Pro (which isn't even as good):

Do you have something to prove this, i cant find tech specs on it... But judging from the price it will be a tlc nand solution, the samsung one on the contrary is MLC.

[Dackzy]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Now, let's look at the price of the Samsung 950 Pro (which isn't even as good):

why should we look at the 950pro, when we have the 960 evo and 960 pro.

 

960 Evo:        250GB      500gb       1TB

read               3.2 GB/s  3.2 GB/s   3.2 GB/s

Write              1.5 GB/s  1.8 GB/s   1.9 GB/s

IOPs(read)     330k        330k         380k

IOPs(write)     300k        330k         360k

 

960 Pro:           512GB     1Tb           2TB

read                 3.5 GB/s  3.5 GB/s   3.5 GB/s

Write                2.1 GB/s  2.1 GB/s   2.1 GB/s

IOPs(read)       330k       440k         440k

IOPs(write)       330k       360k         360k

 

950 Pro:           256GB     512GB          

read                 2.2 GB/s  2.5 GB/s   

Write                0.9 GB/s  1.5 GB/s   

IOPs(read)       270k       300k        

IOPs(write)       85k        110k        

 

The 960 evo is cheaper than the 950 pro and better in every single way... 

The 950 pro is obsolete

[79wjd]

28 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Do you have something to prove this, i cant find tech specs on it... But judging from the price it will be a tlc nand solution, the samsung one on the contrary is MLC.

Based on the SSD performance given by Apple, which is all we have to go on atm, and which has proved relatively accurate in the past. 

 

20 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

why should we look at the 950pro, when we have the 960 evo and 960 pro.

 

I used the 950 Pro because it was on PCPP and I'm lazy, but the 960 is priced similarly, so it doesn't really change much. 

[Dackzy]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

I used the 950 Pro because it was on PCPP and I'm lazy, but the 960 is priced similarly, so it doesn't really change much. 

Well the speeds did and the IOPs did a lot, refresh the site, I put all the stats up

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Dackzy said:

Well the speeds did and the IOPs did a lot, refresh the site, I put all the stats up

What I meant is that Apple's upgrade prices aren't too far off of the rest of the market.

[Dackzy]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

What I meant is that Apple's upgrade prices aren't too far off of the rest of the market.

that is true, but we don't really know the specs other than the read/write speed. 

I am just really impressed by the jump Samsung did, holy shit.

[DELTAprime]

16 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Now, let's look at the price of the Samsung 950 Pro

Consumer vs OEM prices, get back to me when you find the OEM price for a Samsung 961 which spoiler is much cheaper than the consumer parts.

[Bleedingyamato]

On October 29, 2016 at 7:57 AM, DocSwag said:

They didn't sell the ssds they used in previous macs, so there really is no reason to do it now. However, I do remember some small company came out with a not very powerful TLC SSD that was, in fact, using the proprietary connector used in the 2015 MacBook Pro. It was a lot slower than the one used in the Mac, but it made it theoretically upgradeable.

What type of SSD do the 2015 MacBooks use?

 

I'm curious about the SSD itself but also the data connection type.

 

 

 

 

[Bleedingyamato]

17 hours ago, Dackzy said:

why should we look at the 950pro, when we have the 960 evo and 960 pro.

 

960 Evo:        250GB      500gb       1TB

read               3.2 GB/s  3.2 GB/s   3.2 GB/s

Write              1.5 GB/s  1.8 GB/s   1.9 GB/s

IOPs(read)     330k        330k         380k

IOPs(write)     300k        330k         360k

 

960 Pro:           512GB     1Tb           2TB

read                 3.5 GB/s  3.5 GB/s   3.5 GB/s

Write                2.1 GB/s  2.1 GB/s   2.1 GB/s

IOPs(read)       330k       440k         440k

IOPs(write)       330k       360k         360k

 

950 Pro:           256GB     512GB          

read                 2.2 GB/s  2.5 GB/s   

Write                0.9 GB/s  1.5 GB/s   

IOPs(read)       270k       300k        

IOPs(write)       85k        110k        

 

The 960 evo is cheaper than the 950 pro and better in every single way... 

The 950 pro is obsolete

Is the 960 EVO NVME or SATA3?

 

Also how does the estimated lifespan of the 960 EVO compare to the 950 PRO?

 

Both are important to consider besides just read and write speeds.

[The Benjamins]

On 10/30/2016 at 3:41 AM, djdwosk97 said:

How does lightning suck? 

 

Because something that happened eleven years ago represents the market today. And they don't -- not any more than any other company at least (if anything, I'd say Motorola/Samsung/OP/HTC/etc... are worse seeing as you're lucky if you get more than two OS updates).

 

Any functional parts get reused in reurbished/remanufactured devices, any broken parts get scrapped. So, no, there really isn't an environmental issue there. And there are issues with trying to do on-board repairs (causing potential stability issues for users as the issue could easily extend beyond that one resistor, for example).

 

 

I'm done, I'm going to sleep. @RedRound2 have fun.

I think lightning sucks because it is a fancy USB 2.0 port, would be best if they just used USB type C

[Bsmith]

45 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I think lightning sucks because it is a fancy USB 2.0 port, would be best if they just used USB type C

lightning a fancy USB2 port? Do yoiu even realize what you said there? lightning is closer to USB 3.1 then USB 2, in both capability and function.

somehow confused lightning with thunderbolt, nevermind.

[PlayStation 2]

On 10/30/2016 at 1:53 AM, Comic_Sans_MS said:

DB15 (VGA using a different connector), ADC (Also known as "Apple DVI" on Apple's support page), Mini-DVI.

Apple didn't create Mini-DVI though. A select few laptops did use Mini-DVI iirc. Nor can you make the argument for Mini-DisplayPort, because the industry would eventually adopt DisplayPort as a whole.

[79wjd]

6 hours ago, DELTAprime said:

Consumer vs OEM prices, get back to me when you find the OEM price for a Samsung 961 which spoiler is much cheaper than the consumer parts.

That doesn't matter. Dell charges a similar amount for what's likely a worse drive, and again, the SSD in the Mac would be only be overpriced if you could upgrade it yourself for much less, which you can't.

19 minutes ago, Bleedingyamato said:

What type of SSD do the 2015 MacBooks use?

 

I'm curious about the SSD itself but also the data connection type.

 

 

 

 

Some NVME PCIE SSD that's soldered to the motherboard (so as a result, it's not super fast -- 660 read, 460 write.

16 minutes ago, Bleedingyamato said:

Is the 960 EVO NVME or SATA3?

 

Also how does the estimated lifespan of the 960 EVO compare to the 950 PRO?

 

Both are important to consider besides just read and write speeds.

It's NVME. Both are going to be irrelevantly long anyway, so it doesn't really matter. 

14 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I think lightning sucks because it is a fancy USB 2.0 port, would be best if they just used USB type C

lightning can be usb 3.0, they just have to add a chip to support that functionality, but there isn't much of an advantage to it (there's a reason why Samsung stopped using Micro 3.0 and went back to Micro 2.0).

6 minutes ago, Bsmith said:

lightning a fancy USB2 port? Do yoiu even realize what you said there? lightning is closer to USB 3.1 then USB 2, in both capability and function.

It's traditionally limited to USB 2.0 speeds (except in the iPad Pro where there is a chip that enables USB 3.0 speeds).

[Dackzy]

44 minutes ago, Bleedingyamato said:

Is the 960 EVO NVME or SATA3?

 

Also how does the estimated lifespan of the 960 EVO compare to the 950 PRO?

 

Both are important to consider besides just read and write speeds.

NVMe ofc, SATA3 cannot have those speeds and you can see that the IOPs on the 960 EVO are much higher than the 950 pro, so the lifespand is longer

[The Benjamins]

33 minutes ago, Bsmith said:

lightning a fancy USB2 port? Do yoiu even realize what you said there? lightning is closer to USB 3.1 then USB 2, in both capability and function.

but then why are they USB 2 on the other end? If you are talking abut other functionality that is not part of the USB 3.0/3.1 standard but the USB type C standard.

 

21 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

That doesn't matter. Dell charges a similar amount for what's likely a worse drive, and again, the SSD in the Mac would be only be overpriced if you could upgrade it yourself for much less, which you can't.

Some NVME PCIE SSD that's soldered to the motherboard (so as a result, it's not super fast -- 660 read, 460 write.

It's NVME. Both are going to be irrelevantly long anyway, so it doesn't really matter. 

lightning can be usb 3.0, they just have to add a chip to support that functionality, but there isn't much of an advantage to it (there's a reason why Samsung stopped using Micro 3.0 and went back to Micro 2.0).

It's traditionally limited to USB 2.0 speeds (except in the iPad Pro where there is a chip that enables USB 3.0 speeds).

Didn't know that updated it to USB 3.0, But I still think USB C 3.1 is better and they should of moved to that.

 

Samsung stopped using Micro 3.0 because the connector was to big and flimsy, they are now on USB C 3.0

[Bsmith]

24 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

It's traditionally limited to USB 2.0 speeds (except in the iPad Pro where there is a chip that enables USB 3.0 speeds).

 

1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

but then why are they USB 2 on the other end? If you are talking abut other functionality that is not part of the USB 3.0/3.1 standard but the USB type C standard.

 

I have the feeling I fucked up somewhere and confused lightning and thunderbolt.

sorry guys, my mistake

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, Bleedingyamato said:

What type of SSD do the 2015 MacBooks use?

 

I'm curious about the SSD itself but also the data connection type.

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure it's an sm951 or something similar. It's made by Samsung for sure, and I'm pretty sure they use pcie 2.0 x4, except with a proprietary connector (so it's not compatible with m.2, the pins are in different places).

[79wjd]

15 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

I'm pretty sure it's an sm951 or something similar. It's made by Samsung for sure, and I'm pretty sure they use pcie 2.0 x4, except with a proprietary connector (so it's not compatible with m.2, the pins are in different places).

 

1 hour ago, djdwosk97 said:

Some NVME PCIE SSD that's soldered to the motherboard (so as a result, it's not super fast -- 660 read, 460 write.

 

[DocSwag]

35 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

 

 

Oops... I read 2015 Macbook Pro  

 

EDIT: More info about it can be found here. It seems Apple may have developed their own NVMe controller... http://www.anandtech.com/show/9136/the-2015-macbook-review/8

[Zodiark1593]

On Saturday, October 29, 2016 at 5:14 PM, 226477_1454181668 said:

But apple stuff is just better in almost every way. Its more expensive, but its worth paying for. 

If you like Mac OS, then sure. Otherwise, paying for Apple stuff is most certainly not worth considering. 

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

If you like Mac OS, then sure. Otherwise, paying for Apple stuff is most certainly not worth considering. 

If you don't like MacOS, then of course you shouldn't buy a Mac, but if you like MacOS or are don't have a preference, then they're generally priced competitively with other ultrabooks, and are thus worth considering.