Don't believe these sham rumors that windows people are making. My MBP 8GB Base Model has been running for 4 months now only 2.28TB total write. I don't understand how these people are using their macs to get 30tb write per month.

Very interesting, mine doesn't seem to have this behavior since it's only writing like 10 kb per second idling with many apps open (both native and rosetta)

Some people have reported (such as on the m1 pro) up to 50GB/S writes while idling, which is a bit odd to me because I thought these drives could only get up to 3GB/S reads and writes?

This is why, soldered storage and memory is a crime against customer right. User should have and allowed ability to replace their drive and memory without the need of official support. But then, people still willing to pay thousands dollar, so, yes apple will keep laughing at your rights.

People should tell apple to use removable ssd just like in 2017 models. And removeable memory like 2012 model. Stop asking for another 0.1 less thickness. Bring back the balance between thickness and repairability. 2015 model was perfectly fine. Pro was meant to be real pro, not simply air with more expensive price tag.

You should buy mac...
And reinstall and boot on external ssd

Do not buy systems with soldered SSDs! Do not buy Apple!

Quote from: Astar on February 25, 2021, 08:25:19
Of course you would expect this to happen! Whaddaya expect? There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Mac & iOS are well known to have spyware - iTunes is the most notorious culprit, always pushing the suckers to buy & buy with adware. Siri, their maps, Safari, its all spyware. There is no doubt whatsoever that they are logging usage data and reporting to CrApple.

There is also no doubt that their M1 processors probably aggressively pre-fetch & cache or execute data in order to boost performance numbers.

We're talking hundreds of gigabytes per hour. You'd notice that much traffic on your network. I doubt most people have fast enough Internet connections to support those kinds of speed anyway. You're in the region of 1 Gb/s upload (100 GB/ hour is about 222 Mb/s). Not to mention that it's unlikely you'd be able to generate that much usage data.

Reading doesn't wear out an SSD. Pre-fetching from SSD is not a problem. It would be interesting to know whether this issue correlates with the amount of RAM. It could really be memory swapping. PCIe 4.0 SSDs are incredibly fast, they make excellent swapping platform from performance perspective. But swapping can generate a lot of writes. Although, those numbers are still very high. That would take some heavy usage.

Generally speaking, a worry is a bug in a program. Causing unnecessary writes. That can always happen, on any platform.

QuoteSamsung rates the 980 PRO for up to 1.5 million hours of use, for example, or 300 TB of total writes.

You can't say 300 TB written without specifying the capacity. Because those figures are a function of capacity. It's better to say that it's rated for 600 complete rewrites. Which tells you that 300 TB value belongs to the 500 GB version. 2 TB version is rated for 1200 TB.

You can't interpret MTBF this way. It claims to be an average time, meaning some can do better, some worse, across a statistically significant pool of units. But as always, devil is in the detail. Do you really believe someone tested one of these for 1.5 million hours? That's impossible. It's over 100 years. The common way of doing this is to take a whole bunch of them, test them for a given amount of time (a month, for example) and calculate MTBF as #units * time / #failures. If you run a thousand units for a thousand hours (that's about six weeks of 24/7 testing) with one failure, you've got MTBF of one million hours (1000 * 1000 / 1). You don't have to be a genius to realize that testing something for a thousand hours is a very weak evidence for it lasting a million hours. The test can involve accelerated aging - essentially, subjecting the devices to abuse which should significantly shorten their lifespan and expose problems. But the only way to really know whether something will last ten years is to run a significant number for ten years. And that's not practical if you want to deliver a product to a market. So, one needs to be careful with MTBF as a number. You really need the details to make it useful.

Of course you would expect this to happen! Whaddaya expect? There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Mac & iOS are well known to have spyware - iTunes is the most notorious culprit, always pushing the suckers to buy & buy with adware. Siri, their maps, Safari, its all spyware. There is no doubt whatsoever that they are logging usage data and reporting to CrApple.

There is also no doubt that their M1 processors probably aggressively pre-fetch & cache or execute data in order to boost performance numbers.

This is why I dread the switchover to ARM. While more competition on processor is nice and all, ARM stuff have gotten used to soldered stuff being the norm. Thus, most stuff come with soldered ram and hard drives.

Thus the lifespan of our computers and re-usability will only fall.

And this will come to bite us even more as we reach the end of die shrinks. Thus no more low hanging fruit.

Good. Hope those M1 start falling off like flies. Maybe that way Apple might back pedal on that idea

Well it can easily be fixed by replacing the storage, wait it's soldered. Well they're should paid £200 to upgrade to 16GB RAM.