Apple Disables Trim Support On 3rd Party SSDs In OS X

MojoKid (1002251) writes One of the disadvantages to buying an Apple system is that it generally means less upgrade flexibility than a system from a traditional PC OEM. Over the last few years, Apple has introduced features and adopted standards that made using third-party hardware progressively more difficult. Now, with OS X 10.10 Yosemite, the company has taken another step down the path towards total vendor lock-in and effectively disabled support for third-party SSDs. We say "effectively" because while third-party SSDs will still work, they'll no longer perform the TRIM garbage collection command. Being able to perform TRIM and clean the SSD when it's sitting idle is vital to keeping the drive at maximum performance. Without it, an SSD's real world performance will steadily degrade over time. What Apple did with OS X 10.10 is introduce KEXT (Kernel EXTension) driver signing. KEXT signing means that at boot, the OS checks to ensure that all drivers are approved and enabled by Apple. It's conceptually similar to the device driver checks that Windows performs at boot. However, with OS X, if a third-party SSD is detected, the OS will detect that a non-approved SSD is in use, and Yosemite will refuse to load the appropriate TRIM-enabled driver.

Comments

Why?

[swimboy]

Apple loves their walled garden, but doesn't make decisions like this capriciously. Until we know *why* Apple's doing this, it's hard to judge the situation. They may have a reason that seems insignificant to the end user, but you don't get to be the biggest company on the planet by making decisions like this for no reason.

Re:Why?

[itsenrique]

Because they don't want you buy something with the lowest SSD option then upgrade after market? Why do this? Because you have half a brain and realize the "value" in shininess doesn't work for the SSD, HDD and RAM portions of a computer. Why pay their insane prices when you can not pay them? I for one have one Core 2 Duo MacBook (2008) that was a donation. I love OS X, but this kind of shit makes me not want to buy anything expensive or expected to last years from Apple unless I really feel the need to set money on fire via shiny technology. I hope the Apple crowd stands up and bitches, but more likely they'll just say your "buying it wrong".

Re:Why?

[itsenrique]

The walled garden isn't just there to protect Apples brand image via some measures of quality control and moral censorship, its there to squeeze more money out of you, and more money out of the software developers for the platform.

Re:Why?

[TechyImmigrant]

In my experience, mac laptops cost 20% more and last twice as long as alternative PC laptop manufacturers. That doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.

Re:Why?

[itsenrique]

That is an interesting point, however I have owned 5 Mac laptops over the years. A G3 PowerBook, A G4, PowerBook, 2 Core Duos and 1 Core 2 Duo. I have owned about the same number of PC laptops. I have not seen any improvement in reliability over the macs except in the case of ultra cheap netbooks that Apple doesn't directly compete with anyway. Neither of our points matter much as they are totally anecdotal. Also, the 20% figure you list is arbitrary and varies over the years. The point I was trying to make you ignore. Why pay more for Apple to preinstall an SSD for you when you can buy the SAME BRAND if not identical model number they use and install it for usually HALF the cost or less than what they charge for the upgrade? Answer THAT. That is what the article is about after all.

Re:Why?

[TWX]

There are three approaches to computing.

There's the commercial-ubiquitous approach. This is Microsoft's approach. Try to support (or to get manufacturers to support) as much hardware as possible. Be the default solution. Things generally look good (I can't fault Microsoft over their years for most of their UI decisions), stability may not always be terribly good though, and that's the sacrifice, ubiquity over stability, but the gain is to run on just about all hardware in existence. Android is also mostly falling into this category too now.

There's the commercial-restricted approach. Sell your hardware and your software, and only allow a select-few others to sell hardware or software that is compatible with your products. The upside is that the platforms are highly stable, but the downsides are that users will sometimes find they simply can't do something because it's disallowed. It also requires the company to be ever-vigilant about pushing more features and capabilities, as stagnation will mean death. Apple currently leads this community, but SGI, Sun, NeXT, Commodore, and a whole bunch of computer companies throughout the years have tried it and ultimately closed up shop.

The Open-Source method is the third approach, and it's both leading edge (ie, research projects by major universities) and completely behind (many user applications simply don't exist or are only partially functional).


I use Windows, OSX, and Linux daily as desktop environments. Linux is stable and fast, but often not compatible with developments out of Redmond and with a lot of work to make some features function. OSX is very smooth, very stable, and awkwardly locked-down to where some things simply aren't options. Windows is compatible with just about everything and requires weekly reboots to keep it running.

They all suck. All of them.

Re:Why?

[m.dillon]

I can't agree with your reasoning. The many computer companies that have lived and died over the years have primarily died because they were producing hardware that could not keep pace with developments in the industry.

Commodore .. which I was a developer for the Amiga (and a machine language programmer in my PET days), commodore died because AmigaOS was 100% dependent on Motorola and Motorola couldn't keep up with Intel, period.

NeXT died for the same reason. NeXT couldn't keep up with Intel and by the time Jobs caved in and went with his dual-architecture 68K/Intel binary format, it was too late. Also, depending on display-postscript for EVERYTHING was a huge mistake for NeXT and having 15+ year old OS tools for a weird Mach/BSD core that they never really updated messed them up too. I was a developer for the NeXT too.

In modern times, everyone runs on similarly powerful hardware and generally can stay up-to-date on the hardware front. OS makers die from a lack of apps or a lack of ease-of-use. Apple certainly does not suffer from either.

Linux and the BSDs are entirely dependent on a relatively common library of ~20,0000 to 30,000 or so (substantial) open source apps in order to stay relevant, but all suffer from the lack of a cohesive GUI that is powerful and easy to use. KDE, Gnome, the many other little window managers available... none hold a candle to either Apple or Windows. Unfortunately. At least as a consumer machine.

I have no problem running linux or a BSD as my workstation, as long as I am only doing programming or browsing. But if I want to play a *real* game or run *real* photo or video software (not something stupid like gimp which is virtually unusable)... then I have to shift my chair over to my Windows box or my refurbished Mac laptop. For that matter, if I want brainless printing which just works, I have to run it through my Windows box because CUPS is an over-engineered piece of crap that only works well on Macs... certainly not on linux or any of the BSDs.

-Matt

Re:Why?

[leptons]

and last twice as long as alternative PC laptop manufacturers

This simply is not true. There is a new class action lawsuit against Apple for all the defective 2011 macbooks out there. We've had to replace the motherboard 4 times already in one of our macbooks, and now that it's out of warranty Apple wants $1200 to replace the motherboard again, with the same defective crap. 2008 Macbooks and iMacs have similar problems.

The problem comes down to heat dissipation - there is no room for proper cooling inside these computers that Apple designs, because they believe in form-over-function. Cooling it properly might require a slightly thicker macbook and that is unacceptable to Apple.

Re:This isn't new

[weilawei]

No, it's a flat out lie.

TRIM support has been baked into Windows and OS X for long enough that new SSDs aren't typically tested to evaluate the impact of not running TRIM has on the drive.

Apple has long had a history of only enabling TRIM for Apple drives by default.

Read TFA. They enable trim by default for preinstalled SSDs and disable it for everyone else.

Apple is what MS always wanted to be

[dirk]

It always amazes me that people still try to bash Microsoft over the (bad) things they did in the 90s. Apple has become everything we always feared Microsoft would be, but without all the backlash and bashing. This is truly a "We're not done until 3rd party stuff doesn't work" situation that everyone always suggested MS had (and MS probably did have to some extent). They are purposely disabling an industry standard for anything other than their drivers to force people to use their overpriced upgrade hardware. Yes, you can disable this "feature" but to do so you have to disable ALL driver signing on the system, thus removing a big security protection. Apple is by far one of the worst companies as far as policies and screwing people, and yet no one ever seems to say much about it even as people still write Micro$oft. Maybe it's because there isn't a cute little way to put a dollar sign in their name.

Re:Apple is what MS always wanted to be

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is choice.

In the Apple model, yes, they have built that walled garden. Yes, they are generally sealed units with limited upgrade options. But with Apple in 2014, they're just one vendor among many viable alternatives. Depending on who you ask, they're somewhere between 8% and 15% of the market. That leaves a huge selection of alternate vendors from which to choose.

Microsoft, lest anyone forget, is a convicted (unfortunately never punished) monopolist. Is the late '90s they had something like 98% marketshare. In MS' world, you have no choice but to submit to his will and his ecosystem. You would not be free to leave and switch vendors because there would be no alternatives available. And while Gates may have recently been able to buy them a better reputation with his so-called charity work; you're a damn fool if you think he is anything but a viciously ruthless businessman who wanted nothing less than complete dominance over you.

Re:Apple is what MS always wanted to be

[ahabswhale]

lol...Apple is nothing like Microsoft and you clearly have no understanding what they were in so much trouble for in the 90's.

Re:Summary is misleading, you can work around

[DRJlaw]

If you read the rest of the article, you find that you can simply disable the driver loading security to have it working again.

The article paints this as a huge security issue, but why?

Because you cannot simply add your own key, but you have to disable all driver signing in order to use one non-approved driver?

Cn anyone reasonably argue that having a system highly secure for non-technical users with easy workarounds for actually technical users is a bad compromise?

Yes. See every argument ever about UEFI secure boot on PCs intended to run Windows 8.

Re:enable trim on yosemite

[cfalcon]

Could we mod up parent, or similar posts at least? I came in here with righteous anger at Apple and find it's just a simple procedure to reenable this thing if you have one of those. This is Apple actually being more security conscious. My fucking iPhone has a goddamned gray bar overlay because my background is too pretty so it nerfs it, and I have to use buggy Fleksy for Dvorak (which works as of this week), so could we save shitting on Apple for the things it actually does wrong, and not for legit security boosts that are user bypassable without hackery?

The shenanigans that are possible to put in a driver, or in firmware, are hard to over emphasize. Any step towards being able to prevent a cleverly written hardware attack or up the cost of devel have merit, and while that's not worth losing user power over, this certainly isn't that.

Re:Just to be clear...

[Just Some Guy]

Apple, for whatever dumb reason, has _never_ enabled Trim on non-Apple branded SSDs.

I don't work for Apple, but... Older MacBook Pros came with instructions for replacing the RAM and hard drive. This was considered a normal thing to do and didn't void warranties. For example, my 2011 MBP has normal Phillips screws on the bottom, and it takes me about two minutes to have the back panel off and the RAM and HDD snap right out.

SSDs have a history of notoriously horrible firmware. SandForce, anyone? Someone goes to Best Buy and comes home with a new SSD, pops it into their MBP, uses it for a month, and the thing asplodes and eats their data. They call Apple support to scream at them for writing a terrible OS that loses their data, and Apple loses money and reputation.

I can imagine perfectly non-nefarious reasons why Apple would disable TRIM by default and only enable it for drives that have been explicitly tested for compatibility. Even today, you can still turn TRIM on for yourself as you described, at the price of reverting to pre-Yosemite security. I haven't done so on the 840 EVO I swapped into my MBP because I've judged that it's not worth the tradeoff for me, but it's an option. Trim Enabler even has a GUI to do it for you.

I'd be hard pressed to come up with more of a manufactured controversy.

Queue the Apple apologists

[pablo_max]

Seriously, look at this fellow's posts. Doesn't matter what Apples does, it is not their fault, or it is their fault but it's Apple, so there is a good and just reason.

I just understand this mindset. TRIM has been around for a long time now and it works. Plain and simple. It has worked perfectly on my mac after I enabled with a 3rd party hack.
No, this is only a clamp down in order for force you to buy their SSD for double the price.

I am 100% positive if MS sold SDDs and suddenly blocked TRIM, this turkey would be screaming at the top of his lung about power grabs and anti-competitive actions. But, since we are talking about Apple....

Re:Queue the Apple apologists

[BitZtream]

Turn off the driver signing requirement in Yosemite, problem solved, your hack still works and you're in the same condition you were in Mavericks.

They didn't 'block trim' they blocked your hack to make the driver do something it wasn't intended to do.

The only thing needed for your random SSD to have trim support in OS X is for the manufacture to release a driver for their drives, with trim support ... and considering the Apple driver for AHCI isn't exactly hard to find the source for, its not even much more than compile and distribute.

We could debate why Apple doesn't support trim outside of their own drives, but its hard to argue that its their fault for not supplying a driver for your third party hardware.

Re:This isn't new

[jedidiah]

Yes... the demented world of Apple where daring to buy a 3rd party peripheral is only for "power users" or "cheapskates" or some other class of person that will be denigrated by the hive mind.

THIS here is the biggest reason to avoid Apple products. Not the price. Not the novelty form factors that cook your machine. Not the fact that nothing is maintainable.

It's THIS attitude here that anyone that's using this "platform for creatives" in a remotely creative way will get shouted down by the hive mind.