Slashdot Mirror


Apple File System in macOS High Sierra Won't Work With Fusion Drives (arstechnica.co.uk)

An anonymous reader shares a report: MacOS High Sierra will come out of beta and roll out to the public next week. If you have previously installed the beta version, you may need to take extra steps before installing the release so your Fusion Drive-toting machine doesn't experience any negative consequences. Apple announced that the new Apple File system (APFS) won't immediately support Fusion Drives and will only support systems with all-flash built-in storage in the initial release of High Sierra. Those who tested out the beta versions of macOS High Sierra had their Fusion Drives converted to the new APFS. However, support was removed from the most recent beta versions, and it isn't coming back with the public release of High Sierra. Apple provided a set of instructions to help those users convert their Fusion Drives back from APFS to the standard HFS+ format before installing the High Sierra update. The instructions include backing up data using Time Machine, creating a bootable installer, reformatting the machine using Disk Utility, and reinstalling the operating system update.

123 comments

  1. And this is news? by swimboy · · Score: 1, Informative

    Why is this even news? A feature in a beta version of software got cut for the GM. Happens all the time. Any idiot can read between the lines and understands that there's a bug in APFS for fusion drives, and rather than delay the release, Apple is just disabling it on fusion drives until a point update down the line.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

    --
    Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
    1. Re:And this is news? by saloomy · · Score: 5, Informative

      It is news because some people with Fusion Drives expected to be upgraded to the new release and the new filesystem, but now won't. They may be developers, integrators, or whatever, and this lets them know that APFS is delayed for their kit until later.

    2. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one am curious what the bug is that would affect fusion drives but not pure flash storage. Especially since the bug apparently wasn't caught until very late within the beta process.

    3. Re:And this is news? by Sherman+Peabody · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apple's new operating system does not support a feature that they currently sell at a premium because they don't offer large flash drives. That's a significant failure on their part and affects many people who should read this article as advice not to upgrade.

      That's news.

    4. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no kidding, i am not "up" grading to high sierra until i see that bug fixed.

      also it is mind-bogglingly stupid to have a "high sierra" disk format when we already have a "high sierra" disk format (aka ISO 9660). there are literally thousands of names they could have used. it's like including a built-in database called "oracle."

    5. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sense not this makes not.

    6. Re:And this is news? by swimboy · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't they upgrade? The old OS doesn't support APFS on fusion drives either. And it's not like Apple said "Buy this computer now, and get APFS on it later."

      --
      Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
    7. Re:And this is news? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      It's called "Apple File system" (APFS), not "high sierra disk format".

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    8. Re: And this is news? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Translation: "I don't want to hear about it. It's bad news about Apple and I don't want you to hear it, either."

      Sorry to diasppoint you.

    9. Re: And this is news? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      It's okay to upgrade. Just pray you were not one of the beta testers who 'upgraded' a drive that was not well backed up.

    10. Re: And this is news? by yabos · · Score: 1

      Which is why they warn you to not use the beta on a production machine. If you don't listen and something goes wrong then it's your own fault.

    11. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except apple has a history of planned obsolescence. There's no guarantee they will actually do a point update.

    12. Re: And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOLOLOL

      Whatya looking at mi gutfer?

    13. Re:And this is news? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      It's news because the OS / filesystem cares is incompatible with a storage device because it has flash cache baked in.

      WTF kind of sense does that make? The OS / filesystem shouldn't know or care!

      In the PC world, hybrid drives, or "SSHD"s, are completely abstracted away. They're just another fucking storage device and the firmware tries to speed some shit up on its own.

      Apparently for the Mac world, this isn't the case.

    14. Re:And this is news? by swimboy · · Score: 1

      No, that's not the case. Fusion drives are not hybrid drives. While the OS presents a single drive to the end user, a fusion drive is two separately addressable drives to the lowest levels of the operating system. Apple figured that the OS could do a better job of optimizing what data went on the SSD than drive firmware could, since it would know *what* the data was, not just how often or recently it was accessed.

      --
      Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
    15. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Why is this even news? A feature in a beta version of software got cut for the GM. Happens all the time. Any idiot can read between the lines and understands that there's a bug in APFS for fusion drives, and rather than delay the release, Apple is just disabling it on fusion drives until a point update down the line.

      Nothing to see here. Move along.

      It's "news" because anything that can POSSIBLY be "spun" to be negative IN ANY WAY about Apple is grist for the click-mill that is Slashdot.

    16. Re:And this is news? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      it's like including a built-in database called "oracle."

      I'd like people to try my new app. It makes managing your contact lists quite easy, and can even include their pictures.

      I call it the Facebook.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    17. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It is news because some people with Fusion Drives expected to be upgraded to the new release and the new filesystem, but now won't. They may be developers, integrators, or whatever, and this lets them know that APFS is delayed for their kit until later.

      Which is why you get what you deserve if you install a Beta on a "production" (or your personal) machine.

    18. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Translation: "I don't want to hear about it. It's bad news about Apple and I don't want you to hear it, either."

      Sorry to diasppoint you.

      It's NOT "Bad News". It's news about a Beta release.

      Nothing more. Slashdot is just trying to MAKE IT "Bad News".

    19. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I for one am curious what the bug is that would affect fusion drives but not pure flash storage. Especially since the bug apparently wasn't caught until very late within the beta process.

      It's not a "Bug". The focus on APFS Optimizations so far have been on SSD/Flash storage; not Spinning Rust nor Hybrid (Fusion) Drives. That will come later.

      The plan with High Sierra was to automatically convert ONLY SSD Boot Volumes. All else were to be left as HFS+ for now.

      If I had to guess, the Fusion Drives reported their capabilities in some way that "tricked" the installer into treating it as an SSD Drive, thus converting it to APFS.

      So, if there was a "bug", it was a bug in the Installer Script, NOT in APFS itself.

    20. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      no kidding, i am not "up" grading to high sierra until i see that bug fixed.

      also it is mind-bogglingly stupid to have a "high sierra" disk format when we already have a "high sierra" disk format (aka ISO 9660). there are literally thousands of names they could have used. it's like including a built-in database called "oracle."

      You're an idiot.

    21. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Apple's new operating system does not support a feature that they currently sell at a premium because they don't offer large flash drives. That's a significant failure on their part and affects many people who should read this article as advice not to upgrade.

      That's news.

      Oh, shut the FUCK up! You have NO idea what you are blathering about; but ARE the reason Slashdot ran a story about a problem with a BETA Installer Script on a BETA OS Version, FFS!

    22. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It's okay to upgrade. Just pray you were not one of the beta testers who 'upgraded' a drive that was not well backed up.

      And if you are doing that without taking the drop-dead-simple step of making a Time Machine backup first, you deserve just EXACTLY what you get, sorry!

    23. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Except apple has a history of planned obsolescence. There's no guarantee they will actually do a point update.

      You're an idiot.

    24. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      It's news because the OS / filesystem cares is incompatible with a storage device because it has flash cache baked in.

      WTF kind of sense does that make? The OS / filesystem shouldn't know or care!

      In the PC world, hybrid drives, or "SSHD"s, are completely abstracted away. They're just another fucking storage device and the firmware tries to speed some shit up on its own.

      Apparently for the Mac world, this isn't the case.

      If you had bothered to watch the Keynote a few years ago, when the Fusion Drive concept was introduced, you would already know that, unlike idiot Windows and idiot Linux, macOS knows what to do with the Fusion Drive, and the OS makes intelligent decisions, based on usage, as to what data is moved to the Flash portion, and what data is kept/moved on the spinning-rust portion, of the drive. This results in MUCH better performance overall.

    25. Re:And this is news? by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      Works fine on my 2TB flash drive. Not sure what you're talking about.

    26. Re:And this is news? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      1- Nobody sells large flash drives at a consumer-friendly price point.
      2- OS X allows a smaller flash drive and a larger HDD to appear as a single drive, where the flash drive acts as a large cache. They offer this feature for free.

      You can pair any two drives you want in this way. I'm not sure where you get the premium idea.

    27. Re: And this is news? by NominalLoss · · Score: 2

      Did you even read the summary? It is coming OUT of beta and is a PUBLIC release. Presumably, if you update and have a fusion drive it won't work. So, if you were unaware, that would be a rude surprise, correct? This is important news that needs to be released, otherwise - DESPITE the PUBLIC RELEASE - your hardware might not work. Turn your fanboy down a couple notches.

    28. Re:And this is news? by sexconker · · Score: 0

      I'm not a fanboy. Why would I waste my time watching an hour long ad for Apple's shit?
      And clearly, the results are shit don't work.

    29. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the summary? It is coming OUT of beta and is a PUBLIC release. Presumably, if you update and have a fusion drive it won't work. So, if you were unaware, that would be a rude surprise, correct? This is important news that needs to be released, otherwise - DESPITE the PUBLIC RELEASE - your hardware might not work. Turn your fanboy down a couple notches.

      Did YOU even read TFS?

      They are removing support for APFS for Fusion Drives in the GM of High Sierra.

      Those who didn't participate in the Public Beta won't feel a thing. Their Fusion Drives will REMAIN HFS+, like they always were.

      Those who DID participate in the Public Beta were warned. Repeatedly. If they converted their only copy of their Boot Drive without taking the simple step of a Time Machine Backup, AND they did so on their ONLY computer, lthen, guess what? TFB.

      That is all.

    30. Re:And this is news? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Nobody outside of Apple really knows what the fusion drive mechanism does because Apple does not open-source the technology. What you wrote is basically straight from Apple's marketing department. We know that they are very good, this does not mean the technology is that great. Early reports were saying that the tech was basically on par with SSHD (a HDD + some amount of Flash as cache) or a bit better, but not a game changer.

      The closest open-source equivalent would be the ZFS filesystem, which offers several levels of caching with its ZIL and L2ARC features. These do offer very good performance improvements.

    31. Re:And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 2

      I'm not a fanboy. Why would I waste my time watching an hour long ad for Apple's shit?
      And clearly, the results are shit don't work.

      Then why do you feel compelled to comment?

      Shit DOES work; there are ZERO horror stories coming from the Public Beta. Apple is just hedging their bets.

    32. Re:And this is news? by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      >> I for one am curious what the bug is that would affect fusion drives but not pure flash storage. Especially since the bug apparently wasn't caught until very late within the beta process.
      >
      > It's not a "Bug". The focus on APFS Optimizations so far have been on SSD/Flash storage; not Spinning Rust nor Hybrid (Fusion) Drives. That will come later.

      Yeah... "it's not a bug, it's a feature".

      As usual, Macs are only suitable for a certain class of highly pedestrian user and only if you don't "use them too hard".

      Apple's tendency to pretend that it lives 10 years in the future comes to bit it (and it's users) in the butt again.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    33. Re: And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I'm pretty sure that the folks who do 3rd party drive recovery software do know, just from watching it in operation at a low level...

    34. Re:And this is news? by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Except that was a piss poor engineering choice. This mess goes to prove it. They took a device that was designed to be a black box and messed that up.

      They shot their own foot with that nonsense.

      They overcomplicated a situation that didn't need to be.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    35. Re:And this is news? by Sherman+Peabody · · Score: 1

      Fusion HD is a $100 premium on a new iMac.

    36. Re: And this is news? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      When I'm posting this, you account for 24.2% of the replies to this story. Are you sure you're the fake one?

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    37. Re: And this is news? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      It IS definitely news for the users who have been running High Sierra beta. Their fusion drives have been running the new file system and will have to be reverted.

    38. Re: And this is news? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Is there even such a thing as a Mac that is "a production machine"? That is more a server or infrastructure sort of computer.Apple mainly sells to casual/consumer these days.

    39. Re: And this is news? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      You are the one who is scampering around fighting the good fight against anonymous coward comments. If anybody is behaving idiotically it is you.

    40. Re: And this is news? by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Nerds have always hated Apple. At least, since Apple designed an explicitly anti-nerd computer called the Macintosh.

      Those of who were into computers at the time (nerds) remember how condescending Jobs was about it. They killed the Apple 2 about the same time, which was a nerdy open system for the most part.

      Other than a smallish minority, we hate fucking Apple here. I have dealt with conescending-while-clueless Mac users since the mid 80's. This is not the space for those people.

      It is never going to change. Apple has doubled down on their anti-nerd approach as they have converted into being a consumer gadget company. It will never change.

    41. Re: And this is news? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      It's okay to upgrade. Just pray you were not one of the beta testers who 'upgraded' a drive that was not well backed up.

      And if you are doing that without taking the drop-dead-simple step of making a Time Machine backup first, you deserve just EXACTLY what you get, sorry!

      Be nice. Windows users don't even know what Time Machine does.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    42. Re: And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)m sure it was discovered to be a steaming pile, with Appleâ(TM)s new tiny SSD fusion drive setups.

    43. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a poor attitude. Take responsibility for your actions.

      Apple and others (i.e., Microsoft) all provide a warning upon downloading beta operating systems that the software should only be installed on a computer where you are prepared for things to go wrong. In other words, if you have one computer and you use that single computer for your job, schoolwork, or trolling slashdot, don't install software that may make that one computer unusable.

    44. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but if you're professional who bought a fusion drive with your mac, well, then, you're a dick.
      They suck, always have LOOOONG before apple changed the name from HYBRID to Fusion.
      Lay down $2-3k+ on a MBP and skimp on the drive? wtf!!!
      No excuse really for a nerd, but a dumb ass apple customer whining about bezels??? fuck yeah that was another ace roll for where the ludicrous profit margins were for Apple, hybrid drives took a MASSIVE dive before apple came along and repurposed an 'entire tanking hybrid industry' by re-marketing as fusion.

    45. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      When I'm posting this, you account for 24.2% of the replies to this story. Are you sure you're the fake one?

      Sorry. Just on a roll, and bored at work...

    46. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It IS definitely news for the users who have been running High Sierra beta. Their fusion drives have been running the new file system and will have to be reverted.

      And they weren't warned?

    47. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It's okay to upgrade. Just pray you were not one of the beta testers who 'upgraded' a drive that was not well backed up.

      And if you are doing that without taking the drop-dead-simple step of making a Time Machine backup first, you deserve just EXACTLY what you get, sorry!

      Then they shouldn't be commenting.

      Be nice. Windows users don't even know what Time Machine does.

    48. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It's okay to upgrade. Just pray you were not one of the beta testers who 'upgraded' a drive that was not well backed up.

      And if you are doing that without taking the drop-dead-simple step of making a Time Machine backup first, you deserve just EXACTLY what you get, sorry!

      Sorry, my response got eaten...

      If Windows users don't know what Time Machine does, they shouldn't be commenting here.

      Be nice. Windows users don't even know what Time Machine does.

    49. Re: And this is news? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my response got eaten...

      If Windows users don't know what Time Machine does, they shouldn't be commenting here.

      The big question for me is why on earth isn't there a backup utility like Time Machine for Windows baked right into the OS?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    50. Re:And this is news? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      That's the (over) price of the SDD.

    51. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my response got eaten...

      If Windows users don't know what Time Machine does, they shouldn't be commenting here.

      The big question for me is why on earth isn't there a backup utility like Time Machine for Windows baked right into the OS?

      Because Windows sucks?

      Actually, Windows has had a backup utility called "NTBackup" for quite awhile, and then there's the Volume Snapshot Backup. But neither is as simple to setup nor administer as Time Machine. Not by a LONG shot.

    52. Re: And this is news? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Because Windows sucks?

      Actually, Windows has had a backup utility called "NTBackup" for quite awhile, and then there's the Volume Snapshot Backup. But neither is as simple to setup nor administer as Time Machine. Not by a LONG shot.

      Did those back up applications as well? I had the first occasion to restore an entire volume from scratch from Time machine a few weeks ago, and it was flawless. Just haven't been able to figure why nothing like that made it to Windows.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    53. Re: And this is news? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Because Windows sucks?

      Actually, Windows has had a backup utility called "NTBackup" for quite awhile, and then there's the Volume Snapshot Backup. But neither is as simple to setup nor administer as Time Machine. Not by a LONG shot.

      Did those back up applications as well? I had the first occasion to restore an entire volume from scratch from Time machine a few weeks ago, and it was flawless. Just haven't been able to figure why nothing like that made it to Windows.

      Yeah, isn't that cool?!?

      I have had two occasions to do it; both flawless. One was after replacing an HD in an early Intel iMac, and the other time was when replacing that iMac with a 2017 iMac running Sierra (from aTM backup from a Snow Leopard based machine). As I said, both were: Start Resore. Wait. Reboot. Done.

      Windows just has never understood "usability". Never have, never will.

  2. marketing wank translation by nimbius · · Score: 1, Troll

    fusion drive a hard disk drive with a NAND flash storage. this has been around for nearly a decade and exists in MAC as a cost savings measure at the expense of performance and is best suited toward mac customers as the moniker is far more critical to them than any demonstrable value.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re: marketing wank translation by anegg · · Score: 1

      I have a Mac with a 3 TB Fusion drive; it's from 2013. It is a virtual disk with two physical volumes, one electronic, one rotating magnetic media. It automatically migrates frequently used files to the electronic media, and less frequently used files to the rotating magnetic media. It works great; my Mac boots quickly; apps start quickly. I have a decent amount of storage for videos, pictures, and audio at the same time. I don't view it as a way to "cheap out" but rather a clever bit of engineering that gives me the best of both types of media.

    2. Re: marketing wank translation by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      How is that fusion drive any better than just having a smaller, primary SSD and a large secondary spinning platter disk?

    3. Re: marketing wank translation by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Because the most frequently used files are put on the SSD automatically. It's a little known technique called "caching". You might be surprised to find out that the processor in your computer does something similar with respect to RAM.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    4. Re: marketing wank translation by Solandri · · Score: 0
      Outside of Apple circles, that's called a SSHD - solid state hard drive. It does not give the best of both types of media.
      • It's great for speeding up small, frequently-accessed files. Like the files needed to boot the OS or start a program. Hard drives suck at reading or writing these - typically 0.75 to 1.5 MB/s. A small SSD can typically read these at around 10-30 MB/s. This is the only thing it speeds up.
      • It doesn't do anything for large files because the NAND cache is too small to hold large files, and hard drives are already pretty fast at large files (typically 75-150 MB/s, though newer ones can surpass 200 MB/s).
      • The NAND size is too small to hit the blazing-fast 500+ MB/s speeds of real SSDs. You need multiple NAND dies operating in parallel for that, and the NAND sizes in SSHDs are too small for that.
      • It doesn't do anything for infrequently accessed small files because they're not loaded into cache.
      • It doesn't do anything for writes because that could compromise data integrity if the drive loses power before it's written to the HDD. So writes are sent straight to the HDD portion and proceed at HDD speeds.

      Don't get me wrong, it's a substantial speedup in boot times off a slow HDD. I played around with it on a Thinkpad (had a HDD and a 16 SSD configured as cache). Even when I reduced the caching partition down to 8 GB, it was still booting up Windows in about 20 seconds, vs over a minute with the cache disabled. But (1) you don't get the blazing fast SSD speeds (500 MB/s to 2 GB/s) with large files, (2) It doesn't get you these fast speeds with infrequently accessed files, and (3) it doesn't give you these fast speeds with writes. Once you factor in these drawbacks, the performance improvement simply isn't worth the additional cost compared to a SSD + HDD setup.

      I only recommend SSHDs if you have a laptop (which typically use 5400 RPM drives), you need the large storage of a HDD, but the laptop can only take a single drive (i.e. doesn't have a separate M.2 slot for a real SSD). On laptop with a M.2 slot you can run with both SSD + HDD. On a desktop a 7200 RPM HDD is tolerable, and you can install a real SSD. In fact on a desktop, you can toss in a small spare used SSD, install Intel Rapid Storage Technology, and configure that SSD to cache all your HDDs.

      Apple uses these SSHDs in their all-in-ones (iMac line) and Mac Mini basically because they're too much of a control freak to add a M.2 slot to let you add your own SSD. The iMacs which do allow you to add a smaller M.2-type SSD use a proprietary interface, forcing you to buy the SSD from Apple. The whole thing is a racket designed to extract obnoxious sums of money from their customers for the same features PC users get as standard. And yet somehow Apple users are proud that Apple has the highest profit margin in the PC industry? Talk about Stockholm syndrome.

    5. Re:marketing wank translation by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Technical demonstration for the non-haters: Fusion drive is a combination of a hard drive and an SSD. It hasn't been around for nearly a decade, but was introduced in late 2012. The technology is not available on a MAC (Media Access Controller) but on various Macintosh computers. It combines the speed of an SSD drive with the huge size of large hard drive. It is very much appreciated by many customers as they are very good at getting the best value for money and allows for example huge collections of video or music to be stored at reasonable cost, while giving fast access to data that is used a lot.

      For example, a combination of 3TB hard drive and 128GB SSD is a lot faster than just a 3TB hard drive, and a lot cheaper than a 3TB SSD drive.

    6. Re: marketing wank translation by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      It is better than two separate drives because data is moved to the better suited drive automatically at a 128KB block level, not at a file level.

      Typically, all the directory structures will be on the SSD drive, all the parts of the operating system that you actually use. If you have a huge iTunes library, it is likely that most music files are on the slower hard drive, while the portions of those files containing album art that are displayed a lot are on the SSD drive.

      You don't waste time moving files to the right place. All the space of the SSD drive is used, if you do it manually you probably don't use more than 80%.. To improve file writes, 4GB of space on the SSD drive are used as a write buffer. That means all writes go to the SSD drive first (quickly, written sequentially at optimal speed) and later on the OS sorts out where the data should really go in the background.

    7. Re:marketing wank translation by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      fusion drive a hard disk drive with a NAND flash storage. this has been around for nearly a decade and exists in MAC as a cost savings measure at the expense of performance and is best suited toward mac customers as the moniker is far more critical to them than any demonstrable value.

      The Hate is strong in this one!

      You, sir, are both ignorant AND idiotic. Fusion Drives are a PERFORMANCE-centric improvement, NOT a "Cost-Savings Measure".

      So suck it, moron.

    8. Re: marketing wank translation by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      How is that fusion drive any better than just having a smaller, primary SSD and a large secondary spinning platter disk?

      Because the OS manages all this behind the scenes, transparent to the user. The user sees it as one Drive. This allows stuff like the "Applications" Folder to actually have some Applications on the Flash portion, and others on the spinning-rust portion (and maybe that mix will even change over time, as the system watches usage profiles), but to the User, ALL the Applications are in "One Place".

      Actually, it's fairly clever.

    9. Re: marketing wank translation by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I only recommend SSHDs if you have a laptop (which typically use 5400 RPM drives)

      And when Fusion Drives were introduced, that's exactly what Apple was using as a default in their laptops.

      Oh, and what one computer-type is Apple's most popular?

    10. Re:marketing wank translation by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Fusion Drives are a PERFORMANCE-centric improvement, NOT a "Cost-Savings Measure".

      You know what performs even better? SSDs. But they are expensive.

      So suck it, moron.

      If you ever finish sucking the Apple cock, maybe someone else could have a go.

    11. Re: marketing wank translation by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Outside of Apple circles, that's called a SSHD - solid state hard drive. It does not give the best of both types of media.

      No, Fusion drive is not SSHD. SSHD is what Seagate does and provides a NAND flash cache with a 1TB or so spinning drive.

      Fusion Drive is a MacOS X feature that combines an SSD and an HDD together into one volume. In typical shipped configurations, it was a 128GB Samsung 840/850 Pro combined with a standard spinning rust hard drive. It is integrated into the OS X volume manager, and if you Boot Camp, one of the things Boot Camp does is break the Fusion Drive because it doesn't work on Windows. (By breaking it, it turns it into an SSD and HDD).

      While you're right about comments about SSHDs, realize they were done by Seagate and were available in 8GB NAND/1TB configurations, while Apple sells Fusion drive configurations as a 128GB/1TB or 128GB/3TB configuration. (The Mac Mini supports 2 2.5" drives, so a Fusion Drive is one 2.5" SSD one HDD).

    12. Re:marketing wank translation by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Fusion Drives are a PERFORMANCE-centric improvement, NOT a "Cost-Savings Measure".

      You know what performs even better? SSDs. But they are expensive.

      So suck it, moron.

      If you ever finish sucking the Apple cock, maybe someone else could have a go.

      1. SSD's were REALLY expensive (and "wearout" was a real concern) five or so years ago, when Apple came up with the idea of Fusion Drives (and the OS support that makes it work well). Fusion Drives were a way to get the Boot-Performance improvements (primarily) of an SSD, while still allowing for a large overall storage, and without concerns for wearout for often-updated data.

      2. Are you volunteering for cocksucking duties? 'Cause I've got one right here for ya...

    13. Re: marketing wank translation by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      This is not quite correct. For a start, the Apple 3TB fusion drive comes paired with a 128GB SSD. This is much larger than the 8GB cache of typical SSHD, which takes care of your slow read performance. Second according to Apple, their system is not just a cache, it "intelligently" stores most used as well as most recent data and applications. As such it is closer to a tiered access solution than a cache.

      Yes you can do something similar with a HD + a SSD, but AFAIK not trivially. The Intel SSD SRT caching solution is only that, a cache, and I believe it is limited to 64GB of SSD.

      Note that using a SSH as a straight read/write cache can wear it out quickly.

    14. Re: marketing wank translation by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Because the OS manages all this behind the scenes

      Since this is an Apple black box they don't have to do any strange shenanigans with standard hardware. They don't have to "hack" the fusion drive. They can just use two drives as one.

      This is trivial because they control both the hardware and software. They don't have to engage in any hacks.

      Two drives would allow them to better optimize the entire process both for performance and cost.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    15. Re:marketing wank translation by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > 1. SSD's were REALLY expensive (and "wearout" was a real concern) five or so years ago, when Apple came up with the idea of Fusion Drives

      You have a part that you are unsure about so of course the logical thing is to pair it with a more reliable component. You should be pretty much expecting the combined item to fail in short order.

      Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

      Since when is Apple a "cheap skate" brand. I have a laptop with hybrid drive that's nearly 5 years old. I was tempted to go SSD but I'm a terrible cheapskate.

      What's Apple's excuse?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  3. That's courage! by grumpy-cowboy · · Score: 0

    Delivering an half-baked new file system.

    --
    Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
    1. Re:That's courage! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      So... it's a brownies file system?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:That's courage! by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Delivering an half-baked new file system.

      Not "half-baked".

      Rather, "In its early stages; but still a significant improvement for SSD/Flash storage".

  4. Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by MikeDataLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's what happens when you join a beta. The vendor learns things, fixes bugs, delays features, and makes changes.

    I mean seriously. Not trying to be a troll. How is this news?

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    1. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because what you have to do if you want to go from beta to full release. You basically have to wipe and reinstall.

      Thats a nice howdoyado for the people beta testing it for free for you.

    2. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thats a nice howdoyado for the people beta testing it for free for you.

      I know right! If only the terms and conditions of joining the beta program mentioned this might be necessary and that you might lose your data by participating. Oh wait. It does.

      https://beta.apple.com/sp/beta...

    3. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by CustomBuild · · Score: 1

      That's what happens when you join a beta. The vendor learns things, fixes bugs, delays features, and makes changes.

      I mean seriously. Not trying to be a troll. How is this news?

      It's as much news as the rest of the drivel that is considered news. Stick around, I'm sure something will come down the fire hose and re-affirm your beliefs.

    4. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats a nice howdoyado for the people beta testing it for free for you.

      Beta testers that expect no inconveniences... seems like the Reality Distortion Field has survived Jobs.

    5. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you interpret it.

      "APFS has issues with Fusion Drives": News.
      "OMFG! Apple is gonna make their beta testers reformat their drives! WTF, Apple, not supporting their own drives!": Not News.

      I gotta admit, I was kind of curious what APFS did with Fusion drives...

    6. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Kenja · · Score: 1

      Because what you have to do if you want to go from beta to full release. You basically have to wipe and reinstall.

      Thats a nice howdoyado for the people beta testing it for free for you.

      If you never wipe, it starts to itch. However, in this case it's reformatting and restoring from backup rather than wipe and reinstall.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    7. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Troll

      It is nice when nasty things don't happen to you that require a vendor to fall back to disclaimers. It's not the norm for beta testers to get fucked over like this. Yes, Apple is covered from liability. Their shortcomings can fuck over their beta testers without Apple having any liability.

      Are you satisfied, now that your assertion has been fully fleshed out?

      You're welcome.

    8. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps a good PR move would have been to state WHY Fusion drive support was being removed, instead of just saying: Oh, fuck you, reformat this shit.

      Or even when they installed the beta: this drive might not be supported because reasons?
      Or not forcing them to do a complete Fileystem transfer - Windows hasn't for 25 years and still works because why should it care (it'll default to a sane choice, of course)?
      Or requiring them to buy their $200 backup drive as part of the step to reverting?

      Let's be honest: why can't you put any filesystem on any drive? I've never had a problem formatting any drive to any filesystem, even if it wasn't meant for it. The only limiting factor was space and OS support.

    9. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beta means feature complete. It used to be used as a means to get wider testing to look for edge cases and as a customer preview method, but it has become a middle stage between alpha and true beta (which doesn't exist anymore).

    10. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple jews everywhere. Always sucking the necrophied cock of steve jobs

    11. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      If there was no possibility of the beta testers being fucked over like this, you wouldn't need to do a beta.

      It's a beta ffs. Of course this could happen. No software vendor in the world makes guarantees like the ones you are asking for in beta test.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    12. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never had a problem

      god what an idiot

    13. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the norm for beta testers to get fucked over like this. Yes, Apple is covered from liability.

      you are an idiot if you got "fucked over" trusting unreleased software

    14. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      That's what happens when you join a beta. The vendor learns things, fixes bugs, delays features, and makes changes.

      I mean seriously. Not trying to be a troll. How is this news?

      Because Apple News = Clickbait for Apple-Haters...

    15. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      It is nice when nasty things don't happen to you that require a vendor to fall back to disclaimers. It's not the norm for beta testers to get fucked over like this. Yes, Apple is covered from liability. Their shortcomings can fuck over their beta testers without Apple having any liability.

      Are you satisfied, now that your assertion has been fully fleshed out?

      You're welcome.

      That's what Time Machine is for.

      FFS, people!

    16. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      If there was no possibility of the beta testers being fucked over like this, you wouldn't need to do a beta.

      It's a beta ffs. Of course this could happen. No software vendor in the world makes guarantees like the ones you are asking for in beta test.

      A-Frickin'-Men!!!

    17. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Or not forcing them to do a complete Fileystem transfer - Windows hasn't for 25 years and still works because why should it care (it'll default to a sane choice, of course)?

      That's because Windows USES a 25 year old Filesystem, because THEIR "new Filesystem" is still QUITE lame:

      https://arstechnica.com/gadget...

    18. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you interpret it.

      "APFS has issues with Fusion Drives": News.
      "OMFG! Apple is gonna make their beta testers reformat their drives! WTF, Apple, not supporting their own drives!": Not News.

      I gotta admit, I was kind of curious what APFS did with Fusion drives...

      Obviously nothing TOO bad; because those people were happily running APFS-formatted Fusion Drives in the Beta.

      I believe it's just because Apple does not want to roll-out APFS support on any drive that has a spinning-rust component. Not because of anything "bad"; but because the Performance Optimizations have so far been concentrated on SSD/Flash performance.

      Spinning-Rust optimizations will come later, probably with either a Point release in High Sierra, or the next major macOS release.

    19. Re: Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call it click-bait. Anything concerning Apple has been a wankfest for years. This is a wank-around session like all Apple topics on Slashdot. You should know, because you are one of the head clowns.

      All news about Apple products is entertainment. I watched most of the presenation last Tuesday because it sounded like it would be entertaining. It definitely WAS. Watching the guys rush through the Applephone 8 presentation so they could obsolete the thing with it's next gen replacement, all in one session, was funny. I just couldn't help thinking 'they just killed the Applephone 8 bedore selling a single unit!' I am sure I was not alone in thinking this during the presentation.

    20. Re:Uhm, That's kinda why it is called a BETA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. I ain't complaining. Back in July, I upgraded to APFS Fusion and forced it. I was hard headed and kept trying for a week even though there were warning signs. I mean kernel panics during install. I brushed it off as "too early to tell" and "It's just an early release".

      I finally got it up and running. My MBPro ran hot during heavy I/O. Really hot. I lived with it but when the news broke I went back to the old FS. Not complaining because... It is beta. I mean my biggest fear was having my production mac converted which I was not sure I wanted. I even debated leaving it on Sierra for a while after its release. I have never felt that way about updating to a new macOS version. Almost 25 years now.

      So that's pretty big. Right?

  5. But it just works! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except when it doesn't.

  6. Fusion drive by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having read a lot of 1950s and 1960s science fiction, I can confidently say that the usual fusion drive is operated by an engineer with a slide rule, not by a computer of any kind.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  7. Something must be wrong if they removed support by JoeyRox · · Score: 2

    You don't provide device support with a filesystem in a beta and then remove it in the GA release unless something significant was found wrong with it. Like fundamentally wrong with it rather than just a collection of bugs. If I was a beta tester with a fusion drive I would be rather worried now about the state of my data.

    1. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by OnceWas · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Also worrisome is that Time Machine won't back up to drives that have been upgraded to APFS.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy.
    2. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      No. It could be one bug that causes data loss and that hasn't been fixed.

      There's no need for beta testers to worry about their data because, of course, they didn't use this beta for anything critical did they....

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    3. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      I have no inside knowledge, but just based on all the other filesystems that have had trouble with older flash, there may be a firmware issue with TRIM on those drives.

      The nice thing about Apple kit is that, if they want to support the hardware, they can have their updater update the firmware on the drives when they have the bugs worked out.

      The not-so-nice thing about Apple is that they might just not feel like updating the firmware in those drives and labeling them as 'unsupported'. Sounds like they're going to do the right thing this time though.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      You don't provide device support with a filesystem in a beta and then remove it in the GA release unless something significant was found wrong with it. Like fundamentally wrong with it rather than just a collection of bugs. If I was a beta tester with a fusion drive I would be rather worried now about the state of my data.

      Funny how there has been ZERO horror-stories from ANYWHERE about APFS, regardless of the storage medium. Perhaps you need to dial-down your Hater quotient.

    5. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Also worrisome is that Time Machine won't back up to drives that have been upgraded to APFS.

      Wrong.

      Early versions of High Sierra Beta had issues with Time Machine and APFS Volumes; but those appear to be fixed.

      Otherwise, why would Apple's Instructions for REVERTING a Fusion Drive from APFS to HFS+ Start like this:

      "Apple provided a set of instructions to help those users convert their Fusion Drives back from APFS to the standard HFS+ format before installing the High Sierra update. The instructions include backing up data using Time Machine,"

    6. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

      I think you need to dial up your coherency quotient because your post makes absolutely no sense.

    7. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by _merlin · · Score: 1

      He said "wont back up to drives that have been upgraded to APFS" not "won't back up from drives that have been upgraded to APFS". Nothing implies that you can use Time Machine to back up to an APFS volume.

    8. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      He said "wont back up to drives that have been upgraded to APFS" not "won't back up from drives that have been upgraded to APFS". Nothing implies that you can use Time Machine to back up to an APFS volume.

      Learn to read.

    9. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by OnceWas · · Score: 1

      Nice try.

      As of the current macOS beta, you will get the following message is Time Machine tries to backup to an AFPS drive:

      "Time Machine couldn’t complete the backup. The backup disk is not in Mac OS Extended (Journaled) format, which is required."

      You can use Time Machine restore TO an AFPS drive, but you can not back up to an AFPS drive until Apple provides a fix.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy.
    10. Re:Something must be wrong if they removed support by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Nice try.

      As of the current macOS beta, you will get the following message is Time Machine tries to backup to an AFPS drive:

      "Time Machine couldn’t complete the backup. The backup disk is not in Mac OS Extended (Journaled) format, which is required."

      You can use Time Machine restore TO an AFPS drive, but you can not back up to an AFPS drive until Apple provides a fix.

      Oh, did I imply differently? If so, I apologize!

      Time Machine will NOT run ON an APFS drive (yet); but you CAN use an APFS drive as a SOURCE to BE Backed-Up.

  8. WTF is a "fusion drive?" by hackel · · Score: 0

    Last I heard, a fusion drive was a theoretical propulsion system for interplanetary spacecraft. I'm assuming this just means a hybrid SSD/mechanical drive? You know, the kind we've had for years and years? Fuck Apple and it's vile marketing department.

    Apple users continue to be fucking idiots.

    1. Re:WTF is a "fusion drive?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck Apple and it's vile marketing department.

      your spell check is fucked, maybe you should get a better computer, fucker

    2. Re:WTF is a "fusion drive?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fusion Drive" is a brand name for a paired hard disk and NAND flash drive. The logical volume manager in macOS binds them together as a single logical volume with a policy that it tracks usage of files, and more commonly accessed files are moved to the flash portion of the logical volume while less frequently accessed data is placed in the high-capacity storage portion of the logical volume. Multi-tier storage of that sort is a feature of certain types of a storage appliances, but you don't generally see that sort of thing on desktop computers. Windows and Linux have a notion of a caching mechanism (the Windows version is branded "ReadyBoost"), but it doesn't do the same thing or perform as well. The closest might be ZFS tiered storage on Linux/BSD/Solaris with L2ARC. For many uses, Fusion drive gives SSD-like performance with HD-capacity and cost.

      I suspect the reason Apple is not supporting APFS on Fusion drives right out of the box is because the logical volume approach poses some challenges when half the volume is flash and half is disk. Each have different optimization strategies for storage, and APFS stretched across a tiered logical volume like that is going to require some special modifications. People that used the beta probably suffered performance loss for lack of such optimization (maybe stability issues too). So, I think it's not 100% unreasonable that Apple would delay Fusion Drive support.

    3. Re:WTF is a "fusion drive?" by beckett · · Score: 1

      fucking idiots.

      i love how you consider other users "idiots" but can't even find a way to shoehorn a 'fusion drive' pun without being awkward and unfunny as hell.

      Fuck Apple

      Perhaps go back working on your "fusion drive" joke? that was the closest thing approaching "underrated" in your bizzare, non-sequitor rant.

  9. Link to Apple's note? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Apple provided a set of instructions to help those users convert their Fusion Drives back from APFS to the standard HFS+ format before installing the High Sierra update?

    Anyone know the link? Please provide...

  10. It's all about the features, people! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spinning rust does not provide all of the features flash does, features that are being used by APFS.
    So in the beta only the features could be used that are common to both flash and spinning harddisks.
    To take full advantage of the features of flash, the OS has to reside on flash storage. You can still use spinning disks, just not for booting High Sierra on APFS.

  11. Something must be wrong with your brain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I was a beta tester with a fusion drive I would be rather worried now about the state of my data.

    if you are a beta tester and you are worried about the state of your data:

    YOU WERE AN IDIOT FOR TRUSTING A BETA IN THE FIRST PLACE

  12. Typical! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All we want is for Apple to support our Mr. Fusion powered DeLorean time machine. Yet they refuse! How is Marty supposed to get Back to the Future unless the Fusion Drive is supported?!

    1. Re: Typical! by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Get out the Altivec Unit and twirl it's knob! Let's have a scsi risc time here! Fileststems with resouece forks! An SE/30 chugging alonside the Laserwriter as a Server!

      Cyberdog, me mateys!

  13. Fusion Drive? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Isn't that the thing you need to build if you want to build Battlecruisers?
    What's it got to do with Apple and file systems?

  14. Re: Something must be wrong if they removed suppor by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    People do idiotic things when they think they are being leading edge explorers. 'Beta' attracts the propellerhead contingent. I can't say I haven't been guilty of such foolishness in my indiscretionate earlier years.

    I remember the first Windows NT beta. I went for it hot and heavy. I actually spent $1200 on a new 486 (33 megahertz!) motherboard and 16 megs of ram for it. And I needed a CD-ROM drive, so I went straight to CompUSA and spent another $600 on the Sound Blaster Multimedia PC upgrade. That was a 1x propritary interface CD-ROM drive that plugged into a Sound Blaster Pro card. This was before the existence of IDE CD drives, the wiser option would have been an even more expensive SCSI setup.

    Anyhow, I went full-bore with the Windows NT beta install. I eagerly converted my hard drive full of all my 'stuff' (a 300 MB ESDI drive which was a serious piece of hardware in that era) to the NTFS. Then I discovered something interesting. The propritary Sound Blaster CD drive was supported for installing NT, but there was NO driver support for the drive once NT was installed. My fancy new multimedia CDROM PC was gimped completely. Being the young idiot I was at the time, I trashed it all, lost everything, and reverted back to the DOS.

    The only saving grace in the whole thing was that right after this, in the winter of 1993, Yggdrasil came out with their 'plug and play Linux' distribution (the first edition, with the white-cover manual printed with green and black ink), which worked fabulously on systems with the Sound Blaster Pro CDROM system. I was one of the first people in the world to boot up a commercial ready-for-consumers Linux and had a highly capable system to do it with. The Yggdrasil system booted from a floppy drive but then launched a live filesystem Linux off the CD-ROM. It played music at the login prompt and the demo sequence loaded an MPEG video on X11.

    Anyways, that is a diversion, but I never would have has the hardware just sitting there ready for Linux if NT hadn't been such a disaster for me.

  15. Go Back to my Alternative by tmjva · · Score: 1

    I'll have to use my fission drive then.

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT