|
Choadmaster posted:Both of these happened to me. With the first one, what exactly makes you think it was a "dud part"? Two failures in a row, makes it sounds like it was on your end. People have these horror stories and usually 99% of the time I can track it down to something THEY did wrong. Just sayin'. But who cares? Don't use it if you don't want to.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 03:51 |
|
|
Pivo posted:With the first one, what exactly makes you think it was a "dud part"? Two failures in a row, makes it sounds like it was on your end. You know what they say about assumptions - you're a dick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:You know what they say about assumptions - you're a dick. I may be a dick but I'm also often right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Sorry for the de-rail, I only meant to say eBay is a sellers market for MacBooks and I find better deals on other forums and CL, so I'd personally rather buy there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Pivo posted:I may be a dick but I'm also often right. 1. You're not. 2. Either way, it's totally irrelevant to the point that the eBay/Paypal's 45 day limits allow sellers to screw you over without recourse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
I ended up talking a guy down off of Craigslist for a 2008 Unibody macbook from 450$ to 350$. I think I did *fairly* well all things considered.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
I have a standard USB external HD formatted in exFAT since I use it on both a PC and a Mac. It's been a while since I've used it and while it was recognized by the PC just fine, I had to use the Disk Doctor utility to verify it before I could mount in on my rMBP. It seems to be working fine, is there probably some relatively minor problem with the drive?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
Is there a major difference between the current MBP keyboards and the 2009 MBP keyboards asides such as size or layout of keyboard? I don't care if the labels are different, I just need a keyboard cover. A friend recommended this cover but it says it's only compatible with the 2013 MBPs. I'm comparing the two keyboards but I don't see a difference asides from the F3, F4 and new power button on the eject button.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
keevo posted:Is there a major difference between the current MBP keyboards and the 2009 MBP keyboards asides such as size or layout of keyboard? I don't care if the labels are different, I just need a keyboard cover. A friend recommended this cover but it says it's only compatible with the 2013 MBPs. I'm comparing the two keyboards but I don't see a difference asides from the F3, F4 and new power button on the eject button. I don't think so, I've seen other covers listed as being compatible with specific models (by inches) rather than years. That said, if you're looking for covers I'll also recommend the cover I bought for mine since it's listed as fitting all non-retina 13 MBP models.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
Finally got around to applying my matte Best Skins Ever total body skin to my Retina MBP since I have a couple days of not needing the laptop (need to let the skin dry). I'm extremely happy with it, as I've been with all of BSE's products (I think this is the 6th or 7th skin I've purchased from them). I was a bit worried that the greatly increased surface area of a 15" laptop as opposed to an iPhone or an iPad would make it harder to get bubbles out, but it looks perfect. Ever since they started offering the matte skin option, I can't recommend it enough for Apple's aluminum products. It doesn't give your device that plastic-y look that most skins do. It's great at preventing incidental nicks and scratches, and gives me a bit more piece of mind about setting it on uneven, hard-edged workspaces (like the little fold-out desks in lecture halls). I've had Speck products on my 13" Apple laptops in the past to prevent scratches, but after reading a ton of terrible reviews for the 15" rMBP hard cases, I opted to give the BSE skin a shot. I am not disappointed. I'll take some proper pictures in a day or so once I'm sure it's dried nicely. I'm also curious to see if it affects the laptops temperatures at all, since the skin might act as an insulator against the aluminum body. I can't imagine it's any worse than the plastic/rubber hard cases though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Thanks everyone for the SSD advice. I ended up getting a samsung 512gb and holy living gently caress my machine is screaming fast now. Absolutely worth every drat penny. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Did anyone ever make protective covers for the 2006-2008 non-unibody MBPs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
2008 MBP with maxed Ram. Should I get a cheap 240G SSD or 1T SSHD? I'm going to be bottlencked a bit by SATA-I/II(?). Not sure what its going to be used for. Likely Lightroom and some audio editing for now. Space isn't a big issue between 240/1T. Just not sure if the SATA limit is going to make the SSD less appealing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:2008 MBP with maxed Ram. You'll be bottlenecked for max bandwidth stuff but the biggest improvement in user experience is the latency/random I/O improvement, which is still noticeable on slower connections (hell, even FireWire and USB to an extent).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Are Time Capsules still the best option for network backups with Time Machine and file storage? Are there more affordable refurb models that are pretty much just as good, or is it worth it to shell out for the current version? If the hard drive fails, is it going to be a huge pain to get inside and replace it? Does it take a 2.5" or 3.5"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
It's a 3.5" disk, and they are perfect for set-and-forget network backups. A lot of NAS boxes claim Time Machine support, but with varying levels of success. Current gen vs. previous gen depends on whether you want or need 802.11ac.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Caged posted:It's a 3.5" disk, and they are perfect for set-and-forget network backups. A lot of NAS boxes claim Time Machine support, but with varying levels of success. I would personally not use a TIme Machine for a back up device. The Time Machine system is pretty decent, although it weirdly throws errors that can only be fixed by a complete redo of the entire backup, but the lack of RAID in the device is a huge negative. There's a ton of BYOD NAS' that do Time Machine easily but allow you to install a bunch of disks. Typically, GB/Dollar ratio is much cheaper if you get your own NAS. I purchased a D-Link 320 nas (the specific model is discontinued) and then a could of matching 1TB drives. I found one used on SA-Mart, and then purchased a new one on Amazon. The total cost was a little less than the cost of a Time Machine. Of course you don't get a WAP as well, but having RAID in my backup solution is worth it. Also, if you are setting up a backup topology for your house, you should always remember that your data should be in at least three places, and one of those places should be geographically removed from the others. A local time machine is a good start, but you should really consider a cloud backup service, like BackBlaze, CrashPlan, or something like it. A lot of them only cost a few dollars a month and are completely worth it. Data loss is not a matter of "if" but it's a matter of "when".
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:I would personally not use a TIme Machine for a back up device. The Time Machine system is pretty decent, although it weirdly throws errors that can only be fixed by a complete redo of the entire backup, but the lack of RAID in the device is a huge negative. There's a ton of BYOD NAS' that do Time Machine easily but allow you to install a bunch of disks. Typically, GB/Dollar ratio is much cheaper if you get your own NAS. I purchased a D-Link 320 nas (the specific model is discontinued) and then a could of matching 1TB drives. I found one used on SA-Mart, and then purchased a new one on Amazon. The total cost was a little less than the cost of a Time Machine. Time Machine = software backup system part of Mac OS X Time Capsule = hardware device sold by Apple that acts as both a wireless router and storage device Time Machine ≠ Time Capsule It's a quick and easy backup solution that Apple offers for people who want to back up wirelessly. It's not intended nor advertised as can't-fail-ever mission critical enterprise backup. Its for people who get scared by the words NAS, Synology, or Drobo. Binary Badger fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
I just use a Time Capsule and then put very important things like photographs and documents on Amazon S3. If something managed to destroy both my apartment and Amazon's data centre, I doubt files will be a huge concern.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:Time Machine = software backup system part of Mac OS X Thanks for the correction on the terminology. I'd still avoid any backup device that did not have RAID in it. It's advertised as a magical perfect backup. http://www.apple.com/airport-time-capsule/?target=apple/airporttimecapsule posted:It works with Time Machine in OS X to back up your Mac automatically and wirelessly, so you never have to worry about losing anything important again. Actually you do, since the Time Capsule doesn't have redundant drives and it doesn't have any tools for an offsite backup. There's no reason for it not having two drives in it. It could still be transparent and user friendly but still adhere to one of the most very basic requirement for a solid backup system, redundancy, either internally (RAID) or offsite via replication. If you just buy it and set it up as your only backup method, you are really asking for disaster. Pivo posted:I just use a Time Capsule and then put very important things like photographs and documents on Amazon S3. Exactly, you have your data in three places. 1) Your laptop, 2) Time Capsule, and 3) Amazon offsite cloud. That's a sound backup solution. Super-NintendoUser fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:Exactly, you have your data in three places. 1) Your laptop, 2) Time Capsule, and 3) Amazon offsite cloud. That's a sound backup solution. I think what Apple realizes is that most people don't consider their personal computers "mission critical" and so having a backup on one other drive is good enough. The chance of both of them failing at the same time is pretty low, and nobody really thinks that losing their files is the biggest problem if your house burns down or something. On the other hand if they're only on one drive, it's highly likely you'll lose them eventually. It really is good enough. I'm just anal about my photos since they're like a record of my life, so that's why the offsite.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Pivo posted:I think what Apple realizes is that most people don't consider their personal computers "mission critical" and so having a backup on one other drive is good enough. The chance of both of them failing at the same time is pretty low, and nobody really thinks that losing their files is the biggest problem if your house burns down or something. On the other hand if they're only on one drive, it's highly likely you'll lose them eventually. It really is good enough. I'm just anal about my photos since they're like a record of my life, so that's why the offsite. I get that, but for a tech company that sets trends and sells a product labeled "the only backup device you'll ever need", it really needs to produce a product with atleast RAID and an offsite option.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
I would say for the average user Time Capsules are a perfectly fine backup solution. The odds that your computer(s) & Time Capsule will bite the dust at the same time are extremely low. I'm not saying investing in other backup solutions isn't worth it, but the convenience of the Time Capsule is hard to beat. Apple has a habit of randomly breaking third party solutions too. The Airport Extreme or Time Capsule are also one of the best consumer routers you can buy. It just works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
The 2TB Time Capsule is also more compact and comes with 802.11ac too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
I also like how they have dual radios so your stupid friends with their stupid devices that don't do 5GHz can still post selfies from your bathroom
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
The likelihood that your computer hard drive and a single Time Machine drive will die simultaneously (fire excepted) is low. The likelihood of simultaneous drive failure in a RAID array is actually *higher* (more drives == more chance of failure) though (depending on your setup) you can recover from loss of a single drive. However, if you're not careful to source your RAID drives from different batches your chances of simultaneous failure are higher than random chance (ask me how I learned that one  ). RAID isn't a magic failure-proof solution. It also doesn't protect you from the aforementioned fire risk. IMO a local TM backup (RAID or not) should always be complemented by a cloud or other offsite backup (Crashplan or whatever you like). Because I'm paranoid, I also have a set of backup drives I keep offsite with friends, updating them periodically (every month or two, I'm too lazy for more than that).
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:The likelihood of simultaneous drive failure in a RAID array is actually *higher* (more drives == more chance of failure) though (depending on your setup) you can recover from loss of a single drive. However, if you're not careful to source your RAID drives from different batches your chances of simultaneous failure are higher than random chance (ask me how I learned that one What? No. You are talking about RAID0, in which you have two drives stripped for speed. In RAID1 or 5, like a backup solution should use, the drives are mirrored. It makes data loss half as likely. I also didn't say RAID was a magic failure-proof solution. I said any backup hardware that is marketed as a "you'll never have to worry" should at the very least include drive redundancy and an option to sync up with offsite storage. EDIT: Also, if you are talking about RAID failure, there's situations in which if you lose the RAID controller then your RAID1 mirrored disks are not readable. However, there's also setups where if lose the controller or a disk you can easily read from the good disk. The risk of a controller is about the same as losing the Time Capsule, so that risk washes out as equal, and then you are left with the odds of losing one disk or two disks. If Apple did RAID in their Time Capsules (like they should) there's no reason they shouldn't also deploy it in a transparent manner to users, and if a drive dies the other drive can take over and also allow a resync to a replacement drive. Super-NintendoUser fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
Bah my friend just spilled a whole water bottle on her MBP. It automatically shut off. Girl calls me crying... I told her to leave it upside down to dry out, not to try to plug it in or turn it on for at least 3 days, put any desiccant packages or rice she has around it... Speaking of backups, guess who doesn't have any? Right before finals. She says she's going to take it to Apple right away, but they're just going to tell her to replace the mainboard. Maybe it just shorted and cut power and could still survive. I know her hard drive likely will, I can help her get data off that, but jeez. People should stop buying expensive portable devices when you can't afford to replace them. :/ Or buy insurance. Dunno how this is really relevant to this thread, but since we were talking about backups.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
For most people a single external HD backup that is automatically always up-to-date is fine. Something that takes out your computer and your Time Capsule at the same time is probably also going to take out your huge box full of redundant HDs. Apple would be better off pushing their own iCloud-based Time Machine backup plan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
withak posted:Apple would be better off pushing their own iCloud-based Time Machine backup plan. Agreed. As for Raid Time Capsules... they don't have enough John Ive's to throw at that design problem. Relying on regular consumers (the target audience for the Time Capsule) to replace dead drives would be a support nightmare. If someone is using a Time Capsule in an enterprise environment they get what they deserve. They would likely be using OS X server for Time Machine backups anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Jerk McJerkface posted:What? No. You are talking about RAID0, in which you have two drives stripped for speed. In RAID1 or 5, like a backup solution should use, the drives are mirrored. It makes data loss half as likely. Let's say you have a RAID5 array with 6 drives You could lose any 2 drives and then you're hosed. Losing one drive won't hurt you, though. You have 6 potential drives you could lose, I don't know statistics but I'm thinking with 3x the drives to lose (compared to a mirrored set of 2 drives) you have a better chance of losing 2 drives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Oh My Science posted:Relying on regular consumers (the target audience for the Time Capsule) to replace dead drives would be a support nightmare. True, but right now they aren't relying on consumers to service a dead drive in their single drive Time Capsules. So the only thing that would change is instead of the consumer bringing the Time Capsule into an Apple store when it's completely dead, they would bring it in (or not bring it in) when they get a message that one of their drives is dying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:True, but right now they aren't relying on consumers to service a dead drive in their single drive Time Capsules. So the only thing that would change is instead of the consumer bringing the Time Capsule into an Apple store when it's completely dead, they would bring it in (or not bring it in) when they get a message that one of their drives is dying. I'll go out on a limb and say that: A) Most people will ignore those messages until both drives are dead. If it still works who cares! Click ok. B) Most drives will outlast the 1 year warranty and people will bitch and moan that it's not a free replacement, then go with A. C) It's like using a Sledgehammer to drive a nail. Yeah, they could do it... but the audience for that sorta thing is pretty small.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Oh My Science posted:I'll go out on a limb and say that: I'd argue using a single drive in a backup device is like using a tiny toy hammer to drive a nail. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Cool are we done arguing about backup methodologies now?
Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Mar 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Cool are we done arguing about backup methodologies now? But today is world backup day!  http://www.worldbackupday.com/en/
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Back to my 2008 MBP 4.1. So I have a spare 240G Samsung 840 Pro laying around. Wasted on the MBP 4.1? Other options would be a 1T hybrid drive or 2T standard drive (both $100 options I'm willing to go for).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
An SSD is still an excellent upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Are the anti glare films on the market any good? Especially the 'lite' ones which degrade the image minimally? Seems like it might kill any resolution gains from retina displays.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 03:51 |
|
|
I am in the market for a MacBook Air and would like a little advice on when to buy. Assuming the new models will be released in June, I should wait until then, correct? I don't have an immediate need and this will be my first Mac.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 21:23
|
|
