Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yes, and you can very likely compile that code on the 1995 computer and interface with programmer hardware to write that code to a physical chip on the 1995 computer. You can't do any of that on an iPad.

Not sure if you're trying to say my definition wouldn't include the 1995 computer or in what way you find the definition of computer unclear.
You can't only because Apple doesn't allow you you to do so on the iOS, the hardware is perfectly capable of it. You arguing its not a computer because it cant compile code is just absurd. Again, just stop with this drum beat .. you're wrong, it's okay, all of us are wrong many times in life.
 
Again this is just spreading nothing but fear. Not ALL M1 systems have this issue. And some Intel systems are having similar issues. So instead of people freaking out, lets just all get together and find the problematic app that is the cause of this.
How is me holding off spreading "fear". It's MY money....not xWhiplash's money and I'll hold off until I have further information, which if you actually read my post, you'd already know, I'm just waiting on more information until I drop a grand. I realize plenty of hipsters have no issues going into thousands in debt to have the latest and greatest from Apple, I'll hold off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ipponrg and mi7chy
Wow. There is so much of teh dumb in there I almost don't know where to begin.

I begin by pointing out you did precisely zero to refute that vicious pack of facts.

Secondly, you muddied the waters by introducing a completely different issue to the one I pointed out.

Third, you committed a sin of omission by neglecting to mention the shutdown issue was not for batteries capable of retaining 80% or greater of their original charge capacity. All batteries will degrade over time. All batteries will eventually fail to deliver the power the device needs to remain operational. This is was not, is not, and will never be an issue exclusive to Apple.

I could go on, but it is so easy it ceases to be sporting.
You may say whatever you want but the fact remains that only these particular models of iPhone (not any other phones, not iPhone models before or after those models) suffered this issue. Yes all phones start shutting down as the battery degrades. But it's not a black and white. The issue is how soon (into the battery life cycle) those iPhones started doing it and at high charge levels.
 
You may say whatever you want but the fact remains that only these particular models of iPhone (not any other phones, not iPhone models before or after those models) suffered this issue. Yes all phones start shutting down as the battery degrades. But it's not a black and white. The issue is how soon (into the battery life cycle) those iPhones started doing it and at high charge levels.
...aaaaaaaaaaand once again your construction of a strawman was flawless.

Once again you do not refute what I said.

Why are you here again?
 
My 2011 iMac SSD was at 81% remaining life, being turned on for 71 months. Roughly .25% degradation per month. Spinning drive finally crapped out last year.

I've been running my M1 2TB Mac mini for 48 power on hours. It's written 6.9TBs. I've barely used this computer although have copied 500GBs of photos across to it.
 
Internet browsing (edge & safari) and iMessage? How is it even possible to write 20TB of data that I never consumed. Something must be going really wrong with their swap (which I typically see at around 6GB).

Time Machine?
 
You should be backing up your data before the drive dies, because you should be doing it regularly anyway. Not doing so leaves you open to losing it all if the machine is stolen, dies in a house fire, something in the OS goes rogue and deletes/corrupts it, etc.

Yes but with a laptop I do backups maybe weekly or bi-weekly, if my computer suddenly dies mid-week that would really suck. If I had a Desktop then I can attach a USB to it and click backup everyday.
 
My 2011 iMac SSD was at 81% remaining life, being turned on for 71 months. Roughly .25% degradation per month. Spinning drive finally crapped out last year.

I've been running my M1 2TB Mac mini for 48 power on hours. It's written 6.9TBs. I've barely used this computer although have copied 500GBs of photos across to it.
71 months ... nonstop ?
 
Yes, and you can very likely compile that code on the 1995 computer and interface with programmer hardware to write that code to a physical chip on the 1995 computer. You can't do any of that on an iPad.

Not sure if you're trying to say my definition wouldn't include the 1995 computer or in what way you find the definition of computer unclear.
No my definition would include the iPad being considered a computer since I could just write the software in Notes. And again, not every single person is a developer. Does that mean video editors, or 3D modelers or music producers are not using computers, but the SECOND they launch Visual Studio its suddenly a computer?
 
...aaaaaaaaaaand once again your construction of a strawman was flawless.

Once again you do not refute what I said.

Why are you here again?
What did you say? That batteries degrade? What a revelation! But here is a surprise -phone designers know it and design accordingly. The fact remains that those iPhone models were the worst designed phones in terms of power management. Also the battery size was inadequate. Unless you are going to explain how all other phones manage to solve battery degradation problem without throttling.
 
When the battery goes below a certain amount they shut off, as opposed to keep on going.
Is not that obvious? Why did not Apple need to throttle in software all other models? Did not the battery go below "certain" level in those phones? Screwed up power management (could not handle power usage spikes) in combination with those power usage spikes was the problem.
 
Is not that obvious? Why did not Apple need to throttle in software all other models? Did not the battery go below "certain" level in those phones? Screwed up power management (could not handle power usage spikes) in combination with those power usage spikes was the problem.
My theory is the throttling is a good, preventive measure to make sure your phone is on given the situation. Android phones don't have power management (we'll maybe they do in 2021) and to my recollection they just shut off.

But to me I'd rather my phone throttle than to turn it off. (It doesn't always have to do with bad hardware, it could be your phone battery is very cold)
 
How is me holding off spreading "fear". It's MY money....not xWhiplash's money and I'll hold off until I have further information, which if you actually read my post, you'd already know, I'm just waiting on more information until I drop a grand. I realize plenty of hipsters have no issues going into thousands in debt to have the latest and greatest from Apple, I'll hold off.
Its fear because an unconfirmed claim is making you question your decisions. I can make a claim that Windows 10 will hack your bank account, will that make you hold off?
 
My theory is the throttling is a good, preventive measure to make sure your phone is on given the situation. Android phones don't have power management (we'll maybe they do in 2021) and to my recollection they just shut off.

But to me I'd rather my phone throttle than to turn it off. (It doesn't always have to do with bad hardware, it could be your phone battery is very cold)
All phones shut off when the battery goes too low. My theory is that A9 had significant power draw spikes (and I believe Anandtech said as much though I can't find their article now) and that was causing the shutdowns (at unreasonably high battery levels). Normally this should be handled by the power management circuitry but it was inadequate. The only remaining option for Apple in this situation was to preventively lower processor frequency thus reducing the power draw spikes. Another contributing factor was smallish battery (smaller than the ones in competing smartphones). It is likely that this fiasco pushed Apple to increase battery capacities in follow up models.
 
My M1 MBA yesterday finally arrived yesterday right after I saw this thread. I checked the PCIE SSD (WD Black 1T) on my 2010 Macpro which serves as the system drive since May 2019, and saw 15TB reading and writing over last 20 month. It seems that most M1 users here reported the same amount of reading and writing in just two month, which is clearly excessive. I believe that this is a software problem that can be fixed with next update of OS.

Now my brand-new laptop is sitting in its box and waiting for Apple to acknowledge the problem
I ordered one with full specs exactly one week before this issue was reported and I'm hesitating whether I should cancel the order considering the long delivery time of 3-4 weeks. I would hate to have the 2TB SSD fail prematurely if it turns out to be a serious bug instead of false readings. So I don't know what to do at this point... perhaps maintain my order but will leave the MBA in its box like you're doing and wait for Apple's reaction. I really didn't need that kind of stress after spending $2049 😐
 
I ordered one with full specs exactly one week before this issue was reported and I'm hesitating whether I should cancel the order considering the long delivery time of 3-4 weeks. I would hate to have the 2TB SSD fail prematurely if it turns out to be a serious bug instead of false readings. So I don't know what to do at this point... perhaps maintain my order but will leave the MBA in its box like you're doing and wait for Apple's reaction. I really didn't need that kind of stress after spending $2049 😐

On a positive note... larger SSDs have larger TBW tolerances.

So if a drive can fail from these excessive writes... your 2TB drive should survive longer than a 256GB drive.

At least that's the theory. Drives can fail at any time for a variety of reasons. Always have a backup!

No one actually knows exactly what's going on in this situation. We're all craving more information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carltabet
Apologies if this has already been covered, but I can't help but wonder what's with all the power cycling. 256 and 144 in two months, from less than an hour to barely 3 hours use per power cycle? Here's the primary SSD on one of my minis:

Screen Shot 2021-02-24 at 19.35.47.png
 
I made an account just to chime in regarding this issue. I just bought a 256 GB 8G Ram M1 MacBook Air a few weeks ago, and I'm concerned about this, as I do see quite a lot of swap being used when I check the activity monitor.
I called apple support to discuss and the agent said he had never heard of this issue at all.

I am sharing my results here, they aren't crazy like what some people have posted - this is after about 3.5 weeks of use since I got it, but I do run some intense applications like Figma (I know.. maybe 8gb wasn't the way to go). I don't quite understand all the readings especially regarding power cycles. My system information has confirmed that I only have about 10 charge cycles completed, which I know this from memory to be true. BUT this shows a much higher number (123?), and so now I am not sure how accurate the rest of these readings are?

Does anyone understand what's going on with the power reading - AND if this is normal wear for the SSD after just under a month or do I also have cause for concern?

Screen Shot 2021-02-24 at 11.29.48 PM.png
 
My system information has confirmed that I only have about 10 charge cycles completed, which I know this from memory to be true. BUT this shows a much higher number (123?), and so now I am not sure how accurate the rest of these readings are?

Do you have Energy Saver -> Put hard disks to sleep when possible selected? Wondering if that's considered a power cycle.
 
When do you guys think Apple will say something about this? an ETA from them would be nice.....so many potential buyers like myself are postponing our purchase.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.