Apparently for some but not widespread until Big Sur/M1So it's a bug that causes death-by-excessive-SSD-writing in a matter of months, but it's been a bug on MacOS going back years. 🤔
Apparently for some but not widespread until Big Sur/M1So it's a bug that causes death-by-excessive-SSD-writing in a matter of months, but it's been a bug on MacOS going back years. 🤔
I downloaded the native one.Does Edge is written natively for M1? If not, maybe Rosetta is the reason
I myself hardly use Safari i don,t like it.Until its fixed, i suggest anyone concerned switches from Safari which seems to be a culprit in SSD Swap writes with its excessive website caching, to a browser such as the beta M1 Microsoft Edge with The Great Suspender, or a similar tab suspension extension, to suspend your background unused tabs and not write them to cache.
The problem with safari is that even running a limited number of open tabs at once doesn't matter as it will write closed tabs to cache anyway. So you could have just one tab open at all times and still have high cache writes.
Absolutely terrible browser design by Apple in this latest udpate.
Safari with DuckDuckGo ))I myself hardly use Safari i don,t like it.
I use Brave and Firefox with Duck duck Go.![]()
I would like to know what programs were use as this is the more extreme we have seen. 98% gone in 4 months?! ouch.So his SSD failed after 4 months of usage. Ok now that is concerning....... everywhere I see (outside this forum), they say this issue is highly exaggerated.
I didn't have highest hopes for support, and I understand they'd be limited until an issue is announced, but at the same time, I'd expect at least a sense of concern that I'm telling them my machine is writing TB's an hour at peak use, instead of "Lol Apple uses great SSD's, don't worry about it, it will pretty much never die, these ain't the SSD's of the past." They gave me pretty much no options besides bring the PC in to run "diagnostics".^ Unless there is an official word from Apple, the best support can do is record the problem and give you an option to return the machine.
Standard operating procedure along with "well, I've never heard of that problem before." Apple will quietly fix this eventually and then deny it was ever an issue.I didn't have highest hopes for support, and I understand they'd be limited until an issue is announced, but at the same time, I'd expect at least a sense of concern that I'm telling them my machine is writing TB's an hour at peak use, instead of "Lol Apple uses great SSD's, don't worry about it, it will pretty much never die, these ain't the SSD's of the past." They gave me pretty much no options besides bring the PC in to run "diagnostics".
In fairness, it is not entirely clear whether these readings are accurate.I didn't have highest hopes for support, and I understand they'd be limited until an issue is announced, but at the same time, I'd expect at least a sense of concern that I'm telling them my machine is writing TB's an hour at peak use, instead of "Lol Apple uses great SSD's, don't worry about it, it will pretty much never die, these ain't the SSD's of the past." They gave me pretty much no options besides bring the PC in to run "diagnostics".
It has boiled down to that single question it seems. Pretty much every SSD makers these days log the Data Units Written column of SMART records in 1,000 of 512 Byte (512,000 Byte). A SMART reading utility particularly ones with GUI just do simple division and give you the meaningful conventional number unit, in this case TB (TeraBytes). One has to ask if Apple, given their SoC is now double duty as an SSD controller, also reports those numbers with the same base math. If it logs with a smaller increment, this explain the magnitude of seemingly high wear levels since the calculation would be inversely larger.In fairness, it is not entirely clear whether these readings are accurate.
Is this normal?I just downloaded and installed Microsoft Edge browser, just to test how it’s handling resources.
But what I found was intriguing.Can anyone tell me why 2.4GB was written to drive?
The installation file was 200mb.
The app itself 800mb.
But I measured TBW with DriveDx and delta was 2.4 GB 😀
Also this is something that only seems to happen to some people and so far we don't have a clear pattern. Some have reported about 1% since December and then there is that one person that reported over 90% in 4 months. Heck, we aren't even sure that it is Apple's software that is the problem.In fairness, it is not entirely clear whether these readings are accurate.
They would say that as it is not there product.Hey guys, just wanted to add my experience. I installed DriveDx after seeing my Kernel task writing terabytes a day. According to the app I have lost 9% of my SSD lifespan in the month that I've had this 8GB/256GB MacAir M1. I called Apple and spoke to multiple people and none could provide me with an answer and one tech told me not to worry about writing terabytes per day to my SSD and that the DriveDx uses "blackmagic" to calculate and shouldn't be trusted. Needless to say, I'm quite concerned. I see it writing the most when using apps like Lightroom. This is my first Mac.
Meaning that you don't have a problem?but mine is nvme as well...
In a word, yes.After reading all this I am worried to even use my new macbook am I being silly?
No issues on my 2020 MBP 10 Gen intel. In fact it never uses the swap file from what I've observed...It seems Big Sur really means Big Surprise. Looks like Apple knew something from the start ...![]()