Most reliable 17" MacBook Pro 2007-2011?

[Amethyst1]

So how does a dual display setup on the 13-inch 2011s work?

On the 13, the two DP streams piped into the TB controller do come from the HD3000 (i.e. if you attach two external displays, the internal one cuts out). The 15/17 is different.

The Mac mini M1 shipped with Big Sur 11.0.1 in November 2020.

And its daddy sneaked out with a pre-release.

 

[rampancy]

The 2009 MBPs all used GeForce 9 series chips, and for the most part they were very reliable. There were a couple issues with the 9400M when they launched, however it turned out to be a driver issue rather than a physical chip fault like the GeForce 8 series used in the 2007/2008 pre-unibody MBPs.

Ah right, I forget that some of them used the GeForce 9400m; I guess that when it comes to the 17" MBPs, I still think of the machines which used the GeForce 9400m and the GeForce 9600m.

So the 2011 Radeons are… OK…? /s

LOL. Point taken. But your point really does underline the fact that when it comes to long-term reliability, among the early Intel era 15"/17" MacBook Pros it's really hard to find a safe choice. And at least where I live, mid- and late-Intel era MacBook Pros are still prohibitively expensive.

You’re correct: it’s not a guarantee.

But generally, it’s a fairly reliable indicator to be one of the boards repaired under Apple’s watch, as they ate just enough crow to commission and pay vendors to do that work — ostensibly to have enough spares on hand so long as AppleCare plans on the A1226/A1229/A1260/A1261s were still in effect and/or their GPU/logic board replacement programme was still active. That meant having some kind of supply on hand through at least part of 2012 (if not a little bit later for edge situations).

Wanting to fact check myself, I went back to my original post and found a reply from @theMarble which said that apparently some early green dot replacement boards used the defective 602-revision GeForce 8800m chips (!?!?). Which means that for me, unless I were to get some kind of documentation as to when a given MBP's original owner got their motherboard replaced, I can't even be reassured that I'm getting a Mac with a GPU that won't horrifically die. (And maybe even that's not a guarantee; who's to say an AASP doing the repair in December 2008 didn't use a replacement board made in January?)

Maybe one day when I have the wherewithal I'll get the motherboard out of that POS Mac and actually see what kind of GPU it has.

Edit: Fixed the links to the @theMarble's reply and my post lamenting my dead green dot MBP.

 

[theMarble]

Ah right, I forget that some of them used the GeForce 9400m; I guess that when it comes to the 17" MBPs, I still think of the machines which used the GeForce 9400m and the GeForce 9600m.

All 17" 2009 models used both the 9400M and 9600M GT. The article you linked about the reported issues with the 9600M GT ended up being a driver issue. There was no physical fault with the chip(s).

LOL. Point taken. But your point really does underline the fact that when it comes to long-term reliability, among the early Intel era 15"/17" MacBook Pros it's really hard to find a safe choice. And at least where I live, mid- and late-Intel era MacBook Pros are still prohibitively expensive.

If you're talking long-term (and even short-term) reliability, you have to take off the vast majority of late-Intel MacBooks as well. Forgetting severe thermal issues, most suffered from keyboard and display cable failure, add on a handful that had SSD failure along with the former two, and the 12" MacBook which had a plethora of other faults.

Looking at Intel MBP models, once you take off every revision with some kind of major fault, you are only left with: Late 2006, Late 2008 (Unibody), 2009, Mid 2012, Late 2013, 2014 and 2015. Considering all of the MBP revisions made between 2006 and 2020, that list is very short.

Wanting to fact check myself, I went back to my original post and found a reply from @theMarble which said that apparently some early green dot replacement boards used the defective 602-revision GeForce 8800m chips (!?!?).

Yes, if memory serves the first units that were sent in for replacement GPU chips received 602s, and it wasn't until a couple months afterwards that the 603s were swapped in instead. I do recall seeing one or two people with 602-equipped green-dot MBPs.

The only way to find out for sure is to take out the logic board and look at what rev. number is etched onto the die.

 

[Amethyst1]

Looking at Intel MBP models, once you take off every revision with some kind of major fault, you are only left with: […] Late 2013, 2014 and 2015.

Staingate may be an issue on retina MBPs.

 

[B S Magnet]

If you're talking long-term (and even short-term) reliability, you have to take off the vast majority of late-Intel MacBooks as well. Forgetting severe thermal issues, most suffered from keyboard and display cable failure, add on a handful that had SSD failure along with the former two, and the 12" MacBook which had a plethora of other faults.

TIL “vast majority” is a synonym for “all”.

My deep fondness for the Cook-Federighi era runs lower than the Mariana Trench.

Looking at Intel MBP models, once you take off every revision with some kind of major fault, you are only left with: Late 2006, Late 2008 (Unibody), 2009, Mid 2012, Late 2013, 2014 and 2015. Considering all of the MBP revisions made between 2006 and 2020, that list is very short.

Early on notwithstanding, that retina displays could not be replaced unless Apple supplied and installed the part themselves (and forbid, under contract, the sale of those LCDs by LG to any other vendor, anywhere, forever), means even the rMBPs you listed are a nope, as well. (And that excludes the glass coating failing.) If you can’t maintain and service your own system (whether by design or by a soldered, known faulty part), that model belongs in the “compromised” pile.

So the list is: late 2006, late 2008, mid-2009, mid-2012, and fnord. (I took notice of the general premium for mid-2012 15-inch models last month; unless it’s torn to pieces, it seems to be holding up in value remarkably well. Just when Apple finally iron out everything… 🤦‍♀️ )

Yes, if memory serves the first units that were sent in for replacement GPU chips received 602s, and it wasn't until a couple months afterwards that the 603s were swapped in instead. I do recall seeing one or two people with 602-equipped green-dot MBPs.

These units are, relatively speaking, few in number against the 603 green dot revisions. These days, finding one randomly would be tantamount to finding an easter egg filled with, well, wombat cubes: it’d probably be something sold by someone, unaware of the replacement programme’s particulars, other than they remember they brought in that laptop to Apple years ago, long before they shoved it in a closet or box in the cellar after it stopped working a second time.

The only way to find out for sure is to take out the logic board and look at what rev. number is etched onto the die.

Someone should correct me on this if I’m wrong, but the revision number — 0x00a1 for the 603 — would be different in System Info (if one can boot to desktop):

 

[rampancy]

I took notice of the general premium for mid-2012 15-inch models last month; unless it’s torn to pieces, it seems to be holding up in value remarkably well. Just when Apple finally iron out everything… 🤦‍♀️

A quick look at a local buy/sell site for my city shows people selling their 2012 MacBook Pros (13" no less, not even 15") for $400-600.

What planet are these people from?

 

[rampancy]

Looking at Intel MBP models, once you take off every revision with some kind of major fault, you are only left with: Late 2006, Late 2008 (Unibody), 2009, Mid 2012, Late 2013, 2014 and 2015. Considering all of the MBP revisions made between 2006 and 2020, that list is very short.

And on top of that, there's the persistent internal SATA drive cable failures that have plagued the 13" 2011/2012 MacBook Pros.

 

[B S Magnet]

A quick look at a local buy/sell site for my city shows people selling their 2012 MacBook Pros (13" no less, not even 15") for $400-600.

What planet are these people from?

Planet Housing Shortage, obviously.

And on top of that, there's the persistent internal SATA drive cable failures that have plagued the 13" 2011/2012 MacBook Pros.

The design of the SATA drive cable in the 2009 and 2010 13-inch models isn’t terribly different, though. [And yes, I say this as someone who’s replaced the SATA cable twice on my ship of Theseus early 2011 13-inch model, but still…]

 

[Amethyst1]

And on top of that, there's the persistent internal SATA drive cable failures that have plagued the 13" 2011/2012 MacBook Pros.

I’m glad the retinas don’t have SATA cables then. 🤣

What planet are these people from?

The same as these.

 

[B S Magnet]

I’m glad the retinas don’t have SATA cables then. 🤣


The same as these.

Troll them by asking whether it comes with AppleCare…

 

[Amethyst1]

Troll them by asking whether it comes with AppleCare…

They'll reply it comes with AppleCouldn'tCareLess which is much better.

 

[B S Magnet]

They'll reply it comes with AppleCouldn'tCareLess which is much better.

“Great. Then there will be a €299 credit from the seller, nice to know…”