Whether or not Apple condones it, it's literally user replaceable.
Now the MacStudio's removable SSD is not user replaceable.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why Apple don't use NVME m2 slot for mac mini/mac studio
- Thread starter ewu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now the MacStudio's removable SSD is not user replaceable.
Yup. I’ve got a 1TB 3rd party SSD in my 2015 13” MBP.
Appreciate the storage, but it also drains battery on sleep no matter what (known issue with that particular SSD).
It's a regular NVMe port.
SSD Upgrades for 2013, 2014, and 2015 MacBook Pro
Upgrade the SSD of any 2013-2015 MacBook Pro for up to 16x the capacity of the original factory drive. Kit includes all tools needed for DIY installation.
eshop.macsales.com
OWC makes SSD’s specifically for Apples non standard M.2 pin out. If you went with literally any other manufacturer you’d have to use the adapter. You picked the one straightforward swap out product.It's a regular NVMe port.
SSD Upgrades for 2013, 2014, and 2015 MacBook Pro
Upgrade the SSD of any 2013-2015 MacBook Pro for up to 16x the capacity of the original factory drive. Kit includes all tools needed for DIY installation.
The OWC Aura Pro X2 SSD Review: An NVMe Upgrade For Older Macs
The iFixit kit uses a Samsung SSD. Regardless, even if you need an adapter the SSD is user replaceable.OWC makes SSD’s specifically for Apples non standard M.2 pin out. If you went with literally any other manufacturer you’d have to use the adapter. You picked the one straightforward swap out product.
The OWC Aura Pro X2 SSD Review: An NVMe Upgrade For Older Macs
www.anandtech.com
Another big problem, is the internal SSD wearing out especially in the case of cache writes, or when doing AI work which increase the number of writes to the SSD.
This is one of the reasons i am still attempting to run macOS off of an external thunderbolt drive (4 in this case), which has worked well in the past, especially in 2018 macs. For some reason the m2 seems to have problems, as gatekeeper does not respond, and the Mac does not allow kernel access on the external drive, such as when trying to add known developers with reduced security, in order to run FOSS or my own applications.
The moment you run everything back on the internal drive, everything just works!
I already have confirmation from the apple engineering team that this is not expected behaviour, but highlights a big problem for any one doing serious (for work and the like) programming.
Not practical, especially as more and more people will be moving to develop AI integrated software, or create their own on the mac, (there is a nural engine in them after all), one steps forward and 2 steps (intergrated ram and SSD) back?
I cannot help but feel that apple may be leaving money on the table not catering to this with replaceable SSD a minimum in all their SoC skews moving forward IMO. Otherwise even the most loyal may move to alternative more flexible systems.
It’s disappointing, as I have been a Mac loyalist for some time, but even I cannot ignore this.
This is one of the reasons i am still attempting to run macOS off of an external thunderbolt drive (4 in this case), which has worked well in the past, especially in 2018 macs. For some reason the m2 seems to have problems, as gatekeeper does not respond, and the Mac does not allow kernel access on the external drive, such as when trying to add known developers with reduced security, in order to run FOSS or my own applications.
The moment you run everything back on the internal drive, everything just works!
I already have confirmation from the apple engineering team that this is not expected behaviour, but highlights a big problem for any one doing serious (for work and the like) programming.
Not practical, especially as more and more people will be moving to develop AI integrated software, or create their own on the mac, (there is a nural engine in them after all), one steps forward and 2 steps (intergrated ram and SSD) back?
I cannot help but feel that apple may be leaving money on the table not catering to this with replaceable SSD a minimum in all their SoC skews moving forward IMO. Otherwise even the most loyal may move to alternative more flexible systems.
It’s disappointing, as I have been a Mac loyalist for some time, but even I cannot ignore this.
That’s a long way to go for a hypothetical problem that doesn’t seem to be manifesting itself.
Ahem...
Mac Pro
Mac Pro with M2 Ultra combines our most capable Apple silicon yet with PCIe expansion for the ultimate in workstation-class performance.
www.apple.com
Furthermore...
There is evidence SSDs, including what NAND Apple utilizes, can potentially endure petabytes of data writing.
And this — defects aside, of course — typically increases with NAND capacity and free space. For example, if your storage needs, including caches, are ~1TB but you have an 8TB SSD, that’s a lot of extra cells padding for wear. Is that economical? Maybe. As a professional (i.e., profit) that’s part of the expense you need in your financial calculations.
Anyway… Back to the real topic...
Look at the choices and stop trying to swap/merge them, and you’ll have an easier time. If you prefer/need macOS, see advantages of an SOC, gain convenience in Apple’s wide ecosystem, and have the financial means, buy a Mac. If you enjoy tinkering/modding, are not dismayed by troubleshooting, have extra time/flexible schedule, and only see value in literal costs (e.g., individual component price tags), then “build” a PC. If taking time away from your core task (e.g., photographer, bookkeeper, etc) is problematic, you don’t have great PC component knowledge, buy a “prebuilt”/configurable PC (e.g., AVADirect, Digital Storm, Puget Systems).
In other words, stop trying to make a Mac a traditional PC, an iPhone a Samsung Galaxy, iOS into Android, etc, these are the options — and there’s no such thing, nor can there ever be, a device that provides every functionality, definitely not perfectly.
HI NT1440, Thanks for the response.
Please can you let me know how this problem is hypothetical?
All SSDs have a finite amount of life, which is stated by manufacturers to be TBW or Total Bytes Written capacity within warranty documentation. Research continues in industry to extend SSD life as much as physics will allow. So i am confused how this is hypothetical?
Perhaps your set up does not produce that many writes?
Please let me know how you maximise the life of your Mac SSD, is there something you can recommend i try?
Some ref for you regarding TBW.
Understanding SSD endurance: drive writes per day (DWPD), terabytes written (TBW), and the minimum recommended for Storage Spaces Direct | Microsoft Community Hub
Measuring wear is one thing, but how can we predict the longevity of an SSD?
techcommunity.microsoft.com
An Introduction to TBW - Terabytes Written - Embedded Computing Design
Terabytes Written, or TBW, is the total amount of terabytes data that a Solid-State Drive (SSD) can write in its lifetime.
embeddedcomputing.com
Last edited:
Hi MacCheetah3,Ahem...
Mac Pro
Mac Pro with M2 Ultra combines our most capable Apple silicon yet with PCIe expansion for the ultimate in workstation-class performance.www.apple.com
Furthermore...
There is evidence SSDs, including what NAND Apple utilizes, can potentially endure petabytes of data writing.
And this — defects aside, of course — typically increases with NAND capacity and free space. For example, if your storage needs, including caches, are ~1TB but you have an 8TB SSD, that’s a lot of extra cells padding for wear. Is that economical? Maybe. As a professional (i.e., profit) that’s part of the expense you need in your financial calculations.
Anyway… Back to the real topic...
Look at the choices and stop trying to swap/merge them, and you’ll have an easier time. If you prefer/need macOS, see advantages of an SOC, gain convenience in Apple’s wide ecosystem, and have the financial means, buy a Mac. If you enjoy tinkering/modding, are not dismayed by troubleshooting, have extra time/flexible schedule, and only see value in literal costs (e.g., individual component price tags), then “build” a PC. If taking time away from your core task (e.g., photographer, bookkeeper, etc) is problematic, you don’t have great PC component knowledge, buy a “prebuilt”/configurable PC (e.g., AVADirect, Digital Storm, Puget Systems).
In other words, stop trying to make a Mac a traditional PC, an iPhone a Samsung Galaxy, iOS into Android, etc, these are the options — and there’s no such thing, nor can there ever be, a device that provides every functionality, definitely not perfectly.
Thank you for your response!
Are their any journal articles or warranty / technical docs from apple which show this?
Also regarding the Mac Pro, while i definitely want this, i cannot justify the cost to my supervisor! ^^;;
I would love that beast of a machine sitting on my table with pride!
I defiantly agree that there are a tone of advantages to the mac SOC, the problem is the use case i have (ML, Deep learning, Ai), which are guaranteed to produce allot of writes on the SSD, so a more robust solution is needed, as i wish to extend the life of my little silver wonder (mac mini m2 pro) as much as possible.
Apple Silicon Macs have been out for a couple of years now, and yet we have no reports of widespread SSD failures. While Apple does not disclose the endurance of SSDs they use, so far it appears that they might be comparable to enterprise–class. It is also worth noting that the NAND chips Apple uses are custom parts and do not appear in any official catalogues. They might be massively over–provisioned for all we know.
Additionally, I’d like to point your attention to the fact that Apple offers an unlimited subscription–like extended warranty for newer models. This shows their confidence in the SSD endurance – if the SSDs were expected to fail before 6 years they would be losing money on AppleCare+.
All very true, and definitely the case of normal users.
I know for a fact that my project (ml, deep learning) will 100% increase the number of writes on the SSD, meaning i would be changing the Mac mini m2 pro every 3 - 6 months, and an investment (excess) of 79 - 229 every 3 - 6 months.
I think for my use case, the external SSD would make more sense, and while apple does offer this with the more pricier models ( I want them so bad! ) there is always budget to consider.
Did you have the SSD fail on you before? I don't understand your excess figures calculation.
Hi Leman,
Thanks for the reply.
To answer your question regarding SSD failure, yes, many many times over the years with many different types such as NVME, NAND, 3d NANAD etc.
Once the max TBW have been reached or close to, the drive fails. Usually with common builds this goes well beyond the years offered by the drive manufacturer. But in the case of ML, the writes are guaranteed to be allot higher sooner.
Regarding excess: This is the amount that i would need to pay under AppleCare + to replace the Mac Mini m2 pro.
The 3 - 6 months are an estimate on when the TBW would be reached, related to the project i am doing.
The amount of writes performed in machines learning is notoriously excessive, and as such will bump up TBW of any SSD used meaning a higher chances of drive failure, sooner.
I have to account for this in the report i am writing, and when i show my findings, if i did not and their was unnecessary delays or cost, my supervisor will tear me a new one.
Apologies, my question was not precise anough. You appear to be talking about third-party SSDs. But what I want to know is whether the internal SSD on your M2 Mini Pro ever fail on you?
AppleCare+ for a a Mac mini M2 Pro is $34.99 per year. This includes unlimited warranty on your SSD for no additional charge. I don't understand how you arrive at the numbers you quote.
What's your estimated TB written/month?
Hi Leman,
Thanks for the reply.
Regarding “whether the internal SSD on your M2 Mini pro ever fail on you?” No as I have not let it, and don’t want it to. It is a cost that i cannot aford to observe, and then pay out and wait to be resolved for. I need a reliable system now, and i am doing everything i can to keep the mac mini m2 pro reliable.
Regarding: not “understand how you arrive at the numbers you quote”
Please see ref: https://www.apple.com/uk/support/products/mac/
Scroll down to “ Enjoy peace of mind when you buy AppleCare+ for Mac” and you will see 4th and 5th line mention “Excess fee of £79 for screen damage or external enclosure damage, or £229 for other accidental damage.” Now these terms will be down to the person assessing my claim to determine. So cannot be ignored as a potential.
NOTE: other regions may have different policies, excess and costs. So not all regions will be the same, and may be down to whom ever is under writing apple.
Regarding: “what’s your estimated TB written/month?”
2,500tb and that is with feeding the model and with re-enforcement learning. Note: not all data will be kept on the SSD, only the date that is being processed by the model at that time will be on the SSD. The result is then kept on mechanical hard drives. The SSD will be used to process the data, as it is faster then mechanical Hdds.
While not directly related, please refer to this journal article regarding the reliability of data on SSDs as they age. It is a proposal for a frame that can be used to determine SSD wear, and it acknowledges the importance of reliable data in ML.
Ref: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3538643.3539757
Apple has been using a very similar way of booting since Intel. I believe it goes back to T1 or T2 Macs? Theres a fascinating video on how the boot process works from DEFCON I believe in 2018 or 2019.
I’d encourage you to give it a look.
I don’t want to negate anything you are saying by any means. Yes, it’s possible if someone is having an off day the person quoting for the repair maybe swayed one way over another, and region policies do need to be kept in mind.
Generally, in the states, if something is clearly dead and has AppleCare+ a Genius at the Genius Bar would have it replaced. There is still the factor of time which I can appreciate.
↑ integration, ↑ speed, ↓ size, ↓ connection failures
And don't forget that Apple makes its margins with selling upgrades to the base price.
And don't forget that Apple makes its margins with selling upgrades to the base price.
Last edited:
Is the solution for your use case not to use fast external SSD's over Thunderbolt/USB 4 (up to 40Gb/s). TBH if writing so much data at that rate you need a more robust solution as doubt Apple envisaged a Mac Mini being used so heavily. Studio has replaceable storage albeit proprietary to Apple as does the Mac Pro.
Q-6
Why are you quoting accidental damage? How is the internal drive failure related to the accidental damage (protection)?
So, in other words, you do not have an empirical estimate and your statements about the storage endurance of Apple SSDs is mere speculation.
„Accidental damage„ is precisely defined by the insurance terms as physical damage due to handling or external event. Internal component failures are not accidental damage. At most they could argue that a failed SSD is wear and tear. But that will be hard given they never advertise any limits.
Wait a moment, 2,500TB? As in, two thousand five hundred TBs? Assuming 24/7 operation that's almost 1GB/s continuous writes to storage! That is an absolutely insane figure that will require specialised enterprise-level equipment. Discussing these kind of needs in the context of a personal computer storage is like comparing logistic capabilities of a family car to that of an industrial port.
TBH this was my first thought as those I know in a similar position utilise Enterprise Cloud solutions or in the event of a large organisation their own specific Enterprise level HW and again generally in the Cloud.
Q-6