Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #67937 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-12-28 21:54 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-01-02 20:55 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 95 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-28 21:54 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-28 23:58 -0700
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-28 23:31 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 09:00 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-30 13:45 -0600
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 04:34 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-30 00:37 +1300
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 15:12 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 17:51 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 22:58 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 18:24 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 23:34 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 15:05 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-31 01:08 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-30 20:17 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-12-29 23:26 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 23:09 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 18:26 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-29 18:32 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 23:36 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 18:55 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-29 19:08 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 15:08 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-30 20:03 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-31 01:45 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-12-30 22:29 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-31 00:58 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-31 13:56 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-31 16:50 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-31 22:10 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-31 17:44 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-01 00:16 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-01 01:07 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-01 16:10 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2015-01-01 22:04 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-02 03:24 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-31 00:56 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-31 14:01 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-30 00:25 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 21:07 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-30 03:32 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-30 09:41 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-30 16:42 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 21:15 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-30 03:37 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-30 02:36 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-29 11:53 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-30 00:37 +1300
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? David Fritzinger <email@domain.com> - 2014-12-29 11:40 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2014-12-31 02:18 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 23:28 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 15:11 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 08:43 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 16:59 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-12-29 09:22 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-12-29 12:32 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 21:13 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-29 10:41 -0700
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2014-12-28 23:51 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 08:59 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 06:34 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 06:45 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-12-29 10:31 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-29 09:24 -0700
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 08:48 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-29 10:42 -0700
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 11:57 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 20:09 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-12-29 12:55 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-29 17:51 -0700
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 17:53 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-12-29 12:59 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 23:14 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-29 17:47 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 22:56 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 23:16 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-12-29 18:03 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-12-30 18:41 +1300
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2015-01-01 14:47 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-01 17:53 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-29 23:11 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 18:54 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-31 08:23 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-31 17:43 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-12-29 09:16 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-29 10:05 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-29 15:09 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Piso Mojado <conserje@trapeador.net> - 2014-12-29 17:42 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> - 2014-12-29 18:57 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Piso Mojado <conserje@trapeador.net> - 2014-12-30 08:41 -0500
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? "Mr. Strat" <mrstrat@nospam.gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 11:27 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2015-01-01 15:52 -0600
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-01 23:37 +0000
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-02 17:50 -0800
Re: When will Yosemite be safe to use? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-02 20:55 -0500
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-28 21:54 -0800 |
| Subject | When will Yosemite be safe to use? |
| Message-ID | <2014122821543828504-tomevans9890@yahooca> |
When will Yosemite be safe to use? The Apple Web site's feedback section regarding the system shows that half of the about 500 responders gave it one star out of five, and many users returned to an earlier version or wanted to but couldn't. So it appears that Yosemite is still too dangerous to use. So I've postponed my own 'upgrade'. Tom
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-28 23:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <281220142358416822%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #67937 |
In article <2014122821543828504-tomevans9890@yahooca>, Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> wrote: > When will Yosemite be safe to use? > > The Apple Web site's feedback section regarding the system shows that > half of the about 500 responders gave it one star out of five, and many > users returned to an earlier version or wanted to but couldn't. > > So it appears that Yosemite is still too dangerous to use. > > So I've postponed my own 'upgrade'. I've been using it since the first public beta with nary a problem. -- Michelle
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-28 23:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2014122823314227839-tomevans9890@yahooca> |
| In reply to | #67938 |
On 2014-12-28 22:58:41 -0800, Michelle Steiner said: > In article <2014122821543828504-tomevans9890@yahooca>, Tom Evans > <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> wrote: > >> When will Yosemite be safe to use? >> >> The Apple Web site's feedback section regarding the system shows that >> half of the about 500 responders gave it one star out of five, and many >> users returned to an earlier version or wanted to but couldn't. >> >> So it appears that Yosemite is still too dangerous to use. >> >> So I've postponed my own 'upgrade'. > > I've been using it since the first public beta with nary a problem. > > -- Michelle Thanks, Michelle. You've been one of the lucky ones! I'm stuck with Snow Leopard and gradually my various software is becoming obsolete, which limits my choices. I've been wondering if I should upgrade to Mountain Lion (10.8.4). Tom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 09:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnma262a.1r4b.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #67939 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> was all, like: > You've been one of the lucky ones! No, her experience mirrors the vast majority of users. > I've been wondering if I should upgrade to Mountain Lion (10.8.4). No. -- a vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 13:45 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <D0C85CF5.B2A5C%ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
| In reply to | #67942 |
On 12/29/14 3:00 AM, in article slrnma262a.1r4b.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis" <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > Okay, so one time? In band camp? Tom Evans <tomevans9890@yahoo.ca> was all, > like: >> You've been one of the lucky ones! > > No, her experience mirrors the vast majority of users. > >> I've been wondering if I should upgrade to Mountain Lion (10.8.4). > > No. You want to expound on that? Why?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 04:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54a12034$0$46558$c3e8da3$9b4ff22a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #67939 |
On 14-12-29 02:31, Tom Evans wrote: > I've been wondering if I should upgrade to Mountain Lion (10.8.4). Unless you have media for earlier OS version, you can't. I had asked about that a few months ago and was told not to worry. But by the time I had time to upgrade to Maveriks, Yosemite came out on that day and Maveriks was no longer available. Upgraded my laptop to Yosemite. Took greater part of a weekend. Required a hack to disable the check for signed kext. Without this,. OS-X would refuse to continue booting from a non Apple SSD. ONce you put all the geriatric setting to disable the Jony Ive designs/transparency etc, it is usable. I do not use my laptop much, but the on-going problem is its unwillingness to auto-connect to my WiFi when I open the lid (sometimes it does, most times it doesn't) I have to manually select my wi fi network Depending on your app portfolio on Snow Leopard, you lose a large number of apps. In particular, you lose the ability to manage Xserves, Apple deletes the apps without warning. Remember that going from Snow Leopard, it isn't just Yosemite, but 3 years of "back to Mac" changes so it isn't quite clear what is a "bug" and what is just another silly Apple decision. On the other hand, I was pleasantly susprised at how much of the SNow Leopard settings were preserved. Note: X windows goes away. You need to download it manually from a different site.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 00:37 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1lxfxnl.dv1lcf1rttrrhN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> |
| In reply to | #67943 |
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-12-29 02:31, Tom Evans wrote: > > > I've been wondering if I should upgrade to Mountain Lion (10.8.4). > > Unless you have media for earlier OS version, you can't. I had asked > about that a few months ago and was told not to worry. But by the time I > had time to upgrade to Maveriks, Yosemite came out on that day and > Maveriks was no longer available. Mavericks is the odd one out. Apple made it unavailable for "purchase" the day Yosemite was released. Mountain Lion _can_ still be purchased, from the online Apple Store for US$19.99 or equivalent. Once purchased, they email you a redemption code for App Store. That will give you 10.8.5. It isn't possible to get 10.8.4 any more. Whether it is worth the trouble is another question. Mountain Lion only has about nine months left before Apple will stop supporting it with Security Updates and Safari, as happened with Lion in September 2014 and Snow Leopard in September 2013. Upgrading to Mountain Lion is not necessary as a stepping stone to go from Snow Leopard to Yosemite. > Upgraded my laptop to Yosemite. Took greater part of a weekend. Required > a hack to disable the check for signed kext. Without this,. OS-X would > refuse to continue booting from a non Apple SSD. I think you mean that Yosemite would refuse to boot because you were using a third party utility which modified Apple's kext to enable TRIM on a third party SSD. If you forgo TRIM, you don't need to hack the kernel. -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 15:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cgd9bcF96abU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #67944 |
On 2014-12-29, David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote: > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > >> Upgraded my laptop to Yosemite. Took greater part of a weekend. Required >> a hack to disable the check for signed kext. Without this,. OS-X would >> refuse to continue booting from a non Apple SSD. > > I think you mean that Yosemite would refuse to boot because you were > using a third party utility which modified Apple's kext to enable TRIM > on a third party SSD. If you forgo TRIM, you don't need to hack the > kernel. He knows. He just couldn't resist a low-ball troll. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 17:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54a1dadc$0$44866$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #67952 |
On 14-12-29 10:12, Jolly Roger wrote: > He knows. He just couldn't resist a low-ball troll. Until my problems with the upgrade, despite watching what you experts had said about yosemite, I had never seen any mention that starting with Yosemite, kexts had to be signed. (unless you disable signing checks with a boot flag). It took me a very long time to figure it out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 22:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cge4lgFglgaU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #67973 |
On 2014-12-29, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-12-29 10:12, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> He knows. He just couldn't resist a low-ball troll. > > Until my problems with the upgrade, despite watching what you experts > had said about yosemite, I had never seen any mention that starting with > Yosemite, kexts had to be signed. (unless you disable signing checks > with a boot flag). Probably because none of us "experts" are using kernel extensions that aren't signed. Go figure. > It took me a very long time to figure it out. I'm not sure I understand why. The makers of said kernel extension had information about the problem on their web site. Anyhow, TRIM support isn't needed for a large number of SSDs - probably yours too. So there's no need to run that kernel extension. You just absolutely refuse to believe or admit that fact. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 18:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54a1e2be$0$41588$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #67976 |
On 14-12-29 17:58, Jolly Roger wrote: > Anyhow, TRIM support isn't needed for a large number of SSDs NEEDED is a vague word. Yes, the system will run without TRIM. So by that definition, it isn't NEEDED. But yes, without TRIM, the SSD does not function at peak efficiency and will wear down faster because a lot of write operations require multiple writes. (which slows it down).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 23:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cge6oqFgtm5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #67981 |
On 2014-12-29, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-12-29 17:58, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> Anyhow, TRIM support isn't needed for a large number of SSDs > > NEEDED is a vague word. Yes, the system will run without TRIM. So by > that definition, it isn't NEEDED. > > But yes, without TRIM, the SSD does not function at peak efficiency and > will wear down faster because a lot of write operations require multiple > writes. (which slows it down). Not true for all SSDs. You have some homework to do. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 15:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <m7v0hb$j50$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #67981 |
On 2014-12-29 23:24:46 +0000, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> said: > On 14-12-29 17:58, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> Anyhow, TRIM support isn't needed for a large number of SSDs > > > NEEDED is a vague word. Yes, the system will run without TRIM. So by > that definition, it isn't NEEDED. > > But yes, without TRIM, the SSD does not function at peak efficiency and > will wear down faster because a lot of write operations require multiple > writes. (which slows it down). OWC reports that owners would see a degradation of their drive if TRIM was enabled. Last I read, they recommended that it be turned off for their new drives. -- Q: How do you know when <NoBody@nowhere.com> is lying? A: Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> fingers are moving. <NoBody@nowhere.com> reveals himself to be a sockpuppet of sickpuppy Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?STYPE=msgid&A=0&MSGI=%3Cm3jcte%24pq1%241%40dont-email.me%3E
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-31 01:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnma6j58.26im.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #68019 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> was all, like: > On 2014-12-29 23:24:46 +0000, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> said: >> On 14-12-29 17:58, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >>> Anyhow, TRIM support isn't needed for a large number of SSDs >> >> >> NEEDED is a vague word. Yes, the system will run without TRIM. So by >> that definition, it isn't NEEDED. >> >> But yes, without TRIM, the SSD does not function at peak efficiency and >> will wear down faster because a lot of write operations require multiple >> writes. (which slows it down). > OWC reports that owners would see a degradation of their drive if TRIM > was enabled. Last I read, they recommended that it be turned off for > their new drives. Yes. Drives that do their own thing are harmed by TRIM, which is why it is off on OS X for any drive that Apple did not install, where they know that it's doing what it's supposed to. JF is just a Bozo who knows nothing but was once told that TRIM Enabler was a good thing and has chosen that to latch on to in the face of what other people (rational people) would consider insurmountable evidence to the contrary. -- Once again I am banished to the demon section of the card catalog
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 20:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54a34ea2$0$32992$b1db1813$79461190@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #68024 |
On 14-12-30 20:08, Lewis wrote: > Yes. Drives that do their own thing are harmed by TRIM, which is why it > is off on OS X for any drive that Apple did not install, where they know > that it's doing what it's supposed to. So, that Anantech article taks about garbage collection, menrtions Apples uses that controller for their MavBooks and doesn't have TRIM. Why then did Apple later add TRIM support if it wasn't needed by them fancy controllers ? Simple: because you didn't read to the end of the article where the writer admits the problem of write amplification caused by the garbage collection.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 23:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <291220142326071672%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #67976 |
In article <cge4lgFglgaU2@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >On 2014-12-29, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> On 14-12-29 10:12, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >>> He knows. He just couldn't resist a low-ball troll. >> >> Until my problems with the upgrade, despite watching what you experts >> had said about yosemite, I had never seen any mention that starting with >> Yosemite, kexts had to be signed. (unless you disable signing checks >> with a boot flag). > >Probably because none of us "experts" are using kernel extensions that >aren't signed. Go figure. Or indeed any at all. At least not knowingly. -- "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 23:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnma3nq5.1r4b.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #67944 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? David Empson <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> was all, like: > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> Upgraded my laptop to Yosemite. Took greater part of a weekend. Required >> a hack to disable the check for signed kext. Without this,. OS-X would >> refuse to continue booting from a non Apple SSD. > I think you mean that Yosemite would refuse to boot because you were > using a third party utility which modified Apple's kext to enable TRIM > on a third party SSD. If you forgo TRIM, you don't need to hack the > kernel. And hacking the kernel extension to enable TRIM is *STUPID*. -- I never wanted to do this in the first place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 18:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54a1e322$0$41588$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #67977 |
On 14-12-29 18:09, Lewis wrote: > And hacking the kernel extension to enable TRIM is *STUPID*. And Apple disabling TRIM when it isn't one of their own SSD disks is even more stupid. Back to the early days of the MAC when Apple's disk driver refused to mount non Apple SCSI disks and you needed a separate disk driver to do exactly what the Apple disk driver was capable of doing except for the stupid check for approved model numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 18:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <291220141832321756%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #67983 |
In article <54a1e322$0$41588$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > And hacking the kernel extension to enable TRIM is *STUPID*. > > And Apple disabling TRIM when it isn't one of their own SSD disks is > even more stupid. the reason is that some ssds have buggy implementations of trim and apple isn't going to test every single one. it's similar to why apple supports time machine for network storage on a time capsule or a mac with file sharing. they aren't about to test every single nas device out there to see if it works properly. it may be rare that there are problems but why put a backup at risk?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 23:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cge6rrFgtm5U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #67983 |
On 2014-12-29, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-12-29 18:09, Lewis wrote: > >> And hacking the kernel extension to enable TRIM is *STUPID*. > > And Apple disabling TRIM when it isn't one of their own SSD disks is > even more stupid. That's your opinion. My opinion is the decision makes good business sense. TRIM isn't even necessary for many SSDs that use alternative methods of garbage collection and so on. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web