5 ms·

> Note that, as I indicated above, M1 Macs can't readily boot from external drives. There are things you can do, if you have an external Thunderbolt 3 drive (US

> Note that, as I indicated above, M1 Macs can't readily boot from external drives. There are things you can do, if you have an external Thunderbolt 3 drive (USB-C isn't sufficient), but even that won't work if the internal drive is dead. I’m trying to understand the impact of the internal drive dying in the last fragment here. Since these Macs have soldered-on-the-board SSD internal storage, wouldn’t the drive dying require a complete logic board replacement in the first place, which means this condition is not salvageable for an end user without professional repair service anyway? It’s not like an end user could replace it like with Macs of the past (or is it?). On a general note, it’s extremely irritating when Apple drops macOS support for some Macs every year while the latest version still has several limitations and bugs. Anyone who gets on to the latest and greatest version of macOS with hardware that’s older than five years would be taking big risks. In general (with several exceptions), the longevity of the hardware was one of the attractive factors while paying a premium for Macs (also lesser e-waste is a bonus). But deeper problems in macOS could more than offset such benefits (resulting in more cries about planned obsolescence).

bombcar 6y ago
In the past a Mac with a dead drive could run from an external indefinitely.
- uniqueid 6y ago
  In the past, you could copy a bootable volume just by dragging its contents, and you could run Finder straight off the install media. Today I guess Apple finds it eccentric for a user to expect to create a simple backup.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    ...are you talking about OS9? In OS X I'm pretty sure you've always had to explicitly mark a volume as bootable. (Not complicated, but more complicated than just dragging contents over.)
    - gsnedders 6y ago
      Copying the full filesystem should've worked for OS X too, though not copying merely the contents (i.e., you need FS-level metadata). But yes, from OS X you needed a secondary boot loader (BootX) to be discovered by OpenFirmware, whereas for classic Mac OS OpenFirmware itself found the payload to boot (which differed between Old World and New World systems).
    - bombcar 6y ago
      Was blessing a drive an OS 9 thing? I seem to remember that but it did it automatically.
      - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        No, it wasn't, so you could make a backup drive and boot from it directly by just copying the contents in Finder. But never in OS X. Which is why GP confused me...
  - bartvk 6y ago
    Why the extreme sarcasm? Apple apparently thinks it's eccentric for users to clone their internal storage. I think they have the numbers to support it as well. Making Time Machine backups is very convenient. What I've done personally, is started making backups to an SSD. In the event of a problem, I buy a new Mac and restore it to that, in a very fast manner. This means that, including shopping, roughly half a day of work will be lost. This is acceptable to me. If you really can't wait, then don't sell your old Mac and keep it around for as long as it's supported. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather Apple didn't drop this function. But I do understand that cloning is a feature that's not used much, and that temporarily falls by the wayside in the development process.
    - ChrisMarshallNY 6y ago
      > What I've done personally, is started making backups to an SSD. In the event of a problem, I buy a new Mac and restore it to that, in a very fast manner. This means that, including shopping, roughly half a day of work will be lost. This is acceptable to me. I do something similar. I run Time Machine backups, then have what I call “hot backups.” These are CCC bootable clones to a zippy external SSD. I update them every 4 hours. Also, most of my crucial data is “cloudy,” in things like GitHub. APFS has the new “split” system, with a separate “data” volume. This can be used for Restore Mode rebuilds. I have not had to rely on a full backup restore from Time Machine in years. The hot backup has been fine. It also means that I don’t have an issue wiping my computer and taking it in for service. I have the luxury of having a backup device (usually a couple of years older model of my primary).
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
uniqueid 6y ago
If I had a six year old Mac with a dead internal SSD, I'd sooner connect an external drive than shell out for a new logic board.
bsder 6y ago
I have to admit that not being able to boot from an external drive really caught my attention. This is Apple really turning the screws on "You will not install an OS except from our official servers."
- wlesieutre 6y ago
  M1 Macs can boot 3rd party OSes though, no?
  - rubatuga 6y ago
    yep!
- GeekyBear 6y ago
  > I have to admit that not being able to boot from an external drive really caught my attention. You can boot from an external Thunderbolt drive, it's USB drives that people have been having trouble with. >In researching the process, various Mac users have found success with non-Thunderbolt 3 drives, but under oddly specific circumstances without any real rhyme or reason for them working. Save yourself the time and just use a Thunderbolt 3 drive from the outset. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/01/03/how-to-boot-an-apple-silicon-mac-from-an-external-drive https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/01/03/how-to-boot-an-ap...
  - my123 6y ago
    It's still experimental for USB drives, worked well with a Samsung T7 for me. You'll need to explicitly bless the volume beforehand to boot from an install that was made on another Mac though.
NaOH 6y ago
>Anyone who gets on to the latest and greatest version of macOS with hardware that’s older than five years would be taking big risks. In general (with several exceptions), the longevity of the hardware was one of the attractive factors while paying a premium for Macs (also lesser e-waste is a bonus). But deeper problems in macOS could more than offset such benefits (resulting in more cries about planned obsolescence). This has been a problem since the advent of downloaded OS installations (complete move as of 10.7). Other software, too. With Mac OS, some portion is only a little past a beta state, and some hardware gets cut off before that same portion of the OS gets better. While I'd prefer how it used to be—an OS was largely stable and feature complete when shipped (on a disc or disk)—there's no reason for me to think that approach will ever return.
rasz 6y ago
>wouldn’t the drive dying require a complete logic board replacement that will be $1499.95, might I interest you in upgrading to a new model for only $1500?
ohazi 6y ago
> which means this condition is not salvageable for an end user without professional repair service anyway I think it's fair to say that Apple expects their users to use a professional repair service (less likely) or buy a new machine (more likely). The fact that you and I might prefer to replace a drive ourselves isn't really a factor in how they design their systems.
- em500 6y ago
  The expectation is that users should have up-to-date external backups, and the internal drive should be treated as an ephemeral cache. You should already be prepared for the circumstances that your laptop gets stolen or that the actual flash chips or controllers break anyway, so if just the logic boards break you use the same recovery plan. All IT professionals know that quickly restoreable external backups are really the good and proper way, but the reality is that we're only human and most of us fall short of the ideal (just like with exercising, eating healthy, maintaining your teeth, etc). Google's approach with ChromeOS is to force you to treat the laptop storage as a cache by technical means, rather than as primary storage. iOS and Android also largely use that model. Windows and MacOS are clearly heading in the same direction, they're just moving slower due to legacy.
  - ohazi 6y ago
    I agree that this is the correct approach, and even do this myself sometimes. I still find it irksome that what costs ~$100 and takes 15 minutes on a Thinkpad costs ~$1000 and takes a week on a Mac.
kalleboo 6y ago
From what I've understood, on the M1 Macs, the boot firmware lives on the same NAND flash chips as the internal drive. So if that flash dies, you're screwed anyhow and an external disk wouldn't have saved you

bombcar 6y ago

In the past a Mac with a dead drive could run from an external indefinitely.

uniqueid 6y ago
In the past, you could copy a bootable volume just by dragging its contents, and you could run Finder straight off the install media. Today I guess Apple finds it eccentric for a user to expect to create a simple backup.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  ...are you talking about OS9? In OS X I'm pretty sure you've always had to explicitly mark a volume as bootable. (Not complicated, but more complicated than just dragging contents over.)
  - gsnedders 6y ago
    Copying the full filesystem should've worked for OS X too, though not copying merely the contents (i.e., you need FS-level metadata). But yes, from OS X you needed a secondary boot loader (BootX) to be discovered by OpenFirmware, whereas for classic Mac OS OpenFirmware itself found the payload to boot (which differed between Old World and New World systems).
  - bombcar 6y ago
    Was blessing a drive an OS 9 thing? I seem to remember that but it did it automatically.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      No, it wasn't, so you could make a backup drive and boot from it directly by just copying the contents in Finder. But never in OS X. Which is why GP confused me...
- bartvk 6y ago
  Why the extreme sarcasm? Apple apparently thinks it's eccentric for users to clone their internal storage. I think they have the numbers to support it as well. Making Time Machine backups is very convenient. What I've done personally, is started making backups to an SSD. In the event of a problem, I buy a new Mac and restore it to that, in a very fast manner. This means that, including shopping, roughly half a day of work will be lost. This is acceptable to me. If you really can't wait, then don't sell your old Mac and keep it around for as long as it's supported. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather Apple didn't drop this function. But I do understand that cloning is a feature that's not used much, and that temporarily falls by the wayside in the development process.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 6y ago
    > What I've done personally, is started making backups to an SSD. In the event of a problem, I buy a new Mac and restore it to that, in a very fast manner. This means that, including shopping, roughly half a day of work will be lost. This is acceptable to me. I do something similar. I run Time Machine backups, then have what I call “hot backups.” These are CCC bootable clones to a zippy external SSD. I update them every 4 hours. Also, most of my crucial data is “cloudy,” in things like GitHub. APFS has the new “split” system, with a separate “data” volume. This can be used for Restore Mode rebuilds. I have not had to rely on a full backup restore from Time Machine in years. The hot backup has been fine. It also means that I don’t have an issue wiping my computer and taking it in for service. I have the luxury of having a backup device (usually a couple of years older model of my primary).
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

uniqueid 6y ago

If I had a six year old Mac with a dead internal SSD, I'd sooner connect an external drive than shell out for a new logic board.

bsder 6y ago

I have to admit that not being able to boot from an external drive really caught my attention. This is Apple really turning the screws on "You will not install an OS except from our official servers."

wlesieutre 6y ago
M1 Macs can boot 3rd party OSes though, no?
- rubatuga 6y ago
  yep!
GeekyBear 6y ago
> I have to admit that not being able to boot from an external drive really caught my attention. You can boot from an external Thunderbolt drive, it's USB drives that people have been having trouble with. >In researching the process, various Mac users have found success with non-Thunderbolt 3 drives, but under oddly specific circumstances without any real rhyme or reason for them working. Save yourself the time and just use a Thunderbolt 3 drive from the outset. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/01/03/how-to-boot-an-apple-silicon-mac-from-an-external-drive https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/01/03/how-to-boot-an-ap...
- my123 6y ago
  It's still experimental for USB drives, worked well with a Samsung T7 for me. You'll need to explicitly bless the volume beforehand to boot from an install that was made on another Mac though.

NaOH 6y ago

>Anyone who gets on to the latest and greatest version of macOS with hardware that’s older than five years would be taking big risks. In general (with several exceptions), the longevity of the hardware was one of the attractive factors while paying a premium for Macs (also lesser e-waste is a bonus). But deeper problems in macOS could more than offset such benefits (resulting in more cries about planned obsolescence). This has been a problem since the advent of downloaded OS installations (complete move as of 10.7). Other software, too. With Mac OS, some portion is only a little past a beta state, and some hardware gets cut off before that same portion of the OS gets better. While I'd prefer how it used to be—an OS was largely stable and feature complete when shipped (on a disc or disk)—there's no reason for me to think that approach will ever return.

rasz 6y ago

>wouldn’t the drive dying require a complete logic board replacement that will be $1499.95, might I interest you in upgrading to a new model for only $1500?

ohazi 6y ago

> which means this condition is not salvageable for an end user without professional repair service anyway I think it's fair to say that Apple expects their users to use a professional repair service (less likely) or buy a new machine (more likely). The fact that you and I might prefer to replace a drive ourselves isn't really a factor in how they design their systems.

em500 6y ago
The expectation is that users should have up-to-date external backups, and the internal drive should be treated as an ephemeral cache. You should already be prepared for the circumstances that your laptop gets stolen or that the actual flash chips or controllers break anyway, so if just the logic boards break you use the same recovery plan. All IT professionals know that quickly restoreable external backups are really the good and proper way, but the reality is that we're only human and most of us fall short of the ideal (just like with exercising, eating healthy, maintaining your teeth, etc). Google's approach with ChromeOS is to force you to treat the laptop storage as a cache by technical means, rather than as primary storage. iOS and Android also largely use that model. Windows and MacOS are clearly heading in the same direction, they're just moving slower due to legacy.
- ohazi 6y ago
  I agree that this is the correct approach, and even do this myself sometimes. I still find it irksome that what costs ~$100 and takes 15 minutes on a Thinkpad costs ~$1000 and takes a week on a Mac.

kalleboo 6y ago

From what I've understood, on the M1 Macs, the boot firmware lives on the same NAND flash chips as the internal drive. So if that flash dies, you're screwed anyhow and an external disk wouldn't have saved you