Wow - thanks VERY MUCH for your feedback.
Just because I'm not accustomed to unloading computers, I'm kinda hoping you're referring to the [February] 2013 MacBook Pro instead of the late [October] 2013 MacBook Pro? Let me know?
For what it's worth - the only bad experience I've had with mine has been with High Sierra. Other than that, it's always performed extremely well? I did have an issue with the screen getting damaged - the antiglare coating mysteriously wore off? - but Apple replaced that even after warranty due to... whatever nonsense?
A lemon is a lemon, though - and I don't come anywhere near stressing my machine the way you constantly do yours. The fans only kick in when I'm converting video or running VMWare.
So that's the main reason I reacted so poorly to High Sierra suddenly causing my otherwise insanely fast Mac to VERY prematurely start showing "age". I wasn't willing to accept that.
Given Apple isn't about to turn back the clock on APFS, how is that you're preparing for the future then? As far as I know, Apple basically "forces" us to update at least every 2 years nowadays - to continue receiving security updates? We can pretty well guess they're eventually going to force APFS on us?
Thanks again for your fascinating feedback. I suppose I can update and skip APFS as long as Apple allows? But any "split" should be very interesting to watch. I've been with Apple since my 7600/132 - it's always amused/amazed me how rabid the fanboys can get when anyone questions Apple. And you, sir, are to be excommunicated by the faithful immediately! How DARE you question APFS!!! Sliced bread has entered a wondrous new paradigm, thanks to Apple!
Again, hoping the February MBPs are the dogs and I'm safe and cozy with my October release? Someone else asked me to run a disk test, and my SSD is showing an equal 500MB/s read and write. Not nearly as fast as later SSDs, but blazing nonetheless? The most interesting bit is that my reads and writes are the same? I suppose it just makes my machine extra "fair", treating all data "equally"?
Thanks again for your feedback. And here's to hoping I didn't pull from a batch of lemons.
Shh... don't tell anyone - but I'm hoping to keep this machine running for at least 10 years. Why I reckon we done nearly fell close upon the useful limits of that law what Moore done came up with. So I sher as shootin' don't wanna be runnin' no lemony Mac!
Looking at the specs for the MacBook Pro's, it would appear to have been the early 2013 models. Identifying based on the CPU's (Ivy Bridge vs. Haswell).
As for my future plans, at this point I have no plans to adopt AFS. It's not even on my radar. I also have no problem being a few years behind. I upgraded my Mac Pro from Snow Leopard to Lion about 3 years ago, and then to El Capitan approximately a year and half ago I believe. And, I've been happy with El Capitan. I only upgraded this iMac I acquired to High Sierra because it was possible. And, I don't mind having my workflow on the Mac Pro on El Capitan. It does what it needs to do. The iMac (that I acquired by pure chance) will not be part of my serious work. It's just going to be used for light tasks, when I don't need the power of the Mac Pro (primarily to conserve electricity in the home environment - shifting to only using the power hog when required). The task I threw at the iMac (illustrated previously) was just because I happened to want to see what it would do before it would crash... and it didn't crash... which surprised me, that was more than I expected it to do. Efficiency-wise, the Mac Pro is still going to kill the iMac in raw processing power with 8 cores thrown at my projects. Though the iMac did handle the task admirably for what it is.
If the day comes that I'm required to adopt AFS to utilize a newer OS, then I'll evaluate it's current state, and design improvements (if any), and decide from there. If I have to, I'll keep important data on an older machine, and use a different machine for daily tasks. There's also the option of utilizing file servers, which will store information their own way. Basically the equivalent of cloud storage done locally to my own alternate machine.
I actually have a bare hard drive set on my router that each of my machines can talk with and store files to. If the time comes, I can set up Linux box to act as a file server. That way Mac OS would just be telling the file server to hold this file, and the server would hold it in a more reliable method. I could also set up a Windows file server, and have the file held in NTFS (which is far safer than even the Mac OS X Journaled system).
Or, I could just pick up a dedicate NAS (Network Attached Storage) device. My eventual plans are to move to a RAID based storage system that contains numerous drives, and redundancy upon redundancy (essentially RAIDing multiple RAIDS - yes it can be done and often is in the Enterprise industry). For now, I have several backups, but the RAID would be more convenient. It's just not in my finances at the moment.
There are a lot of options to keep your data somewhere other than on an AFS system. If I have to, it'll be a boot drive only. But, I could also move over to Windows at that point to. I've been working on a transition, I'm just taking my time with it. But, I do have PC's here that also contain the same information that is on my Mac Pro. I just haven't moved the workload over to them. But, I do keep my computers (Mac and Windows) essentially matched with data syncing... So I can move to either machine, and find what I'm looking for without having to turn on the other computer.
There's lots of ways around Apple's walled garden.
I've left Apple before... When they trashed the Apple II series for the Mac. At that point the Mac was a joke. And, many of us had significant investments in our Apple II series computers. I knew a lot of people who had just purchased an Apple IIgs and had a lot of money tied up in it, and I had an Apple IIe that I had significantly updated and was about to install the kit to transform it into a IIgs. And, then the news the next week... The Apple II series was abruptly abandoned with no notice... We now had an entire product line abandoned. And, they thought we'd say oh.. we need a new computer, we'll get a Mac (since it was Apple's only option)... well, they were wrong, we all moved to IBM and IBM clones. Why would we throw our money away again? The IBM market was clearly here to stay. And, Apple now had a record of abandoning an entire computer platform. If we had to invest in an entirely new computer platform, new hardware, new software, new everything, we certainly weren't going to give our money to a company that just abruptly abandoned their entire product line and left us high and dry.
There is a definite reason that Apple's Macintosh never took over the industry. It was backlash. Prior to discontinuing the Apple II series, Apple had a commanding lead in many portions of the industry. Nearly every school had computer labs packed with Apple II series computers, and since that was the computer that almost all the schools used, that meant it was the computer that parents purchased for their home (so their kids could use the same computer they used at school). The Apple II series was fully entrenched. It was in libraries, schools, and homes. And then Apple pulled the plug and said that entire product line is dead now (even if you just purchased it yesterday, too bad). They thought if the Mac was the only computer they offered, then that's what all the Apple users would buy... and they were wrong. That was the first step to killing Apple. And, they never did bounce back from that.
Everyone moved over to the IBM market, and thus the PC became the defacto computer everywhere. Not just big business, but schools, homes, libraries, offices, everywhere. The Mac just wasn't worth the gamble, and certainly wasn't worth the price. And everyone switching over to PC's proved to be a wise investment, because the PC became THE computer to have. And, while Apple has recovered financially from all their prior missteps, they likely never will regain the entrenched status they once enjoyed in the computer market.
I came back to the Mac for one reason. I had a career that revolved around PC's, and I had no complaints. I made a lot of money with them. And, the design was good. But, I also tire of things once I've been under the hood long enough. Every time I get something perfect, I move on to something else. If I build a car, then a few months after it's completed, and perfect, and all my custom designs have proved themselves, I sell it. The reason I sell it is simple, I know it inside and out since I built it and have had my hands and eyes on every single minor detail and bolt. I just know it too well, and it's time for something else. And, that's how I moved back to the Mac. Simply knew the PC too intimately. Not in a bad way, just that I knew it intimately (every minor detail down to the circuit and coding level) and was ready to not look at it anymore.
At this point, I'm in a transition phase... My PC's outnumber my Macs. And, that's not going to change, unless Apple surprises me. At this point, Apple hasn't released a computer since 2006 that I've wanted. Nothing in any machine they've made since then has impressed me. And, the further we get, the more they fail to impress. They don't put their full effort into their designs. They're uninspiring, and every machine lacks something... that one thing that would make it the perfect machine. They're afraid to make all of their computers "great" because then their machines will be competing against each other. If they go 95% of the way on each machine, then you still have a reason to spend more money and climb up to the next level, except they only went 95% of the way there on that one too... So, no matter how high you climb in the product line, that one part that would make it "great" is missing. And, then that slow update thing, if it started out at 95% of the way to being "great", by the time it gets updated it's down to like 50% of the way there by price / specs falling greater into being less favorable.
It's not a formula for success. Designing their computers to accept regular updates would change that significantly. Upping the specs monthly, or every few months, as technology evolves, or prices adjust down on component parts (permitting increasing the specs of the machine while maintaining the profit margin), that would help significantly. I've shopped for PC's from the major vendors, and often the same model will have a spec increase either weekly or monthly. They don't sit stagnant for a year (Apple's traditional cycle), or worse 4 to 5 years (Apple's more recent trend).
If they weren't so set on locking the design down, they could design the logic board to support an entire range of CPU's, including others in the same product line that haven't been released yet. PC makers have been doing that for years. New CPU comes out, their existing model can already accept it (often times). But, Apple has to wait until they can't sell a particular model before they decide to update it, but by then, people have purchased a PC. They just keep trying to kill themselves.
So, with the trend / direction Apple has been showing for the last several years, I currently have no intention of every buying a brand new Mac again. That's not a statement of pride, or for spite, or just to make noise. It simply is the way it is. My transition is already in place. I've established the means to move my workflow. I just haven't fully moved the workflow due to my Mac Pro still doing the job, and I am practiced at the task with the Mac Pro. My current iMac that I just received was free... and that is absolutely the only reason I have it. If they had asked $10 for it, I would have passed.
I am happy with the machine. It appears to do just fine for the use I will have for it. And, it does give me the convenience of putting off my transition a bit. But, the equipment for the transition is sitting right here. And, it's ready for the job. I've already tested my uses to verify they will perform the task. And, I have no preference between Windows 10 and El Capitan or High Sierra. All three seem to be doing great, and do the task I give them.
. In fact El Capitan would do just fine (I use Logic Pro X so I can't go back to El Cap anyway). So if the sole reason is to stay current, why would I be satisfied with a worse peformance?
