Mac Studio’s removable SSD is reportedly blocked by Apple on a software level
theverge.com
theverge.com
"If you want to play around with those storage modules in a Studio, you should know that 1) you definitely need to do a full DFU erase, and 2) if you populate both slots, they definitely need to be the same size, and they might need to be the same vendor (there are several)."
For $2 or so in quantity 1, I can order an x16 connector from DigiKey and have 164 pins to connect two modules together. And being an edge connector, I don’t need one for each board (like “DuPont” or DIN 41612 does). If the board won’t be removed, you could even get away with the free tin plating (skipping gold).
As others have noted, that doesn't necessarily mean "incompatible primarily for the sake of breaking third-party upgrades."
It may very well be that there are advantages (such as better or more predictable performance, lower component cost, better power or heat dissipation, or higher reliability) to using raw modules with a custom controller rather than going through an SSD interface. Perhaps (for example) there are advantages to having the SSD's cache in the Mac's uniform memory and controlling when writes are performed.
(As an interesting aside, Steve Jobs famously convinced Shugart to make a stripped-down "SA390" floppy drive for the Disk II to save money. With Woz's controller and improved encoding they also managed to squeeze more data onto the floppy disks, so it saved [Apple] money while improving density and read rate - though possibly increasing the likelihood of bad sectors and data loss.)
Based on what I've heard from people who work (or worked) at Apple, that isn't normally how they roll - usually there's a cost, performance, user experience, security, reliability, or functionality (etc.) reason and breaking third party upgrades, compatibility, or repairs is just a happy (for Apple) side-effect. ;-)
Placing the SSD cache in unified RAM would seem like a plausible performance and cost justification to me, not "wild speculation" as you claim. I've seen papers describing how to optimize the use of flash storage that require low-level control of the device as well as modifications to the OS/file system or even the cache and memory system - all things Apple could certainly do. However, as you note, evidence will tell.
Regarding whether Apple passes its own savings on to customers, I will note that the Disk II was said to be "obscenely profitable." In general Apple maintains some of the highest margins in the industry. Which is not to say Apple products are a poor value (I generally consider them an excellent value for what you get, and for my own use cases) but it is saying that they are very good at keeping money in their own pocket.
"* YouTuber Luke Miani decided to test whether or not the machine is actually upgradable through a series of comprehensive tests…"
"* Miani took the wiped SSD from the second machine and inserted it in the open slot on the first machine, but the Mac’s status light blinked SOS and it wouldn’t boot up"
"* He then swapped the SSDs between two Mac Studios and found again that neither would boot"
"* In a disappointing move, it appears that Apple has locked user-upgradability in software (the device recognizes the SSD, but Apple stops it from booting)."
Given Apple's recent attention to security at the hardware/firmware level, it is possible that, for example, Apple is requiring some type of hardware authentication from the SSD, and not simply to prevent the user from upgrading their SSD. (Along the same lines as the T2 chip, is what I'm imagining.)
I'm not a security person, so I don't know if this is likely. I'd be interested in the thoughts of any of you who do know this stuff. Is there a valid security purpose that could explain this?
I think you’re on to something. I suspect we’ll get a tech note or presentation at WWDC that explains what’s happening.
Because the machine now sees flash that doesn't belong together in a single disk and (quite sensibly) refuses to assemble that into a volume. A DFU restore might fix this.
> He then swapped the SSDs between two Mac Studios and found again that neither would boot
Because the data is encrypted to a key unique to the original machine's SoC, so the other machine can't read it. A DFU restore is likely to fix this.
Eventually that SSD is going to fail, but by then five or six years have passed and they'll just tell you to buy a new Mac. I'm very happy with my Mac Mini m1, and I'll probably buy a MacBook Air when the next one comes out, but I'm doing this with the understanding this is not going to last forever.
Not at all. Apple can replace the flash module (it's not really an SSD) and, eventually, there will be some aftermarket options.
https://www.macrumors.com/2021/04/06/m1-mac-ram-and-ssd-upgr...
Unless you have a soldering iron, you're stuck, this is so frustrating because it artificially limits the lifetime of an expensive product. Hypothetically would say my m1 Mac mini breaks down in 5 years, I strongly doubt Apple will replace the SSD out of the goodness of their heart.