The 'slower chipset' is NVidia MCP79. I have a unibody MacBook with the exact same chipset and it's running at 3 Gigabit. This is probably just a driver or firmware issue.
This appears to be a configuration issue, as the relevant hardware is the same as the previous models. Performance only appears to be effected on high-end aftermarket SSDs, not on the drives Apple ships.
The best way to "win" is to skimp on parts that reviewers won't
notice, and to beef up the parts that they will notice.
(I bought a bike the other day that includes a very nice pump, which I
will probably never use, but skimps on the freewheel and chainring,
which I will have to replace at my own expense. Very silly.)
Comments
The 'slower chipset' is NVidia MCP79. I have a unibody MacBook with the exact same chipset and it's running at 3 Gigabit. This is probably just a driver or firmware issue.
New unibody: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/06/6-15-0...
Old unibody: http://files.getdropbox.com/u/48012/unibody.png
This appears to be a configuration issue, as the relevant hardware is the same as the previous models. Performance only appears to be effected on high-end aftermarket SSDs, not on the drives Apple ships.
The best way to "win" is to skimp on parts that reviewers won't notice, and to beef up the parts that they will notice.
(I bought a bike the other day that includes a very nice pump, which I will probably never use, but skimps on the freewheel and chainring, which I will have to replace at my own expense. Very silly.)
It's unlikely that Apple saved any money by underclocking the SATA interface; I would guess they did it to save power.
Since when did this become an Apple news site?
since macs became popular with hackers.