or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Firewire not sleeping in Mavericks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Firewire not sleeping in Mavericks

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

The Apple Discussions Forum reports that for many Mavericks users, external Firewire drives will not sleep, even when ejected to the Trash. The only way (after ejecting of course) is to switch the drive off (that is, switch off its DC power supply). The upgrade to OS 10.9.1 has not cured it. Thunderbolt drives are probably also afflicted but USB drives are not.

 

This is a problem particularly for users who need a Firewire drive spinning all the time, yet need to spin down for wear and energy consumption reasons when the Mac sleeps. These uses include a Time Machine drive, an automatic daily clonable backup, and any drive that is needed for its speed (USB being too slow for some uses), and other uses. LaCie told me that Apple were aware of the problem.

 

For users who do not need a firewire drive to be spinning all the time while the computer is awake, (eg., for occasional backups, occasional contact with applications, utilities or data) any insomniac Firewire drives having a USB connection can be reconfigured to USB.

 

The many posts on the Apple Discussions include the following:

 

1. Firewire is being phased out in favour of Thunderbolt and therefore Apple will not fix the bug despite there being may users needing a sleeping Firewire drive;

 

2. Apple want to ditch Firewire as quickly as possible and the quickest way to do that is to purposely make Mavericks fail to sleep it and force people to change quickly to Thunderbolt;

 

3. Irritation has been caused by the lack of notice given by Apple to allow time to change over, and to prevent users wasting money on new Firewire drives;

 

4. Irritation that there is no sign from Apple that they recognise the problem nor that they are working on it.

 

Has anyone any comments, especially on a way to get Firewire drives to sleep in Mavericks?

post #2 of 10
For some reason, they prevent sleep when drives are encrypted too and affects all disks, not just firewire. If they are unencrypted, they spin down when ejected immediately.

One way to get round the problem with encrypted disks and may work with this issue is to manually set disk sleep to the lowest option of 1 minute. The option in system prefs I believe defaults this to 10 minutes, which is way too long to wait for a drive to spin down during a drive eject.

Use the following command in the terminal:

sudo pmset -a disksleep 1

This sets disk sleep to 1 minute. Sometimes drives spin down quicker than a minute with this setting. It has the downside of sleeping disks quickly when you don't need them to and you still have to wait a little bit but it's not that bad. Unchecking the energy saver box will set it to 0 (disabled) and rechecking it will set it back to 10. You can check what it is set to using:

pmset -g

I don't know why they screw up on such important things. Having to force power off a hard drive is not a good thing to have to do, especially every time a drive is disconnected because it makes the drive head bang into the mechanical stop.

A while ago, they at least went some way to fixing the issue about not being able to eject volumes due to files in use but there are still issues with this too. If you move a file to trash that Quicklook takes time to decode and you open the trash to empty it, it says the trash can't be emptied because the file is in use. It's the Finder itself that has started Quicklook processing the file - the very same Finder trying to delete the file. This affects drive eject sometimes.

I can understand preventing eject or deletion in case of drive writes but surely not drive reads and definitely not if it's Quicklook because that's just a preview. Quicklook should be excluded from being able to block a drive eject or deletion and probably the Finder process itself as long as it's not in an explicit copy task on the drive.

The priority should be to complete the latest command the user issues so if a user says to eject a drive, the OS should be as ruthless as possible in shutting down processes using any files on the drive and do whatever it can to eject volumes and power down safely.
post #3 of 10
Thread Starter 

Thanks. I have solved my problem by changing my Time Machine from its Firewire connection to USB 2. I do not notice any slowing down of my iMac caused by the (slower) USB. My other Firewire discs are normally ejected because I don't need to access them very often. But anyone needing rapid access to data on a firewire drive, requiring the greater speed of firewire, are stuck.

 

I am really surprised that Apple have not fixed this with 10,9.1, or not been honest by simply telling us that they are ditching firewire and don't want to be bothered with bug repairs (although that would not be the actions of a caring supplier).

 

Have you thought of approaching Apple at Moderator level in AppleIinsider, asking for a statement of intent and a date for the bug to be fixed. Apple need to be put on the spot.

 

How about it?


Edited by Stevekir - 1/15/14 at 4:09pm
post #4 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevekir View Post

Have you thought of approaching Apple at Moderator level in AppleIinsider, asking for a statement of intent and a date for the bug to be fixed. Apple need to be put on the spot.

How about it?

Appleinsider isn't linked with Apple in any way but they usually pick up on issues people have and deal with them in their own time.
post #5 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
 Appleinsider isn't linked with Apple in any way but they usually pick up on issues people have and deal with them in their own time.

"in their own time" is very true, and can include years!

 

I wonder why a forum has to be linked to Apple to raise an important issue, especially one that has survived a .1 update of Mavericks, and bearing in mind how slow Apple can be in tackling bugs, for instance the 2 1/2 year old mouse cursor/pointer disappearing in Lion, M. Lion and now Mavericks.

 

I am disappointed with AppleInsider's relaxed view of its role in raising customer's problems.

post #6 of 10
Originally Posted by Stevekir View Post

I wonder why a forum has to be linked to Apple to raise an important issue, especially one that has survived a .1 update of Mavericks, and bearing in mind how slow Apple can be in tackling bugs, for instance the 2 1/2 year old mouse cursor/pointer disappearing in Lion, M. Lion and now Mavericks.

 

I am disappointed with AppleInsider's relaxed view of its role in raising customer's problems.

 

You don’t seem to have read the post you quoted.

 

We aren’t Apple. We have nothing to do with Apple. We have no influence at Apple. We have no way of ensuring your complaints get to Apple. AppleInsider is not Apple.

 

Do this.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #7 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

You don’t seem to have read the post you quoted.

 

We aren’t Apple. We have nothing to do with Apple. We have no influence at Apple. We have no way of ensuring your complaints get to Apple. AppleInsider is not Apple.

 

Do this.

I KNOW that!! I was suggesting that, being a discussion forum which is aimed (I presume but correct me if I am wrong) at helping users of Apple products, Marvin, with the position and authority of a Moderator, might therefore be seen by Apple as a responsible observer of the Apple scene and its problems rather than an oddball moaner; as a result, that he would stir himself to take this long-standing and productivity-damaging fault to Apple to see what they plan to do about it. Apple have not responded at all, let alone fixed the bug, despite countless alerts to Apple Feedback (to which you referred me) by many people over the years. Now we have the Firewire no-sleep bug which has survived a dot update to Mavericks without a peep from Apple.

 

But perhaps AppleInsider does not see itself as being proactive. That's fine by me, but not what I would expect of a discussion forum. Thanks for listening.

post #8 of 10
Originally Posted by Stevekir View Post
Marvin, with the position and authority of a Moderator, might therefore be seen by Apple as a responsible observer

 

The only thing they care about is if someone here posts their intellectual property before public release.

 

Think Secret learned that the hard way.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevekir View Post

I was suggesting that, being a discussion forum which is aimed (I presume but correct me if I am wrong) at helping users of Apple products, Marvin, with the position and authority of a Moderator, might therefore be seen by Apple as a responsible observer of the Apple scene and its problems rather than an oddball moaner

I think people make the wrong assumptions about what being a moderator means. All it takes is for someone running the website (a website that anyone can setup) to check a preference box to change an account status. The main thing with it is being trusted enough to not abuse it but Apple doesn't know anything about that. There's no reason to think that if I walked into Apple's HQ with the line 'don't you know who I am? I'm a moderator on Appleinsider' that they're going to take what I say more seriously. It would make zero difference the complaint coming from me as it would from you or anyone else. If it's an issue that ranks more highly than everything else they are dealing with, they'll give it some priority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevekir View Post

But perhaps AppleInsider does not see itself as being proactive. That's fine by me, but not what I would expect of a discussion forum. Thanks for listening.

It's exactly what you should expect of an internet forum. Everything on the internet is done because people can't be bothered doing it in real-life.
post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 

OK. Thanks. I sent a long-ish message to Macworld about the bugs in Apple's operating system, and wondering whether Apple paid as much attention to longstanding problems as they should, but got no response, not even an acknowledgement. There have been many posts on Apple Discussions about the 2 1/2 year old mouse cursor/pointer, and the Mavericks Firewire no-sleep problems, in the mouse case many tens of thousands of viewings.  There have been many complaints sent to Apple feedback. Not a peep from Apple, not one, over 2 1/2 years.

 

Apple could be taking the view that of all the millions of Apple computers and operating systems sold, a small percentage of ignored gripes is commercially acceptable. But my suppliers of computer software (other than Apple), cars, washing machines, TVs, cameras, satnavs etc etc. are more responsive to complaints and can actually be contacted and (get this) receive a response of some sort!. I'll bet that the makers of a robotically-assisted surgical operating systems are on the ball.

 

So there is no way for users to contact Apple and put them under pressure to fix their product. That problem seems permanent and part of the Apple experience. It would be acceptable if "It just works" was still in operation, but it isn't. We are not (yet) back to the pre-Jobs years of the 1990s when Apple computers often crashed, and a US Apple speaker at an Apple seminar in London advised users to re-start their Macs several times per day! But some Apple users on Apple Discussions find that a Mac is unusable for business or scientific use.

 

Grin and bear it seems the answer, and concentrate on the undoubted elegance of Apple's products.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Firewire not sleeping in Mavericks