Backup software
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: TaliesinSoft on 4 Oct 2007 18:17 On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:34:46 -0500, Daniel Cohen wrote (in article <1i5hd7b.1v22itciiu6z5N%danspam(a)f2s.com>): [responding to my request to detail advantages of the recent update of CarbonCopyCloner over SuperDuper!] > Have a look, play with it, and see for yourself. I haven't actually used > CCC yet. > > One thing is that if one does not want to clone everything (for instance, > if one has movie or music files that are separately backed up) it can be > done with SuperDuper but the explanation of how to do it is a bit > complicated, whereas with CCC it seems easy. I think there are other > places where CCC is easier. In my case my backup partitions, all eight of them, are at this time all larger than the hard drives they backup, so there is no advantage to me, at least that I see, to omit anything from the "Smart" backups that SuperDuper! automatically performs each day. As an aside, and as I've stated in other threads, my expectation is that my backup strategy, once Leopard is released, will emply a combination of TimeMachine and SuperDuper!. -- James Leo Ryan ..... Austin, Texas ..... taliesinsoft(a)mac.com
From: Jolly Roger on 4 Oct 2007 18:37 On 2007-10-04 17:00:41 -0500, me(a)home.spamsucks.ca (Kir�ly) said: > Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: >> I figured as much. I'm not willing to do without password protection. >> I guess I'll have to try getting my wife to go to the login window when >> she's done. I'm not sure that'll be a good solution though - even *I* >> would tend to forget to do that every so often. For now I've resorted >> to disabling computer sleep on that machine. > > I programmed a keyboard shortcut to first switch to the login window and > then sleep the Mac. I wrote an Automator app to run two Terminal commands > to do each of the above, and used XKeys to launch that app when I press > F13. It works a treat. > > The Terminal commands are: > > /System/Library/CoreServices/Menu\ > Extras/User.menu/Contents/Resources/CGSession -suspend > > sleep 3 > > osascript -e 'tell application "System Events" to sleep' > > Watch out for the line wrap on the first one - it should all be on one > line. Cool thanks. I guess what I would prefer, though, would be to have the system automatically do this after being idle for a certain amount of time. That way if my wife uses the computer to look up something on the web and then walks away, after a specified amount of time the computer would automatically bring up the login window without logging her out. I may look into automating that somehow when I find time. -- Note: Please let me know if you send email to this address so that I can be sure your email doesn't get eaten by pobox.com's ultra-aggressive SPAM filter. Help improve Usenet: * Learn proper Usenet etiquette: http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html * Kill-file Google Groups: http://improve-usenet.org/ JR
From: Jolly Roger on 4 Oct 2007 18:41 On 2007-10-04 17:12:36 -0500, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> said: > In article <2007100416103616807-jollyroger(a)poboxcom>, > Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > >>> Set your Mac to wake up at 5 am and shut down at 7 am; program your >>> backup software to automatically back up at 5:15 am. >> >> The last time I tried that, the computer went right back to sleep >> just a minute or so later (maybe because I wasn't at the console >> moving the mouse or typing?), which wasn't very helpful. > > You have to set the Energy preferences not to put the computer to sleep. > Set the monitor to sleep, but not the computer or hard disk. Yep, and I do that, but then there's the energy consumption problem. I want my cake and eat it too, I guess. We already have the System Preferences > Security > Log out after -n- minutes of inactivity setting. I would love it if Apple would allow us to instead say: [Switch to Login Window] after -n- minutes of inactivity. That way sleeping the computer wouldn't be as much of a problem, because waking it up at the login window wouldn't result in it going right back to sleep due to inactivity. -- Note: Please let me know if you send email to this address so that I can be sure your email doesn't get eaten by pobox.com's ultra-aggressive SPAM filter. Help improve Usenet: * Learn proper Usenet etiquette: http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html * Kill-file Google Groups: http://improve-usenet.org/ JR
From: Jim Glidewell on 5 Oct 2007 12:41 The New Guy <replytogroup(a)here.thanks> wrote: >> > > > Or did I miss something? > >> > > Oh, I'd say so... >> > >> > Well that was a lightning fast reply. So what did I miss? >> >> Oh, about a zillion _ing threads on _ing backup software over the last >> few weeks. >> >> > I'd love >> > to get this working properly with either SuperDuper, Retrospect or >> > Silverkeeper. If I need something else, I'll get that too. >> > Suggestions would be most valuable. > > Dave you're great at putdowns. At solutions you're sadly lacking. > Try to contribute some time. It would be most appreciated. If its > simple, it should be simple to explain. I've found that Dave is quite helpful to people who aren't lazy and/or idiots. Your unwillingness to actually read the documentation puts you in the former camp, while your failure to understand the incredibly helpful and detailed postings you've already received hints at the latter. As Dave notes, there have been many, many threads about Mac backups in these newsgroups, and there were many contributions to those threads that did not have the wonderful x-no-archive tag, so you are free to read them via a simple search using groups.google.com. But you expect us to spoon-feed you answers, wasting our time instead of investing a bit of your own in reading past threads and what is actually quite good documentation from EMC/Dantz. Your sense of entitlement is distasteful and unattractive.
From: Jim Glidewell on 5 Oct 2007 12:53
M-M <nospam.m-m(a)ny.more> wrote: > In article > <replytogroup-F737C4.12501203102007(a)news.lga.highwinds-media.com>, > The New Guy <replytogroup(a)here.thanks> wrote: > >> I >> never use "Users, Documents, My Folders, Etc). My folders are in the >> same column that Users are in. > > > Not a good idea. If there is another user on your computer they have > access to your stuff. > > If you are the only one to use your computer, I guess it can't be that > bad, but you really should keep all your personal stuff in your user > folder- that way it is readable/writable only to you. > What's particularly dumb about his strategy is that he could accomplish the exact same thing by simply creating a folder (or folders) in his home directory, and create corresponding aliases where he wants them. I am eagerly awaiting the day where he finds out that his clever and efficient plans for user file management (so much superior to Apple's default) and his optimized backup scheme (which ignores the too-deeply- nested home directory) results in him losing all his photos, music, etc. which reside in his "unused" home directory (which *obviously* didn't need to be backed up). We will then be treated to a diatribe about how Apple should have prevented him from doing anything so stupid... |