Time Machine: Spit!!!
in [UK Mac]
|
From: T i m on 19 Nov 2009 17:15 On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:47:13 +0000, thewildrover(a)me.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote: >> >> http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?moduleno=341961 > >But that's another �30 on top of a hard drive, and as far as I can see, >doesn't really have any advantage over Time Machine. Other than if you don't have TM or OSX you mean, ;-) > >It also doesn't seem to have anyway to control what drives are backed up >either (reading the FAQ answers) - I've looked into that a bit and I think you can add folders but then I think it takes away it's automation to some degree. Or you can set it to do a complete backup. Obviously not the same as a disk image but at least it could be done by yer Nan. ;-) > I have four external volumes here, >which I exclude from Time Machine, as they are for storage of large >stuff, like scratch file, my Aperture Library, and the backup Vaults for >that, as well as a Super Duper clone. I think this dongle would just see any 'data', although you can taylor the file types considered as 'data' so may be able to exclude that sort of stuff? > >You actually need to exclude the Aperture Library from live backups >while Aperture is in use - that's more to do with how Aperture uses the >library though. Ok. > >> Plug it into your PC/Mac and into yer USB drive and it does it all for >> you. > >So does Time Machine if you leave it at default settings, which most >probably will do. OK, so it's one click to say 'Yes' (or 'No') to using >an external drive for Time Machine, but big deal. It appears this solution might also need a click to TM ... like 'No' don't use it'. ;-) Unfortunately it also seems happy to restore the existing data that's on there (telling me it's a windows backup) but didn't give me any backup options., probably because there was no Mac friendly space on the external drive. I'll pop it in W7 and shrink that partition down and then use DU to put a suitable one on there as well (what type would I need)? > >> >> Probably not expensive or unpredictable (or white) enough for most Mac >> users but that makes it perfect for me. ;-) > >Erm, it's *more* expensive than my current Mac setup! Well, because you have TM on there. > Time Machine is >included with the OS, 10.5 + as I understand it? > and seems to work predictably enough on my system >- at least as *I* expect it to work anyway :-). I'm sure you are right (although not so for some there). > >Possibly a good solution for those on older systems that don't have Time >Machine though. Or less tekky family members with Windows as well (to make full use of it and do something TM couldn't do). I also like it's portability. You could take your backup to any machine with no matching backup software and restore your data. Or backup that machine etc, and to any USB drive (they sell a ClickFree drive as well). How would TM cope under that scenario (multiple machines locally to the same drive shared about)? Cheers, T i m
From: Andy Hewitt on 19 Nov 2009 19:14 T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:47:13 +0000, thewildrover(a)me.com (Andy Hewitt) > wrote: > > >> > >> http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?moduleno=341961 > > > >But that's another �30 on top of a hard drive, and as far as I can see, > >doesn't really have any advantage over Time Machine. > > Other than if you don't have TM or OSX you mean, ;-) Quite, but this is a thread about TM! > >It also doesn't seem to have anyway to control what drives are backed up > >either (reading the FAQ answers) - > > I've looked into that a bit and I think you can add folders but then I > think it takes away it's automation to some degree. Or you can set it > to do a complete backup. Obviously not the same as a disk image but at > least it could be done by yer Nan. ;-) Yes, so can TM at it's most basic level though. Plug in a hard drive, and click 'Yes'. > > I have four external volumes here, > >which I exclude from Time Machine, as they are for storage of large > >stuff, like scratch file, my Aperture Library, and the backup Vaults for > >that, as well as a Super Duper clone. > > I think this dongle would just see any 'data', although you can taylor > the file types considered as 'data' so may be able to exclude that > sort of stuff? Unless it has software included to control it, I don't see how. The implications are that it has no such control. [..] > >So does Time Machine if you leave it at default settings, which most > >probably will do. OK, so it's one click to say 'Yes' (or 'No') to using > >an external drive for Time Machine, but big deal. > > It appears this solution might also need a click to TM ... like 'No' > don't use it'. ;-) Unfortunately it also seems happy to restore the > existing data that's on there (telling me it's a windows backup) but > didn't give me any backup options., probably because there was no Mac > friendly space on the external drive. I'll pop it in W7 and shrink > that partition down and then use DU to put a suitable one on there as > well (what type would I need)? That may not work, although I'm not sure, as I've not tried it myself. For TM to use a drive it does need to be formatted in HFS+ with a GUID or Apple Partition map. Formatting a partition to HFS+ is fine, but you'll have to set all partitions to the same partition map type - it won't work on a MBR disk, or one formatted for Windows (according to Help). > >> Probably not expensive or unpredictable (or white) enough for most Mac > >> users but that makes it perfect for me. ;-) > > > >Erm, it's *more* expensive than my current Mac setup! > > Well, because you have TM on there. Yes. > > Time Machine is > >included with the OS, > > 10.5 + as I understand it? Correct. > > and seems to work predictably enough on my system > >- at least as *I* expect it to work anyway :-). > > I'm sure you are right (although not so for some there). Being a little pedantic, it works 'predictably', but not always in a manner that some require. That's the same for most software though - you can't please all of the people all of the time, etc. > >Possibly a good solution for those on older systems that don't have Time > >Machine though. > > Or less tekky family members with Windows as well (to make full use of > it and do something TM couldn't do). Would a 'less tekky' family member be likely to have both a Mac and Windows machine? In the case of different family members having their own machine, would you really want to risk all their backups on one piece of hardware? I have a Windows machine here, but it's not got anything on it that even warrants the cost of a cheap backup drive, however, it has one, and I just use the built in backup software as supplied with Windows (which took a lot more effort than TM). > I also like it's portability. You could take your backup to any > machine with no matching backup software and restore your data. Or > backup that machine etc, and to any USB drive (they sell a ClickFree > drive as well). > > How would TM cope under that scenario (multiple machines locally to > the same drive shared about)? It's possible, although not necessarily cheaply. I can do it by connecting a drive to my Airport Extreme, and then all Macs with TM can backup to that drive. Personally I wouldn't do that, it's just increased risk of losing backup data for multiple machines IMHO. I certainly wouldn't want to be using a single backup drive as a source for multiple machines though. Far too much risk of losing stuff for my liking. The whole point of TM is to be able to restore, whether it's a new hard drive, or a reinstall, or to a newly purchased Mac. You can choose to restore from a given point in time, and whether to restore an entire system, or just user data. All the best. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.me.com/andrewhewitt1/>
From: T i m on 20 Nov 2009 05:09 On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:14:09 +0000, thewildrover(a)me.com (Andy Hewitt) wrote: >Quite, but this is a thread about TM! Since when has that made any difference. ;-) > >> >It also doesn't seem to have anyway to control what drives are backed up >> >either (reading the FAQ answers) - >> >> I've looked into that a bit and I think you can add folders but then I >> think it takes away it's automation to some degree. Or you can set it >> to do a complete backup. Obviously not the same as a disk image but at >> least it could be done by yer Nan. ;-) > >Yes, so can TM at it's most basic level though. Plug in a hard drive, >and click 'Yes'. Ok. > >> > I have four external volumes here, >> >which I exclude from Time Machine, as they are for storage of large >> >stuff, like scratch file, my Aperture Library, and the backup Vaults for >> >that, as well as a Super Duper clone. >> >> I think this dongle would just see any 'data', although you can taylor >> the file types considered as 'data' so may be able to exclude that >> sort of stuff? > >Unless it has software included to control it, I don't see how. It does and that's *the point* of this dongle. It has a virtual CD thing like these USB BB dongles that autorun on insertion. > The >implications are that it has no such control. Plug in, click 'Yes' to the agreement (the first time on that machine) and away it goes. > >[..] >> It appears this solution might also need a click to TM ... like 'No' >> don't use it'. ;-) Unfortunately it also seems happy to restore the >> existing data that's on there (telling me it's a windows backup) but >> didn't give me any backup options., probably because there was no Mac >> friendly space on the external drive. I'll pop it in W7 and shrink >> that partition down and then use DU to put a suitable one on there as >> well (what type would I need)? > >That may not work, although I'm not sure, as I've not tried it myself. This backup dongle onto an external drive with a suitable Mac partition? >For TM to use a drive it does need to be formatted in HFS+ with a GUID >or Apple Partition map. Formatting a partition to HFS+ is fine, but >you'll have to set all partitions to the same partition map type - it >won't work on a MBR disk, or one formatted for Windows (according to >Help). So what would you recommend for a file system for this Mini / Backup (under OSX) then please? > >> > and seems to work predictably enough on my system >> >- at least as *I* expect it to work anyway :-). >> >> I'm sure you are right (although not so for some there). > >Being a little pedantic, it works 'predictably', but not always in a >manner that some require. That's not quite what I'm reading here (but I could easily be reading 'it ate my data' and not realising that was what it was supposed to do .... under any circumstances). > That's the same for most software though - you >can't please all of the people all of the time, etc. <Nods> > >> >Possibly a good solution for those on older systems that don't have Time >> >Machine though. >> >> Or less tekky family members with Windows as well (to make full use of >> it and do something TM couldn't do). > >Would a 'less tekky' family member be likely to have both a Mac and >Windows machine? Quite possibly (my Mum and Dad have one each). My point was more that with the dongle you CAN do both. > In the case of different family members having their >own machine, would you really want to risk all their backups on one >piece of hardware? Versus not doing a backup at all, yes. > >I have a Windows machine here, but it's not got anything on it that even >warrants the cost of a cheap backup drive, however, it has one, and I >just use the built in backup software as supplied with Windows (which >took a lot more effort than TM). Indeed, 'takes effort'. I was just mentioning this dongle thing (in a thread about backing up) as something that some might find handy for their friends / family that they know they should do some sort of backup but don't. > >> I also like it's portability. You could take your backup to any >> machine with no matching backup software and restore your data. Or >> backup that machine etc, and to any USB drive (they sell a ClickFree >> drive as well). >> >> How would TM cope under that scenario (multiple machines locally to >> the same drive shared about)? > >It's possible, although not necessarily cheaply. I can do it by >connecting a drive to my Airport Extreme, and then all Macs with TM can >backup to that drive. Personally I wouldn't do that, it's just increased >risk of losing backup data for multiple machines IMHO. And way way too complicated. This was just a practical down_n_dirty solution that would allow even the most lazy and non technical person actually have a reasonable chance of saving some of their most important data. > >I certainly wouldn't want to be using a single backup drive as a source >for multiple machines though. Far too much risk of losing stuff for my >liking. Me neither, so we share the dongle but have a drive each. ;-) > >The whole point of TM is to be able to restore, whether it's a new hard >drive, or a reinstall, or to a newly purchased Mac. You can choose to >restore from a given point in time, and whether to restore an entire >system, or just user data. Of course and from what I've read here (of those who have actually got TM running and had to use it in earnest and it has behaved as they expected ... which isn't everyone by the look of it) it's a very clever / good solution. I was only making light hearted comparisons. ;-) Cheers, T i m
From: Tim Streater on 20 Nov 2009 05:49 On 20/11/2009 10:09, T i m wrote: > Of course and from what I've read here (of those who have actually got > TM running and had to use it in earnest and it has behaved as they > expected ... which isn't everyone by the look of it) it's a very > clever / good solution. Not sure what you mean by "got it working", as if I have to re-install the OS with a magnifying glass and a bar magnet as my only tools. If you backup to a disk on your own machine, its a couple of clicks (and more if you want to exclude it from backing up everything, obviously). If you back up to a disk *not* on your machine, then the extra complication is limited to ensuring that the drive you want to back up to is mounted and writeable. I do both of these and it was dead simple. Occasionally the backup of mine onto hers fails, but that is due to something fishy with how 10.5 seems not to find disks from time to time when the other machine is asleep and I don't wake it up soon enough. Nothing to do with TM - when that happens I can't access those disks, full stop. Then I have to fiddle with Finder->Go->Connect to server which usually fixes it, and I then tell it to back up and it does so. No data lost, you'll note.
From: T i m on 20 Nov 2009 06:15
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:49:08 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: >On 20/11/2009 10:09, T i m wrote: > >> Of course and from what I've read here (of those who have actually got >> TM running and had to use it in earnest and it has behaved as they >> expected ... which isn't everyone by the look of it) it's a very >> clever / good solution. > >Not sure what you mean by "got it working", Nor do I ... where did I say that? All I am suggesting is that TM isn't a suitable solution for everyone, even those who have access to it and would like to like it. >as if I have to re-install >the OS with a magnifying glass and a bar magnet as my only tools. ? > >If you backup to a disk on your own machine, its a couple of clicks (and >more if you want to exclude it from backing up everything, obviously). Ok? > >If you back up to a disk *not* on your machine, then the extra >complication is limited to ensuring that the drive you want to back up >to is mounted and writeable. > Ok? >I do both of these and it was dead simple. It must have been! <ducks> >Occasionally the backup of >mine onto hers fails, Ok. > but that is due to something fishy with how 10.5 >seems not to find disks from time to time when the other machine is >asleep and I don't wake it up soon enough. Nothing to do with TM - when >that happens I can't access those disks, full stop. Fair enough (well not but I know what you mean). > Then I have to >fiddle with Finder->Go->Connect to server which usually fixes it, and I >then tell it to back up and it does so. No data lost, you'll note. Because you get that fixed before her machine crashes I've noted, yes. Anyway, I have no issues with TM and am glad it works for you. Cheers, T i m |