[Dan Frakes]

trip1ex said:

This is just a fear mongering article.

I disagree. Many people are describing Time Machine as the ultimate/perfect backup tool. Joe was simply pointing out some of the drawbacks/limitations of Time Machine -- things the typical user may not understand.

trip1ex said:

The only other thing you need to do is store copies of some things off-site in case the worst happens. Most folks know that though.

I really disagree on that one ;) In my experience with users at various levels, hardly anyone who isn't a "computer geek" understands the need for an off-site backup. Once you explain the reasons for it to them, they get it, but they've simply never thought about it before.

[JoeKissell]

toor said:

At Macworld SF I played w/ a MacBook that had a NetGear ReadyNAS attached via ethernet and it was working w/ Time Machine just fine.

Time Machine can be hacked to back up to any network volume, but I have it on good authority from a source at Apple that doing so is playing with fire - it may look like everything's working, but when it comes time to restore files, you could find that some of your data is damaged or missing. Other than Time Capsule, no other NAS (currently) has all the necessary features Time Machine depends on to ensure the safety of your data.

I was as disappointed as the next person that Time Machine wouldn't work with my AirPort Disk (let alone third-party boxes), and I still hope Apple finds a way to fix that at some point without simply forcing us all to buy Time Capsule. I'm just saying: this is the state of affairs at the moment.

[JoeKissell]

cweber said:

I'm with all those who complained that this article is needlessly negative. Time Machine is a great tool for all those who have been lax about backups, which includes probably over 98% of the Mac using population.

My intention was not in any way to be negative. I like Time Machine, and I use it myself. I'm relieved that Apple has finally seen the importance of backups and built this into Mac OS X. However, as the author of numerous books and articles about backups, I've heard tons of feedback from actual users on how they do (or do not) back up their computers, and the point of this article was to address some of the range of ways people use backups. Time Machine really, truly, is not perfect for everyone, for the reasons I mentioned - but that's all I'm saying. If it's good for you, by all means use it! And also, I think almost everyone should have a separate bootable duplicate.

Quote

I don't understand the complaint about Time Machine's inability to use DVDs or CDs. Get real, with current hard drives over 100 GB no optical drive will realistically allow full backups without massive pain. I once archived my iTunes library to DVD, and even that required 5 disks and a LOT of time. Not something I am going to do routinely!

I couldn't agree more. However, lots of people (I know; they keep sending me email) feel they can't justify the cost of an external hard drive, but hey, they've got this built-in SuperDrive and DVDs are cheap, so why not just use those for backup? Personally, I wouldn't do this, but some people either can't or aren't willing to use a hard drive, and I wanted to be clear that this is the only sort of backup Time Machine will do.

Quote

Faulting a consumer level tool for not providing pro level features is generally uncool. Nobody says iPhoto is only good for a small subset of home users with the simplest of needs, and all others should look to a combination of Photoshop and Aperture. I applaud Apple for providing a credible backup tool as part fo the OS with dead simple setup. It'll bring comprehensive backups, even though slightly flawed in the eyes of a real pro, into the mainstream.

I, too, applaud Apple for delivering Time Machine - even with its limitations. I'm not faulting it because it doesn't have pro features; I'm pointing out that if you happen to need pro features, Time Machine doesn't have them and therefore is not for you.

[EmilSkoda]

Joe Kissell,

I did appreciate this article on TimeMachine -- I first read in the print edition, then re-read it online to glean further information. As I said previously, I hope there will be a followup article on TM to more precisely describe its process for discarding old data. And I look forward to the eventual review of Time Capsule -- I want to know if it's worth upgrading from my current AEBS and USB-hub connected drive to the Time Capsule.



Also, given all the recommendations to have off-site backups, a review of online backup services would be very useful! I set my wife's Mac up to backup to her .Mac account and found it almost unusable. It took nearly a week to get it working, as it would fail inexplicably, issuing useless errors. And at $100 for a meager 10 GB, it's too expensive and seems too small to be useful. I'd love to have a good survey of Mac-compatible online backup services to complement my Time Machine.

[JoeKissell]

EmilSkoda said:

Also, given all the recommendations to have off-site backups, a review of online backup services would be very useful! I set my wife's Mac up to backup to her .Mac account and found it almost unusable. It took nearly a week to get it working, as it would fail inexplicably, issuing useless errors. And at $100 for a meager 10 GB, it's too expensive and seems too small to be useful. I'd love to have a good survey of Mac-compatible online backup services to complement my Time Machine.

How about this for starters:
Easy online backups

Long story short: the interesting contenders at the moment are CrashPlan, Mozy, and Amazon S3; of these, Mozy is the cheapest for large quantities of data, but CrashPlan is more powerful and flexible (and still pretty darn cheap). I currently use CrashPlan for my own online backups.

[EmilSkoda]

Thanks for the link and the followup comments. I read that article when it came out. I was hoping for a more detailed followup to its big-picture description of backup options. I'd love to see reviews of specific online services -- in the style of normal hardware & software reviews -- that detailed the quality of service, price plans, and gave "Mouse" ratings to them. An article along the lines of Ars Technica's review (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/other/online-backup-solutions-a-review.ars) last summer.



For the home user -- having offsite backups won't happen unless it's through an online service. I'm a pretty savvy computer guy, and I'm not going to bother to rotate hard-drives from the office to a friend's house. But recommendations for affordable and usable online services could help many "normal" people have offsite backups and fill the gaps left by TimeMachine.



Thanks! (And I'll check out the sites you mentioned).

[galley]

Regarding SuperDuper--

The latest release (2.5) can now produce a bootable backup on the volume used by Time Machine, without partitioning.

I did have a problem when I booted from that backup the first time, where the Dock was crashing every few seconds. SuperDuper tech support supplied me with a Terminal command that corrected the problem:

update_prebinding -root "/Volumes/your-backup-volume-name" -force

If you get an error message about not having sufficient privileges, put "sudo" at the beginning of that line (no quotes) and enter your administrator password when prompted.

My MacBooks' internal drive is 80GB, and my backup USB drive is 160GB. After running Time Machine since Jan. 11, and adding a SuperDuper bootable backup of "all files", I still have almost 52GB free on that backup drive.

[galley]

{quote}Shouldn't any NAS that supports AFP work just the same?{quote}

It is my understanding that a Time Machine volume uses hard links for directories (folders), as well as for files. Apparently, most NAS systems lack the ability to create hard links for directories, which is an extension that Apple implemented to minimize the time and space it takes to do backups (otherwise, they would have to create a hard link for every individual file in every folder that had not changed). OS X 10.5 and Time Capsule understand directory hard links, so that is why Time Machine can use volumes shared from other Macs running Leopard or volumes plugged into Time Capsule.

That's what I've read, anyway.

[gpstein]

Below is a idea from MacOSXhints.com, it works great for me.
MacBook;(first generation)
10.5.2

Make a bootable Time Machine backup drive

Early on after Leopard was released, I followed this tip on how to make a small partition on my Time Machine ™ drive and clone a copy of my install DVD to it. The point here was to have faster access to the restore feature of TM, without the need to locate and boot from your install DVD. This worked well, but I've since discovered an even simpler method which does not necessitate the need to partition the TM drive.
Starting with a clean, newly-formatted TM drive, use Disk Utility and do a restore (source: Install DVD; Destination: TM drive). Once the restore has completed, you'll have a bootable TM drive which can be selected on startup by pressing and holding the Option key down. All that's left is to go into TM's preferences and select this drive for your TM backups.
Simple, quick, and works like a charm, without the need to partition the drive.

[seriousmac]

> Doesn’t Use AirPort Disks* If you have a hard drive attached to your AirPort Extreme Base Station—or for that matter, any network-attached storage (NAS) device except the Time Capsule—Time Machine won’t recognize it.
[/quote]
I have a Seagate external HDD hooked up to my PowerMac. When I am on the same network (at home) I can turn on my MacBookPro and TM recognizes the external drives hardwired to my PowerMac G5. I can then I can back wirelessly, which is very similar I suppose to what TimeCapsule does, except then I wouldn't have to go through another computer. TM creates a .sparse back up volume, which later on can be opened.

[3dmac]

Doesn’t Use AirPort Disks If you have a hard drive
attached to your AirPort Extreme Base Station—or for that matter, any
network-attached storage (NAS) device except the Time Capsule—Time
Machine won’t recognize it.

Well this isn't completely true !

I've been using a pair of IXmeta NetDisks NDAS attached to my Netgear MaxRange G wifi from day one with ZERO problems running Time Machine !

Totally invisable to anyone that may break into my network due to the fact that these will only be visible to those mac's or PC's that have the drive key ( 20 digit key specific to each disc). Cheaper and you can configure with any size hard drive you wish.

NetDisk - PC World's #1 Ranked Network Attached Storage Device - PC World 05/06

[phoenixbwp]

In certain situations; Yes. Others; No.
My case; yes. My iBook hard drive started acting weird. I use an external hard drive to back up all my files, but I don't have a bootable clone (No Firewire drives, just USB.)
When I got the iBook back from Apple Care, it took 1:15 to install Leopard and all the files I was working on. And I had to transfer files from my iMac to the iBook that I worked on while in the shop, and now everything is fine.
I don't use TM on my iMac, as I have an External Drive connected and keep everything there (and I offload only the keepsake files to another drive after one month, rotating the drives every six months, to see what a pack rat I am.)

[Greg_the_Gruesom]

The author of the article replied to another commenter who had a similar experience [here|m-617073] (hopefully, this link works).

[phoenixbwp]

Just wait; the money you spend now, will help on R&D for what you REALLY want.

With the Author stating that 'hard links' are used for files, this does cause some difficulty in making a working solution. But the current implantation of TM works, and simply. Use TM and another backup, and your safe.

Now, to all, a point to common sense: If you are complaining to Apple for features on keeping your data safe, I give a nice question to you: Do you own a safety deposit box?
An old tradition like this and other tech from the past, should be held for the future.

Apple Q&A'd about backing up, and they got the answer of NO, so they gave you something easy to work with.
There have been other free backup programs and now they work with Leopard, your choice. Don't complain about one option.
The option will evolve over time...