Re: Fortune: Apple a YEAR ahead of the competition

"Tommy Tickler" <Smudge@xxxxxxxxx> stated in post
nmjhj.43259$z92.13438@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 1/9/08 11:58 PM:

Snit wrote:


Well, when you discount external and internal drives for backup, as you do,
then that limits you.

From using a Mac portable, I completely agree

Then do not set such limits on yourself.

, unless there is some third party OS X archiving app that will archive my
folders and files in a similar fashion to Shadow Copy.

Ah, so you are looking for Shadow Copy... not a solution to the problem -
even if it is easier for most users.

But the functionality in Vista is perfect for my archiving needs. I have
peace of mind in that I can go back in time and recover previous versions of
files and folders on an as required basis without the need for me to lug about
an external HDD, or partition my primary drive and give up a significant
portion of the capacity, or use a third party app, in the case of a Mac, to
create a daily image of my system.

Why not use a disk image and back up what you want with Time Machine?

....
Backup is not the goal. The goal is archiving, i.e. the ability to get
back previous versions of a file or folder.

Ah, Time Machine makes that easier than any other system I know of...

Yes, but has the limitations of requiring me to choose one of these two
unpalatable options:

1. Partition my primary drive (space is already cramped in there, so
cutting out a significant chunk to make room for TM to do its thing is
not for me.

2. Lug around an external drive. More gear to carry is not my goal.

How does it "require" you to do that, as opposed, for example, to use my
suggestion of a disk image?

So I will allow Vista's solution do its thing until Apple improve TM for
road warriors like me.

I do not deny that there is room for improvement in Time Machine, as
excellent as it is - but you keep discounting disk images.

You start putting Time Machine on the same physical HDD as your primary
drive, it could hardly be called a backup now could it.

Not interested in the semantic debate you are pushing.

I was merely pointing out that you cannot call data stored on the same
physical drive as the original data a backup.

Humoring you and looking up multiple definitions an argument could be made
either way. The arguments, frankly, hold little interest for me...

What has been really useful for me is archiving. I still backup data, but
thankfully never needed to restore. But there have been times when a document
has been edited, and I need to retrieve a copy of that document in the state
it was at an earlier time.

Pretty much the same story for me...

TM cannot do that, at least in a mobile context, without serious limitations.

What are the limitation you refer to if you use a disk image?

Vista can, and that's why I prefer to travel with Vista.

Travel with what pleases you... no argument here.

You keep saying this but not saying why... or commenting on disk images.
For this simple fact I am not sure what you are referring to by disk
images. Am I supposed to create a disk image daily and keep them stored
somewhere as travel about? Shadow Copy does this for me without any of
that hassle

No - create a variable size disk image that the OS sees as a separate
device... and use that for Time Machine. A disk image is a single file that
can be treated as a separate volume... you do have to mount the image for
the computer to work with it.

I am happy to explain things to you if you just admit you do not understand.
No shame in not understanding something... I certainly do not look down at
you for not knowing what a Disk Image is.

You tout simplicity as TMs big advantage over Vista's Previous Versions
feature, however now I need to make a variable size disk image?

Use Disk Utility... File > New > Disk Image

How would I use such an image to restore a version of an important word doc as
it was written say on September 20, but has been subsequently edited in
October, again in November?

Open the folder with the file (or do a search for it by any about any
criteria) and then invoke time machine... click the date you want *or* click
the arrow to take you to the last time there were changes in the view you
are looking at.

I will grant that Time Machine does not narrow down the changes for one file
unless you do a search that narrows things down to that one file. I wish it
highlighted the changes somehow.

You can also just open the volume with the backups and navigate to the
file... you sound like you know your way around a file system and since you
know the dates in question you can see where to go. To double check you can
use QuickLook to view the file before you copy it.

In Vista's case, I simply right click on the file, select properties, click on
the Previous Versions tab, and see a list of previous versions of the file. I
prefer that simplicity.

I do not deny that is simple... but it also takes you out of the "standard"
view... and does not work for items that users might not see as files, as
discussed before.

Do not get me wrong - I am not saying Previous Versions is not good or not
useful - but my original comment was that Time Machine allows for backups
(or archives) and retrievals in a way no other back up allows and, in many
cases, it is easier to use for most users. I have pointed out one weakness
of it, above (lack of telling you what changed in the folder you are
examining). I hope Apple improves that in later versions. Would also be
good to be able to click on a file and see its "Time Line" alone... giving
you what Previous Versions does... in a way that is similar to it.

--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing. - Edmund Burke

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: another Time Machine thread - still need SuperDuper?
    ... I was thinking of making the partition the same size as the Mac's boot ... experience with Time Machine, and someone who has a similar usage ... Machine backup looks like a complete copy of your data, ... I have two identical hard drives which I'll be using ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: another Time Machine thread - still need SuperDuper?
    ... I was thinking of making the partition the same size as the Mac's boot ... experience with Time Machine, and someone who has a similar usage ... Machine backup looks like a complete copy of your data, ... I have two identical hard drives which I'll be using ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: Time Machine error code -43
    ... The backup file system got ... all messed up and I had to erase the back up hard disk. ... Time Machine software like it can be done with Windows XP? ... I use TM to backup to two external FW drives: ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Time Machine error code -43
    ... The backup file system got ... all messed up and I had to erase the back up hard disk. ... Time Machine software like it can be done with Windows XP? ... I use TM to backup to two external FW drives: ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Time Machine to NAS - tips please
    ... I could use SuperDuper to backup to a networked disk image, ... Although you can get Time Machine to backup to non-Time Capsule network ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)