Re: Backing up
- From: Paul Russell <prussell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:07:45 +0100
Sak Wathanasin wrote:
In article <5eju02F380ut5U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Paul Russell <prussell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Retrospect doesn't "take charge" of your hard disk. You can specify subvolumes to back up and you can also create filters to include/exclude specific files using various criteria.
It's crap. Retrospect under OS9 was utterly reliable (I have backup tapes going back to 1999 to prove it). I'd take the prev night's tape out, shove in the next tape and it'd back up and shutdown my Mac. Under OSX, it's a dog: I don't dare have it shutdown the Mac or quit after backing up as it either locks up the Mac or causes a KP. And it's dog slow: that "scanning for changed files" pass takes forever. And it doesn't know how to wake the Mac up for a scheduled backup.
Yes, I've pretty much abandoned Retrospect under OS X. It's felt like an orphaned product for some years now and it's painfully slow at scanning large disks. I only keep it around for retrieving stuff from old archives. For cheap and cheerful backups I just use SuperDuper and external hard drives these days.
Paul
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Backing up
- From: Sara Kirk
- Re: Backing up
- References:
- Backing up
- From: DBSnappa
- Re: Backing up
- From: Paul Russell
- Re: Backing up
- From: Sak Wathanasin
- Backing up
- Prev by Date: Re: Firefox resume downloads?
- Next by Date: Re: Firefox resume downloads?
- Previous by thread: Re: Backing up
- Next by thread: Re: Backing up
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
