Sponsored in part by... Readers Like You! READERS LIKE YOU! Support TidBITS with a contribution today!
<http://www.tidbits.com/about/support/contributors.html>
Special thanks this week to John O'Shaughnessy, Bob Dolan,
Robin S. Armstrong, and David M. Douds for their generous support!

 [F] TidBITS  / TidBITS  / TidBITS Talk  /

Backup 3.0 Observations

[Nik]Nik (apparently) - 08:31am Sep 21, 2005 PST
via email

Backup 3.0 is a very nice update for the under-featured backup
software. The ability to make arbitrary groups of files back up to
just about any media is quite welcome indeed. I was hoping that this
update would let me forego a planned purchase of Retrospect Desktop,
but it has a few glaring inadequacies compared to the more mature
Retrospect.

Here's a summary of problems/bugs I've discovered:

Firstly, burning to a CD or DVD requires enough disk space on your
drive to create a disk image of the target media. That means that you
EITHER need as much free space on your drive as you're backing up, or
enough free space to fill one disc. For CDs, no big deal, that's 700
MB tops, but for DVDs, keeping nearly 5 gigs free might be a
challenge for some users. (Myself included.)

Backup to HD works fine, but network backup isn't quite there yet.
Network backup WORKS, but only if the target backup location is
already mounted. Backup 3 will not mount a remote drive in order to
back up to it. If you don't have the network drive mounted, it will
churn (endlessly?) waiting for the volume to be mounted, and then
start the backup as soon as the volume appears. Presumably this is
the same way it will act if an external HD isn't available.

The spotlight search in order to create a backup target is a great
idea. What I thought it did, based on the description, was use smart
folder/saved search criteria to define a backup. That way you could,
for example, back up all files with a certain Finder label. As it
turns out, all it does is let you search as a plain search and then
select any/all the items in the search results and add them to the
backup set.

Without any ability to filter based on flexible criteria (label, file
name, etc...), backup is pretty much an all-or-nothing option for any
given folder. That's good enough for a lot of people, but if you need
more powerful backups, you're better off looking elsewhere.

However, it does finally give users the ability to make incremental
backups to optical media, make full backups to hard drives (not sure
if they'd be bootable clones or not), and adds flexible scheduling to
all these options. This is enough to BARELY meet the basic features
in "Take Control of MacOS X Backups," and is probably enough for a
large number of users.

Me, I think I'll just have to go buy Retrospect.

--Nik


Mark as Read
  OutlineAll MessagesOlder MessagesOldest MessagesNewest MessagesNewer Messages

Nik (apparently) - Sep 22, 2005 6:29 am (#1 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
via email  

Photo of Author
Posts: 386
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

On Sep 21, 2005, at 11:21 AM, Gordon Meyer wrote:

On Sep 21, 2005, at 8:31 AM, Nik wrote:


The spotlight search in order to create a backup target is a great

idea. What I thought it did, based on the description, was use smart

folder/saved search criteria to define a backup. 


I have not tested this, but is it possible to create a "smart folder" in the Finder, then add that folder to the backup set? This would seem to accomplish what you were trying to do. (A neat idea, by the way.)


As with pretty much every MacOS X application outside of the Finder, smart folders are files to Backup. Apparently it isn't coincidence that they're named ".savedsearch," because they are definitely NOT a Folder in any traditional sense.

--Nik

lord.flipper (apparently) - Sep 23, 2005 10:24 am (#2 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
via email  

Photo of Author
Posts: 2
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

>As with pretty much every MacOS X application outside of the Finder, smart folders are files to Backup. Apparently it isn't coincidence that they're named ".savedsearch," because they are definitely NOT a Folder in any traditional sense.
>
>--Nik

It's not that they aren't 'folder's' in any traditional sense, it is that a so-called 'folder' is simply a file containing a list of other files. So, 'folders' ARE files, in the traditional (and technically accurate) sense.

It's a Unix thing, remember, and in Unix everything is a file. It's the 'latecomers' to the world of 'operating systems' (Microsoft, Apple) that decided to make the ':' or "/" into a file with a 'folder icon' on it.

Brian Stegner

James Wilson - Sep 27, 2005 3:35 pm (#3 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
 

Photo of Author
Posts: 3
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

Me? I tried BU3 and will now buy Retrospect.

Killer problems with BU3 include: - No support for multisession writes to optical media. If your last backup puts 2MB onto the last DVD, then that's that, nothing more on that disk. For a home user this is not good enough.

- There are real problems restoring data to locations other than where it came from. This simply does not work for me (I only get an empty hierarchy of folders) and I see a lot of similar feedback on the Apple discussion boards.

- I want to be able to backup all the users on my Mac in one go. Backup 3 does not seem to be able to do this easily.

kori42 (apparently) - Sep 27, 2005 3:35 pm (#4 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
via email  

Photo of Author
Posts: 1
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

re Retrospect vs Backup 3.0
I've used Retrospect 3, 4, and 5 for years to back up PCs and Macs to
tape drives. But I have had little success with Retrospect 6.
It will hang trying to backup Tiger. It will try to backup far too
much, even with spotlight and caches skipped. It takes forever to
scan before it begins to back up. I cannot get it to back up to a
folder - it wants to take the entire Firewire drive. It will back up
to a FILE - but who wants a 20 gig file?

I have found Backup 3.0 very useful for backing up Safari,
Stickybrain files, os 9 files, password files, keychain, etc. Things
that I need to run the computer even if the HD dies - I back up to
iDisk. Other things like email, documents, etc I back up to a
firewire drive - which goes very fast.

I have also found Data Backup 2.0 from Prosoft to be very useful. It
has scripting and versioning and version limits. But with all things
in OS 10, it is hard to know what to select to back up. I have
2/3rds of an 80 gb drive filled, with 30gb being under my user name.
30 gb is too much to backup as a versioned backup as it rapidly fills
a 120gb external drive.

   So far, the only simple backup plan I have is to clone the entire
HD to an external. That is a lot faster than any of the backup
programs. Then use Backup 3.0 for special files.

lmdoc50 - Sep 27, 2005 3:35 pm (#5 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
 

Photo of Author
Posts: 1
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

Backup 3 only searches the internal hard drive for Purchased iTunes music. My iTunes music folder is on an external firewire hard drive so the Bup 3 plan for saving purchased music misses everything I purchased at the Apple Music Store. This is 2 gig worth of music. A lot of people store their music externally.

Apple needs to fix this glitch soon.

edward (apparently) - Sep 28, 2005 11:58 am (#6 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
via email  

Photo of Author
Posts: 275
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

At 03:35 PM 09/27/2005 -0700, Kori wrote:
>But I have had little success with Retrospect 6. It will hang trying to
>backup Tiger. It will try to backup far too much, even with spotlight and
>caches skipped. It takes forever to scan before it begins to back up.

I'm backing up a Tiger system using Retrospect 6.5, and have none of these
problems. Well, of course it backs up way too much, but that's simply
because way too much is pre-installed on a Tiger system. ;-) Has never
hung, takes no excessive time.

The caveat: Retrospect 6.5 is running under Windows XP, backing up a Tiger
system remotely, with the Retrospect Client on the Tiger system. Could make
a LOT of difference. Retrospect runs on Macs and Windows, and it's much the
same, but the two versions certainly are not clones of each other -- which
is not surprising given that parts of the program must interact with the OS
at a fairly low level.

>I cannot get it to back up to a folder - it wants to take the entire
>Firewire drive.It will back up to a FILE - but who wants a 20 gig file?

What you want is called a Disk backup set. It's much more flexible than a
File backup set, allows you to put it where you want (including members
spread across multiple disks), and put a limit on how much of a disk it can
use.

Caveat again: this is based on experience with the Windows version. I
*think* the Mac version 6 has Disk backup sets, but I haven't gone back to
the docs to check, and since it's been a couple of years since I ran it on
a Mac, my memory is rusty. OK, so my memory is rusty for things I did
yesterday too.

Edward
Art Works by Melynda Reid: http://paleo.org



Larry Rosenstein (apparently) - Sep 28, 2005 4:37 pm (#7 Total: 7)  

Reply to this message
via email  

Photo of Author
Posts: 94
Re: Backup 3.0 Observations

At 11:58 AM -0700 9/28/05, Edward Reid wrote:
>At 03:35 PM 09/27/2005 -0700, Kori wrote:
>>I cannot get it to back up to a folder - it wants to take the entire
>>Firewire drive.It will back up to a FILE - but who wants a 20 gig file?
>
>What you want is called a Disk backup set. It's much more flexible than a
>File backup set, allows you to put it where you want (including members

The Mac version of Retrospect 6 does have disk backup sets. These
can use multiple disks, but Retrospect erases and uses the entire
disk (essentially taking it over). I don't think there's an option to
use part of a disk.

There is a workaround, however, because Retrospect will use a mounted
disk image as a member of a disk backup set. Since Mac OS X has a
command line tool to create/mount disk images, and Retrospect
supports an AppleScript event handler, it is possible to (mostly)
automate this. It's not pretty, but I have been using it
successfully.

--
Larry Rosenstein
lrosensteincatsincharge.com



  OutlineAll MessagesOlder MessagesOldest MessagesNewest MessagesNewer Messages


 [F] TidBITS  / TidBITS  / TidBITS Talk  / Backup 3.0 Observations




Add a message

To add a message to this discussion, you must be a registered user. Enter your email address below. If you have an account associated with the email address you enter, you will be prompted for your password. If not, you'll be able to create a new account with no fuss.

Enter your email address:

Submit