Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Updates Time Capsule to 1 TB and 2 TB Capacities
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was wondering if they ever fixed it so that you can use Time Machine to backup wirelessly via an Airport Extreme base station with a USB HD connected. Currently I use an iMac wireless to an Airport Extreme and a MacBook as well. But I have my Time Machine volume connected via firewire to my iMac and I would like to connect a larger volume to my Airport and have both Macs Time Machine through the Airport.
Was this solved?
Was this solved?
Ha ha, this forum is so funny. So many of you say, "Nice upgrade, but too expensive". This is a product that protects you from losing your valuable files while giving you a wireless solution within the whole package. The price complaint makes me laugh because many of the same people here are willing to pay up to $1000 for 256GB SSD just to get faster read/write speeds as if were all too lazy to wait for OS X to bounce the icon in the dock a few extra times before launching the app. 
A little over a year ago, I was in need of a new router, and also just had a hard drive fail on my primary mac (with my last hard backup being done about 3 months prior - oops). I picked up a 500 gig TC, and don't regret it. I think I paid 299 for it at the time, which considering the N band router, and cost of HD's, wasn't really all that bad a price. Sure, if you look at the cost of either item by itself, this costs more than other options - but, it's *fantastic* not having to worry about backups. I also use it as a wireless print server, so all of the computers on my network (macs and work pc's included) can print without problems (and it keeps my noisy laser in the basement, where it doesn't bother us).
But honestly, it always comes back to the ease of backups - I don't have to worry about remembering to plug in an external from time to time (or more importantly, my wife remembering to plug in an external from time to time) - I don't have to worry about anything - it just does its thing.
Now, when my new mac pro shows up (hopefully today or tomorrow), that will get an internal drive dedicated to backups (faster, cheaper), but I'm okay with that - not only do I have other macs on the network that will still need to be backed up, I really needed a decent router.
Anyhew, my decision to buy the 500 gig was based on the relative ease that the HD can be upgraded in these - I figured if I ran out of space, down the road I could just replace the drive (at a far cheaper cost than the price difference between the 500 gig and 1 tb were at the time). Here, a year later, it's starting to eliminate my older backup files (which doesn't bother me), and it's been backing up a 320 gig hard drive (which is mostly full) - it's been a great purchase. And knowing that my pictures (~19,000 family pics on the computer) are safe is worth it to me. Raid on my backup didn't make too much sense - there's a lot of extra cost involved, and you're only protecting against the odds that both your primary drive and your backup drive (located in different areas) are going to die at the same time... I'd rather save the money and have a single drive for backup, personally.
But honestly, it always comes back to the ease of backups - I don't have to worry about remembering to plug in an external from time to time (or more importantly, my wife remembering to plug in an external from time to time) - I don't have to worry about anything - it just does its thing.
Now, when my new mac pro shows up (hopefully today or tomorrow), that will get an internal drive dedicated to backups (faster, cheaper), but I'm okay with that - not only do I have other macs on the network that will still need to be backed up, I really needed a decent router.
Anyhew, my decision to buy the 500 gig was based on the relative ease that the HD can be upgraded in these - I figured if I ran out of space, down the road I could just replace the drive (at a far cheaper cost than the price difference between the 500 gig and 1 tb were at the time). Here, a year later, it's starting to eliminate my older backup files (which doesn't bother me), and it's been backing up a 320 gig hard drive (which is mostly full) - it's been a great purchase. And knowing that my pictures (~19,000 family pics on the computer) are safe is worth it to me. Raid on my backup didn't make too much sense - there's a lot of extra cost involved, and you're only protecting against the odds that both your primary drive and your backup drive (located in different areas) are going to die at the same time... I'd rather save the money and have a single drive for backup, personally.
Awesome! Does anybody know if any of the other specs changed in the new model or just the storage?
So is Thursday the new Tuesday? Time Capsule this week, Final Cut Studio and Logic last week...
would you rather go back to the days of updated stuff only at Macworld, WWDC and first of Oct.
Yup... but would be nice to have one w/o wireless router. I've got one already
it's called a hard drive. about 50 different companies make them. try your local best buy
No RAID1 = no sale for me sadly.
it would be nice if they updated the software so you could run a raid on a TC, perhaps with Snow Leopard
Why does speed matter? The backups run in the background. As long as each one is finished before the next one is scheduled to start you are fine. I rarely notice if TM is doing a backup.
That's because other companies fit tech advances into their products, not like Apple which waits until tech advances fit its price structure.
Which would you rather have, new and improved for $100+ now, or, 6-12 months later for same price? Apple makes the decision for you.
Quicker Time Machine backup.
Introduced in Mac OS X Leopard, the revolutionary Time Machine made backing up your hard drive easy for the first time. Time Capsule took backup even further with its wireless hard drive that works seamlessly with Time Machine. Now Snow Leopard makes Time Machine up to 50 percent faster and reduces the time it takes to complete your initial backup to Time Capsule.
for me, as much as i love this product, it smacks as being too high a margin for me. Apple is definitely padding their margins on a product that ought to come in a bit lower.
for me its about $100 too much
for me its about $100 too much
One of the largest causes of data loss is theft of the equipment and things like fires. TM is not going to help with those. Other causes are operator error and software failures. Again TM will not help
If you care about the data jst follow a couple rules:
1) Keep the data on at least three different physical media
2) Keep the data in at least two different geographical locations
Youcan count the Time Machine drive is "1" in each of these rules. One is beter than zero but not as good as 3 and 2.
And also, most importantly, The above should be true DURING a backup operation. So if your backup software wipes out the last backup before writing the new one you need to keep four four copies. Same wit off sire rotation, You need enough to do a rotation so that at least one is always off site. You might say "what's that change of a disk failure occurring during the few minutes it takes to run a backup? I'd argue that is the most likely time. If you are a typical move user running a backup is the most stressful thing you do to your disk drives.
Very few people bother with this so.....
I predict that in 100 years there will be almost no 100 year old photos, except for those printed onto photographer by machines at drug stores.
RAID1 does give you some protection. To me it's fine enough for home purposes, I don't need a RAID5.
Naturally this happens the DAY after I purchase a 1 TB hard drive and NAS enclosure.
Oh well. I think my new D-Link DNS-323 will do more for me than a Time Capsule, anyway.
Oh well. I think my new D-Link DNS-323 will do more for me than a Time Capsule, anyway.
I love my 500gb - and i don't use it as a backup device (unless you count manual moving of stuff around). But it's a great central storage unit between the 4 computers.
I wish it was the new dual band one, but well, considering it got it free from Apple for a customer service fiasco - i'm not complaining. It's something i never would have bought myself either - but now that i have it, i can't imagine life without it!
When the warranty runs out i'll probably ponder doing an upgrade on the drive.
I would start putting money away if it had been an iTunes server.
I wish it was the new dual band one, but well, considering it got it free from Apple for a customer service fiasco - i'm not complaining.
It's something i never would have bought myself either - but now that i have it, i can't imagine life without it!When the warranty runs out i'll probably ponder doing an upgrade on the drive.
I would start putting money away if it had been an iTunes server.
The VM file is actually a bundle, with some config files and then a binary that is the Windows virtual hard drive image. That image is by far the big byte-eater here, so the way to handle your issue is to somehow mount that on the OS X side. At that point Time Machine will treat it like any other mounted disk.
Luckily, Parallels has a tool to do just that: Parallels Mounter. Presto! Incremental backups of your Win data. If you were to ever recover from a disk loss you'd have to recreate the Parallels virtual machine, but you'd be able to clone the data back to Windows after setting it up.
Ha ha, this forum is so funny. So many of you say, "Nice upgrade, but too expensive". This is a product that protects you from losing your valuable files while giving you a wireless solution within the whole package. The price complaint makes me laugh because many of the same people here are willing to pay up to $1000 for 256GB SSD just to get faster read/write speeds as if were all too lazy to wait for OS X to bounce the icon in the dock a few extra times before launching the app.
...and so does a 1TB 3.5" drive in an enclosure for $80...the only diff is that you have to plug it into a USB port.
And I doubt the people who are complaining about this are in the market for a $1000 SSD.
I'm guessing when I upgrade to Snow Leopard I'll have to start a new Time Machine backup? Sounds like a good time to upgrade my 500GB to 2TB (I want to include all of my media this time).
Uhh.. that doesn't usually happen. Typically, newer generation of product retain the pricepoints of the product being replaced. The only different with Apple is that they NEVER lower the prices of the current product, and simply replace it. With other companies, the price is actually lower since the launch, hence why the product replacing it will be more expensive. There's no advantage to the consumer with Apple's approach, since you're often paying way, way too much for outdated hardware.
And 299/499 for 1/2TB is anything but cheap. I bought a 1TB drive for $79 the other day. I know Timecapsule includes a wireless router, but still.
Time capsule storage is managed
Some one earlier in this thread said their time capsule was almost full of backups. Well that is the point of the device. It will backup hourly daily weekly until it is full. Then it will start to delete the oldest backups for you. That is a great backup device IMHO. I can go into time machine and find backups from almost a year ago, and mine has started pruning out the oldest backups. That is exactly what I wanted in a backup device, one I could hook up and forget about.
Some one earlier in this thread said their time capsule was almost full of backups. Well that is the point of the device. It will backup hourly daily weekly until it is full. Then it will start to delete the oldest backups for you. That is a great backup device IMHO. I can go into time machine and find backups from almost a year ago, and mine has started pruning out the oldest backups. That is exactly what I wanted in a backup device, one I could hook up and forget about.