I am wondering as too what would be the difference with cloning vs using time machine? Seems redundant on the face of it. I've been using Tiger and never really needed to "go back" for a file.
But I also have SL on my machine and want to make a partition on an ext hd for either cloning or time machine....but not both 'cause, like I say, it 'sounds' like a redundant operation for the most part.
If that being the case...that they're basically the same...I'd probably stick with cloning, but, I'm ignorant on the time machine subject
But I also have SL on my machine and want to make a partition on an ext hd for either cloning or time machine....but not both 'cause, like I say, it 'sounds' like a redundant operation for the most part.
If that being the case...that they're basically the same...I'd probably stick with cloning, but, I'm ignorant on the time machine subject