Do you think Time Machine can replace my Super Duper?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by orbitalpunk, Nov 2, 2007.

  1. orbitalpunk macrumors 6502

    orbitalpunk

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    #1
    Hi guys,

    Im a super duper user considering to switching to time machine but am not sure if 1, its safe (stable) and 2, well, just better to use.

    I have 3 drives right now. my macintosh hd, media drive and backup of media drive. currently i have super duper do two things once a week. first back up my mail folder to the media drive and the backup the media drive to its backup drive. one thing that i think, and correct me if im wrong, i could benefit from using TM is that say i have a system crash 2 days ago. my weekly backup will miss all that info. but in TM, it will catch it. right? so that is the plus. so my restoration has more versatility with TM. i dont care about making a bootable copy cause im not backing up my boot drive. all my docs and pics are on drive number 2. my only concern is if TM is so far reliable and stable. please post if you've seen TM seriously malfunction.

    Thanks for reading.
     
  2. rhoydotp macrumors 6502

    rhoydotp

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    #2
    you might want to do the following:

    - tm for the first backup disk
    - superduper to duplicate the first to the second backup disk

    you get the benefit of tm + redundancy
     
  3. RumMunkey macrumors 6502a

    RumMunkey

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    +1

    OR... you can run TM as a normal back up for retrieving lost files when needed, and do a Super Duper to another drive every-so-often as a rock solid bootable backup (you can't boot from TM remember, it'll only do a restore once you've fixed whatever problem you had then re-install a fresh OS).

    By and large each has their own place, but they can work together quite well I'd imagine.
     
  4. richard.mac macrumors 603

    richard.mac

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    51.50024, -0.12662
    #4
    TM will never substitute superduper for me. ive currently got TM set to only backup my library and users in the root of the hard drive and my third party applications. i use super duper to make a clone of my whole hard drive. if i loose my TM backups ive then got a complete clone of my hard drive that i can restore instantly. also superduper is very useful when doing maintenance on your main hard drive. you can boot into the superduper clone and use disk utiltiy, ipartition, idefrag etc etc.
     
  5. orbitalpunk thread starter macrumors 6502

    orbitalpunk

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    #5
    as mentioned in my first post i am not interested in booting of this backup. its just camera raw files, docs and mp3s. and having a superduper and tm is expensive hardware wise. i would have to add a 3 drive for the extra back up and im using 500gb drives now. 2 500gb was expensive enough. i understand some of you still like superduper cause you can boot with. but even if i use superduper, i cant boot onto a bunch of photos and songs. its jsut media, not an OS. i had hoped someone could be in the a similar situation and shed any light as to if TM seemed pretty stable and reliable.

    thanks again for the input
     
  6. koobcamuk macrumors 68040

    koobcamuk

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    #6
    This is great advice and what I do :)
     

Share This Page