Actually, thinking about this, it would mean a media player that crashes, incompatibility for older programs, your old data being copied incorrectly AND your new data being trashed...
These symptoms remind me of something... can't think what... hmm
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.
OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard Build 10A335 Seeded to Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, thinking about this, it would mean a media player that crashes, incompatibility for older programs, your old data being copied incorrectly AND your new data being trashed...
These symptoms remind me of something... can't think what... hmm
Say you have a lot of data saved on an external drive synched though Time Machine..
If you install SL, is there any way to get that data onto SL? Not really sure how all this stuff works..
If you install SL, is there any way to get that data onto SL? Not really sure how all this stuff works..
Say you have a lot of data saved on an external drive synched though Time Machine..
If you install SL, is there any way to get that data onto SL? Not really sure how all this stuff works..
You can just open the most recent backup folder ("latest") and just copy the stuff you want to keep. Restoring old applications or obscure settings and libraries can get ugly, even if you're staying with the same OS.
Try to make a fresh start, download all of those little open source apps you have again and re-install major application (office, iLife, Photoshop, etc.).
Can someone explain if opencl and grand central have been implemented yet and to what extent they have? These are pretty huge updates on the way
The os handles things and I am wondering how they are going along but everything has been suspiciously silent.
The os handles things and I am wondering how they are going along but everything has been suspiciously silent.
That does sound more straightforward.. I always have errors during my Time Machine backups anyway.. bet my external drive is a mess
Wow, you mean, Juno is on a separate development track than a new operating system? I can't believe it. Unless you work for Apple and understand the reasons why Juno has taken so long to be released, your post is just ignorant of the facts.
Oh yeah,
Just like how Snow Leopard is going to be a variation (read: optimization) of Leopard? Seems like SL was a great name to pick, considering that is exactly what they're doing.
I miss the days when people on this site knew what they were talking about.
And, with all due respect.... I miss the days when people were polite. Surely, it would have been possible to make the same points without belittling the poster? Sing it with me.... " We are family..... "
No it is not mainly a stability update. You think things like GrandCentral and OpenCL just happen over night with a few lines of code? There are few flashy and easy to market items.
True it's not just stabiity. There are very significant features "under the hood." Which is fine by me. I applaud Apple for making this OS lean and mean.
That does sound more straightforward.. I always have errors during my Time Machine backups anyway.. bet my external drive is a mess
Use Super Duper to make non-incremental backups (i.e. copy all the files in a folder or even a complete volume). This backs up EVERYTHING, unlike Time Machine which ignores files that can supposedly be restored (caches, temporary items, etc).
I use Time Machine via network (automatic, wireless backups are kinda cool) and I copy the important folders (my user's library, pictures and documents folder) to another drive every once in a while. Don't trust your technology.
Cool, I have to check out Super Duper. I never got the thing with Time Machine anyway. Rather than have a mirror copy of everything I want to keep, I get a copy of everything I've intentionally thrown away... a gargantuan pile of digital garbage.Use Super Duper to make non-incremental backups (i.e. copy all the files in a folder or even a complete volume). This backs up EVERYTHING, unlike Time Machine which ignores files that can supposedly be restored (caches, temporary items, etc).
I use Time Machine via network (automatic, wireless backups are kinda cool) and I copy the important folders (my user's library, pictures and documents folder) to another drive every once in a while. Don't trust your technology.
The best way to configure Time Machine is to use the exclusionary rules (also exclude Spotlight from indexing and searching the Time Machine volume and always do the first backup over night without using the system, something Apple doesn't and should inform their customer base). I don't back up certain folders, esp. my downloads folder or desktop. This is the main way I can keep Time Machine from becoming ridiculously large (and I set a specific folder as a working folder for design work, as files I am constantly changing and don't need cluttering up Time Machine are excluded). I also wish Apple would allow more manipulation of time intervals. Currently it's either manual or one hour automatic backups, daily, weekly and monthly automatic backups would be nice for users who don't need perpetual saves. Plus going into Time Machine and deleting individuals folders, files, etc. is a big pain. Definitely needs streamlining. However, as I recently had one Western Digital SATA drive crash on a four year old iMac, the Time Machine restore was sweet, put everything right back and saved a lot of time.
And getting rid of the 32-bit kernel of Leopard for a 64-bit one, and rewriting all of the drivers and kernel extensions because of that.
They were implemented in the original WWDC seed, just not working particularly well. There's been a lot of changes since then.
Hey thanks!!! That's the crux of the matter there isn't it? Btw, these changes are a crucial substrate on top of the kernel right? If you are to change the way the whole system handles processes and cores and graphics you are in for another mobileme potential delay, or even (i exaggerate here) another copeland, right?
Possibly but I don't see it happening. I've been using SL since the first build and I've seen vast improvements in each new seed.
There might even be an internal build that's running a lot better than the Dev. seeds but Apple is keeping it closed due to unreleased upcoming hardware.
Rosetta doesn't have anything to do with OS9. OS9 is dead and gone. Rosetta is (essentially) the emulation layer that allows PowerPC-compiled programs for OS X to still run on Intel-based Macs. (It works for programs that use G3, G4, and AltiVec instructions; G5 specific instructions won't fly.)
Basically every backup utility excludes certain items (like caches) but there are certainly differences in so far as which files exactly are excluded.
Here is the list for CCC:
http://bombich.com/software/docs/CCCHelp/CCCHelp.html?page=faq
I am sure Super Duper also excludes certain files. There are certainly some files which are created at boot time, which could confuse the OS if they appeared on clone drive from which one boots. Apart from being completely unnecessary (like swapped out memory).
Only block-level cloners will copy these files (but block-level cloners should only be run a non-booted from drive).
I know that, but previous builds did not list the SR MacBook as a platform for testing x64. Despite the hardware being capable, it will only be able to run x64 Snow Leopard if drivers are rewritten to be 64-bit capable. I'm not sure Apple will do that for older hardware.
My TM backup goes back five months. I have 263 GB on my main drive, my TM size is 305 GB. The only thing excluded is the 23 GB VMware image. In short, a five month archive takes up only 65 GB or 25% of my total amount of data. This is not what I call ridiculously large.
Are you sure, your TM backup would be 'ridiculously large' without your precautions? Or is this just an unjustified prejudice?
There are enough tools around which let you freely choose the interval.
What most people somehow misunderstand is the hourly nature of the backups. For any files older than one month, only weekly backups are saved (and for anything older than one day, only daily backups are saved). This is not as much data as people keep thinking.
I guess I chose my words incorrectly. I wasn't criticizing it, merely suggesting a few improvements. I have many clients that use Time Machine and there are certain precautions about proper utilization to improve effectiveness. For someone who works on their system, backups can be large as their working data becomes significant over time. This is especially true for photographers and designers who work with large amounts of data (such as RAW file formats). Otherwise, it is a solid system.
He said that he excluded his download folder. Imagine if you downloaded lots of movies and TV shows before you move them to a NAS drive on your home network, Time Machine would pick up every one of them and create backups and you'd have hundreds of gigs in no time.
Personally I'm not sure how I'm supposed to benefit from Time Machine. If I want to keep a file, I keep it. If I want to get rid of a file, I get rid of it. The purpose of backup, for me anyway, is to have an exact shadow copy in case the hard drive goes. Time Machine does the opposite, it skips certain files and instead it accumulates tons of old garbage that only exists in that location, so if your TM drive goes you lose all that stuff anyway. In a worst case scenario, it teaches people to be careless about throwing files away, and then return a couple of months later only to find that TM has pushed those old files off the cliff. It's like replacing the trash can with an entire garbage dump. Nice interface though.