Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Restore Points on a Mac like in Windows

Saturn1217 said:
@-aggie-

I kind of agree but I just did some more searching and according to this site
http://travisisaacs.com/2008/02/10/the-almost-perfect-local-backup-solution/
you can use superduper (or CCC) + time machine which gives you something almost like a restore point. Not as painless I realize but I think it will work for me.
Click to expand...
I don't want anything like restore points. It is an incomplete solution that offers a false sense of security. If you cannot reach your restore points, you're hosed. All that's needed is Time Machine, & its hassle free.
 
macrem said:
I don't want anything like restore points. It is an incomplete solution that offers a false sense of security. If you cannot reach your restore points, you're hosed. All that's needed is Time Machine, & its hassle free.
Click to expand...

Sigh. You know you can have restore points AND incremental backup, right?

And "all that's needed is time machine" is not correct. Time machine often fails to restore properly when needed, it's not bootable, and it makes backups at intervals instead of when files change. At the very least one should also use a disk-cloning method.
 
Daveoc64 said:
You're also missing the point.

In Windows Vista and 7, the Windows Shadow Copy service has been integrated with System Restore.

That means that "previous versions" of files like documents CAN be recovered.

Files are backed up daily and whenever a restore point is created.

The main advantage of this approach over Time Machine, is that it can happen without additional hardware being attached. I have a MacBook, it's not connected to an external hard drive very often, so I don't use Time Machine.

Even if it was, I don't want to dedicate an expensive drive to something that is likely to remain pointless 99% of the time.

My main issue with it is that the only time I am likely to use the feature, is when it wont work - because the computer hasn't been connected to the drive and the file I need wont have been backed up. Windows 7's "Previous Versions" doesn't have that issue.
Click to expand...

If you have the room, you could actually partition your internal drive, dedicating one partition to Time Machine, thus you would not need a external drive. If you decided to go this route, and your system would not boot, you could boot off the install dvd, and preform a Time Machine restore from the dedicated partition. Naturally, if your hard drive failed, your backup would not be accessible. But the same would be true of Windows and restore points.
 
cmaier said:
Sigh. You know you can have restore points AND incremental backup, right?
Click to expand...
Too much overlap & confusing to the average user. Time Machine is quite reliable. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, a friend who was depending on Windows Restore Points recently got burned because he could not reach any of them. Had he had a feature like Time Machine, it would have saved him.
 
Steve-M said:
If you have the room, you could actually partition your internal drive, dedicating one partition to Time Machine, thus you would not need a external drive. If you decided to go this route, and your system would not boot, you could boot off the install dvd, and preform a Time Machine restore from the dedicated partition. Naturally, if your hard drive failed, your backup would not be accessible. But the same would be true of Windows and restore points.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but I don't have the space to do that (I triple boot).

I have the room on my server, but there is no (official) way to use Time Machine with SAMBA shares.
 
macrem said:
Too much overlap & confusing to the average user. Time Machine is quite reliable. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, a friend who was depending on Windows Restore Points recently got burned because he could not reach any of them. Had he had a feature like Time Machine, it would have saved him.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the part about it being too confusing. Also, a Windows user, who an external drive would not have the problem you stated and he wouldn't need the saving. With TM you have to have an external drive. Anyway, I think it would be an improvement for the Mac OSX. We can agree to disagree.
 
-aggie- said:
I disagree with the part about it being too confusing. Also, a Windows user, who an external drive would not have the problem you stated and he wouldn't need the saving. With TM you have to have an external drive. Anyway, I think it would be an improvement for the Mac OSX. We can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
It would be confusing to offer multiple apps with overlapping features. TimeMachine backups are essentially restore points. Also MobileMe offers syncing important files to an offsite location.

My friend thought his data was safe with RPs until he found out otherwise the hard way. RPs was invented for an OS that frequently experienced system file & Registry corruption (from viruses). I think it would have very little value add on OS X, outweighed by added complexity & providing an inferior alternative when there is no sane substitute to backing up onto another drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back