I do an occasional rsync of home directory to SD card. I might add a SD Time Machine target to the mix as well.
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.
SD Card Slot in New MacBook Pros Supports UHS-II With Speeds Up to 250 MB/s [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do an occasional rsync of home directory to SD card. I might add a SD Time Machine target to the mix as well.
I own XQD cards. These are identical to CFExpress type B I believe? They are considerably bigger. The thickness measurement on CFExpress appears to be at least 50% greater than SD.
Edit: Here are the relevant specs: SD cards are 32mm x 24mm x 2.1mm. CFExpress Type B cards (I’m going to suggest that these are the “common” format for use with pro cameras) are 38.5mm x 29.8mm x 3.8mm. That is significantly larger by volume than SD — and far less common on Planet Earth in 2021, when it comes to the large variety of removable storage use cases that typically employ SD (this goes well beyond photography).
Last edited:
RS-232 to connect to a projector? Whaaaaat? They connect to a projector using a serial port?
It also sounds like you don’t have a firm understanding about how PCIe bandwidth between ports/interfaces and processors is allocated. It has essentially nothing to do with the port itself, it is totally about bandwidth available for the port. Probably the same reason Apple wouldn’t put a CFExpress slot on the machine (in addition to form factor).
Apparently, given how few laptops on the market come equipped with such a feature. I’m sure Apple would be happy to have you school them on the subject… ?
I understand the benefits that TM provides, but I wish it were faster. I also realize that iCloud is susceptible to being inadvertently trampled as you describe, and that can mean permanent loss of data. But after working for years in enterprise backup / restore environments in large data centers, I know that corrupted data can make its way through many generations of backups, too, in spite of all the care taken to prevent that happening. Stuff happens, right? And the depth of backup generations isn't unlimited.
TM is a good tool in many ways, but it's also limited. I've been upset for a long time about it's performance deficiencies. Things like closing a backup and starting a new, full backup way too frequently irk me. Anyway, I accept the risk of using just iCloud. That has served me well while moving to a new system many times. But I'm also willing to try TM again, but I don't know how its performance would be going to an SD card instead of a LAN backup drive like WD My Book. If it still takes me 27 hours to do a full backup (that was an actual example) to heck with it.
But anyway, thanks for the discussion.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
OK, then as backup to that backup suggestion, my next suggestion would be periodic "clones" using SuperDuper or Carbon Copy Cloner. Since they are doing WHOLE backups too, they will also be SLOW. But at least you would have a generational complete copy however often you choose to create a clone.
For example, maybe that's monthly. Something happens during the month that kills important files and also kills them in iCloud. Worst case is you go back about 32 days to the last clone. Best case is you made the clone minutes before the disaster.
I do NOT think trying to use an SD card will be great as a TM backup... but that option would be better than nothing.
I also think you will have a better experience with a direct connection instead of trying to backup over LAN. Hook up a hard drive directly and TM will be faster. The downside here is that your files and your TM backup are side by side. So if one is stolen, odds are the other is too.
However, the solution is to rotate TM drives. For example, I also backup one over LAN but also have 1 to directly connect. The latter I store away from home office. I pick it up for an updating backup about every 30 days or so. So the LAN TM backup is fresh and always as recent as minutes ago. The 30-dayer is for catastrophic scenarios where I've lost the computer and the LAN backup too. Worst case is I'll only be able to recover files up to about 30 days old and back.
Apple TM software is smart enough to simply alternate when there are 2 backup drives. So I don't have to think about it much or do anything in particular other than hook up the 30-dayer and let it backup to that one. Then eject and get it back to offsite storage until next month.
If that LAN drive you have will double as direct connect, do that for the initial "full" backup and then do the incremental over LAN. That will give you a faster one-time backup and then make regular backups in the background for you. I THINK I recall that if you will start the backup over LAN and then stop it... and then directly attach a drive... it will "finish" the TM backup as if it is still connected via LAN (but much faster because it is directly connected). Then when you put it back on the network, it will just continue with TM backups as if you let the whole initial backup happen over LAN. That may not still be necessary but I think I recall it being that way several years ago.
You could also just let it backup the whole thing over LAN and simply wait out that slower pace. At least it does its thing in the background.
For example, maybe that's monthly. Something happens during the month that kills important files and also kills them in iCloud. Worst case is you go back about 32 days to the last clone. Best case is you made the clone minutes before the disaster.
I do NOT think trying to use an SD card will be great as a TM backup... but that option would be better than nothing.
I also think you will have a better experience with a direct connection instead of trying to backup over LAN. Hook up a hard drive directly and TM will be faster. The downside here is that your files and your TM backup are side by side. So if one is stolen, odds are the other is too.
However, the solution is to rotate TM drives. For example, I also backup one over LAN but also have 1 to directly connect. The latter I store away from home office. I pick it up for an updating backup about every 30 days or so. So the LAN TM backup is fresh and always as recent as minutes ago. The 30-dayer is for catastrophic scenarios where I've lost the computer and the LAN backup too. Worst case is I'll only be able to recover files up to about 30 days old and back.
Apple TM software is smart enough to simply alternate when there are 2 backup drives. So I don't have to think about it much or do anything in particular other than hook up the 30-dayer and let it backup to that one. Then eject and get it back to offsite storage until next month.
If that LAN drive you have will double as direct connect, do that for the initial "full" backup and then do the incremental over LAN. That will give you a faster one-time backup and then make regular backups in the background for you. I THINK I recall that if you will start the backup over LAN and then stop it... and then directly attach a drive... it will "finish" the TM backup as if it is still connected via LAN (but much faster because it is directly connected). Then when you put it back on the network, it will just continue with TM backups as if you let the whole initial backup happen over LAN. That may not still be necessary but I think I recall it being that way several years ago.
You could also just let it backup the whole thing over LAN and simply wait out that slower pace. At least it does its thing in the background.
Last edited:
Such a typical comment. UHS-III is basically no where. UHS-II makes sense, and is more than capable for why the SD card is there. And no, it is not there to be your secondary harddrive.
I run VMs (macOS and Windows) off SD cards. Have not had one fail.
Did not think iTunes or Music was that big of a disk IO hog. Maybe still indexing? My library is 47 gig and I am not seeing even a fraction of same disk read/write usage weather scrolling or playing local songs.
Even $2000 cameras have dropped SD for CF Express. And the new $6500 cameras are dual CF Express except for the R3 which inexplicitly downgraded from dual CF Express with unlimited buffer to only one CF Express with a backup slot.
Most people still own older cameras that use SD cards, including myself, so that’s what Apple was aiming for.
Yes, so put the SD slot on the consumer machines like the iMac and Macbook Air. The pro machines should have pro ports.
The problem is that a lot of the use cases for ethernet on a laptop involve having a long cable hanging off of it. The RJ-45 connector/plug on actual ethernet is ideal for this, as it's rugged, locking, and can hold up the cable. The USB-C connector, in comparison, isn't rugged, doesn't lock, and can't deal with a heavy cable hanging off of it. I'd rather have a real ethernet port on the new MBPs than the HDMI port or SD card slot.
I recall some company making SD cards way back when that were specifically designed to fit flush into the side of a MBP. Don't recall the company name. I wonder if they're still around, or if some other company will take up the mantle.
What’s locked up? I’ve booted M1 machines from the IDE hard drive that shipped in a G4 tower 20 years ago through a usb2.0 adapter. Macs still boot from anything that has a useable version of macOS on it.
I use one of these daily. It’s on a 10,1 and holds my whole iTunes library. I also run Jettison, just in case of shutdown/sleep instances but I’m not sure I need to anymore. Running Catalina for a month now.
My 10,1 (early 2013) works perfectly. Used almost daily. I use a “BaseQI” brand adapter.
Last edited:
Jettison is supposed to help with this issue specifically. Mine does hiccup every once in awhile though.
This is what I’ve been asking everyone: supposedly the Type A CFExpress, which is on all the Sony’s, can be read by a normal SDXC reader but needs different software. I am wondering if Apple supports this ?
I would have schooled them on bringing back ports but they decided not to…oh wait
If you make a living in networks, servers, etc a real ethernet port is a godsend. I frequently use mine on the 2012 MBP. Call me a lunatic but one USB-A port on the new MBP‘s would have made me very happy just for convenience. That‘s what made the pros the pros in the past. Variety of ports.
Last edited:
Indexing on Apple internal storage should’ve been done years ago. And mine is 500GB.
Anyways, I don’t sit in front of Mac scrolling all day so no big deal.
Apple silicon Mac will not boot into anything if the internal storage is broken, which is not exactly the case for older Intel Mac.