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.
Time Capsule Arrives, Early Notes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Excellent example. I used to only use SuperDuper until Time Machine. Now I use both backup types side-by-side for exactly that scenario.
Time Machine: rolling back to a previously saved version of a document.
Super Duper: Clone for a bad HD or some update that goes horribly wrong.
Read closer next time.Read posts #41 & #43 and you'll see the answer to the exact same question is yes.
Ahh--sorry! I didn't connect accessing things remotely with stuff other than Time Machine Backups being on the drive. It's been a long day! Ha!
No worries, it's late on a Friday - we should all leave work, start relaxing and enjoy the weekend already!
With a USB transfer cable, of course. There is still a USB port on Time Capsule. Cables are cheaper than the ethernet dongle.
Since when? Since finally getting rid of our old Compaq behemoth, my family has always operated on multiple laptops without a central desktop. Currently, my girlfriend and I each have our own MacBook in our apartment, because we both need the portability, and literally use our computers everywhere. Time Capsule is great way to backup for us. Sure, we could just get a USB external drive and pull it out and move it around and hook it up to our constantly moving notebooks, but why should we when we really don't have to? I don't even need to break out a USB thumbdrive to transfer data between us anymore, since I've set up password-protected shared folders we can both access.
Wireless backup is a great idea. I think it's a shame that Apple failed with getting AEBS, and if they don't give some kind of firmware update to make that work, I'll be disappointed in them. But Time Capsule is still a great solution for those of us who hadn't invested in something like that, and are looking for an all-in-one wireless backup solution.
I can't remember but did Apple ever advertise this AFTER Leopard was released?
I remember before Leopard was released, every page on Apple.com that talked about Leopard and it's features had the disclaimer that features can change, etc, etc.
No doubt that it was originally suppose to work. For some reason, Apple decided to pull it. Why, only Apple knows.
-Kevin
Hey look, it's NAS with a router... but more expensive!
Of course, home storage - which is what 90% of these devices will be used for - is fairly pointless. Back up off site or you're kind of missing the point.
Of course, home storage - which is what 90% of these devices will be used for - is fairly pointless. Back up off site or you're kind of missing the point.
Yeah, that's a good setup. I admittedly only use SuperDuper to make a bootable clone of my entire system every couple of weeks or so, but I am well aware of the potential loss of data in the interim between back-ups and am comfortable with that. Better than no back-up at all!
If I was working on more serious projects or things which were work-related then obviously a Time Machine back-up would make sense as well, just in case, but as that is not the case for me (at least right now) SuperDuper meets my needs just fine.
And also, how far do you take it? A back-up using SuperDuper, a back-up using Time Machine, then a back-up for your back-up drives, then a copy of that stored off-site in case of fire, etc. and maybe one more back-up just in case?!
People also need to realize that it is quite possible for their back-up drive to fail before their primary drive, especially with all the writes and so forth an application like Time Machine performs. I think some people are oblivious to the fact that their precious back-up drive is nothing more than another drive at the end of the day, susceptable to the same potential problems. Not saying a catastrophic disk failure will always happen and that will be the sole reason for requiring a back-up, but it does happen nonetheless.
Well, actually there was some language indicated that features were subject to change. And, the technical reasoning behind it appears to be fairly sound. It seems that Apple ran into a hurdle, realized it could do more harm than good, and removed a possible feature.
Well, it's a one box solution for several different individual components, which is just nice. Furthermore, TM backups over wireless is great for someone like my wife, who should be backing-up her data, but won't take the time to plug her laptop into the drive and run the backup.
The more 'automagically' a backup happens, the more likely it's going to be done and that means real protection against hard-drive failure or loss.
...And also, how far do you take it? A back-up using SuperDuper, a back-up using Time Machine, then a back-up for your back-up drives, then a copy of that stored off-site in case of fire, etc. and maybe one more back-up just in case?!
Hey, I expect my data to survive anything short of thermonuclear war.
Does anyone know, if the TC's HDD can be accessed through the internet by a web app or something like that??? It would make for a really nice and relatively secure online vault for personal files... I know some of the offerings by netgear and Dlink can do this, but I must say the TC looks really good and adds the usb printer support...
My guess is probably not, as it would eat up .mac profits from back to my mac...
My guess is probably not, as it would eat up .mac profits from back to my mac...
i'm thinking about getting one to use as a time machine backup and to have some extra hd. do you think that if i store my itunes library in time capsule will it play nicely over the air? and video files?
If this is true and not just an exaggeration on your part, then you weren't using it properly.
Time Machine uses less space than traditional backups by it's very design. The only thing that would use less space would a single backup image of your data that overwrites itself with each backup. For reliability you would want to store at least two complete images and that alone would make the space required larger than a typical Time Machine backup of the same data that spanned a week or two.
Pretty impressive, you already managed to get so much data onto your Air (wirelessly of course) that it's going to be a pain for you to back it up? Something doesn't quite add up... I don't imagine that you're really complaining about a situation you yourself are actually in, huh?
Well he's probably using VMs. Since TM is file based, every time you change a VM it has to copy the whole file again. Say bye bye GBs of space. I have all of my VMs in a separate folder that I have TM ignore. Then I have to manage backing those up on my own.
Prepared for Shipment
My order says "Prepared for Shipment" just now (which is about 6PM EST). I placed my order for the 1TB on Feb 12. Would have been nice to play with it this weekend!
So has ANYONE on this forum got theirs yet?
My order says "Prepared for Shipment" just now (which is about 6PM EST). I placed my order for the 1TB on Feb 12. Would have been nice to play with it this weekend!
So has ANYONE on this forum got theirs yet?
Can we have some speed benchmarks? I have a Mac Mini and a Macbook. It's pretty much impossible to transfer files larger than 100 MB from one to another because it takes forever and usually stalls after a few MB, sometimes with "disconnected" errors. The Mac Mini is hooked up via 100 Mbit Ethernet to the Router, Macbook is on Wireless g (54 Mb/s) with full bars all the time. Any help?
Seriously, I barely get 1 MB/s across using AFS or SMB. Is Time Capsule better, i.e. is it quick enough for casual backups and video streaming?
Seriously, I barely get 1 MB/s across using AFS or SMB. Is Time Capsule better, i.e. is it quick enough for casual backups and video streaming?
dotmac hackable?
The only reason I would be willing to get a TC would be if it ran a localized .mac server.
I'm currently planning an attempted hack up of my linksys nslu2 with dotmac, just so I can use idisk and .mac sync across my macs, but TC seems the ideal choice of dotmac homeserver. Anyone yet worked out how hackable it is?
The only reason I would be willing to get a TC would be if it ran a localized .mac server.
I'm currently planning an attempted hack up of my linksys nslu2 with dotmac, just so I can use idisk and .mac sync across my macs, but TC seems the ideal choice of dotmac homeserver. Anyone yet worked out how hackable it is?