Time Machine backup drive

[throAU]

I'm looking to buy an external Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) drive for Time Machine backups. Since I don't see how speed of the backup would be an issue I'm guessing a traditional hard disk would work as well as an SSD.

Two things

• yeah time machine is dog slow anyway, spinning disk will be fine
• SSDs eventually lose data if left powered off for a long time. This gets worse as they wear, but if you're ever planning to use this as a long term archive, or leave unplugged for weeks/months or maybe longer.... I'd suggest a hard drive instead of an SSD. Especially given the price/capacity and fact that time machine is slow anyway.

 

[iAssimilated]

Two things

• yeah time machine is dog slow anyway, spinning disk will be fine
• SSDs eventually lose data if left powered off for a long time. This gets worse as they wear, but if you're ever planning to use this as a long term archive, or leave unplugged for weeks/months or maybe longer.... I'd suggest a hard drive instead of an SSD. Especially given the price/capacity and fact that time machine is slow anyway.

So I should be worried about my Samsung T5 and T7 drives? They are my data drives on my 2018 mini and they are on 24/7.

 

[throAU]

If the drive is going to be used solely as a Time Machine backup for your internal drive, a drive more than 1TB is a waste.

Depends very much on how far you want to go back in time, and what your rate of change is.

 

[throAU]

So I should be worried about my Samsung T5 and T7 drives? They are my data drives on my 2018 mini and they are on 24/7.

Lets put it this way - I would ensure that they are NOT the only place you have a backup.
I'm not saying they WILL die on you, but the risk is there - as the cells get more worn their ability to hold charge degrades.

If they leak charge while powered off, they leak data. This is more likely to be a thing if you are likely to keep the drive in a cupboard and powered off for weeks or more as it gets older.

 

[theSeb]

A few years ago there was a bit of hysteria about SSDs can lose all data if left wihtout power in just 7 days. Well, that presentation was made by a Seagate executive droning about how great mechanical HDDs still are. This is simply not true in usual conditions and you will find plenty of information to refuse this.

I stopped using my 2012 Macbook Pro (the first retina one with an SSD) last year in November. Earlier this month I put it on the charger and then started it up. The data is just fine. I have done the same thing but for around 6 months at a time with my 2015 Macbook a few times in the past and again all the data is fine.

I have a little mSATA SSD drive in an enclosure. I cannot even remember the last time I used this drive until last week. It has been lying in my drawer for many years. The data on this drive is still perfectly fine.

Having said all that, no, you don't need an SSD for time machine backups. Save your money and use mechanical HDDs. And yes, you absolutely should have your data backed up and not just living on one drive, no matter what technology the drive is using. Nothing is 100% failure proof.

 

[cyberstudio]

I have 2 Macs Time-Machine to each other. Backing up to something attached to the same machine is not safe enough. For example, what if a thief comes and steal both the machine and everything attached to it? Power supply blows up and destroy both the machine and everything attached to its USB ports? For my most important files I have a third backup off-site as well.

 

[theSeb]

I keep all the really important stuff on the cloudy computers

 

[throAU]

A few years ago there was a bit of hysteria about SSDs can lose all data if left wihtout power in just 7 days. Well, that presentation was made by a Seagate executive droning about how great mechanical HDDs still are. This is simply not true in usual conditions and you will find plenty of information to refuse this.

Yeah, I'm not talking about that presentation in particular, and the problem is more prevalent in TLC and MLC NAND, vs. the SLC from years back.

I guess the take-away is this:

Having one single backup on any media is prone to failure when you need it most.

Whether you run SSD or HD, I'd suggest at least two backups and rotate them.

Which brings up a massive deficiency in time machine - if you do that, it splits files between the two disks, apparently (A friend ran into this a week ago).

I'm considering my options, but currently have a mix of iCloud and time machine. I might look into something like Backblaze as a third source.

i.e., most of my important stuff is in iCloud, but not everything (e.g., virtual machine files, etc.). So I need a second backup like time machine but... not crap (and preferably cross-platform so I can restore it to windows or Linux too).

 

[russell_314]

Lets put it this way - I would ensure that they are NOT the only place you have a backup.

This is really good advice with any backup. Never have only one backup.

 

[IngerMan]

Yep I have Time Machine on one SSD and CCC on another. I have a few HD drives laying around I use to use for backups, but honestly with everything turning SSD, I could not stand the only noise I would hear was my HD backups. So those got changed to SSD as well.

 

[HDFan]

I would ensure that they are NOT the only place you have a backup.

Yes. The most recommended backup stategy is a 3-2-1. Time Machine counts as only one of the 3. The other 2 should not be TM due its tendency to fail.

Save your money and use mechanical HDDs.

Yep. For backups an SSD are a waste of money, except for special cases with extreme enviromental conditions (dust, vibration, etc.).

 

[throAU]

Yep. For backups an SSD are a waste of money, except for special cases with extreme enviromental conditions (dust, vibration, etc.).

Pretty much, but if you're storing your BACKUPS in extreme environmental conditions you're probably doing it wrong

Best idea would be to run a network to said extreme conditions and have the backup out of that environment. Unless its in space or something