Time machine or CCC?

Discussion in 'OS X Mountain Lion (10.8)' started by lukester, Oct 2, 2012.

  1. lukester macrumors 6502

    Dec 2, 2009
    I am trying to figure the best system to use. I have never used Time machine since it seems slow.
    I am thinking of CCC.. thoughts?
  2. MacDawg macrumors Core


    Mar 20, 2004
    "Between the Hedges"
    I use both for different purposes

    CCC allows you to boot from your clone
    TM does not

    Both allow you to migrate your data

    I use TM to go back (if needed) to get a file or a "state"
    I use CCC in case of catastrophic failure of the HD

    I have had occasion to use both and both function well
  3. lukester thread starter macrumors 6502

    Dec 2, 2009
    How do you set drives up to handle both?
    2 partitions and how large above the original should you go?
  4. Partron22 macrumors 68020


    Apr 13, 2011
    I use SuperDuper! rather than CCC., but principles are about the same, so:

    I keep a separate drive for periodic and complete SuperDuper! backup of my main drive.
    Time Machine partition resides on yet another disk, along w partitions for older Systems and the like. Time machine backups are restricted to only the contents of my Documents and Developer folder, (minus iTunes media library). This lets me keep the size of that partition down to a few hundred gigs, and still have ready access to older copies of whatever docs I'm working on. Apps and such (as well as docs) get BU's every few weeks with the SuperDuper! clone.

    I've little need to keep copies of every minor App update, but documents can be another story, so they get the full time-machine treatment.
  5. Weaselboy Moderator


    Staff Member

    Jan 23, 2005
    I use the same setup Macdawg described.

    You would want two partitions if you plan to do this with one drive (and there is nothing wrong with that).

    How large for Time Machine partition depends a great deal on your usage. If you regularly copy/edit large 5GB video files for example and you create multiple versions of those files, this could very easily swell the Time Machine backup by a never ending 10-15GB or more a day.

    For someone like me who only ever adds a few documents here and there to my drive, Time Machine does backups expand very little from the original backup. Right now my SSD has about 60GB of data on it and my Time Machine backup sparse bundle is sitting at 62GB in size... this is from a new backup set I started on July 25. So for me a third or so over the original data amount will hold me a long while.

    I would get all my data on the machine then look at how much space you need and add to that maybe half again as a starting point. Like I said, it really depends a lot on what type of work you do on the machine.

    Same issue essentially for CCC, as it will archive versions if you want, creating the same storage issues Time Machine has.
  6. throAU macrumors 603


    Feb 13, 2012
    Perth, Western Australia
    As above they solve different problems.

    Time machine will give you hourly snapshots of your files to help with the "oh bugger i shouldn't have saved over that" human error type disaster.

    You can restore a complete system from it too, but if you're not a regular time machine user, doing an initial backup is very slow.

    Time machine, on lion and mountain lion can run "local" backups on your laptop (previous versions of files) if your time machine disk is not attached or available. These snapshots will be deleted if space is required, but if you have free space they're useful. Obviously if your drive dies you're going to have to restore from your time machine disk, but if its just a stupid mistake you can get it back easily.

    CCC is probably best if you are planning in advance to wipe your machine or rebuild it to a new disk. It should be a lot faster than time machine, too.

    Personally I think running time machine is a no brainer. Grit your teeth through the initial backup then just leave it to run its course as required. It really is "set and forget" if you're backing up to a disk over the network.

    Unless you run a backup program religiously every day, typically if you screw something up its likely to be a few days or weeks of time since your last backup and you've lost a lot of work. With time machine you're looking at 1 hour of lost work, tops. Your backups are only as good as how often they are run.

    Run CCC if you want to keep a snapshot of your machine permanently, or to replicate it to new hardware.
  7. WesCole macrumors 6502a

    Jul 1, 2010
    I use Time Machine, CCC, and CrashPlan.

    Here is my reasoning:

    1. Time Machine can go back in time and get older copies of files, photos, etc.
    2. Time Machine will be great for getting a new Mac setup the way I want it.
    3. CCC copies are bootable, so that will reduce downtime in the event of a HDD failure.
    4. CrashPlan to back up my movies, photos, music, important files, etc. Basically, I like to keep things on here that can't be easily replaced.
  8. r0k macrumors 68040


    Mar 3, 2008
    Much like you, I use Time Machine for convenience, CCC for migrating drives and Crashplan for off site backup. I don't back up my movies off site. I can always simply rip them again. I keep the original DVDs down in the basement next to the 78 rpm records, 8 tracks and buggy whips.
  9. WesCole macrumors 6502a

    Jul 1, 2010
    Most of my DVDs have been lost over the years...but, I am not really worried about those anyway; there are always ways to recover those videos. I was talking more about home movies from the 80s and 90s when I was a kid. I ripped them to the computer and, even if I could find the VHS tapes, would not want to repeat that whole process again. :)

Share This Page