Time Machine vs Carbonite/Mozy

Discussion in 'macOS' started by jeremy6044, Oct 16, 2007.

  1. jeremy6044 macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    I'm going to be switching to a mac shortly, and I guess I'm disappointed that Time Machine doesn't work like Carbonite or Mozy...ie. it's not an offsite backup solution. I don't want an onsite backup...if my apartment goes down in a fire or earthquake, I want to be able to buy another computer and then download everything to the way it was. I don't want to have to worry about losing my backup, too.

    I use Carbonite on my PC now, and guess I'll switch to Mozy when I get a mac because Carbonite refuses to finish their mac client...but it would have been nicer to use an apple program that's already integrated into the o/s. (i.e. time machine.)

    so now that i'm done with my rant, my question is...how long do you think it will take before time machine becomes an off site solution like carbonite or mozy?
  2. projectle macrumors 6502a

    Oct 11, 2005
    Well, the infrastructure already exists for .Mac users. The biggest thing is getting enough storage capacity to make it worthwhile.

    With minimal effort, Apple could even set up a system for identifying Applications and System Files, storing them in a Global share on their Servers to limit the amount of data sent back and forth. This would also allow for more efficient transfers back and forth, as they would be able to omit any Applications that they already know about, and then just store the User Profiles on the client computers.

    I will be implementing a similar setup with Leopard's Time Machine Server software as soon as it is released. This will allow for immediate restores from an OpenDirectory server and our Imaging server, and the End User would have everything set up exactly as it was in an up-to-the-minute backup system.
  3. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    i wish they would that up for consumers. carbonite is very intuitive, easy and i don't have to worry about a thing. if apple would set up .mac the same way, i would subscribe to it in an instant. i would even pay a little more than carbonite since it's a native solution.
  4. WildPalms macrumors 6502a


    Jan 4, 2006
    Honolulu, HI
    jeremy, are you looking for backup software for your new sexy Mac?

    Or are you happy to stick with snapshotting with Time Machine?
  5. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    oh, i don't care how it's backed up. i don't need to retrieve anything, or at least i haven't yet (knock on wood)...i just want something off site. and i'm tired of burning dvd's every few months and sending them to my parents.

    i have about 20gb of data (mostly music and photos)...and it would be great if time machine worked liked carbonite and could back up my data on some server somewhere else.
  6. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    is no one else interested in off site backups? i find that kind of bizarre.
  7. Blubbert macrumors 6502

    Nov 1, 2006
    Im not interested in offsite backups for several reasons. I dont have the bandwith that would make my backup simple and quick. I have about 50gb on my disk, and backing it all up would take forever. I also dont have anything on this computer that i would be worried about loosing. And also, the biggest threat to my computer is not an earthquake or a fire, its me. I like to fiddle a lot, and i like knowing that even when i mess up everything, i can boot of my external and return everything to what it was.
  8. Krevnik macrumors 68040


    Sep 8, 2003
    .Mac comes with a Backup app that lets you do offsite backups, but usually I have my own tools for doing snapshots of important things onto a remote space like my SVN tree...

    FTP, rsync, SFTP, etc, etc are all valid options, and usually can be automated. I believe there are some tools meant to mirror or snapshot things onto remote servers.
  9. Flowbee macrumors 68030


    Dec 27, 2002
    Alameda, CA
    It's not that people aren't interested in offsite backup, I think it's more that no one outside of Apple can answer your question. "How long do you think it will take before time machine becomes an off site solution like carbonite or mozy?" Who knows? Six months? Two years? Never? Your guess is as good as ours.
  10. projectle macrumors 6502a

    Oct 11, 2005
    Offsite backups are great...
    The only bad thing is that it requires quite a bit of time to get a complete backup taken care of.

    This is something that really would not be that bad if it were implemented into something like the iDisk, where data is written to a local disk image prior to uploading, allowing for a delayed write when bandwidth is available.

    While this is really not the best solution for a corporation, it would work well for end-users with a minimal interruption.
  11. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    well, i would look into all the other solutions, but i've gotten pretty used to the ease of carbonite, so maybe i'll just wait until they come out with a mac client.

    hopefully time machine will take the same approach sooner or later.
  12. vansouza macrumors 68000


    Mar 28, 2006
    West Plains, MO USA Earth
    If you know of a solution

    If you know of a program that does what you need done, why worry about Time Machine?
  13. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    1. carbonite doesn't work on the mac yet.

    2. everyone is excited about leopard coming out...time machine being one of the "super secret" new features. it's a shame i can't make this new integrated feature useful for my purposes.
  14. /dev/toaster macrumors 68020


    Feb 23, 2006
    San Francisco, CA
    You can do this ... however, prepare to pay a lot for it. There are quite a few ways to do it, but the biggest problem is the cost of storage.

    You can get an el cheapo virtual host with 200GB of drive space for $40 - $50 a month (Been a while since I priced it, don't quote me on this). Then just use VPN to it and open up either SMB, AFP, etc.

    You can pay out the arse to get enough space from .Mac (Dunno if you actually get get enough from them)

    Find a cheap way to get a provider that will allow you to have a lot of space very cheap and allows you to mount the partition. That should do it.
  15. bplein macrumors 6502a


    Jul 21, 2007
    Austin, TX USA
    I am a happy carbonite user for my Windows-based file server.

    If you want carbonite-like features, plus more, for Mac, you can try CrashPlan. I am testing it right now. You have the option of backing up to CrashPlan's site OR to a another machine over the network. The other machine can be a friend's machine, for example. The "Pro" version offers versioning too, so you can go back and get old copies of changed files.

    For those of you worried about your bandwidth, I don't think you've looked at the product features. These products don't do a full backup every time. They do an incremental backup, sending only changes. So if you rip a new DVD, yes, it will take a while to backup to the offsite location. So what? It's better to have it backed up than not at all.

    Right now I am CrashPlan backup to my Windows box (they support multiple OSes), and then that is protected to Carbonite.

    My only gripe so far with CrashPlan is that it's $60, with one year of support and free upgrades. That means it is, in effect, $60 per year. I would expect a better price differential vs. pure offsite backups like Carbonite.
  16. kresh macrumors 6502a


    What to backup on Mozy?

    I use Mozy now, I just love the $5 per month unlimited storage.

    But when I upgrade to Leopard should I continue to backup my regular drive that I use for document and multimedia storage, or should I use Mozy to backup my Time Machine backup drive?

    I'm going to rely on Time Machine for backup recovery and Mozy for catastrophic emergencies (Fire, Flood, ect...).

    Anybody thought this through yet?
  17. CavemanUK macrumors 6502


    Jun 29, 2006
    Rhyl, North Wales
    Anyone know whether Time Machine can be configured to backup to a network location? if so, an offsite backup shouldnt be too hard to figure out...

    alternatively, if Time Machine can be fooled into backing up to an open DMG that would help too..
  18. stomer macrumors 6502a

    Apr 2, 2007
    Leeds, UK
    Time Machine was able to backup to my NAS without any problems.
  19. jeremy6044 thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 6, 2007
    so time machine can back up to a network drive that can be off site. i wonder if any third parties will start offering networked storage to interact with the time machine front end. doesn't seem like apple offers enough storage on .mac for that.
  20. Tafkas macrumors regular


    Mar 23, 2007
    Princeton, NJ
    As long as I have not updated to Leopard I will continue backing up my files using mozy.
    The best thing is that every person that clicks on the link and starts using Mozy, will get another 256MB of free backupspace.
  21. psychofreak Retired


    May 16, 2006
    OK, done :)
  22. ravencr macrumors member

    Mar 3, 2009
    Looks like Carbonite is setup for Mac now. I just merged all my files to one of my external drives and in the process lost every bit of data of my current PC desktop and laptop. I've got to find something that routinely backs up my existing and new files automatically. I think Carbonite is the answer for the new MacBook pro I have coming: http://www.carbonite.com/mac/mac.aspx

  23. sizzle macrumors newbie

    Nov 24, 2008
  24. ravencr macrumors member

    Mar 3, 2009
  25. bindigok macrumors regular

    May 14, 2007
    I have a little seagate go that I use for a backup and keep it in my safe - in case of fire etc. Not as good as off site backup, but I worry about off site backups - what if they aren't there in a year or 2 when I really need them?

    I have all of my documents on Mobile Me, and some of my more important pics. I have DVDs of things, and my software install discs with my Seagate in my safe.

Share This Page