"Iv used time machine for probably 2 years now and havnt had any problems....am i missing something? why does it have such a bad reputation?"
Consider this scenario:
- You try to boot your Mac, it won't boot.
- Repeated attempts to boot end in failure
- You can't seem to find your original System Software DVD's.
- You arrive at the realization that you need to try booting from a second drive, so...
- You reach for your "backup" drive with your TM backups, and then....
- You try to boot from it.
What happens?
This is one of the most common "failure scenarios" for home computer users.
The best solution for such a problem is to have a BOOTABLE backup drive. Nothing -- NOTHING -- makes it easier to get running again.
TM cannot do this. For that reason alone, it's a horrible "answer" to the question of "backing up" for end users.
Even an OLDER bootable backup created with CarbonCopyCloner or SuperDuper is far, FAR more useful in a moment of extreme need than the latest TM backup, simply because you can "get going again" in VERY short order.
Time Machine looks deceptively simple in System Preferences with its "cute" on/off switch. It entices users into thinking, "hey, backup is so easy!". And, actually TM DOES make _creating_ a "backup" easy, with little thought or input from the user.
The problems arise when users -- again, in moments of extreme need -- try to GET AT the data in their TM backups. All of sudden, things can get complicated and far from "easy".
The "cloning" backup apps work almost 180 degrees in reverse. You have to "think a bit more" to create a backup using CCC or SD, and, once created, you have to think to maintain that backup. But -- if the *#**# hits the fan -- it's very easy to get rebooted again if things go wrong.
TM makes "backup" look easy when it ain't.
And that's what's wrong with it.