 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Mac Applications / May 2008Back up drive compatible with SuperDuper
I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive that is compatible with the software. The manual suggests that either a LaCie, Maxtor One Touch, WiebeTech of Other World Computing will be compatible. All with Firewire. Can anyone recommend a drive from personal experience here in the U.K. Thanks, Peter  SignatureHe spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled. P.G. Wodehouse 1881 -1975 > I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive > that is compatible with the software. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks, > Peter I use a couple of OWC Mercury Elite Pro drives, one for a complete clone and another to sync my 'Tunes. I connect them via FW 800. No problemo. As my collection of 'Tunes has gotten larger, I have had to up-size the drives twice (now using Segagate 1TB.) OWC sells the empty cases if you can find the drives more cheaply. 1 TB ~ $179 US this week @ Frys. Signature________B___a___r___b___a___r___o___s___s___a________ Wayne B. Hewitt Encinitas, CA whewitt@ucsd.edu > I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive > that is compatible with the software. > The manual suggests that either a LaCie, Maxtor One Touch, WiebeTech of > Other World Computing will be compatible. All with Firewire. > Can anyone recommend a drive from personal experience here in the U.K. Most any hard drive will work. I would stay away from any hard drive enclosure with Maxtor or Western Digital hard drive mechanisms, because they tend to have shorter life spans (and shorter 3-year warranties, which says something ;). Seagate mechanisms are one of the most reliable (and they usually come with long 5-year warranties as well). SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > I would stay away from any hard drive enclosure with Maxtor or Western > Digital hard drive mechanisms, because they tend to have shorter life > spans (and shorter 3-year warranties, which says something ;). Seagate > mechanisms are one of the most reliable (and they usually come with long > 5-year warranties as well). I guess it's still possible to find Maxtor-branded hard drives around, but Seagate acquired Maxtor in late 2005: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051221-5816.html Seagate currently sells Maxtor-branded hard drive enclosures but the actual drives are all Seagate now. Signature<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/election.shtml> Election 2008 goods. <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude > > I would stay away from any hard drive enclosure with Maxtor or Western > > Digital hard drive mechanisms, because they tend to have shorter life [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Seagate currently sells Maxtor-branded hard drive enclosures but the > actual drives are all Seagate now. Right. What I mean is I would avoid any Maxtor-branded internal hard drive mechanism. SignatureNote: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter. JR > > I guess it's still possible to find Maxtor-branded hard drives around, > > but Seagate acquired Maxtor in late 2005: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Right. What I mean is I would avoid any Maxtor-branded internal hard > drive mechanism. Okay, we're on the same page, and I absolutely agree about Maxtor-branded internal hard drives. Anyone selling them would have to have rather old inventories, though. Signature<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/election.shtml> Election 2008 goods. <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude >> I would stay away from any hard drive enclosure with Maxtor or Western >> Digital hard drive mechanisms, because they tend to have shorter life >> spans (and shorter 3-year warranties, which says something ;). Seagate >> mechanisms are one of the most reliable (and they usually come with long >> 5-year warranties as well). > I guess it's still possible to find Maxtor-branded hard drives around, > but Seagate acquired Maxtor in late 2005: And Seagate has kept the Maxtor name for their crappy consumer drives. There are Maxtor drives all over the shelves of your big box retail outlets. All with crappy 1 year or maybe 2 year warranties. > http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051221-5816.html > Seagate currently sells Maxtor-branded hard drive enclosures but the > actual drives are all Seagate now. Seagate reserves the Seagate name for their better products. Signature"Woof bloody woof." > > I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive > > that is compatible with the software. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > mechanisms are one of the most reliable (and they usually come with long > 5-year warranties as well). Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. SignatureNote: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter. JR > Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because > you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. For the specific application mentioned (SuperDuper), there is another more important reason to prefer FireWire. You can't boot from a USB drive. At least with many Macs. I haven't followed all the details, so there might be cases where you can now, but it certainly used to be the case that Macs couldn't boot from USB. Making a bootable backup is one of SuperDuper's nice features, so it would be a bit of a shame to get a drive that can't do that. SuperDuper will work fine on a non-bootable drive - if you don't care about the backup being bootable. As it happens, I do care. SignatureRichard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain > > Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because > > you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. > > For the specific application mentioned (SuperDuper), there is another > more important reason to prefer FireWire. You can't boot from a USB > drive. intel macs can boot from usb; powerpc can't (although it is technically possible if one wants to work at it). Just for the record on this SuperDuper! bootable backup thread: If your primary or working Mac fails (either the internal HD or some other internal component) and you have a bootable backup on an external drive, you can indeed boot from it -- but you of course need another standby Mac to which you can connect that external HD; and even if the failed Mac is under warranty, it may be some time (like weeks) before you get it repaired and back in service (although I will agree that if it's only the internal HD that fails, that can be often be swapped out on the spot at an Apple store or other repair shop). In any event, if you're in a situation where you need to have a "hot" (or nearly hot) standby Mac more or less instantly available in case of failure of your primary Mac, one way to do it is to maintain a primary Mac and a standby Mac, both of the same model; and do your SuperDuper! bootable backups from the primary Mac to the standby Mac operating in Target Disk mode. Turns out that if you do this, the standby Mac will boot instantly from the SuperDuper! bootable backup that's on its internal HD, just by shutting it down from Target Disk mode and restarting it -- at least, I've done this a couple of times with a pair of 13" MacBooks (once as a test, once under pressure of necessity), and it seems to have worked fine both times, with essentially all settings, passwords, and the like fully preserved. I've been advised that this might not work as well between two different models of Macs, because of incompatibilities in drivers and the like; but at least it worked with the two MacBooks purchased about 6 months apart, one having an 80 GB internal drive and the other 120 GB. This sound like an expensive way to provide a backup drive, but if your primary Mac fails you're going to have to get a temporary replacement (or quickly repaired) Mac somehow. Having the hot standby instantly available can be important, or at least very handy in some situations; and my approach in any case is to always buy the bottom of the line model of Mac and put any additional funds into peripherals and software. > Just for the record on this SuperDuper! bootable backup thread: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > it's only the internal HD that fails, that can be often be swapped out > on the spot at an Apple store or other repair shop). If the only failure is the internal hard drive, then you should be able to boot up immediately using the external drive written as a bootable copy by Super Duper! by restarting the computer and holding the option key down. If your external drive is the same type as your internal drive (ATA, SATA, etc.), then you could also remove the drive mechanism from the external enclosure and install into your Mac as a replacement for your damaged internal drive. SignatureJim Gibson Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- > For the specific application mentioned (SuperDuper), there is another > more important reason to prefer FireWire. You can't boot from a USB > drive. At least with many Macs. I haven't followed all the details, so > there might be cases where you can now, but it certainly used to be the > case that Macs couldn't boot from USB. Yes, there are cases where you can boot from USB drives now, and those are every last Intel Mac. Signature<http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/election.shtml> Election 2008 goods. <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/greet.cgi> Holiday cards with attitude >> For the specific application mentioned (SuperDuper), there is another >> more important reason to prefer FireWire. You can't boot from a USB [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Yes, there are cases where you can boot from USB drives now, and those > are every last Intel Mac. It seems to me I read that Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2. In any event, you can buy a LaCie 320 gig external HD with Firewire and USB for about $120. I did that a few months ago and use that drive and SuperDuper to back up my MacBook Pro. Via Firewire 800. > It seems to me I read that Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2. firewire 400 is faster than usb2, and firewire 800 even more so. > >> It seems to me I read that Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2. > > firewire 400 is faster than usb2, and firewire 800 even more so. Yes, well, I am pleased with the LaCie Quadra drive I bought to backup my laptop. LaCie makes some nice stuff, and the ergonomics are nice, too. > It seems to me I read that Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2. Firewire 400 is faster than USB2. Firewire 800 is MUCH faster than USB2. I need a decent FW800 1TB drive for cheap. Or an eSATA 1TB, I suppose. SignatureIt was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought...should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. > Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because > you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. Jolly, are you still using an Exabyte tape drive for backups? If you were making a purchase decision today, would you still go with a tape drive or go another route? > > Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because > > you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. > > Jolly, are you still using an Exabyte tape drive for backups? If you > were making a purchase decision today, would you still go with a tape > drive or go another route? Yep, I am still using it. I back up a total of roughly 200 GB of data from several Macs (from Mac OS X, Mac OS, Windows XP, Linux) (incremental plus) daily to two rotating sets of tapes, one of which is stored in a fireproof safe at all times. I have another set that is an archive of my 3 terabyte 4-bay concatenated RAID file server storage volume. I haven't had a single tape failure, unless you count one tape that was defective from the start and has been replaced. If you read up on the technology used in these drives, it's really next generation stuff. I'm impressed with it. The initial investment was substantial, but so far it's been worth every penny, IMO. I sleep easy at night knowing my data is safe. Would I purchase it again today? Probably so, yes, because I can store a lot of data on small tapes and store them for a long long time if needed. SignatureNote: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter. JR > > Jolly, are you still using an Exabyte tape drive for backups? If you > > were making a purchase decision today, would you still go with a tape [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > yes, because I can store a lot of data on small tapes and store them for > a long long time if needed. Thanks, great info. I'm concerned about using only drives for backups due to the risk of failure and theft. Tapes are cheap enough to keep multiple around and store offsite. What software are you using to do the backup to the tapes? Are you backing up to the server first and running the backup software there? > > > Jolly, are you still using an Exabyte tape drive for backups? If you > > > were making a purchase decision today, would you still go with a tape [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > due to the risk of failure and theft. Tapes are cheap enough to keep > multiple around and store offsite. Yep. I mean you *could* lug a rack of 4 hard disks around - but tapes are just so much more convenient. Also, I have much more confidence in the ability to restore data from a 10-year-old tape than I would a 10-year-old hard drive. : ) That's particularly true with VXA tapes, because the packet technology they use solves a lot of the problems that plague most other common tape technologies (tape head mis-alignment, fault intolerance, etc.). > What software are you using to do the backup to the tapes? Are you > backing up to the server first and running the backup software there? The tape drive comes with Retrospect. I've been a Retrospect user for over 10 years. For years now, Dantz's Retrospect for Mac development team (which, over the years, had been paired down to just a couple developers who seemingly didn't work on Retrospect for Mac full time) has had Retrospect for Mac in maintenance mode - doing only the minimal amount of work to keep it running on today's operating systems and to maintain compatibility with newer hardware storage devices. Because of this, Mac users watched Dantz add more new features to the Windows version of the product over the past few years than the Mac version. Kind of irritating, considering Retrospect was a Mac product first! Grrr... @->: ( With that said, the current version of Retrospect, even with its obviously outdated interface and feature set, is still an *extremely* robust, feature-rich, and stable program. Retrospect's feature set is hard to match. It backs up several Macs over the network in my household every single day of the year, largely unattended, and never complains or crashes. Note that a lot of other Mac backup solutions, like SuperDuper do a great job at one thing - duplication. Retrospect, on the other hand, does smart, unattended incremental network backups of Mac OS (classic and X), Linux, and Windows clients to tape, disk images, various optical media, and duplication of files to hard drives - without breaking a sweat. Lucky for us, there is some light on the horizon: Recently, EMC purchased Dantz, and there are signs that the Mac team is once again doing serious development with the product. EMC recently announced they are in development of a new product called "Retrospect X", which will replace the current version (in fact, if you purchased the current version on or after January 14, 2008, the upgrade is free for you). Retrospect X reportedly has a significantly updated code base offering feature parity with the Windows version and additional Mac-only features. Apparently they are also looking at adding some features to simplify the user interface (a big complaint from users new to Retrospect is that the interface is too complex - it does take a little time to learn such a complex product): <http://preview.tinyurl.com/5hh8w9> EMC also recently announced a public beta for both Retrospect X Client (for network backups) and Retrospect X, and have already released two beta candidates of the client!: <http://preview.tinyurl.com/22qmk7> I've been running the client beta for a month or so with no problems. These are exciting times for Retrospect users. : ) SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > > > > Jolly, are you still using an Exabyte tape drive for backups? If you > > > > were making a purchase decision today, would you still go with a tape [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > > These are exciting times for Retrospect users. : ) I used Retrospect back in System 7 days and was very happy with it. Now, backing up over localtalk was not fun though. :) I'll have to consider Retrospect again as I formulate my plans. Thanks for all the detail. > > Thanks, great info. I'm concerned about using only drives for backups > > due to the risk of failure and theft. Tapes are cheap enough to keep [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the ability to restore data from a 10-year-old tape than I would a > 10-year-old hard drive. Personally, I use quality DVD-R or R/W discs for archiving. My bet is that the biggest problem restoring from 10-yr old tapes will be finding a device to read them. (Anyone remember Bernoulli disks?) I think DVD readers will be around for quite a while. I've also found tape drives to be less reliable ('fatal hardware error') than disc readers. Don't know whether Retrospect will write to a DVD, either R or R/W. Last time I checked (quite a while ago), it didn't. --Fred > Personally, I use quality DVD-R or R/W discs for archiving. My bet is > that the biggest problem restoring from 10-yr old tapes will be finding > a device to read them. (Anyone remember Bernoulli disks?) I think DVD > readers will be around for quite a while. I've also found tape drives to > be less reliable ('fatal hardware error') than disc readers. While I generally agree, be aware that CC/DVD R and R/W media does *NOT* necessarily have very good shelf life. I've had lots of cases where I could no longer read the media a few years later. It is a media problem - not a drive one. Yes, you can do many things to improve this. But if you blissfully ignore the matter, you can get "burned"; I can testify to this first hand. For example, don't use stick-on paper labels. They warp and cause problems with time. I'm highly suspicious of that as a cause of some of my problems. I used to have a label maker that I used; stopped that practice a long time ago after multiple bad experiences. Getting good quality media also makes a big difference. Note that home-burned CD/DVD media is completely different from that of commercial DCs/DVDs. THey do *NOT* generally have the same life expectancy, or even close. SignatureRichard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain >> Personally, I use quality DVD-R or R/W discs for archiving. > While I generally agree, be aware that CC/DVD R and R/W media does > *NOT* necessarily have very good shelf life. I have a lot of CDRs from the early/mid 90's that are still perfectly readable (back when CD-R burners cost like $1000 and burned at 1x). But most of my CDRs from the late 90's early 00's didn't last 5 years. My first CDR was a complete backup of all the drives on my "Tempest" in December of 1993 and was written on a borrowed CDR drive.<1> I can't remember how much the balnk disc was, but it was expensive. There was quite a bit of room left over on the CDR too. Maybe 50%. That disc was still readable when I tossed it last year after 14 years. > Note that home-burned CD/DVD media is completely different from that > of commercial DCs/DVDs. THey do *NOT* generally have the same life > expectancy, or even close. The problem discs for me all seem to have been the blue variety; and light blue at that. The really dark blue discs were fine, and all the silver or gold ones I have all are still readable (baring any nicks or scratches). Some of the discs that have failed where Maxell's or TDKs and some that are still good were generics. <1> Borrowed from a friend's job in the clean room of a data center. We also burned a couple of custom CDs while we were at it. SignatureWell I've seen the Heart of Darkness/Read the writing on the wall/an the voice out in the desert/Was the voice out in the hall > > Personally, I use quality DVD-R or R/W discs for archiving. My bet is > > that the biggest problem restoring from 10-yr old tapes will be finding [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > While I generally agree, be aware that CC/DVD R and R/W media does > *NOT* necessarily have very good shelf life. Absolutely, Richard. Shelf life depends greatly on the quality of the blanks. My preference for a long time has been whatever the top of the line Kodaks were. (I've found their run-of-the-mill blanks to be mediocre.) Currently, that's the Kodak Gold Preservation. Here is a link to one seller (picked at random): <http://www.yesbuy.net/kodak-gold-preservation-8x-dvdr-dvd-r-blank-media. html> For those not aware, the data on a burned CD/DVD (as opposed to commercially pressed) actually lies closer to the top surface than the bottom (the side from which the laser operates). The top of the line Kodaks have always had an extra layer of plastic on top to protect the data. Not having that layer is why adhesive labels and permanent marker pens are not good things to use on the top surface. The solvents in them can deteriorate the plastic and your data. Here's a link to a Kodak FAQ about their Preservation discs. They claim a 100 yr life (Item 6): <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/faqs/faq1629.shtml> I don't want to get into a debate about whether the claim is just marketing fluff, but it _is_ their claim. Taiyo Yuden is also a respected brand, though I don't have much experience with it. > ...For example, don't use stick-on paper labels. They warp and cause > problems with time. I'm highly suspicious of that as a cause of some of > my problems. I used to have a label maker that I used; stopped that > practice a long time ago after multiple bad experiences. Getting good > quality media also makes a big difference. Yes, the ONLY place I write on my archive discs is around the clear annulus. Not much space, I know, but I can write enough info to uniquely identify what's on the disc. and In article <jollyroger-C77152.15045222052008@individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > Retrospect has supported optical media of various formats for a long > time, FWIR: > > <http://www.macworld.com/article/54547/2006/12/retrospect61.html> That's good to know, JR. I once did lots of scripting in Retrospect for clients, but not for over 5 yrs now. I often said that if Microsoft wrote a GUI for backup software, they'd have produced Retrospect. In fairness to the Retrospect developers, they were trying to be all things to all people under all conditions. Not an easy goal to accomplish. Besides, none of my clients wanted to tackle the interface, so I billed more hours. ;) --Fred > In article <jollyroger-C77152.15045222052008@individual.net>, > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Besides, none of my clients wanted to tackle the interface, so I billed > more hours. ;) LOL - I hear you. The interface could be so much simpler. Then again, if it were too simple, Retrospect wouldn't be nearly as useful as it is. SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > > > Thanks, great info. I'm concerned about using only drives for backups > > > due to the risk of failure and theft. Tapes are cheap enough to keep [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Personally, I use quality DVD-R or R/W discs for archiving. The lack of shelf life makes DVD media less attractive than tape, for me. > My bet is > that the biggest problem restoring from 10-yr old tapes will be finding > a device to read them. (Anyone remember Bernoulli disks?) Perhaps... Then again 10 years is a long tome for *any* technology. Only time will tell. > I think DVD > readers will be around for quite a while. I've also found tape drives to > be less reliable ('fatal hardware error') than disc readers. I have too, but then the packet technology used in Exabyte VXA tapes is so much better than all other current tape technologies, related reliability issues are a thing of the past: <http://www.exabyte.com/adcounter2.cfm?id=3689> > Don't know > whether Retrospect will write to a DVD, either R or R/W. Last time I > checked (quite a while ago), it didn't. Retrospect has supported optical media of various formats for a long time, FWIR: <http://www.macworld.com/article/54547/2006/12/retrospect61.html> SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > Also, I'd choose Firewire over USB whenever you have the choice, because > you will almost always get better performance with Firewire. What do you mean, "almost"? SignatureThe fact that Bob and John are married does nothing to diminish anyone else's marriage any more than a black woman marrying a white man, a Jew marrying a Catholic, or an ugly Lyle marrying a Pretty Woman > I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive > that is compatible with the software. The manual suggests that either > a LaCie, Maxtor One Touch, WiebeTech of > Other World Computing will be compatible. All with Firewire. > Can anyone recommend a drive from personal experience here in the U.K. Is there any drive that is NOT compatible? And you're talking about the electronics in the external drive, not the hard drive I imagine. I've used a few cheap made in China external firewire cases and they work the same as my Lacie. We'll see how long they last of course. And no, they are not built as ruggedly as the Lacie. But its placed on your desk. You're not playing football with it. I was thinking the other day that perhaps what most people need is a dual backup system. One hard drive has various backups that are updating all the time (via Time Machine or the like) and stays with your computer. Its never unplugged. Another is backed up every day or every week and that is stored away from any risk of theft or fire. > Is there any drive that is NOT compatible? if the drive works with the mac (which virtually every drive does), then it will work with superduper. > I was thinking the other day that perhaps what most people need is a > dual backup system. One hard drive has various backups that are > updating all the time (via Time Machine or the like) and stays with your > computer. Its never unplugged. Another is backed up every day or every > week and that is stored away from any risk of theft or fire. good plan. > I've just downloaded a copy of Super Duper and now need to get a drive > that is compatible with the software. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks, > Peter Thanks for all the replies and information on this item. Peter |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.