 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31
02-12-2008, 09:54 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As I've said elsewhere, it's preferred to partition the drive. If your drive fills up, you can either remove the SD! backup or copy the whole thing to a new, larger drive...
__________________
--Dave Nanian 
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| backup file size—SD vs. Time Machine | jotaro | General | 10 | 06-23-2009 10:00 AM |
| SuperDuper and Leopard if not using Time Machine | edesignuk | General | 3 | 02-03-2008 06:41 AM |
| Will Time Machine make SuperDuper obsolete? | JAC II | General | 9 | 11-07-2007 03:54 PM |
| A different angle on SD & Time Machine integration | badlydrawnboy | General | 10 | 10-26-2007 08:37 PM |
| How will SuperDuper! integrate with Time Machine? | Felix | General | 15 | 10-23-2007 03:55 PM |
Linear Mode
