Shirt Pocket Discussions  
    Home netTunes launchTunes SuperDuper! Buy Now Support Discussions About Shirt Pocket    

Go Back   Shirt Pocket Discussions > SuperDuper! > General
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #5  
Old 10-06-2009, 11:13 AM
JoBoy JoBoy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by avramd View Post
Ok, that is a valid point... So let me paint the picture a little differently: ...in thinking it through, I realized that I can not think of a single situation in which I would take option 1 (well except for if I had an HD crash at 3am that I knew for sure happened after my SD! backup had completed, but before I had done any other work that TM! caught).
Unfortunately, I've had failures of my system twice in the recent past from a graphics card defect. The first time, I, too, took option 1 for the same reason, but I took option 2 the second time because I was aware of what data would be missing if I took option 2. There is nothing like real-life failures to stimulate thinking along the lines of this thread. However, I agree with the view that tying TM to SD! poses practical problems. There may even be proprietary issues with Apple.

Although it isn't true, it seems like TM is constantly trying to back up data. I've learned to ignore it and continue on with my work despite the constant background noise of the nearby Time Capsule. (I network TC via GbEthernet rather than using an external Firewire drive.)

My wish list includes a Super Duper! that runs simultaneously with my work flow and provides an updated, hourly backup, but not the versioning that is TM's stock in trade. That way, there is room for both apps in the market. TM would continue in its slow, versioning way and SD! would provide a quicker and reasonably current restoration that I would nearly always prefer because it restores a bootable system to my main drive in a very simple, very quick manner. I would use TM to restore an individual file or folder that I had previously deleted.

I have a concern about restoring from any copy that was made immediately prior to a system failure. Can such a copy perpetuate early file corruption that later leads to a system failure? This may be more of a worry than a valid concern, but I'd prefer something not quite so current for that reason. Losing up to 1 hour's work doesn't bother me, but concern over perpetuating corrupted files does bother me. Again, is that a valid concern? Could a really recent backup be programmed to quarantine the files copied during the last few minutes before a crash so that a person could elect to use them or not depending upon the cause of the crash?
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
alternating backup snoopy67 General 11 04-04-2009 05:14 PM
Hard drive size doubled after backup.... sanketr General 7 08-02-2008 12:16 PM
Feature Request: Last Backup Date bobm General 2 04-24-2008 02:31 AM
Server drive won't mount after backup rhennosy General 1 11-09-2007 03:49 PM
(Zero-length) File caused SuperDuper to abort backup alancfrancis General 7 08-31-2005 10:42 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.