 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
02-29-2008, 04:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slower than with Tiger
Hi, we love Super Duper. We've been using it on a MacBook Pro 17. Yesterday we upgraded to Leopard (we're using Super Duper 2.5), and while it works wonderfully, it is very, very much slower than it was before we did the Leopard Upgrade. By the way, we are not using Time Machine. Any thoughts? Thanks.
Last edited by wordwiz; 02-29-2008 at 05:02 PM. 
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Can I clone an Intel Tiger boot volume using PPC SD? | PaulMBCA | General | 3 | 11-20-2006 08:46 AM |
| Tiger Install | na goodman | General | 4 | 10-10-2005 04:01 PM |
| SuperDuper vs Tiger - slower backups? | 2stepbay | General | 31 | 09-30-2005 11:22 PM |
| Upgrading a safety clone to tiger | 00afro | General | 12 | 07-09-2005 11:53 AM |
| Major Tiger Bug (in Tiger itself) - be aware! | dnanian | Frequently Asked Questions | 0 | 05-05-2005 09:16 PM |
Threaded Mode