13 Replies Latest reply: Feb 20, 2009 2:29 PM by scb
pinkystink Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
Hi There,
Please help I have a Mac book Pro running 10.6.6 and a Imac running 10.4.11. I have an external drive and I would like to back up both machines. How do I do this?
I have Time machine on the laptop, do I need to have the same OS on the Imac? will they copy over each other? does it "partition" itself or do I have to do that myself? Is "partition" even the right word.
Seem to have got lost after many years of Mac use and struggling to get my head around how to run a properly backed up system.
Thanks for any help offered

Mac book Pro and Imac G5, Mac OS X (10.5.6)
  • thomas_r. Level 7 Level 7 (30,130 points)
    Okay, multiple questions here...

    First, you can't back up the iMac with Time Machine, because Time Machine is part of Leopard (10.5.x), and the iMac only has Tiger (10.4.x).

    Second, it should easily be possible to back up two computers to the same drive. Just make sure the backups for each machine go into separate folders on that drive. (I don't use Time Machine, but I assume it could put its backups in a specific folder... if not, it *****.) No need to make separate partitions or worry about them copying over each other, especially since you'll have to use something other than Time Machine on the iMac.

    Now, as for something to use on the iMac, if you have a .Mac (or MobileMe) account, you can download a copy of Backup and use that. Otherwise, maybe use something like Carbon Copy Cloner (free, Google it).

    Also, how are you connecting the drive to both machines? You can just plug it in to either, or you can leave it hooked up to the iMac and share it over the network with the MacBook Pro. (To do the latter, go to System Preferences -> Sharing and enable File Sharing. Make sure that the drive, or even just a specific folder on that drive, is shared.

    Good luck!
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    You can just backup to one drive. Period. No separate folders needed. No partitioning. I am doing it right now. Here's the caveats:
    1. Use TM for the Leopard volume. It gives you a folder called "Backups.backupdb". Inside that is a folder with the network name of that Volume'. Backup as many Leopard volumes as you want. A new "network name folder goes into Backups.backupdb for every backup you make.
    2. The 10.4 machine can be "cloned" to that same backup, and nothing is overwritten. Use Carbon Copy Cloner (free) or SuperDuper (fee) for this.
  • pinkystink Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
    Ok thanks for your response.
    So with the time machine as its automatic I wasn't sure I would be able to set up two folders. Leaving that issue aside. I have copied over the files from the imac, no probs.
    I do have an iMac account and tried to find the mention backup app.I don't know if its just me but I can't see it anywhere, tried searching for Backup.... any glues where you found it please

    sorry for being so lame and thanks

    Like your idea of hocking it up to one machine and wirelessly conecting to the laptop, will try that out. TA
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    No, don't use Backup. Use what I suggested. Make a bootable clone. You will be glad you did.
  • pinkystink Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
    will do my friend..... whats wrong with backup then........not that I can find it.
    Is it me or do these things just hide from me......
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    "Wrong" isn't the question. But, TM is not bootable, AND auto, so why use Backup. CCC and SD are both auto if you want, and make bootable clones. Backup does neither. Just not useful.
  • thomas_r. Level 7 Level 7 (30,130 points)
    Backup can be found by going to your .Mac account's iDisk (in the Finder, choose Go -> iDisk -> My iDisk) and then looking in the Software folder.

    I like the way Backup works, personally. I like having an incremental backup where only changed files are added to the backup and you have multiple versions of files that change often. If you screw something up and then back it up before you realize, having this kind of backup saves your bacon. I use Backup to back up to two different hard drives -- one stays in the safe deposit box at the bank, one at home, and I swap them now and then. And if I ever need to recover a file that I deleted a year or two ago, it'll be on one of those drives.

    Personally, I don't like bootable backups. They take too long, and to have a truly bootable backup, you've got to basically copy your hard drive onto another hard drive, so you'll burn a whole drive or partition. (Disk image backups are not bootable.) They also tend not to be incremental. But if you need to get back up and running immediately after a major crash, they'll let you do that. (Of course, if system problems caused the crash, you're just increasing your chances of data loss by working with that backed-up system, especially if you then start backing it up and aren't keeping incremental backups!)

    So if you do a bootable backup, it's for emergency use only -- resist the temptation to just copy it back over and keep using that system after a crash.
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    Mr. Reed makes some erroneous statements.
    1. Time Machine is incremental, and it's ability to retrieve, and it's use of "hard" alias links is astounding. Backup is good for this, if you use Tiger, or older systems, but it is no longer necessary with TM.
    2. The 2 applications I mentioned make incremental backups. They do not recopy the entire drive when making those bootable backups. I make an update once a week, and it takes maybe 10 minutes. This, and my TM backup is on the same drive, unpartitioned, un-foldered. They reside perfectly together in harmony.
  • thomas_r. Level 7 Level 7 (30,130 points)
    scb wrote:
    Mr. Reed makes some erroneous statements.
    1. Time Machine is incremental, and it's ability to retrieve, and it's use of "hard" alias links is astounding. Backup is good for this, if you use Tiger, or older systems, but it is no longer necessary with TM.


    I wasn't referring to Time Machine, I was referring to the comparison of Backup and Carbon Copy Cloner on the Tiger machine. You recommended CCC over Backup for that machine to make a bootable clone. I was pointing out issues and alternatives.

    2. The 2 applications I mentioned make incremental backups. They do not recopy the entire drive when making those bootable backups. I make an update once a week, and it takes maybe 10 minutes. This, and my TM backup is on the same drive, unpartitioned, un-foldered. They reside perfectly together in harmony.


    Again, you're missing the context. I was referring to the use of CCC to make a bootable clone. I did not make any comparison between Time Machine and Backup.
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    No, Mr Reed, I did understand. I was pointing out in the first case that TM replaces BU because it is easier/better/faster/wider/deeper/etc On the second point, I was making the case against your, what I presume, assertion that CCC or SD cannot make incremental backups. They do, and better/faster/deeper/wider/higher/etc. This is, of course, my opinion.

    One other thing. Backup will be relegated to the dust bin of history soon. It is kept alive by Tiger/Panther users who do like it's features. I believe TM has more adoptees, and will be the stand alone soon. This, too, is only my opinion.
  • pinkystink Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
    well Hummm, thanks for your passionate advice, all duly noted and recorded.

    Cheers
  • thomas_r. Level 7 Level 7 (30,130 points)
    scb wrote:
    No, Mr Reed, I did understand. I was pointing out in the first case that TM replaces BU because it is easier/better/faster/wider/deeper/etc


    TM cannot replace Backup on a Tiger machine. What is it that is difficult to understand about that? Further, I never said that it did.

    On the second point, I was making the case against your, what I presume, assertion that CCC or SD cannot make incremental backups.


    Of course Carbon Copy Cloner can make incremental backups. What it cannot do is make incremental bootable backups. Those are, by definition, a snapshot of the last time the backup was done. As I was pointing out a few of the limitations of bootable backups, whether or not CCC can make incremental backups was not at issue.

    One other thing. Backup will be relegated to the dust bin of history soon. It is kept alive by Tiger/Panther users who do like it's features.


    The original poster has a Tiger machine.

    I'm not interested in debating TM vs. Backup, TM vs. Carbon Copy Cloner or any of this. My points were: 1) Backup has its uses, and 2) bootable backups are not perfect and do have drawbacks. If you would like to debate these points, rather than arguing about how I was wrong about points that I did not make, then please do so. Otherwise, I consider this discussion closed.
  • scb Level 5 Level 5 (5,380 points)
    Click........