Time Machine and Superduper backups

Okay, there are a lot of posts on TM versus superduper. I like TM and do routine backups of my two mac computers with TM. I recently downloaded superduper and performed a backup of one computer. In doing a Superduper back up I thought that it would be identical to a TM backup, but it does not appear to me to be identical. In fact, Superduper did not copy a few movies that I had saved on my mac computer hard drive. The movies were there though on my TM backup. So, now I have questions. Is superduper really worth it? Do I really need it? Did my movies really not copy and they are just hidden? Has anyone else had problems with superduper?

Thanks!

MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.6.2)

Posted on Feb 4, 2010 9:08 PM

Reply
7 replies

Feb 4, 2010 9:57 PM in response to coffeehouseblues

SuperDuper is if you want a bootable clone of your current system exactly as it is. Also more flexable through scripting what you do and don't want. You should build a backup script and that will get you all your files. If you need file versioning, stick with Time Machine. Also re images from superduper are quicker if you have a HD fail. Also SD backups tend to fail less often when restoring.

Feb 5, 2010 7:55 AM in response to coffeehouseblues

coffeehouseblues:

TM and SD perform different functions. TM allows you to go back in time to restore specific files/folders, whereas SD makes a one time clone of your volume. SD will make a bootable clone whereas your TM backup is not bootable. I maintain two SD clones on separate external HDDs and one TM backup. I rotate my SD backups so that I am able to recover from a older backup if something gets screwed up in between backups. I can boot my computer from the SD backup and run diagnostics and repairs on the internal HDD, which is a really neat function. So while both are technically backups, there are significant differences in how they do it, and the place they have in one's backup strategy.
In fact, Superduper did not copy a few movies that I had saved on my mac computer hard drive.

This is unusual. I have never had such an experience. I would contact SD tech support and as about that.

😉 cornelius

Feb 5, 2010 9:28 AM in response to coffeehouseblues

TM and SuperDuper! are completely different programs with different functions and different philosophies. SuperDuper excels at making an exact duplicate of your hard drive, one that you can boot the computer with and as such it is the best in class, in my opinion. After making the initial duplicate, you can have it incrementally make backups to keep the clone in sync with its source. TM, on the other hand, starts out by backing up the entire computer but after that original backup it makes incremental backups and keeps each incremental separate. While the SD! backup is always an exact duplicate of your current drive, the TM backup can used to create an exact restoration of now or yesterday or last week - or in my case, even sometime last year - but the TM backup itself cannot be used to start up the computer. This is one crucial difference between the two programs.

While SD! is very flexible, the demo/free version is limited, I think, to making an exact duplicate. Therefore, your cloned drive should be EXACTLY the same as its source. I've had very few problems with SD! over the years I've used it and failing to make the backup I've requested - unless it errored out and said so - is not one of them.

Feb 5, 2010 1:24 PM in response to coffeehouseblues

I would like to second using Super Duper in addition to Time Machine, as a bootable clone can be invaluable. For one thing, if your hard drive dies a sudden death, you can boot from the clone and keep working until it is convenient to replace your internal drive. You can also boot from the external and use Disk Utility to repair your internal drive. Super Duper and Time Machine are complementary in what they do, so it makes sense to use both as a comprehensive backup strategy.

Am curious as to why the movies didn't clone. Were they on a separate partition of your boot drive or something like that?

Feb 8, 2010 9:45 AM in response to coffeehouseblues

coffeehouseblues:
I was using the free version, and it DID NOT give me an exact copy of my hard drive. Only when I paid for the Super Duper did I get an exact copy.

Actually, it should not make any difference. The free version will make an exact clone of the volume you are copying. The difference between the registered copy and the unregistered copy is that registration allows you to do SmartUpdates (cumulative backups) which means you don't have to clone everything over each time you clone. SmartUpdates will scan both drives, the erase data which has been updated on the Source and replace it with the updated data. So far as the original clone with the unregistered copy of SD, it should make an identical copy of the Source on the Destination. Here is how their documentation describes the difference:
Once registered, SuperDuper allows you to schedule backups, quickly update backups with Smart Update (saving a lot of time), select “copy modes” other than Erase, then copy, create Sandboxes, fully customize the copying process using its unique Copy Scripts, save and restore settings, and avoid authenticating every time you copy.


😉 cornelius

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

Time Machine and Superduper backups

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.