Working alternative to Time Machine

I have used CCC for years. It is scheduled to do a bootable clone at 8 am every day which, if necessary, could get me back to full working within 5 minutes (less the lost work since 8 am).. I also do a manual backup to a USB HD about twice a month. I also have TM running, but twice over the last two years it has behaved eratically by refusing to backup and claimimg that the disc is full when it is not.

My reference to 2001 was because of a new AFP security protocol that Apple introduced in 2002. In 2011, Apple disabled the old, insecure protocol and every NAS device in the world stopped working.

Time Machine is designed to work with notebook computers. You don't have to keep it plugged into the backup drive constantly. Even when not connected, Time Machine will make local backups that provide protection against accidental deletion. Plus, with a local drive, you can encrypt your backup.

It isn't a question of what was introduced in Mountain Lion. Maybe the change was in Panther? That is the problem with open source software. Apple's software is well understood and documented. Your version of Linux, like all versions of Linux, is different than every other version.

It is WD's responsibility to get their NAS working with Mountain Lion. If you rely on WD's device, then you can't upgrade until WD gives you the OK. If you were to switch to a solution that Apple supports, then you would get your backup done quickly, turn on local snapshots, and be on your way. If you insist on working with the NAS, then you need to contact WD.

sokratov wrote:

Sorry, I do not understand what is this post about. Consider me stupid if you want. The title of the discussion is "Working alternative to Time Machine". There is one (CCC) suggested already and considered by me right now, though evidently one cannot expect it to work exactly like TM. If you can suggest anything else - please, do it. I know that these were changes from Lion to Mountain Lion which stopped my Back Ups. I am not blaiming Apple or WD, and I am not interested in who should be contacted to for making WD NAS and Mountain Lion to work together. The fact is simply like this: TM from Mountain Lion is not working with my NAS. So, I am looking, well, for "Working alternative to Time Machine" with my hardware set-up, which includes MacBook Air and WD MyBookLive among many ther devices. Buying a Time Capsule can also be a solution, but from the posts so far CCC seems to be cheaper and more reliable. Thank you.

If you had a working solution with the WD, then you should troubleshoot that to find out why it's not working before resorting to alternatives to TM because THERE IS NONE. Nothing works with the simplicity and elegance and completeness of TM - NOTHING. As I said CCC is an excellent product, but it is NOT a TM replacement. Try using it to flick back through the different iterations of a file until you find the one you want. Try shutting down the Mac halfway through its copy process. These are typical reasons why TM is better at backups. Use CCC to archive your disk maybe. Certainly use it if you want to create a bootable clone of your HD, but don't be mislead into thinking it can do what TM can do.

There are other backup solutions that promise much, but in my experience don't actually deliver all they promise and even that is less than what TM offers.

Look into getting TM functioning first. If you want to solve your backup problems, you will HAVE to work through them in a logical manner and right now, that means trying an alternative backup destination that is guaranteed to work with TM. Once you've tried that, you'll know where next to look.

Why do you need network backup? If it's just the one machine then USB is not a bad solution.

Do you use Apple Airport Extreme BaseStations for your WiFi? If so, you could connect a USB disc to the Airport and make that a TM destination (basically turn it into a Time Capsule), so you'd achieve network backup to an approved TM setup.

Local backups (such as you've just done) are I think done to a different format than those over the network, so trying to use one on the other doesn't work. However, you can copy the backups from 1 destination to another of the same type and continue using that.

Any reason not to consider just getting a Time Capsule?

Nothing works with the simplicity and elegance and completeness of TM - NOTHING. As I said CCC is an excellent product, but it is NOT a TM replacement.

IMO, TM isn't simple or elegant. It's major shortcoming is that one needs to verify restoring before assuming it'll work. These forums are replete with failures. As for CCC, it provides a similar backup, archiving is available, as is cloning the Recovery HD, and if properly used by making a bootable clone, provides an immediately verifiable volume. Finally, CCC can be set up to mimic TM's hourly updating. I've not used TM since it shipped, preferring multiple, verifiable clones and I make those for three OSs.

sokratov wrote:

Nope, the cable connection did not change anything. Its 230 days for the remaining 27.85 Gb (it did work at night). Of course the number of "required" days is varying continuously, but does not look like dropping down.

Nice ot know that at least it was not WiFi slowing down the process...

FYI if your Network Preferences is configured such that Wi-Fi is given precedence over Ethernet, your Mac will still be using Wi-Fi whether or not you connected an Ethernet cable.

The system will use what you tell it to use, which may or may not be the fastest network connection.

This may or may not be the problem, but to eliminate confusion, turn off Wi-Fi. 230 days is absurd.