Working alternative to Time Machine

Question

Level 1

0 points

Working alternative to Time Machine

The Time Machine is simply useless after the upgrade to Mountain Lion (MacBook Air 11-inch, Late 2010). 231 days for 29.8 Gb is too much even for a first back-up (WD MyBookLive NAS), which in my view should be just copy from from one disk to another. The back-up used to work before the upgrade. Basically I tried everything found in discussions (IP address instead of Time Machine, deleating TM files in system, choosing various settings, etc).

Any alternative to this software working under Mountain Lion? Really feel unsafe without backing-up...

OS X Mountain Lion

Posted on Sep 17, 2012 11:22 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Best reply

baltwo

Level 9

62,362 points

Sep 17, 2012 5:06 PM in response to sokratov

I prefer Carbon Copy Cloner and only make bootable clones.

Reply

Answer 2

etresoft

Level 8

46,312 points

Sep 17, 2012 5:14 PM in response to sokratov

Did you try a backup device that is supported by Time Machine. All of those NAS devices use flaky open source software designed for Macs in 2001. Use a locally connected hard drive or a Time Capsule and Time Machine works great.

Reply

Answer 3

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:04 PM in response to etresoft

In my understanding if Time Machine recognizes WD MyBookLive in local network as a TimeMachine disk, makes the backup (just impossibly slow) and was making it reasonably fast before Mountain Lion - the problem is not in Linux (why "for Macs in 2001"?) on NAS, but in Mountain Lion or TimeMachine software. Backing Up one notebook is not the primary service of NAS in my case - iTunes library is in there and can be used by all the local computers, movies from there can be shown on Philips TV directly and on any other TV through WDTVLive. Installing Time Capsule just for TimeMachine sounds a bit too much. Keeping a USB drive always connected to MacBook Air makes it - well, not a notebook anymore. Before this would be solved - one can either downgrade back to Lion, or to find an alternative to TimeMachine. That is why the question was raised.

Reply

Answer 4

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:07 PM in response to baltwo

Thanks. Sounds attractive. But did you try it with a network share? Did not find "supported hardware" in the description...

Reply

Answer 5

LousyFool

Level 4

2,662 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:18 PM in response to sokratov

I don't think Time Machine can be blamed. "231 days for 29.8GB"... I'm sure we're talking WiFi as well, which is further slowing down an already slow way.

I am using Time Machine and Time Capsule, and over Cat-6 the initial ML backup with 130GB took appr 5-6 hours, which one should be able to live with, e.g. by letting it run over night.

So, (a) don't use WiFi, at least not for the initial backup, but a proper Cat-5e or Cat-6 cable to enjoy the fastest possible transfer speed over Ethernet in this setup, (b) expect WD MyBook Live still to be a bit slower than Time Capsule, but don't sit and watch but go sleep or do anything else, haha.

Then Time Machine will do a good service for you, too.

Reply

Answer 6

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:23 PM in response to LousyFool

Thanks. Overnight will be suitable. You are right - did not try with cable yet. But it used to be overnight through WiFi before...

Reply

Answer 7

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:47 PM in response to LousyFool

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...

Reply

Answer 8

LousyFool

Level 4

2,662 points

Sep 17, 2012 10:51 PM in response to sokratov

What type of cable are you using? If Cat-5e or 6, then blame WD. Again, it can go MUCH faster than that, I'm the living proof.

Reply

Answer 9

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 11:15 PM in response to LousyFool

I know it should be faster - I was using it for couple years with the same hardware set-up. Just it became slow after the last Mountain Lion upgrade. Quite possible that Apple finally implemented something helpful for Time Capsule but not "understood" properly in the present WD firmware (what it has to do with the cable? Mine is Cat-5e, but since it is slow both with cable and WiFi it can be also incompartibility of the present TimeMachine settings with the settings in my router. NAS is simply part of it - no even USB port in there).

Will try with some directly connected USB disk, but would not be able to compare the speed after and before system upgrade (hopefully much faster than either WiFi or Ethernet) - never used it before for Back Ups. And do not want to use it in future.

It seems that I already lost all my previous TimeMachine Back Ups anyway - TimeMachine does not see them - so can play around.

So far it looks like the TimeMachine from Mountain Lion is not compartible with WD MyBookLive. At least without some adjustments listed on various discussion boards, but not helping in my particular case. If it would at least produce some error message - would be something to look into...

Reply

Answer 10

baltwo

Level 9

62,362 points

Sep 17, 2012 11:21 PM in response to sokratov

I don't do network stuff. However, this might give you the particulars: http://help.bombich.com/kb/usage-scenarios/backing-up-tofrom-network-volumes-and -other-non-hfs-volumes

Reply

Answer 11

LousyFool

Level 4

2,662 points

Sep 17, 2012 11:27 PM in response to sokratov

The cable is important, because with a lousy cable, especially a long lousy cable, you won't get faster than with WiFi.

Sure, with the initial TM backup being tons of little files would go better through the router if the package size were set appropriately small, but that wouldn't turn more than half a year into hours.

Some say Mountain Lion is slower with the initial backup, which I can't confirm. So, yes, WD MyBook Live, at least when used with ML, must be the bottleneck, or better the show-stopper... 😟 You should be able to confirm when using an external USB drive.

Reply

Answer 12

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 17, 2012 11:45 PM in response to baltwo

Thanks a lot. I interpret it as the possibility to back up documents and most probably the possibility to back up the entire Mac disk as a disk image. Of course there can be some hidden limitations (Non-HFS+ formatted volumes... offer limited support for HFS+ filesystem features) now and with future MacOSX and WD firmware updates - but it makes sense to try.

Reply

Answer 13

sokratov Author

Level 1

0 points

Sep 18, 2012 12:02 AM in response to LousyFool

The pity is, it became the bottleneck after I proudly "Moved my Mac even further ahead". Somethimg weird - asking to back up everything before the upgrade and having no possibility to see such a back up after. At least should be stated that the back up software would not work with third-party hardware such as WD MyBookLive.

But this is not the point. The point is that the only suggested alternative to TimeMachine is so far Carbon Copy Cloner. And it has some unclear limitations when dealing with network disks.

Reply

Answer 14

LousyFool

Level 4

2,662 points

Sep 18, 2012 12:06 AM in response to sokratov

Not so sure what causes your previous backups to be invisible, could also be account/permission issues due to changing accounts.

With your connection speed, can you imagine how long it would take to restore even if you had access to the backups? For obvious reasons, it is always good to have a backup on an external USB or similar disk, best bootable.

True, CCC is highly reputed as THE other solution.

Reply

Answer 15

UKenGB

Level 2

306 points

Sep 18, 2012 1:04 AM in response to LousyFool

CCC is NOT an alternative to Time Machine and shouldn't be considered as such. CCC is an invaluable piece of software and I wouldn't want to be without it, but it cannot work in the seemless way that TM should. Both products are brilliant at what they do, but they are not interchangeable.

So you need to sort out your TM setup. Since you are not using a true TM supported backup device, that's the first thing to check. What you are using may well have a problem with Moutain Lion that did not exist previously. Not necessarily a fault of either, but these things happen as software that is supposed to work together, but is supplied and upgraded from totally unrelated developers.

As suggested, connect a backup device directly. A USB HD would probably be the simplest and see if that works as expected. If it does, then it points unequivocally to your WD MyBook Live as the problem. If it is still so slow, then you need to look further at your OSX installation. But I suspect that's not going to be the case and it's an incompatibility between your WD MyBook Live and ML.

Before anyone sounds off against Apple for bad development of their OS, remember it is not their responsibility to check it againt absolutely everything else out there in the marketplace as that would clearly be an impossibility. It is in truth up to the third party suppliers to ensure their product is kept up to date with developments of the OS with which they claim their product is compatible.

Reply