[muglo] Re: AEBS or Time Capsule
- From: Dave Knight <dave@xxxxxxx>
- To: muglo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:46:39 -0400
On 2011-10-31, at 12:56 PM, Frank BIrch wrote:
> Excuse me for butting in but:-
This would be a pretty poor discussion forum if nobody was prepared to butt in
:)
> Remember that Time Capsule is a single point of failure. The odds your
> system would go down with the Time Capsule are not great but if it was a
> massive power spike, that your surge protector could not handle, then you
> are toast.
>
> A storage vault with two physical drives, one to mirror the other and
> removable (hot swap) is a good alternative but expensive ad probably not
> recognized by Time Machine. It may work with some other backup program.
It's not the drive, but how it's presented to Mac OS. If it's a directly
attached HFS+ volume it should Just Work (tm). If it's HFS+ made available over
the network shenanigans may be required, such as creating this file
".com.apple.timemachine.supported" in the root of the volume.
> The backup program is an individual choice but, (my 2 cents) I feel a
> network storage, with two physical drives, with mirror capability is
> probably the least risky option. Remember the lower the risk, the higher the
> cost.
It all comes down to cost in the end, backups of backups cost time and money
too. I use Time Machine to a Time Capsule. If I was being super diligent I'd be
making regular backups of the Time Capsule to somewhere outside of my house. I
have the capability, but so far have no found the time to set that up... I
shall just have to hope for the best until that time presents itself :)
> Currently I use HP network storage, 2 500 Gb drives one mirroring the other
> for my PCs.
>
> Unfortunately OSX does not recognize the unit for backup. I use a 500 gb
> LaCie for my MacBook, and a MYBook for the Imac.
> Not the best solution, however I do copy my important files from the Imac
> and Macbook manually to the storage unit. (the file formats are compatible).
>
> Possibly a good topic for face-to-face discussion in the near future.
>
> Regards
>
> frank
>
>
> On 11-10-31 12:24 PM, "Dave Knight" <dave@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2011-10-30, at 10:33 PM, Paul Tucknott wrote:
>>
>>> In use, either option is the same. Time Machine works equally well with with
>>> setup.
>>>
>>> Logistically the Time Capsule is easier as the router and backup drive are
>>> in
>>> a single enclosure - less cables and power supplies to deal with.
>>
>> Agree with that, until it breaks and taking it offline for repair also robs
>> you of your router.
>>
>>> The Time Capsule option uses a server-grade hard drive.
>>
>> Apple marketing may say so, but it's not actually true
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Time_Capsule#Hard_drive
>>
>>> Most people looking to buy a drive to add to an Airport Extreme are usually
>>> going to go with the cheapest option.
>>
>> Which for this application doesn't seem like a bad idea, a drive used for
>> backup is going to be mostly asleep, spinning up a few times a day to get a
>> bunch of writes done to it, then back to sleep. The 'green' disks you get
>> these days seem ideal for the purpose (and in fact it seems that that's what
>> Time Capsules actually ship with these days).
>>
>> dave---
>> Manage your account options at //www.freelists.org/list/muglo
>
>
> ---
> Manage your account options at //www.freelists.org/list/muglo
---
Manage your account options at //www.freelists.org/list/muglo
Other related posts:
