I don't do commercial "work" from my personal computer at home, but nun the less I have some data that I consider critical. Now this is mostly limited to Photos, but to a lesser extent it includes Media and a few odd files. I have Time Machine backing up in rotation to two external HDD which covers all data types. This prevents a backup's loss due to simple HDD failure (with or without cat sabotage). Additionally, I have iCloud Photo Library serving as a quasi off-site back up of that specific data. Additionally about 4 times a year I will copy the Photo's database as a whole onto my RAID 1 array (distinct hardware from the Time Machine back ups). In case my iMac crashes, I should be able to restore from one of the external HDDs. If not I can set up the replacement computer and iCloud should sync all of my photos. If this some how fails, I can copy over the Photos library from the RAID array. I realize this redundancy is only for the Photos data, but that is all I have that is really critical.
The less important category of Media follows a similar plan except that instead of using iCloud Photo Library for the "off-site", I have Apple Music and iTunes in the Cloud; new purchases are downloaded and stored on the RAID immediately after purchase. The few odd important data files I have (tax records, scans of Passports and other hard documents, etc.) are also saved to the RAID and "off-site" with iCloud, dropbox, and google docs (except tax records). Since they are static documents, once they are saved, there is no need to worry about incremental backups "off-site" or to the RAID.
I only wanted to share this so that "normal" users can see that even they have some critical data and that a relatively easy back up plan can be made with little or no added cost that would protect their personal critical data. This plan is in no way a replacement for more professional solutions for critical commercial data, however this particular plan has the advantage in using only built in software or services. I could make my solution even more robust with CCC or SuperDuper added, but in my specific case the only two important data sets that I have that are not static (Photos and Media) are backed up in an easily recoverable way. For me the computer is just a terminal and if it dies, it will be replaced and the important data reloaded or attached in a few hours (in the best case automatically from the time machine backup).
When you (I) push backing up for too long, you (I) end up with a 2TB worth of files to backup from your Mac. Using TimeCapsule at that time makes it dead slow since it takes forever to backup.
Would CCC or some other app work faster, or are they as slow?
I'd prefer to use the stock apps just for the fact that they are from Apple.
At a very basic level, the more data you have to backup, the longer it takes.
Personally, i would not get rid of your TimeMachine backup - it is a great tool & great interface for recovery of files. If you have TimeCapsule that means it is on your wifi right? Set (in System Preferences) TimeMachine to backup automatically.
The problem with general cloud uploads is that they tend to upload all kinds of stuff, even in the documents folder there are up to tens of thousands of useless files left around ( in particular by Word) and in the library files lots of guff. There are GBs of uploads that you don't need and wont restore.
Apps - in general on the Mac I use stock apple or Mac store installs. Where I don't I know about it and where to find them ( and where the license is).
Photos - handled by iCloud. Documents - handled by iCloud ( and I email important stuff to myself). music - iCloud/iTunes software - GitHub
I think iCloud also does Reminders, Calendars etc.
And thats it. I don't like the dropbox model of dragging into a special folder. Sync isn't as important as backup.
By and large if I lose this Mac I can get going in a day somewhere else.
The article says you should have a backup and a spare computer. Why not combine both and have your main computer backup to the spare instead of having a special purpose backup device.
When you (I) push backing up for too long, you (I) end up with a 2TB worth of files to backup from your Mac. Using TimeCapsule at that time makes it dead slow since it takes forever to backup.
Would CCC or some other app work faster, or are they as slow?
I'd prefer to use the stock apps just for the fact that they are from Apple.
The bottleneck is probably your connection (wifi), not the software. If you were to connect your computer to the Time Capsule with Ethernet you'd probably get faster Time Machine backups.
Time Machine or CCC connected to a USB or Thunderbolt HD would be about the same speed.
I run both, incidentally; Time Machine for versioning, CCC so I always have a perfect clone. TM runs whenever the laptop is plugged into my display, CCC at 5am nightly. If I were really smart I'd also do Backblaze for offsite backup, but my wifi is not so dependable.
The article says you should have a backup and a spare computer. Why not combine both and have your main computer backup to the spare instead of having a special purpose backup device.
That works too.
Backups are infinitely customizable, depending on what the user needs.
…buy two NAS units… Once a month, bring the home one to the office, and bring the other one home to put on your home network… etc.
No offense, but wouldn’t cloud backup to Backblaze (or whatever) cover all the same disaster scenarios you're preparing for, be a lot less work, and even solve for that bit rot issue you described? They have something like 7x redundancy.
(plus a simple USB drive for your hackintosh clone, that's a separate need)
I used to use the method you describe, but I ditched it years ago. I now use TimeMachine to a NAS for a local backup and ARQ for my offsite backup:
1) ARQ can backup your entire hard drive if you want and it does not have the limitations of BackBlaze in regards to retention (i.e., you can store as many versions as you have storage for). For me, backing up system files/apps/VMs to the cloud is a waste of time. If my Mac dies, I would restore from my TimeMachine backup. If the TimeMachine backup is damaged or my house has burned to the ground, then I would buy a new Mac, reinstall my apps and restore my files from ARQ.
2) True, but my backups to ARQ only take a few minutes for the changed files and if I ever needed to restore, I would only need to download my files over the Internet.
3) ARQ data is encrypted in transit and at rest. The encryption key is stored on your local Mac and therefore your data cannot be unencrypted by the company hosting your backup files.
I found switching hard drives every month to take work: you need to shut down the NAS, remove the drive, install the other one then trigger the backup. Also both drives are in the same location at the same time (i.e., if you have a disaster, your data is gone). Cloud backups are set-it and forget-it. Moreover, having a cloud backup has saved me a ton of rework when I am on site with a client and accidentally delete a file I am working on -- I can just download the file from the last ARQ backup instead of having to go home to my NAS to recover it.
By this criterion Backblaze by itself is not a backup, since it just keeps the current version of all files. It is really just the offsite component of a backup.
I believe back blaze keeps deleted files for 30 days, if you are using their backup plan
My mistake! I checked and Backblaze keeps historical versions of all files for four weeks. So definitely a backup all by itself!
Comments
The less important category of Media follows a similar plan except that instead of using iCloud Photo Library for the "off-site", I have Apple Music and iTunes in the Cloud; new purchases are downloaded and stored on the RAID immediately after purchase. The few odd important data files I have (tax records, scans of Passports and other hard documents, etc.) are also saved to the RAID and "off-site" with iCloud, dropbox, and google docs (except tax records). Since they are static documents, once they are saved, there is no need to worry about incremental backups "off-site" or to the RAID.
I only wanted to share this so that "normal" users can see that even they have some critical data and that a relatively easy back up plan can be made with little or no added cost that would protect their personal critical data. This plan is in no way a replacement for more professional solutions for critical commercial data, however this particular plan has the advantage in using only built in software or services. I could make my solution even more robust with CCC or SuperDuper added, but in my specific case the only two important data sets that I have that are not static (Photos and Media) are backed up in an easily recoverable way. For me the computer is just a terminal and if it dies, it will be replaced and the important data reloaded or attached in a few hours (in the best case automatically from the time machine backup).
At a very basic level, the more data you have to backup, the longer it takes.
Personally, i would not get rid of your TimeMachine backup - it is a great tool & great interface for recovery of files. If you have TimeCapsule that means it is on your wifi right? Set (in System Preferences) TimeMachine to backup automatically.
I would add in CCC or similar as a secondary.
Apps - in general on the Mac I use stock apple or Mac store installs. Where I don't I know about it and where to find them ( and where the license is).
Photos - handled by iCloud.
Documents - handled by iCloud ( and I email important stuff to myself).
music - iCloud/iTunes
software - GitHub
I think iCloud also does Reminders, Calendars etc.
And thats it. I don't like the dropbox model of dragging into a special folder. Sync isn't as important as backup.
By and large if I lose this Mac I can get going in a day somewhere else.
Time Machine or CCC connected to a USB or Thunderbolt HD would be about the same speed.
I run both, incidentally; Time Machine for versioning, CCC so I always have a perfect clone. TM runs whenever the laptop is plugged into my display, CCC at 5am nightly. If I were really smart I'd also do Backblaze for offsite backup, but my wifi is not so dependable.
Backups are infinitely customizable, depending on what the user needs.
(plus a simple USB drive for your hackintosh clone, that's a separate need)
1) ARQ can backup your entire hard drive if you want and it does not have the limitations of BackBlaze in regards to retention (i.e., you can store as many versions as you have storage for). For me, backing up system files/apps/VMs to the cloud is a waste of time. If my Mac dies, I would restore from my TimeMachine backup. If the TimeMachine backup is damaged or my house has burned to the ground, then I would buy a new Mac, reinstall my apps and restore my files from ARQ.
2) True, but my backups to ARQ only take a few minutes for the changed files and if I ever needed to restore, I would only need to download my files over the Internet.
3) ARQ data is encrypted in transit and at rest. The encryption key is stored on your local Mac and therefore your data cannot be unencrypted by the company hosting your backup files.
I found switching hard drives every month to take work: you need to shut down the NAS, remove the drive, install the other one then trigger the backup. Also both drives are in the same location at the same time (i.e., if you have a disaster, your data is gone). Cloud backups are set-it and forget-it. Moreover, having a cloud backup has saved me a ton of rework when I am on site with a client and accidentally delete a file I am working on -- I can just download the file from the last ARQ backup instead of having to go home to my NAS to recover it.
juls