I know they were not, did not mean to imply they were. I recall this from the WWDC preview in August. Don't recall the guys name - mid 30's, did the whole Time Machine demo. Got the feeling they were testing some Steve Jobs 2.0 models, and he was the better one IMHO.
I agree. That's why I don't have little snitch. But Adobe Photoshop DOES send data every time it's launched. Either way, that doesn't mean it won't become a problem. As the mac platform grows, you can expect pc devs to switch over and bring their tactics with them.
A backup on the same partition would be far less safe.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe. A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
“If your hard drive fails – you can buy a new hard drive, put it in your machine, and be right were you were before that hard drive died”
Source: Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006
To me, the quote implies that you can go out, like to BestBuy, buy a new hard drive yourself, and "put it in your machine". To me, a fair read of the quote does not imply you would need to physically send in your machine or have a service call. That is my take on it.
Granted, "bang in" might have been an oversimplification, but the quote to me basically says this.
The exact quote was, "If your hard drive dies, you can buy a new one and be right back where you were." Scott Forstall. Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006 at approx. 10:35 am PST
If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous.
From Apple's site: [url]http://Although it also states that you can, "?Change the drive or volume you?re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer." it appears obvious that backing up to an internal partitioned volume that is you primary drive totally defeats the purpose and is downright stupid-even if it is allowed to do so at all.
I can't agree with that conclusion.
While I wouldn't RECCOMMEND backing up to a partition on the same drive as your OS, or data, it is better than nothing.
Most of the time, with s soft crash, it's the partition that crashes, not the entire hd.
i've had that happen numerous times over the years.
So while it certainly isn't ideal, it's better than doing nothing.
Though, with the low prices of hd's these days, there really isn't any good excuse not to get one for the purpose.
I agree. That's why I don't have little snitch. But Adobe Photoshop DOES send data every time it's launched. Either way, that doesn't mean it won't become a problem. As the mac platform grows, you can expect pc devs to switch over and bring their tactics with them.
It really isn't true that your computer won't need Little Snitch. I have it, and many legit sites seem to do something that calls it up and reports, sometimes several reguests for sending out, and it's not for pizza. I assume it's for ads on the site, and the cookie that was loaded on my machine from the site is involved.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe. A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
While I can't give numbers, software corruption on drives is a much bigger problem these days than actual hd failure.
I've had dozens of hd's over the years, and only three failed. But, I can't count the times that a drive, or partition, became corrupted.
Me neither. Time Machine isn't just for recovery from hard drive crashes. It's for getting back files that you deleted, or going back to a previous version of a file from 4 days ago since you made a mess of it trying to "improve" it.
And Time Machine works on the app that you are in when you launch it - if Finder is frontmost, Time Machine looks for Finder files; if you launch TIme Machine from iTunes, it looks for music; if you launch it from iPhoto, it looks for photos that were deleted from the iPhoto library.
The exact quote was, "If your hard drive dies, you can buy a new one and be right back where you were." Scott Forstall. Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006 at approx. 10:35 am PST
If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous.
Sir – you are the one who is mistaken. He did in fact say "put it in your machine", as I said before. It is your quote that is incorrect - as it leaves out these words.
Instead of calling one another names – lets just get the facts from the horses mouth – shall we?
He even used a hand gesture when saying “put it in your machine” to add emphasis of putting it into your machine (which you cannot do on the MacBook Pro and iMac). Please, go back and look at the video again, about 34 minutes into it and then tell me that I’m wrong.
Here is a tip: I suggest before correcting someone – make sure you have the facts. It makes you look like a complete ass when you say "If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous", and then the person you said that to post the video that clearly showes they were right, and it was you who left out a key part of the quote.
Also, I would like an apology for the comment by inferring that I was disingenuous – where I was actually just quoting someone. It was uncalled for, and as the video clearly shows, it is YOU that is leaving out a key part in the quote.
I will make one correction – he said at the start – “if your hard drive dies”, where I quoted him as saying “fails” – however, this is a minor error as they are similiar words in this context.
Lets not make this a flame war - I'm right on this, and nothing will be gained from insults. He might have said what you quoted, but he also said what I quoted. The video is right there for all to see.
------------
Let me add one thing here, since some might take my post as "anti-Apple" or "anti-iMac" - I’m not against the iMac or anything – in fact I have a 20 inch iMac Core 2 Duo connected to a current revision (post Aug 2006) 23 inch ACD. I’m a major Apple and iMac fan. Heck, I even put an Apple sticker on my new FN Herstal FS2000 rifle I’m such an Apple nut.
However, I stand by my original point – that he made it sound so easy to replace the hard drive, and to me I took it as the user replacing the hard drive. However, this is not possible and at the same time keep your warranty, with two of their most popular products.
Instances on Mac OS X of applications transmitting private data without your consent are fairly rare.
Buy a copy of Little Snitch and be surprised. Sure, it's maybe not 'private data' but an awful lot of apps these days phone home and I'd rather be on the safe side.
I've never had anyone get past my router's firewall coming in so IME, outgoing data is of more concern.
Sir – you are the one who is mistaken. He did in fact say "put it in your machine", as I said before. It is your quote that is incorrect - as it leaves out these words.…
My apologies. Actually we are both still wrong.
However, my source from which I quoted (http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/07/l...-jobs-keynote/) I assumed was accurate. As you can see, they left out the "put it in your machine" (notice that he didn't say, "you," which also implies that someone, particularly with sufficient expertise may have to do.
By the way, there is a difference between "fails" and "dies." You can have heart failure and quite often will fully recover. If your heart dies, that is another matter. True you may be able to be brought back to life, but that usually takes manual intervention, usually from an expert. Like a hard drive may have to be.
So, my inferrence to your being indisengenuous was in part wrong, and I apologize for that. However, I have to go back and again repeat that in know way should Apple be called such.
Meanwhile, some additional Spotlight features have surfaced, though they are not necessarily new to latest builds of Leopard. They include the ability to perform math algorithms from the Spotlight search pane (without having to launch Apple's Calculator application).
Okay, what is it with search utilities providing calculators? Google does it, and so does MSN Search (though, not very well). Does anyone actually use this?
While I wouldn't RECCOMMEND backing up to a partition on the same drive as your OS, or data, it is better than nothing.
Most of the time, with s soft crash, it's the partition that crashes, not the entire hd.
i've had that happen numerous times over the years.
So while it certainly isn't ideal, it's better than doing nothing.
Though, with the low prices of hd's these days, there really isn't any good excuse not to get one for the purpose.
Backing up to a partition is not the same as backing up your hard drive. Duping a file to the same drive or copying it to a petition on the same drive is just that. No security at all and that is what Time Machine is intended to provide.
In everything that I have read, heard or seen from Apple as a user, developer and ADC member, Time Machine is intended to automate backing up and equally effortlessly restore files to an original state in time from an external hard drive attached to your computer, a server, on or off site. As preface in the Time Machine introduction, only 26% of users back up regularly, and only 4% of users back up automatically. And as Scott Forstall said, "We plan to change all of that in Leopard with a feature called Time Machine."
I for the life of me, have never heard an expert advise or suggest that copying or duping a file to the same drive, partitioned or not, as a recommended backup procedure.
I applaud your position that you wouln't recommend backing up to the same…drive as your OS…, but I can't agree that it is better than nothing.
It would seem obvious that with size of the current drives and the tend to go even bigger, that backing up becomes even more important than ever before. Short cutting the process is tantamount to suicide. Certainly not good medicine. Condoning such is only aiding the potential demise.
Incidently, I would also suggest that your back drive will have to be at least the same size as the drive you are protecting. In fact, larger. True there may be a compression during the process, however, running out of space or not having the guaranteed space to accomlish the activity properly could lead to disaster. Or worse yet, the every spinning wheel of death.
However, my source from which I quoted (http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/07/l...-jobs-keynote/) I assumed was accurate. As you can see, they left out the "put it in your machine" (notice that he didn't say, "you," which also implies that someone, particularly with sufficient expertise may have to do.
By the way, there is a difference between "fails" and "dies." You can have heart failure and quite often will fully recover. If your heart dies, that is another matter. True you may be able to be brought back to life, but that usually takes manual intervention, usually from an expert. Like a hard drive may have to be.
So, my inferrence to your being indisengenuous was in part wrong, and I apologize for that. However, I have to go back and again repeat that in know way should Apple be called such.
In the context of hard drives ? the terms ?fails? and ?dies? is often used interchangeably with hard drives, at least in my experience. Whey someone says either ? I assume there is a terminal end for the data on the drive. However, this is an opinion ? so YMMV
Here is how I think it was disingenuous? the speaker, at least my read on it, made it sound so easy where all the user would need to do is to go buy a new hard drive, put it in your machine, and be fully restored.
The way he couched it to me ? make it seem like a simple afternoon repair, and it would be for a Mac Pro or MacBook. However, due to their lack of non user upgradeable drives ? it would be significantly more complex and time consuming for the iMac and MacBook Pro, in their current form. You would have to physically send in your unit ? wait week(s) for the drive to be replaced, and then get it back, hopefully under warranty. Or you could have a tech do it at an Apple store or in home, but still that is a PITA for most of us.
So ? to me, and this is just my opinion ? the presentation made it sound so simple and matter of fact, when for some of their computers, it would be a difficult and time consuming activity. That is the basis of my previous statemet .
While I can't give numbers, software corruption on drives is a much bigger problem these days than actual hd failure.
I've had dozens of hd's over the years, and only three failed. But, I can't count the times that a drive, or partition, became corrupted.
Thankfully, I haven't had either happen to me in nearly a decade. That still doesn't mean I'm going to take the chance. Generally the drive's a lot cheaper than the data so I just go with extra drives.
Backing up to a partition is not the same as backing up your hard drive. Duping a file to the same drive or copying it to a petition on the same drive is just that. No security at all and that is what Time Machine is intended to provide.
In everything that I have read, heard or seen from Apple as a user, developer and ADC member, Time Machine is intended to automate backing up and equally effortlessly restore files to an original state in time from an external hard drive attached to your computer, a server, on or off site. As preface in the Time Machine introduction, only 26% of users back up regularly, and only 4% of users back up automatically. And as Scott Forstall said, "We plan to change all of that in Leopard with a feature called Time Machine."
I for the life of me, have never heard an expert advise or suggest that copying or duping a file to the same drive, partitioned or not, as a recommended backup procedure.
I applaud your position that you wouln't recommend backing up to the same?drive as your OS?, but I can't agree that it is better than nothing.
It would seem obvious that with size of the current drives and the tend to go even bigger, that backing up becomes even more important than ever before. Short cutting the process is tantamount to suicide. Certainly not good medicine. Condoning such is only aiding the potential demise.
Incidently, I would also suggest that your back drive will have to be at least the same size as the drive you are protecting. In fact, larger. True there may be a compression during the process, however, running out of space or not having the guaranteed space to accomlish the activity properly could lead to disaster. Or worse yet, the every spinning wheel of death.
Good luck.
I'm sorry, but again, I don't agree.
That's the simple belief. But, any backup is better than no backup. As I've said, and you can look up articles on this youraelf. hd's fail rarely these days. It's mostly corruption that is a problem. Corruption on one partition does not affect another partition on the same drive.
I did make the strong point that I don't recommend it as a first choice, but it does have it's place.
Your hysteria over this is not warrented. The truth is that hd's are not recommended for backups anyway. A second hd is just as likely to fail as the main one is. The reality is that it is just as likely to get corrupted as a second partition on the main drive is as well.
For real protection, a backup that is not running in conjunction with you working drives is the only real procection. Backing up should be the only, and one time a day, job the backup should have. Then it should not run at all. As in a tape backup. Even mirroring isn't considered to be relyable.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe.
I wouldn't either, personally. But it's an improvement.
Quote:
A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
Comments
I know they were not, did not mean to imply they were. I recall this from the WWDC preview in August. Don't recall the guys name - mid 30's, did the whole Time Machine demo. Got the feeling they were testing some Steve Jobs 2.0 models, and he was the better one IMHO.
His name is Scott Forstall.
I agree. That's why I don't have little snitch. But Adobe Photoshop DOES send data every time it's launched. Either way, that doesn't mean it won't become a problem. As the mac platform grows, you can expect pc devs to switch over and bring their tactics with them.
Agreed.
You could use a secondary partition.
A backup on the same partition would be far less safe.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe. A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
There's no way Leopard will ship before March or April with the state of OS X's resolution independence seen in AeroXP's forums.
Give us some linkage please
The exact quote from Apple (or an Apple rep) was…
“If your hard drive fails – you can buy a new hard drive, put it in your machine, and be right were you were before that hard drive died”
Source: Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006
To me, the quote implies that you can go out, like to BestBuy, buy a new hard drive yourself, and "put it in your machine". To me, a fair read of the quote does not imply you would need to physically send in your machine or have a service call. That is my take on it.
Granted, "bang in" might have been an oversimplification, but the quote to me basically says this.
The exact quote was, "If your hard drive dies, you can buy a new one and be right back where you were." Scott Forstall. Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006 at approx. 10:35 am PST
If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous.
From Apple's site: [url]http://Although it also states that you can, "?Change the drive or volume you?re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X server computer." it appears obvious that backing up to an internal partitioned volume that is you primary drive totally defeats the purpose and is downright stupid-even if it is allowed to do so at all.
I can't agree with that conclusion.
While I wouldn't RECCOMMEND backing up to a partition on the same drive as your OS, or data, it is better than nothing.
Most of the time, with s soft crash, it's the partition that crashes, not the entire hd.
i've had that happen numerous times over the years.
So while it certainly isn't ideal, it's better than doing nothing.
Though, with the low prices of hd's these days, there really isn't any good excuse not to get one for the purpose.
Instances on Mac OS X of applications transmitting private data without your consent are fairly rare.
Unless you've already unwittingly installed a trojan horse, or spyware.
I agree. That's why I don't have little snitch. But Adobe Photoshop DOES send data every time it's launched. Either way, that doesn't mean it won't become a problem. As the mac platform grows, you can expect pc devs to switch over and bring their tactics with them.
It really isn't true that your computer won't need Little Snitch. I have it, and many legit sites seem to do something that calls it up and reports, sometimes several reguests for sending out, and it's not for pizza. I assume it's for ads on the site, and the cookie that was loaded on my machine from the site is involved.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe. A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
While I can't give numbers, software corruption on drives is a much bigger problem these days than actual hd failure.
I've had dozens of hd's over the years, and only three failed. But, I can't count the times that a drive, or partition, became corrupted.
I can't agree with that conclusion.
Me neither. Time Machine isn't just for recovery from hard drive crashes. It's for getting back files that you deleted, or going back to a previous version of a file from 4 days ago since you made a mess of it trying to "improve" it.
And Time Machine works on the app that you are in when you launch it - if Finder is frontmost, Time Machine looks for Finder files; if you launch TIme Machine from iTunes, it looks for music; if you launch it from iPhoto, it looks for photos that were deleted from the iPhoto library.
The exact quote was, "If your hard drive dies, you can buy a new one and be right back where you were." Scott Forstall. Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, August 2006 at approx. 10:35 am PST
If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous.
Sir – you are the one who is mistaken. He did in fact say "put it in your machine", as I said before. It is your quote that is incorrect - as it leaves out these words.
Instead of calling one another names – lets just get the facts from the horses mouth – shall we?
Here – look at the actual conference keynote
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...39&q=WWDC+2006
He even used a hand gesture when saying “put it in your machine” to add emphasis of putting it into your machine (which you cannot do on the MacBook Pro and iMac). Please, go back and look at the video again, about 34 minutes into it and then tell me that I’m wrong.
Here is a tip: I suggest before correcting someone – make sure you have the facts. It makes you look like a complete ass when you say "If you are going to quote somebody, quote it. Don't make it up. Talk about being disingenuous", and then the person you said that to post the video that clearly showes they were right, and it was you who left out a key part of the quote.
Also, I would like an apology for the comment by inferring that I was disingenuous – where I was actually just quoting someone. It was uncalled for, and as the video clearly shows, it is YOU that is leaving out a key part in the quote.
I will make one correction – he said at the start – “if your hard drive dies”, where I quoted him as saying “fails” – however, this is a minor error as they are similiar words in this context.
Lets not make this a flame war - I'm right on this, and nothing will be gained from insults. He might have said what you quoted, but he also said what I quoted. The video is right there for all to see.
------------
Let me add one thing here, since some might take my post as "anti-Apple" or "anti-iMac" - I’m not against the iMac or anything – in fact I have a 20 inch iMac Core 2 Duo connected to a current revision (post Aug 2006) 23 inch ACD. I’m a major Apple and iMac fan. Heck, I even put an Apple sticker on my new FN Herstal FS2000 rifle I’m such an Apple nut.
However, I stand by my original point – that he made it sound so easy to replace the hard drive, and to me I took it as the user replacing the hard drive. However, this is not possible and at the same time keep your warranty, with two of their most popular products.
Instances on Mac OS X of applications transmitting private data without your consent are fairly rare.
Buy a copy of Little Snitch and be surprised. Sure, it's maybe not 'private data' but an awful lot of apps these days phone home and I'd rather be on the safe side.
I've never had anyone get past my router's firewall coming in so IME, outgoing data is of more concern.
Sir – you are the one who is mistaken. He did in fact say "put it in your machine", as I said before. It is your quote that is incorrect - as it leaves out these words.…
My apologies. Actually we are both still wrong.
However, my source from which I quoted (http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/07/l...-jobs-keynote/) I assumed was accurate. As you can see, they left out the "put it in your machine" (notice that he didn't say, "you," which also implies that someone, particularly with sufficient expertise may have to do.
By the way, there is a difference between "fails" and "dies." You can have heart failure and quite often will fully recover. If your heart dies, that is another matter. True you may be able to be brought back to life, but that usually takes manual intervention, usually from an expert. Like a hard drive may have to be.
So, my inferrence to your being indisengenuous was in part wrong, and I apologize for that. However, I have to go back and again repeat that in know way should Apple be called such.
Meanwhile, some additional Spotlight features have surfaced, though they are not necessarily new to latest builds of Leopard. They include the ability to perform math algorithms from the Spotlight search pane (without having to launch Apple's Calculator application).
Okay, what is it with search utilities providing calculators? Google does it, and so does MSN Search (though, not very well). Does anyone actually use this?
I can't agree with that conclusion.
While I wouldn't RECCOMMEND backing up to a partition on the same drive as your OS, or data, it is better than nothing.
Most of the time, with s soft crash, it's the partition that crashes, not the entire hd.
i've had that happen numerous times over the years.
So while it certainly isn't ideal, it's better than doing nothing.
Though, with the low prices of hd's these days, there really isn't any good excuse not to get one for the purpose.
Backing up to a partition is not the same as backing up your hard drive. Duping a file to the same drive or copying it to a petition on the same drive is just that. No security at all and that is what Time Machine is intended to provide.
In everything that I have read, heard or seen from Apple as a user, developer and ADC member, Time Machine is intended to automate backing up and equally effortlessly restore files to an original state in time from an external hard drive attached to your computer, a server, on or off site. As preface in the Time Machine introduction, only 26% of users back up regularly, and only 4% of users back up automatically. And as Scott Forstall said, "We plan to change all of that in Leopard with a feature called Time Machine."
I for the life of me, have never heard an expert advise or suggest that copying or duping a file to the same drive, partitioned or not, as a recommended backup procedure.
I applaud your position that you wouln't recommend backing up to the same…drive as your OS…, but I can't agree that it is better than nothing.
It would seem obvious that with size of the current drives and the tend to go even bigger, that backing up becomes even more important than ever before. Short cutting the process is tantamount to suicide. Certainly not good medicine. Condoning such is only aiding the potential demise.
Incidently, I would also suggest that your back drive will have to be at least the same size as the drive you are protecting. In fact, larger. True there may be a compression during the process, however, running out of space or not having the guaranteed space to accomlish the activity properly could lead to disaster. Or worse yet, the every spinning wheel of death.
Good luck.
My apologies. Actually we are both still wrong.
However, my source from which I quoted (http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/07/l...-jobs-keynote/) I assumed was accurate. As you can see, they left out the "put it in your machine" (notice that he didn't say, "you," which also implies that someone, particularly with sufficient expertise may have to do.
By the way, there is a difference between "fails" and "dies." You can have heart failure and quite often will fully recover. If your heart dies, that is another matter. True you may be able to be brought back to life, but that usually takes manual intervention, usually from an expert. Like a hard drive may have to be.
So, my inferrence to your being indisengenuous was in part wrong, and I apologize for that. However, I have to go back and again repeat that in know way should Apple be called such.
In the context of hard drives ? the terms ?fails? and ?dies? is often used interchangeably with hard drives, at least in my experience. Whey someone says either ? I assume there is a terminal end for the data on the drive. However, this is an opinion ? so YMMV
Here is how I think it was disingenuous? the speaker, at least my read on it, made it sound so easy where all the user would need to do is to go buy a new hard drive, put it in your machine, and be fully restored.
The way he couched it to me ? make it seem like a simple afternoon repair, and it would be for a Mac Pro or MacBook. However, due to their lack of non user upgradeable drives ? it would be significantly more complex and time consuming for the iMac and MacBook Pro, in their current form. You would have to physically send in your unit ? wait week(s) for the drive to be replaced, and then get it back, hopefully under warranty. Or you could have a tech do it at an Apple store or in home, but still that is a PITA for most of us.
So ? to me, and this is just my opinion ? the presentation made it sound so simple and matter of fact, when for some of their computers, it would be a difficult and time consuming activity. That is the basis of my previous statemet .
I hope this clears it up.
While I can't give numbers, software corruption on drives is a much bigger problem these days than actual hd failure.
I've had dozens of hd's over the years, and only three failed. But, I can't count the times that a drive, or partition, became corrupted.
Thankfully, I haven't had either happen to me in nearly a decade. That still doesn't mean I'm going to take the chance. Generally the drive's a lot cheaper than the data so I just go with extra drives.
Backing up to a partition is not the same as backing up your hard drive. Duping a file to the same drive or copying it to a petition on the same drive is just that. No security at all and that is what Time Machine is intended to provide.
In everything that I have read, heard or seen from Apple as a user, developer and ADC member, Time Machine is intended to automate backing up and equally effortlessly restore files to an original state in time from an external hard drive attached to your computer, a server, on or off site. As preface in the Time Machine introduction, only 26% of users back up regularly, and only 4% of users back up automatically. And as Scott Forstall said, "We plan to change all of that in Leopard with a feature called Time Machine."
I for the life of me, have never heard an expert advise or suggest that copying or duping a file to the same drive, partitioned or not, as a recommended backup procedure.
I applaud your position that you wouln't recommend backing up to the same?drive as your OS?, but I can't agree that it is better than nothing.
It would seem obvious that with size of the current drives and the tend to go even bigger, that backing up becomes even more important than ever before. Short cutting the process is tantamount to suicide. Certainly not good medicine. Condoning such is only aiding the potential demise.
Incidently, I would also suggest that your back drive will have to be at least the same size as the drive you are protecting. In fact, larger. True there may be a compression during the process, however, running out of space or not having the guaranteed space to accomlish the activity properly could lead to disaster. Or worse yet, the every spinning wheel of death.
Good luck.
I'm sorry, but again, I don't agree.
That's the simple belief. But, any backup is better than no backup. As I've said, and you can look up articles on this youraelf. hd's fail rarely these days. It's mostly corruption that is a problem. Corruption on one partition does not affect another partition on the same drive.
I did make the strong point that I don't recommend it as a first choice, but it does have it's place.
Your hysteria over this is not warrented. The truth is that hd's are not recommended for backups anyway. A second hd is just as likely to fail as the main one is. The reality is that it is just as likely to get corrupted as a second partition on the main drive is as well.
For real protection, a backup that is not running in conjunction with you working drives is the only real procection. Backing up should be the only, and one time a day, job the backup should have. Then it should not run at all. As in a tape backup. Even mirroring isn't considered to be relyable.
So, a seperate partition IS better than nothing.
I wouldn't even consider a backup on the same drive to be safe.
I wouldn't either, personally. But it's an improvement.
A different partition might protect from file system corruption, but for me, that has been pretty rare regardless of operating system. Mechanical failures are cross-platform.
Agreed.