Backup or Time Machine?
As a .Mac user and also Backup user, why would I continue to use Backup now that Time Machinei s built into Leopard?
When I installed Leopard and fired up Time Machine, it wrote over the top of all my Backup backups. Should I continue to use Time Machine, or is Backup still the way to go. As far as I can see Time Machineis the better product.
When I installed Leopard and fired up Time Machine, it wrote over the top of all my Backup backups. Should I continue to use Time Machine, or is Backup still the way to go. As far as I can see Time Machineis the better product.
Comments
As a .Mac user and also Backup user, why would I continue to use Backup now that Time Machinei s built into Leopard?
When I installed Leopard and fired up Time Machine, it wrote over the top of all my Backup backups. Should I continue to use Time Machine, or is Backup still the way to go. As far as I can see Time Machineis the better product.
Backup always sucked, never use it again.
Backup always sucked, never use it again.
I'm using it right now. Why does it suck?
My short term solution for 10.5: keep a backup (using Backup) on one external drive while using Time Machine to backup to an other external drive. After a month, I'll decide if it's worth it to keep .mac/Backup/iDisk or just use TM.
Backup just never interested me. Still doesn't.
I use Superduper, and I'll be going over to Time Machine full time soon. Time Machine doesn't need to be bootable for me.
Well I'm going TM fulltime from now on.... but doesn't it lessen the value of .Mac even further if one of the reasons I used it is now available to everyone in a better package for free?