Remember that the hard disk in the Time Capsule is a Server grade hard disk. You are going to see a far lower failure rate on those drives compared to the off the shelf cheapies out there.
Many TimeCapsules shipped with Hitachi DeskStart drives...hardly 'server grade'. They do have a very high MTBF rating, so they should fail less that cheapies. Still a good value for the price of adding 1/2TB or 1TB of storage.
Methinks it's possible the bug causing the delay for "AirDisk" backup might have been the bug up someone's butt to get out a high-margin Apple-branded TimeCapsule product people would buy first before they released the capability to do it with a cheap third-party disk.
Would you please explain how you could actually believe what you say and still remain an Apple customer? I would really like to know because if I really believed Apple did stuff like you and others theorize there's no way I could remain a customer. My personal ethics would get in the way. Yet you and others like you are constantly espousing nasty conspiracy theories about Apple's motivations and supposed evil deeds. But you're still here and still posting. Why is that?\
Am I the only one that can't get anything to work? My time machine doesn't know my airport extreme drive exists. I can see it in finder just fine though, it's under Shared and I see the drive as a shared directory (a folder with peeps holding hands).
Add to all that, my Airport Utility can't even see my Airport Extreme, so I have no way to tell what firmware it's on.
Do you think a USB disk attached to a non-802.11n AEBS (I have the 802.11g version) will work with time machine? Or, do I need to buy a newer version of AEBS.
What about those of us with an Extreme and a Firewire backup drive? There are no Firewire ports on the Extreme and trying to network my PowerBook with my desktop, to which the external drive is attached, does not work as it did with Tiger - still.
I would like to be able to do automatic Time Machine backups to my external drive wirelessly, rather than having to switch around the cables between my desktop and laptop (which I have been doing).
Methinks it's possible the bug causing the delay for "AirDisk" backup might have been the bug up someone's butt to get out a high-margin Apple-branded TimeCapsule product people would buy first before they released the capability to do it with a cheap third-party disk.
This is just nonsense. TimeCapsule shiped less than 4 weeks ago. How many could been sold until now? Ether your accusation is totally untrue or Jobs' been really cheap.......I mean really really cheap.
This is true and if one of those Macs is on 24/7/365 (such as a server) that is the way to go I feel, if not an AE is next best choice I suspect (but will do some tests asap) AE will be slower ... but maybe not. Anyone done any test?
I wish the initial back up could be done over Firewire as it takes so long wirelessly. I tried this but once relocated the TM starts a fresh initial back up, ignoring the one already there. Has anyone found a work around for this?
Use Ethernet. If your Macs have Gigabit ports (most if not all currently shipping Macs have it) just plug into the Extreme (or the other Mac if that's where you backup disk is). That will be much faster than wireless. After your initial backup is done, the incremental backups over wireless should be fine.
Use Ethernet. If your Macs have Gigabit ports (most if not all currently shipping Macs have it) just plug into the Extreme (or the other Mac if that's where you backup disk is). That will be much faster than wireless. After your initial backup is done, the incremental backups over wireless should be fine.
I have 7 Macs on my network, two are laptops hence need for wireless on those. The rest are ethernet connected.
What about those of us with an Extreme and a Firewire backup drive? There are no Firewire ports on the Extreme and trying to network my PowerBook with my desktop, to which the external drive is attached, does not work as it did with Tiger - still.
I would like to be able to do automatic Time Machine backups to my external drive wirelessly, rather than having to switch around the cables between my desktop and laptop (which I have been doing).
Sounds like there is something wrong with your setup. Are you connecting the Macs direclty, or via the Extreme? Are there other routers in your network? Can your PB see your desktop otherwise, or is it just Time Machine that can't see the desktop?
I'm in the midst of updating all my computers to Leopard and network to N, so I'm not there yet (working on it this weekend), but my plan is to backup wireless to a drive connected to a desktop via FW (and the desktop connected to the Extreme via Ethernet).
I have 7 Macs on my network, two are laptops hence need for wireless on those. The rest are ethernet connected.
Yes, so you hook up your laptops via Ethernet for just the initial backup, which over Gigabit will be about as fast as the FW connection you wished you could use for your first backup.
The problem is that TM treats network drives a little differently than directly connected drives (ie: FW). So you can use Ethernet, which will be far faster than wireless, and your TM backup drive will always be viewed as a network drive.
Incremental backups should be fast enough over wireless. However, if you just loaded 3 GBs of photos onto your laptop, then you may want to connect via Ethernet for the next incremental backup!
1) Apple does not yet have a statement that Time Machine can use an AirDisk
2) The Airport does not have a statement that the AirDisk can be used with TM
3) TM records into the disk differently when connected directly to a USB drive, it creates a series of folders and stores the backup in a folder with the machine name.
4) TM when connected to a drive via AirDisk, skips the creation of the directory structure and instead it writes the backups at the root level of the drive
5) TM is unable to take into consideration the previous backups that were created when the drive was directly connected to the Mac and does not attempt to convert the old backup to the new format (sparse tree).
6) In about this mac, the new build number is rather odd and not similar to the previous
7) The patch screw-up the copyright of OSX by setting it to 2007 instead of 2008
Before you answer, I understand things are working, and I understand that sharing with a mac looks the same as with AirDisk, but the big questions in my mind are:
Is this what Apple intended, for the two methods to produce so completely different results? and Is the fact that is working an accident given that Apple has yet to post the capability? Are there any technical issues why a sparce-tree could not have been created in a directory structure? What drove Apple to create the backup in a different location?
My backups are very important to me, this makes me nervous.
Personally, my opinion would be to keep the backup target disk seperate from a network device. Should a time capsul fail or ever need to be serviced, you are effectivly loosing both your router and system backups at the same time. From what I understand, the Time Capsule will not function with the hard drive removed, nor is there a way to remove the drive without violating warrenty.
What I like about the Airport Extreme approach (which I can now thankfully take advantage of) is that as long as the hard drive is recognizable by the unit as a USB device, I can effectivly add as much (or as little) storage as I want.
So while I may decide that 500GB is enough for me now as a backup target, I can easilly bump it up to 1TB or higher by swapping out the hard drive attached to the Airport, or even through the adding of a USB raid enclosure.
Then again... this is only my opinion. \
That is most likely the smartest thing I have heard between here and MacRumors. I have Airport Extreme 802.11n with the Time Capsule added to my network. That way is one goes out I can always keep my network connection.
1) Apple does not yet have a statement that Time Machine can use an AirDisk
2) The Airport does not have a statement that the AirDisk can be used with TM
3) TM records into the disk differently when connected directly to a USB drive, it creates a series of folders and stores the backup in a folder with the machine name.
4) TM when connected to a drive via AirDisk, skips the creation of the directory structure and instead it writes the backups at the root level of the drive
5) TM is unable to take into consideration the previous backups that were created when the drive was directly connected to the Mac and does not attempt to convert the old backup to the new format (sparse tree).
6) In about this mac, the new build number is rather odd and not similar to the previous
7) The patch screw-up the copyright of OSX by setting it to 2007 instead of 2008
Before you answer, I understand things are working, and I understand that sharing with a mac looks the same as with AirDisk, but the big questions in my mind are:
Is this what Apple intended, for the two methods to produce so completely different results? and Is the fact that is working an accident given that Apple has yet to post the capability? Are there any technical issues why a sparce-tree could not have been created in a directory structure? What drove Apple to create the backup in a different location?
My backups are very important to me, this makes me nervous.
really good points...Apple's perspective still seems to be that this is unsupported and a hack.
"But I read it on the internet, it sound be fine" \
I'm a little spooked on how time machine is handling the backup on the time capsule or air disk backups. Don't get me wrong ... I'm happy this all works ... and it does work on my system. But I don't like the single sparse bundle file. What if that one file goes bad and becomes unmountable as has been reported. That means all my backup files (in excess of a million) would go bad.
I think I will stay tethered to my usb or firewire cable when using time machine until I hear I hear specific comments on this being supported and safe from Apple.
Would you please explain how you could actually believe what you say and still remain an Apple customer? I would really like to know because if I really believed Apple did stuff like you and others theorize there's no way I could remain a customer. My personal ethics would get in the way. Yet you and others like you are constantly espousing nasty conspiracy theories about Apple's motivations and supposed evil deeds. But you're still here and still posting. Why is that?\
Umm, you obviously didn't stand in line too long to buy a $600 iPhone on Day 1, did you?
And who said anything about conspiracy theories and evil doing? Business decisions are made every day around the world on what the window of opportunity is on a product release. Grow up, read a book or two, attend a few shareholder meetings of big companies, look at the business section of a newspaper once in a while. If you think Cupertino is the land of milk, honey, and charity towards all, you're missing a very large part of Apple's history.
Look, it's just a product. Something to sell people. That's what Apple does. They're not saving the universe by suddenly letting you copy files to a USB disk. I'm a very huge Apple fan (and stockholder), but after 25 years of Apple product use and purchases, I guess I'm a bit more skeptical than you. That doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist.
And if your ethics actually have that much impact on what you purchase and from whom, you must walk everywhere you go, cause there's no way you're buying gasoline.
Comments
Remember that the hard disk in the Time Capsule is a Server grade hard disk. You are going to see a far lower failure rate on those drives compared to the off the shelf cheapies out there.
Many TimeCapsules shipped with Hitachi DeskStart drives...hardly 'server grade'. They do have a very high MTBF rating, so they should fail less that cheapies. Still a good value for the price of adding 1/2TB or 1TB of storage.
Methinks it's possible the bug causing the delay for "AirDisk" backup might have been the bug up someone's butt to get out a high-margin Apple-branded TimeCapsule product people would buy first before they released the capability to do it with a cheap third-party disk.
Would you please explain how you could actually believe what you say and still remain an Apple customer? I would really like to know because if I really believed Apple did stuff like you and others theorize there's no way I could remain a customer. My personal ethics would get in the way. Yet you and others like you are constantly espousing nasty conspiracy theories about Apple's motivations and supposed evil deeds. But you're still here and still posting. Why is that?
Add to all that, my Airport Utility can't even see my Airport Extreme, so I have no way to tell what firmware it's on.
Is the drive HSF+?
It started backing up when i was browsing the disk in Finder ... weird...
I would like to be able to do automatic Time Machine backups to my external drive wirelessly, rather than having to switch around the cables between my desktop and laptop (which I have been doing).
What about those of us with an Extreme and a Firewire backup drive? There are no Firewire ports on the Extreme...
I will wager that no software or firmware update is going to make your Extreme sprout a Firewire port, so you'd better go buy a USB drive.
Methinks it's possible the bug causing the delay for "AirDisk" backup might have been the bug up someone's butt to get out a high-margin Apple-branded TimeCapsule product people would buy first before they released the capability to do it with a cheap third-party disk.
This is just nonsense. TimeCapsule shiped less than 4 weeks ago. How many could been sold until now? Ether your accusation is totally untrue or Jobs' been really cheap.......I mean really really cheap.
This is true and if one of those Macs is on 24/7/365 (such as a server) that is the way to go I feel, if not an AE is next best choice I suspect (but will do some tests asap) AE will be slower ... but maybe not. Anyone done any test?
I wish the initial back up could be done over Firewire as it takes so long wirelessly. I tried this but once relocated the TM starts a fresh initial back up, ignoring the one already there. Has anyone found a work around for this?
Use Ethernet. If your Macs have Gigabit ports (most if not all currently shipping Macs have it) just plug into the Extreme (or the other Mac if that's where you backup disk is). That will be much faster than wireless. After your initial backup is done, the incremental backups over wireless should be fine.
Use Ethernet. If your Macs have Gigabit ports (most if not all currently shipping Macs have it) just plug into the Extreme (or the other Mac if that's where you backup disk is). That will be much faster than wireless. After your initial backup is done, the incremental backups over wireless should be fine.
I have 7 Macs on my network, two are laptops hence need for wireless on those. The rest are ethernet connected.
I will wager that no software or firmware update is going to make your Extreme sprout a Firewire port, so you'd better go buy a USB drive.
What about those of us with an Extreme and a Firewire backup drive? There are no Firewire ports on the Extreme and trying to network my PowerBook with my desktop, to which the external drive is attached, does not work as it did with Tiger - still.
I would like to be able to do automatic Time Machine backups to my external drive wirelessly, rather than having to switch around the cables between my desktop and laptop (which I have been doing).
Sounds like there is something wrong with your setup. Are you connecting the Macs direclty, or via the Extreme? Are there other routers in your network? Can your PB see your desktop otherwise, or is it just Time Machine that can't see the desktop?
I'm in the midst of updating all my computers to Leopard and network to N, so I'm not there yet (working on it this weekend), but my plan is to backup wireless to a drive connected to a desktop via FW (and the desktop connected to the Extreme via Ethernet).
I have 7 Macs on my network, two are laptops hence need for wireless on those. The rest are ethernet connected.
Yes, so you hook up your laptops via Ethernet for just the initial backup, which over Gigabit will be about as fast as the FW connection you wished you could use for your first backup.
The problem is that TM treats network drives a little differently than directly connected drives (ie: FW). So you can use Ethernet, which will be far faster than wireless, and your TM backup drive will always be viewed as a network drive.
Incremental backups should be fast enough over wireless. However, if you just loaded 3 GBs of photos onto your laptop, then you may want to connect via Ethernet for the next incremental backup!
1) Apple does not yet have a statement that Time Machine can use an AirDisk
2) The Airport does not have a statement that the AirDisk can be used with TM
3) TM records into the disk differently when connected directly to a USB drive, it creates a series of folders and stores the backup in a folder with the machine name.
4) TM when connected to a drive via AirDisk, skips the creation of the directory structure and instead it writes the backups at the root level of the drive
5) TM is unable to take into consideration the previous backups that were created when the drive was directly connected to the Mac and does not attempt to convert the old backup to the new format (sparse tree).
6) In about this mac, the new build number is rather odd and not similar to the previous
7) The patch screw-up the copyright of OSX by setting it to 2007 instead of 2008
Before you answer, I understand things are working, and I understand that sharing with a mac looks the same as with AirDisk, but the big questions in my mind are:
Is this what Apple intended, for the two methods to produce so completely different results? and Is the fact that is working an accident given that Apple has yet to post the capability? Are there any technical issues why a sparce-tree could not have been created in a directory structure? What drove Apple to create the backup in a different location?
My backups are very important to me, this makes me nervous.
To be honest '5 seconds' is 'instantly' in my book ... maybe I am older and time is running faster
I don't think so, I am sure you're young enough! And patience is a virtue, or so they tell me.
But I guess my stress levels are not what they should be.... maybe my blood pressure should be checked a bit more often....
Personally, my opinion would be to keep the backup target disk seperate from a network device. Should a time capsul fail or ever need to be serviced, you are effectivly loosing both your router and system backups at the same time. From what I understand, the Time Capsule will not function with the hard drive removed, nor is there a way to remove the drive without violating warrenty.
What I like about the Airport Extreme approach (which I can now thankfully take advantage of) is that as long as the hard drive is recognizable by the unit as a USB device, I can effectivly add as much (or as little) storage as I want.
So while I may decide that 500GB is enough for me now as a backup target, I can easilly bump it up to 1TB or higher by swapping out the hard drive attached to the Airport, or even through the adding of a USB raid enclosure.
Then again... this is only my opinion.
That is most likely the smartest thing I have heard between here and MacRumors. I have Airport Extreme 802.11n with the Time Capsule added to my network. That way is one goes out I can always keep my network connection.
I am a bit concerned about some of these changes:
1) Apple does not yet have a statement that Time Machine can use an AirDisk
2) The Airport does not have a statement that the AirDisk can be used with TM
3) TM records into the disk differently when connected directly to a USB drive, it creates a series of folders and stores the backup in a folder with the machine name.
4) TM when connected to a drive via AirDisk, skips the creation of the directory structure and instead it writes the backups at the root level of the drive
5) TM is unable to take into consideration the previous backups that were created when the drive was directly connected to the Mac and does not attempt to convert the old backup to the new format (sparse tree).
6) In about this mac, the new build number is rather odd and not similar to the previous
7) The patch screw-up the copyright of OSX by setting it to 2007 instead of 2008
Before you answer, I understand things are working, and I understand that sharing with a mac looks the same as with AirDisk, but the big questions in my mind are:
Is this what Apple intended, for the two methods to produce so completely different results? and Is the fact that is working an accident given that Apple has yet to post the capability? Are there any technical issues why a sparce-tree could not have been created in a directory structure? What drove Apple to create the backup in a different location?
My backups are very important to me, this makes me nervous.
really good points...Apple's perspective still seems to be that this is unsupported and a hack.
"But I read it on the internet, it sound be fine"
I think I will stay tethered to my usb or firewire cable when using time machine until I hear I hear specific comments on this being supported and safe from Apple.
Would you please explain how you could actually believe what you say and still remain an Apple customer? I would really like to know because if I really believed Apple did stuff like you and others theorize there's no way I could remain a customer. My personal ethics would get in the way. Yet you and others like you are constantly espousing nasty conspiracy theories about Apple's motivations and supposed evil deeds. But you're still here and still posting. Why is that?
Umm, you obviously didn't stand in line too long to buy a $600 iPhone on Day 1, did you?
And who said anything about conspiracy theories and evil doing? Business decisions are made every day around the world on what the window of opportunity is on a product release. Grow up, read a book or two, attend a few shareholder meetings of big companies, look at the business section of a newspaper once in a while. If you think Cupertino is the land of milk, honey, and charity towards all, you're missing a very large part of Apple's history.
Look, it's just a product. Something to sell people. That's what Apple does. They're not saving the universe by suddenly letting you copy files to a USB disk. I'm a very huge Apple fan (and stockholder), but after 25 years of Apple product use and purchases, I guess I'm a bit more skeptical than you. That doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist.
And if your ethics actually have that much impact on what you purchase and from whom, you must walk everywhere you go, cause there's no way you're buying gasoline.