dewme said:

The Amazon Alexa app has been doing something similar on iOS and iPadOS for a while now. The first time I launch the app it immediately closes and goes into the background. It looks like a crash but it can be opened from the list of background apps. If I terminate it completely and relaunch from scratch a second time it opens correctly in the foreground. There’s always something off with new versions of software.

elijahg said:

nicholfd said:

elijahg said:

darkvader said:

I don't give a flying fuck if a backup solution is 'efficient'.  I care that it backs up data and makes it easily retrievable.  Time Machine does that better than anything else out there at any price.

Does it really? Due to the design of TM, storing a disk image on a server, disconnecting a Mac from the network during a backup breaks that disk image's filesystem and therefore the backup. That makes it far from "easily retrievable".

Many people here seem to think their single data point means everyone else is "holding it wrong" to use the infamous phrase. You apparently fall into that group.

Not my experience.  I have all my Macs (desktops & laptops) backing up to a FreeBSD server running NetATalk.  Have had for years.  Laptops come & go also during backups.  Rarely do I have any issues requiring the Time Machine backups needing to be verified.  When they do need to be verified, Time Machine just seems to "take care of it", without any issues - it's automatic on the schedule backup, when it's required.

Every time I've had a "backup needs verifying" message it's always resulted in "unable to verify, a new backup needs to be created". Literally right now my Macbook's APFS TM backup is broken, disk utility can't fix it either. TM is unreliable enough for me that I have a backup of the backup. These problems don't seem to occur on wired Macs.

TM's method of hosting a filesystem structure over a network is a bad idea, it's way too fragile. A mid-backup disconnect is no different to yanking out a USB disk while copying data to it, and you rightly receive a warning for that. Basing it on rsync would be way more sensible, but Apple has a habit of rolling their own solution even though it's often not actually better than what already exists. Rsync would allow the destination OS to deal with the filesystem structure so disconnects wouldn't be a problem, it would support on-the-fly compression and it streams the data in one long transaction rather than requiring tens of SMB transactions for each file - making it orders of magnitude faster. This is possible now they no longer backup system files.

Of course I only have the experience of myself and a couple of friends to go by, though they have had the occasional issue too. I have however read a lot of people with similar problems.

Also not sure if you realised AFP has been deprecated, you can use Samba/SMB now without Netatalk. AFP is definitely slower than modern implementations of Samba, too.

elijahg said:

darkvader said:

I don't give a flying fuck if a backup solution is 'efficient'.  I care that it backs up data and makes it easily retrievable.  Time Machine does that better than anything else out there at any price.

Does it really? Due to the design of TM, storing a disk image on a server, disconnecting a Mac from the network during a backup breaks that disk image's filesystem and therefore the backup. That makes it far from "easily retrievable".

Many people here seem to think their single data point means everyone else is "holding it wrong" to use the infamous phrase. You apparently fall into that group.

MacPro said:

I will have to try TM on my M1 Mac mini, I use CCC these days.

BTW anyone has else noticed you can now unplug an external without ejecting first without any warnings with macOS Monetary (like Windows)  on an Intel or an  M1 Mac?  Or is it just mine?

waveparticle said:

crowley said:

waveparticle said:

crowley said:

waveparticle said:

nicholfd said:

MplsP said:

nicholfd said:

killroy said:

nicholfd said:

killroy said:

Using a OWC Thunderbolt 3 dock and all is well.

And this article is about USB-C hubs & docks, not Thunderbolt.

It's also USB-C with Thunderbolt.

All current OWC Thunderbolt docks required a Thunderbolt connection to the computer.  They will not work with just a USB-C connection to the computer.  This article is about USB-C docs/hubs, that connect via the USB protocol to the computer.

Thunderbolt 3 is USB C. your comment makes no sense

Thunderbolt 3 is not USB-C. You need to educate yourself before replying.  

Thunderbolt 3 uses the USB-C physical connector.  However, a USB-C physical connector can be USB-C only, and not be Thunderbolt 3. 

My comment makes perfect sense to someone who knows what they are talking about.

If USB-C and Thunderbolt 3 cannot work together, why make the physical connector identical? Error is prone to happen. The engineers don't know this basic common sense? 

USB-C is a connector, Thunderbolt is a protocol.  They can work together, and every Thunderbolt port uses the USB-C connector and supports the USB protocol, but not every USB-C port supports Thunderbolt.  Those that do will be clearly marked with the Thunderbolt logo.  On Apple computers where every USB-C port is a Thunderbolt port it's absolutely fine, everything will work.

Be careful about which USB-C cables you buy off the Internet

https://www.technobuffalo.com/usb-c-cable-safety-what-to-buy
Apple's Thunderbolt 3 is USB4. It does not have this problem.
http://https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB4

I'm not sure what you think you're telling me with the copy pasting random cable articles that you've found.  Apple don't own Thunderbolt 3, it is not "Apple's", and besides that you've got it backwards, USB 4 is partly based on Thunderbolt 3 (support is optional, not required), not the other way round, and it is only on the most recent Macs.  Also, neither USB4 or Thunderbolt 3 is the same as USB-C, because USB-C is a connector, not a protocol.  

Your original assertion that "USB-C and Thunderbolt 3 cannot work together" is still incorrect, even with all the flailing link pasting.

If I say Thunderbolt 3 on Apple's MacBook Pro is USB4, does it make sense to you? lol