Talk:Time Machine (Apple software)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Time Machine (Apple software) article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] No subject

Do you think it's worth mentioning that Acer once had a system restoration program called Time Machine? [1] Apple's Time Machine still seems far superior, but I'm wondering if this could fall under a trivia section. Gordeonbleu 18:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The main point is that there is already an existing trademark for a software program called Time Machine. Listing the future product from Apple stomps on the trademark owners efforts to market a product for a similar purpose. Michaelmorrison 20:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

  • But it's not for a similar purpose, it's a way to change program time without changing system time, while Apple's product is a backup utility. I have seen software with different purposes but the same name before. Anyway, it's not Wikipedia's place to arbitrate these things, only to describe them. This is no different than any other disambiguation situation. --Jamoche 20:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


    • No, I'm talking about Acer's Time Machine software, which came bundled with Acer computers in the early 2000s, before System Restore was introduced in Windows Me. It is exactly a backup utility, just as with Apple's Time Machine. I'm not suggesting a new article. I'm just asking whether we should have a subsection called "Trivia", and then note this fact. See here: [2] Gordeonbleu 01:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone should compare and contrast Time Machine with Windows Server Volume Shadow Copy, introduced with Windows Server 2003. Michaelcox 19:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Since it is similar feature (Volume shadow copy) to Windows, it should be mention. I just feel that apple give a nice name rather than revolutionary feature. Kyawtun 12:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Leopard's Time Machine and rg. Volume Shadow Copies do not have anything in common. Volume Shadow Copies is a file system feature as Time Machine's a front end to a backup system which again does not work like Volume Shadow Copies acting on Files but on structured application data. Eg. with Time Machine it is Possible to restore one calendar event even though it is not stored in a separate file on disk. I'll change the article section according to this. —Feuermurmel 13:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I worked on this section which seemed vague to me. I looked for information to back up the statements that were there, and didn't find much except for some pretty seriously emotional blogs! But, I used 'em and cited 'em. --joeOnSunset 18:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

What about Tivoli Continuous Data Protection for Files? Does it offer the same functionality? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.77.115.238 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC-8)


[edit] Encryption info is probably wrong and/or misleading

I made an encrypted disk image, mounted it, then tried to get TM to back up to it. Doesn't show up in TM's list of possible destinations.

The article says that backing up an encrypted disk image will work. If the files from the mounted image are backed up, they will backed up unencrypted. If the encrypted image itself is backed up, and if the image is not tiny, this will be extremely inefficient, and if it is even in fact reliable, it will have to lock out access to the disk image during the backup of the disk image, and even then, who knows whether the image is in a consistent stat at such time as TM tries to back it up. This all needs careful investigation before the article goes on to make sweeping statements such as it does.

I think the best option is for TM to allow backing up to a mounted, encrypted disk image.

Dave Yost (talk) 09:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the article actually only means that you can back up an encrypted disk image. You can't back up directly to an encrypted disk image. I'm not sure how backups of disk images work, but I'm sure Apple's software engineers couldn't possibly have been THAT dumb to not think that files might be changed during backup...right? D: --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 22:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Whole hard drive ?

From article:

Time Machine requires using a whole hard drive or hard drive partition to perform backups. File-level backups, such as using just a folder on a partition of a hard drive instead of requiring the use of the whole drive or partition, cannot be done through Time Machine.

This needs so be precised. Time Machine does not "take over" the whole disk, it creates a directory (IIRC "Backups.db") at the root of the drive and keep its backups inside taking as much space as it needs, deleting the oldest backup if there isn't enough free space. (I can post a screenshot of TimeMachine documentation if needed)

Which means that if you put files on your disk, it will not delete these files. Just take over the existing free space. If you want to add files to your disk, you can manually free some space by deleting some backups and then copy your files.

As long as you don't mess up with the Time Machine backup directory, you are free to copy any files to your backup hard drive.

--VincentRobert (talk) 11:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I think what was originally meant was that you have to back up FROM a whole volume, not TO a whole volume. You can EXclude individual directories or files, but you can only INclude whole volumes. This is all IIRC too, btw. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's that about wired networks?

Time machine works fine over any network connection, including ethernet and firewire. I am using the later method to back up my notebook right at this moment and it's faster than any other connection method. Deleting the comment to the contrary.

67.174.198.191 (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Oleg

TM does not work fine over any network connection, it will not run if you are only connected to a wireless network. – ɜɿøɾɪɹℲ ( тɐʟк • ¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs ) 19:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It works fine over wired or wireless connections. You need to make sure that you are connected to the backup volume (time machine is not able to connect automatically). Also leave the notebook connected to the power adapter. I heard backup will not start on battery power, but I am not positive enough to include this in the article.

148.87.1.167 (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Oleg

Time Machine does NOT officially and stabely backup over Airport connection. This was advertised pre Leopard release by Apple but was pulled probably due to stability for the official release.... It can be turned on with the terminal but is unsupported and apparently unstable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.197.33.179 (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A whole section dedicated to other products?

The section "Similar functionality in other operating systems isn't necessary. This can be covered by a "See Also" section with links to relevant articles. If I see no objections I'll replace it sometime today. Gh5046 (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Since no one seems to oppose this time, I'm gonna go ahead and remove it again. - Josh (talk | contribs) 06:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Limitations section

I removed the following statement from the Limitations section:

Time Machine does not support the use of multiple backup disks. If a laptop user keeps multiple Time Machine disks (e.g, one at work and one at home) they must reconfigure Time Machine each time they switch disks.

The statement is contradictory, and I was able to find an article to negate it: http://www.appleinsider.com/print.php?id=3297

I tried to include that url in my edit summary, but I did not realise it got cut off. Gh5046 (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What is the deciding factor of what a limitation is?

I am stuck with these items in the Limitations section:

  • Time Machine cannot create encrypted backups.
  • Due to Apple's continuation of the HFS+ file system, Time Machine does not support block-level backups. If even one entry in a large data file changes, the entire new version of the large file must be backed up...

Time Machine wasn't made to do these things, they are not part of its offering, so can they even be considered limitations? Who or what decides what a limitation is? If the software wasn't designed to do it is it notable?

The statement about Filevault backups requiring logout makes sense, and since Apple does support some network based back ups it makes sense to list what it doesn't support. But, if it isn't an announced/supported feature in anyway does it make sense to note it? Gh5046 (talk) 21:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I am removing the Limitations section. I don't see value in listing features that it doesn't have when it was not claimed that it would have them. The bit about Filevault will be moved to the Requirements section. If someone sees need to add a Criticisms section, with sources, I'm fine with that. Gh5046 (talk) 05:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Why can the "User interface" and "How It Works" exist without sources, but a "Limitations" or "Criticisms" cannot? As is, the article reads like an advertisement. - Cg-realms (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
How it reads is subjective. I didn't view it that way, but maybe that's because I've owned an Apple TV and it seemed accurate to me. Yes, the article needs more sources, but just because the rest of the article lacks them doesn't mean a criticism section should be able to exist without them. Gh5046 (talk) 04:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
While it may not be a "limitation" it is important information for understanding how Time Machine works. I added the information about block-level vs. file level backups back in using value-neutral language. Feel free to edit it, but please don't remove this important information from the main article. It is very useful for understanding why you might wish to block time machine from backing up virtual drives or torrent files, etc. kerim (talk) 09:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Does not require a hard drive connected to the computer

I don't care if you have a source or not, it does not require the hard drive to be connected to the computer. I do Time Machine backups over the network, and of course, Time Capsule works wirelessly. 206.124.7.10 (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Unless it's an AFP shared disk or a Time Capsule, backing up over the network isn't supported. It can be done, as the article states, but it isn't supported. Gh5046 (talk) 00:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edited By Some Apple Lover?

This page used to list the limitations and problems with Time Machine. It also gave links to open source alternatives, These have since been edited out.

This needs to be fixed IMMEDIATELY. Apparently, Apple doesn't like it when people criticize their software. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.130.5 (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Look two discussions above this one, and you'll see why they were removed. Also, there is a link to the article "List of backup software". That more than suffices. Gh5046 (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)