Text 40857, 71 rader
Skriven 2007-12-14 00:37:00 av ROBERT FOWLER (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av ALAN ZISMAN
Ärende: Re: *ac !
=================
-=> ALAN ZISMAN wrote to ROBERT FOWLER <=-

 JG>> 2) *nix file systems, which OS X versions are based on, are rather more
 JG>> resistant to fragmentation than FAT or NTFS.  Use of the fsck (file
 JG>> system check, similar to chkdsk in MS-land) in *nix will even report a
 JG>> fragmentation percentage, which is generally very low, a couple of
 JG>> percentage points.  How the various file systems actually compare in
 JG>> real-world fragmentation, I don't know - never saw any such tests.

 RF>   I found the following blog to have some rather interesting
 RF>   discussions/ratings regarding software for cloning the Mac OS:

 RF>   http://tinyurl.com/hwgju.

 RF>   If this is accurate, it may help explain the rumour that it isn't
 RF>   possible to restore a Mac from backup (as opposed to original state,
 RF>   as Alan desribed).

 RF>   I certainly would want to have a more thorough understanding of this
 RF>   before purchasing a Mac for any non-casual use.

 AZ> Depends what one is wanting... for several years, for instance, my Mac
 AZ> desktop was set to back up my Applications and Home folders on a daily
 AZ> basis to an external hard drive, using a free tool from hard drive
 AZ> vendor LaCie called Silverkeeper (which did not require a LaCie drive
 AZ> to work).

 AZ> Because software installation under Mac OS X is much less convoluted
 AZ> than under Windows, using that tool (which backed up files in readable,
 AZ> non-proprietary format) could easily be used to restore a Mac to the
 AZ> current state-- after first installing the OS.

 AZ> It could also be used to transfer files and settings to a new Mac, with
 AZ> minimal difficulty.

 AZ> Set up the way I had it, it couldn't be used to create a clone of an
 AZ> existing Mac or restore a system from scratch without first installing
 AZ> the OS, but frankly, for my needs, it was good enough.

 I understand, and that seemed to be the blogger's point....anything more
 using third party software is problematic.

 AZ> With OS X 10.5 Leopard, I've stopped using it, to use Apple's built-in
 AZ> Time Machine which by default backs up the entire system every 15
 AZ> minutes, and looks like something out of 2001 A Space Odyssey.

 A quick check with google found the following comment on Time Machine
 in Wikipedia:

 "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. Competing products will simply back up the portion of the
 file that has changed [3]. This missing feature has raised serious
 concerns, as many Apple users make use of virtualization; virtual disk
 images are very large and change every time they are booted, making it
 almost impossible to include these disk images in Time Machine backups.

 I also noted the reference to Time Machine helper (for networking the
 backup).  Sounds like this is still a work in progress, and perhaps
 not quite ready for those who want to run XP or Vista in a VM.

 Regards,

 Robert Fowler


 

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.43
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)