digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at tuaw.com —

New Get a Mac ad: Time Machine

tuaw.com — Apple is airing a new Get a Mac ad today (thanks to everyone who sent this in) all about Time Machine. The ad, as you might be able to guess from the shot above, features a number of Macs who quickly explain what Time Machine is to a slightly confused PC.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • beerbarron, on 01/14/2008, -33/+8Always nice to see new mac add's although I got to say, I never had the need to use it. But yeah, have they sorted wireless backup's yet?
    • johnpaul191, on 01/14/2008, -0/+21it's like insurance... when you DO need it, it's way too late to set it up.

      as a side note, people have been using it to transfer data when replacing (upgrading) the internal drive in their MacBooks.
      • crayment, on 01/14/2008, -3/+2And this couldn't be done by moving your files to any external hard drive? I fail to see how time machine gives you an advantage.
        • SilentSpyder, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Didn't you see the ad? It does it every hour by itself. He said "side note".
    • Ataxia2008, on 01/14/2008, -48/+10Wow, as a Windows user I'm *really* going to miss this sort of useful feature...because restoring something from the ***** recycle bin isn't easy enough. Oh and System Restore is also available, but as I'm not a mac user/retard, I know how to properly maintain my computer.
      • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -37/+7Ya exactly system restore was out well before this "time machine" thing from apple. Now apparently its this great new thing...
        • epyon180, on 01/14/2008, -7/+45I'm not gonna try to argue with someone who compares timemachine with system restore.
        • almostadesigner, on 01/14/2008, -6/+35System restore and Time machine are completely different.
        • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -5/+26Time Machine provides a way to browse folders of backups, allowing you to restore a single file or an entire directory. The built in windows backup is a "all or nothing" type restore. I switched to a Mac over a year ago, but before that I was Windows only, and I have NEVER seen the Windows backup do anything but waste space and fail right before you need it. Time Machine, on the other hand, has saved me twice already.
        • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -3/+16It's not System Restore, It's Volume Shadow Copy, or "Previous Versions" which does the same thing as Time Machine.

          Though, System Restore actually uses VSS, so I can see how you'd mix them up.
          • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 01/14/2008, -2/+5It's not the same either. Shadow Copy just keeps a history of changes on the same hard drive. Time Machine keeps it on a separate drive.
      • Stoker, on 01/14/2008, -11/+6Wow, I guess that makes you about one in one thousand PC users that does!
        • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -14/+4No I actually know how to make my own backups and don't need System Restore, but this "Time Machine" is nothing new...
      • planksconstant, on 01/14/2008, -2/+18not everybody keeps every file they've ever deleted in their recycle bin. and also, if your hard drive breaks, you'd have a hell of a time getting the files back that way. no one is saying this is a new feature, its just a new implementation of it. and time machine has saved my ass.

        that said, its like the mac ad guys aren't even trying anymore.
      • yabos, on 01/14/2008, -2/+15It's not restoring from the recycle bin dummy. The Mac has the Trash. If you delete the file from your desktop or whatever other folder and I mean really delete it from the hard drive you can get it back through Time Machine. This is NOT system restore either because system restore, surprise, restores your SYSTEM. I guess you can't figure that part out so now you know.
        • ShrimpCrackers, on 01/14/2008, -0/+5However its nearly identical to Volume Shadow Copy which has been out for a while now. The difference is Microsoft didn't do a good job of making it as intuitive for end users as its meant as a tool for business IT administrators.

          As for Time Machine, its bundled with Leopard. The problem I personally have is not with Time Machine its with how Leopard is just buggier compared to Tiger which can be rock solid.
      • macattacks10, on 01/14/2008, -10/+8You are a windows retard who doesn't know what you're talking about at least. Besides restoring old files, it does a constant hourly backup of every single file on your computer onto an external hd, only works with an external hd. Having a very tightly knit system for backing up files and your hd crashes, it makes it easy to replace the hd and be right where you left off.
        • ShrimpCrackers, on 01/14/2008, -1/+10Am I the only Mac user that gets embarrassed when Apple Fans get rabid? Everyone has different preferences for an operating system, its not the end of the world. What next? You're an uppity Vegan? Relax.
      • Tenoq, on 01/14/2008, -1/+4Fail. System Restore only backs up system files (registry, in particular).
        If you want a comparison, Time Machine is a lot more like Windows Home Server. VSS backups to another HDD, automatically. Home Server also lets you browse your backups and retrieve particular files - or completely re-image your machine. I guess the difference is Home Server is only designed to backup once a day (although you could increase the frequency) and it's also designed to backup 10 boxes to one location. Time Machine is a lot cheaper though. :p
        • teh_techie, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Fail. Windows home server is not a locally running service on each machine... Backups that frequent over the network would be a killer.
      • MetisElara, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0I'm embarrassed for you.
    • mateo60, on 01/14/2008, -2/+38I installed a new hard drive the other day in my Macbook. When I put the new drive in, put the Leopard disc in and booted up, I selected "Restore from Time Machine" and walked away. 30 minutes later, the new drive was exactly like my old one, but bigger. It was by far the easiest hard drive swap I've ever had to do. That was the firs time I was truly impressed with Time Machine.
    • P373Y, on 01/14/2008, -3/+4yes, airport extreme.
      kevin rose has one.
      http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/sharing.html
      • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -0/+9Time Machine does not allow you to use an Airdisk as a Time Machine drive, without a tiny bit of 'haxoring.'

        I did set it up, but it just wasn't as fast or reliable as a local drive. Maybe with a wired network connection, but if you're tethered to the Router, why not just plug in an external drive too?
        • Tenoq, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1I don't understand the obsession with trying to backup over wi-fi. Wi-fi isn't reliable. If you want a reliable backup - why would you torture yourself with an unreliable medium? Seems crazy. People complained about the same thing with WHS - it's stupid. Do gigabit, do get quick backups.
          • MikeOSX, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Perhaps it's time to get off of that 'b' network.
    • rdoger6424, on 01/14/2008, -0/+7My first hard drive crash happened the week before an 8 page term paper was due. I've backed up since.
      • Whaines, on 01/14/2008, -1/+7Shouldn't of been too bad. Most people wouldn't have even started an eight page paper a week before it was due.
        • 2shae, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3Very true,
          Have to hand in one today...started on it yesterday :)
  • Wailord, on 01/14/2008, -20/+308Good to see one that doesn't devote itself to bashing Vista.
    • sirbeta, on 01/14/2008, -11/+54My thoughts exactly. There have been no shortage of those lately. It was getting pretty old, pretty fast.
    • sonicdeviant, on 01/14/2008, -38/+40True...Vista manages to sufficiently bash itself by merely existing.
      • ProjectRice, on 01/14/2008, -18/+10Digg him down all you want, but it's true
      • betacmag4u, on 01/14/2008, -5/+3As much as I dislike Vista (I am forced to support it at work) Bill said at CES that it has shipped 100 million copies already.....I guess we are stuck with it for a while..........
      • VPurpmalkV, on 01/14/2008, -4/+2I have no problems with Vista. Been running it for almost a Year now.
        • teh_techie, on 01/14/2008, -2/+3I also don't have any major issues with it. We rolled it out at work on desktops and laptops, and fewer actual support calls come in for it than XP ever did. Bitlocker rolled out to the league of notebooks is great too. We don't worry about lost notebooks like we used to.
    • clak, on 01/14/2008, -19/+15Because God knows we don't want to upset Vista.
    • smpdigital, on 01/14/2008, -16/+13Looks like Vista is making a pretty good job at bashing itself
    • celkin, on 01/14/2008, -9/+10Here's the ad without the blogspam:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoi05MLtqP0
    • xatx2, on 01/14/2008, -8/+2lame as ***** anyway, and spam nonetheless
    • xStainDx, on 01/14/2008, -0/+8Vista has this feature called "Previous Versions" Yeah it was introduced in Windows Server 2003 and XP Pro aka Volume Shadow Copies. If apple was to "bash" here they'd look silly immediately. The feature also only saves the block level changes of a file whereas the apple setup makes full copies as far as I'm aware.
      • etandrib, on 01/14/2008, -1/+3Having a feature and being usable are completely different. Hence all the headlines about the Safari mobile having huge numbers on sites whereas all other phones have been out for 10 years still haven't broken the barrier. They have internet browsers but nobody uses them. No one uses them for a reason. They suck. I'd say the same about Vista's "Previous Versions" feature. It is there but no one uses it. Do you? I thought so...
        • teh_techie, on 01/14/2008, -0/+5Not on vista, but at work in the enterprise environment, saves a *****-TON of work from going to the data center just doing a file restore of someone's spreadsheet.
    • Niubai, on 01/14/2008, -7/+2I'm not a PC or Mac fanboy, but damn, these mac adds are pretty lame. Lame screenplay and lame music. PC guy is lame in a nerdy way. Mac guys is lame trying to be modern and cool. Are they trying to sell macs to retards ?
    • falafelkiosken, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1Yeah, it was funny without resorting to bashing other brands.
      I guess Apple has listened to the critics, continuing the bashing would only make harm too Apple itself in the end
    • iPhrankie, on 01/14/2008, -1/+2I find it funny that a lot of you are getting your panties in a bunch over these commercials. The Mac community has had to put with Apple/Mac bashing for years. I remember every article ZDNet put out a couple of years ago bashed Mac users in some way (just an example). Anyone remember Jim Louderback bashing Apple through the entire MacWorld keynote on TechTV? Thanks to Leo, there was one voice for the Mac users on that entire network. Anyways, Apple is finally getting their day and they are enjoying it.
    • HypocriteDigg, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1What a bunch of ***** losers. Who gives a ***** who they 'bash'. Don't buy their products if it bothers you that much, you bunch of whiny little babies.
      • OrangeSoda31, on 01/15/2008, -0/+0Because the average user is dumb enough to believe slander. Not to say that there isn't material for bashing, but it needs to be done correctly.
    • OrangeSoda31, on 01/15/2008, -0/+0Well said. I have hated the mac ads for a long time, simply because they say so little about what they are trying to sell. This one at least shows off a feature...

      Macs gaining ground will be very good for everyone, it means compatibility will increase (hopefully), and competition will increase. Microsoft will work harder (Vista and Windows ME have something in common...) as will Mac, and the only people who benefit are the consumers. I don't want them to take over the market, because then we have another Microsoft.
  • yobboninja, on 01/14/2008, -13/+146I liked the ad, but did i really have to click 3 links to get to it?
    • GayMafiaKingpin, on 01/14/2008, -8/+74Did your clicker finger get tired? You can take a breather if needed. I know the Interwebs can be exhausting at times.
    • Ataxia2008, on 01/14/2008, -1/+38I'd advise you stay away from Wikipedia or Counter Strike, unless you want arthritis or something...
    • eld4nt3, on 01/14/2008, -1/+4It's good criticism, though. Link to the ***** file next time, not some ***** saying "I've been on record suggesting this, and they finally took my advice LOL." I don't need that in my day.
    • Tyrghast, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1Wasn't so much the links but the fact that i had to screamed "No! ***** you I am not installing Quicktime McNaziware!"
  • Urkel, on 01/14/2008, -8/+250This is what an apple ad should be. Rather than wasting time putting down a competitor, they instead took the time to actually talk about a feature that non-mac users probably have no idea about.
    • affanjam, on 01/14/2008, -2/+74Before it was "You suck because...." now its "We're awesome because...".
    • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -31/+23or about features that windows users have been enjoying since XP's inception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_copy
      • baldgye, on 01/14/2008, -16/+17don't feel bad about the negative number of diggs they are only digging you down becasue such as it with all things. The truth hurts.
        • neonfunk, on 01/14/2008, -5/+16no, actually I'm digging you both down because they're implemented very differently, even if they are both backup programs (and I'm not talking about appearances)
          • ShrimpCrackers, on 01/14/2008, -2/+2They're implemented differently, but the end result is the same. Unless of course you're confusing Shadow Copy with System Restore. The interface isn't pretty but its also based by dates just like Time Machine is.
          • Tenoq, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Shadow copy is a mere 'shadow' of Time Machine. It's a bastard to use and without WHS, not particularly friendly, IMO. Not to mention it's not automated or on by default. It's also quite buggy... :(
        • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -11/+5Actually I think it's funny when Macfans digg me down on Apple stories. They know it's the truth, they just choose to ignore it. Shadow copy has been around for ages. XP had a proto version of it. Windows Server 2003 and Vista's implementation of shadow copy IS time machine.
        • solistus, on 01/14/2008, -7/+2Gotta love the ignorance of PC users who can't understand that not all systems that create some sort of back up are identical. It's especially funny to claim a feature has existed since XP, then link to an article that helpfully explains it has not. XP's backup was a JOKE; it didn't even create permanent snapshots!
          • baldgye, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I'm not ignorant at all, and have a fair amount of use of mac's compared with most networking students. XP's back up is almost identical, except it doesn't look fancy and you don't need an external HDD attached to another Windows machine to use it.
      • ilikechaitea, on 01/14/2008, -1/+7why is this comment being dugg down???? Windows, and particularly Vista actually, does have really back-up and retrieve features. Its just windows hasn't packaged it up in some kind of weird sci-fi thing.

        But it is good, and its is very usable and simple. The only problem is its not available on all version of Vista, and that is *****. And of course, windows don't make ads about its features, which is a shame because unlike thousands of ohter users, I've been loving vista, its performed amazingly on my new 1GB RAM HP Laptop
      • jackflap, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Actually the reason he's being dugg-down is that the Shadow feature was so buggy that it didn't actually work till SP2. Even now, I cringe whenever I roll-back in XP since it doesn't actually roll-back properly occasionally. Not to mention the manual schedule backups tool STILL doesn't work and has never worked reliably, the software's an absolute joke.

        Haven't used Time Machine, so don't really know how well it's implemented. I should imagine it's intuitive and beautifully designed. That's your answer.
    • MScrip, on 01/14/2008, -10/+6How about Apple making an ad showing the iMac... or someone using an iMac. Show the Mac! Show iLife. I'm sure most people who buy a Mac want to sort their photos and would like to edit video. Time Machine is a great feature... but I don't see hordes of people switching over to a Mac to get Time Machine. Macs are great computers... tell people that!!!!! Two people arguing on a white background is not a good ad.
      • awhiteflame, on 01/14/2008, -3/+16I think Apple is pretty happy with their marketing without your expert advice.

        Not to be mean, but.
        • klick37, on 01/14/2008, -7/+3I would have given you a + if it wasn't for, "Not to be mean, but." That doesn't make sense. I hate you.
        • turpenine, on 01/14/2008, -1/+5agreed, it seems to be working pretty well for them
        • MScrip, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1Obviously. They've been running the commercials with the two guys standing in a white space for years. That's why Macs are flying off the shelves. I think it's great that Mac sales are growing, despite the lack of information about their product in their own commercials.

          Expert advice? Yeah, I'm a consumer, and I'd like to SEE the product before I buy it. Good thing I live near an Apple store, and was curious enough to go see their product in person.
          • Kyan, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2And why did you go to the store? Maybe b/c you saw an ad?
        • solistus, on 01/14/2008, -0/+6MScrip: name ONE operating system that provides a full explanation of all its features in a short TV ad. The point of ads for complex products like a computer-OS combination are designed to catch attention and cause people to seek out more information themselves. The idea that the purpose of a commercial is to provide the consumer with all the necessary information to make a purchasing decision was relegated to infomercials and low-budget local ads long, long ago. You clearly know very little about advertising if you think that Apple is bad at it.
          • MScrip, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1You're right. People must go out on their own to learn more about Apple products. I just want one Mac ad that shows how COOL a Mac is... and how good their software is. How else are people gonna even begin to think about switching?

            What's next? Coke ads where all they do is bash Pepsi?

            I want Macs to be in every home. The general public doesn't even know what a Mac is... even with all these ads. The first dozen Mac ads told people what was wrong with Windows. I wish they showed how GOOD a Mac is, instead of how bad Windows is. How many Mac ads used the word Vista in it? Macs will continue to be a cult product, gaining new owners only by personal recommendations and the occasional Apple store walk-in.
    • klick37, on 01/14/2008, -10/+3What about restore points? My XP SP2 makes one every day. I'm not saying that it came before Time Machine, but it's not like Windows doesn't have it.
      • turpenine, on 01/14/2008, -3/+6restore points have nothing to do with time machine.
      • fr34k5h0w, on 01/14/2008, -1/+6Restore points only back up your critical system configuration such as the registry. Time Machine backs up the entire drive (minus the folders you tell it not to touch).
      • Worldchrisis, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Restore points back up all of your files as well as the registry.
    • crayment, on 01/14/2008, -4/+1If only it was a good feature... Since when is the recycle bin not good enough? I have never lost a file in windows that wasn't caused by a combination of me neglecting to save and the system crashing. And that hasn't happen to me since windows ME.
  • osage, on 01/14/2008, -47/+5thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,
    thank you,

  • dgblackout, on 01/14/2008, -4/+367i like how the mac guy changes his clothes every hour.

    • DaffyDuck, on 01/14/2008, -16/+41I think the clothes are a metaphor for files. Different backups contain different files.
      • rojano17, on 01/14/2008, -0/+26O RLY?
      • Super6, on 01/14/2008, -0/+15I think blackout was making a joke
      • jeff94, on 01/14/2008, -3/+3Comment 1: You've cracked the code!
        Comment 2: Captain Obvious is masquerading as "DaffyDuck"
      • michaelz92, on 01/14/2008, -5/+1who said each person indicated 1 hour? It probably indicated 1 day, and i dont know about you, but i change my clothes every day.
        • Speed, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2The Mac guy did "It makes copies of me every hour"
    • Brenner14, on 01/14/2008, -1/+61he also slightly changes the thickness of his mustache
    • Ataxia2008, on 01/14/2008, -34/+11And that mac users are trend-whores.
    • Ireland, on 01/14/2008, -8/+17Changing clothes is showing that there were changes every hour.
    • rojano17, on 01/14/2008, -1/+78Its a widely known fact that mac users are obsessed with their desktop backgrounds
      • turpenine, on 01/14/2008, -3/+3truth. the 15 minute rotation build in was similar to the third coming of jesus.
        second coming was the birth of s.j.
    • senatorpjt, on 01/14/2008, -0/+55All mac owners change their clothes every hour. As a non-mac user, you're just not sophisticated enough to notice.
      • dgblackout, on 01/14/2008, -5/+4i've been a mac user for the past 2 years, i was being ironic.
        • timusca, on 01/14/2008, -2/+2The fact that your comment is actually NOT ironic, is in fact, ironic.
  • ChaosProfessor, on 01/14/2008, -28/+4i just saw it on tv
  • r1y23, on 01/14/2008, -38/+261I still like PC more than that smug little bastard.

    I feel for ya PC
    • Ireland, on 01/14/2008, -6/+69John Hodgeman is a likable guy, and a comedian. For what it's worth though.. he's actually a Mac user.
      • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -12/+4And he speaks for hobos. Anyone who supports Ron Paul, which is everyone on Digg, should hate poor people who leach off of the private enterprise of freight shipping.
        • thrallie, on 01/14/2008, -1/+14how the ***** did you turn a discussion on john hodgeman into a ron paul bash session?
        • Whyaduck, on 01/14/2008, -1/+0@thrallie: Dear God, Ron Paul could be guaranteed to solve all of America's problems in his first hundred days in office and I still would vote against him just because of the humorless asshats that support him.
      • AmICoolNow, on 01/14/2008, -0/+9John Hodgeman is incredibly funny. Everyone should read Areas of My Expertise.
        • huggybarrel, on 01/14/2008, -0/+5or download the audio book from iTunes, cuz listening to him read his own book is even funnier.
    • Genma, on 01/14/2008, -19/+6which is why I guess he feels ok with misrepresenting the pc.
    • GreenAlien, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I think he's cool. Maybe you should watch our UK version of the Mac adverts (tip: as funny as a poke in the eye) then you'll appreciate him more ;)
  • myempyrean, on 01/14/2008, -3/+168or.. we could go to a direct link and not through someones blog.
    http://www.apple.com/getamac/ads
    • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -11/+14TUAW isn't "someones blog" it's TUAW.
    • MacGyver2210, on 01/14/2008, -9/+2"it" sucked, and the apple site was faster. these commercials piss me off with their yuppie douchebag spokesman and the iBackground(the blank white *****). Come up with something clever instead of using the same played-out ***** you have for years. and for all of you "you're just hating on mac" people, screw you. I just spent 4 hours trying to get networking to work at my parents house on their god-awful macs and it ended up being a bad board in the server mac.
      • turpenine, on 01/14/2008, -1/+4tuaw is a good place man.
      • michaelz92, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1it shouldn't have taken you 4 hours to figure out theres a malfunctioning piece of hardware. Would've taken me 10 minutes. And what the hell is a "server mac?" are you referring to a router? or a mac? or a server (which i doubt your parents would have).
    • treeboxgrass, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I like how we will spend the time to read through 50 comments for a direct link over the 2 seconds it would have taken to just click through three links in the article.
  • RandoTheKing, on 01/14/2008, -35/+117Incremental backups. Yeah, my PC is scheduled to do that also, but let me guess, this is more user friendly?
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -46/+23Agreed, PC has the exact same damn thing. Just shows how ignorant most Mac users are
      • Jak08, on 01/14/2008, -9/+18If by ignorant, you mean having used the best free backup tool I have ever used, then I guess I am extremely ignorant, and I use both my PC and Mac farily regularly. Actually have them side by side, unfortunitly they don't do intresting dialog like the comercials :(
      • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -11/+8How ignorant we are? Can you show me where, in Windows, you have something like this:
        http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1674/picture1nu ...
        It allows me to select anything from a single file, to my entire hard drive to restore. When installing Leopard, I can restore from a Time Machine backup, and my computer will be just like it was before the reinstall. From my experience with Windows, the built in backup system wastes a ton of disk space, only takes daily snapshots (if it works at all) and usually fails to resolve any problem when used.
        • cquinnd, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2In Windows by itself you have pretty much the previous versions feature. But with add ons thru third party tools, everything you just described has been available in one form or another since the days of WIndows 9x.

          Not to say that Apple has not done a good job with Time Machine.
        • Whaines, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3God I hope my PC never has to do that just to restore a file. I can't say I usually keep my files in the depths of space.
      • KyleMistry, on 01/14/2008, -6/+3How does Apple's advertising department represent _most_ Mac users?
        • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1Um...let's see...because they conduct studies to see what type of demographic they're dealing with?
      • shitheels, on 01/28/2008, -0/+0Hey, I've got a reply that's worthy of your comment, into which I have put as much thought as you have into yours:
        Bite me, retard... figure out what you're talking about *before* you talk about it. 'Kay?
    • binder520, on 01/14/2008, -13/+56Leopard's Time Machine application allows users to selectively preview and restore archive files. This feature, not incremental backups, is what makes Time Machine a unique back up application.
    • stillasleep00, on 01/14/2008, -10/+23Yeah, it actually is.
    • imnojezus, on 01/14/2008, -6/+14I don't know what you're using to backup, but yes, the UI is far friendlier than anything I've ever used from the Windows universe. Yes XP and Vista both have a backup utility that comes buried in the system, but both are pains in the ass to use compared to even third party apps, much less Time Machine.
      • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -0/+4There's shadow copy in Vista, which is very similar to Time Machine. However, it only runs on the more expensive versions of vista you aren't likely to see on a home machine. It's actually decent, from what I hear, but Time Machine is easier for the average user, and suits most people's needs. I use Time Machine and I love it.
    • klick37, on 01/14/2008, -1/+5Yes.
    • johnpaul191, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2The Mac os has shipped with something called Backup.app for a few years, let alone any scripting or 3rd party solutions for backing up data. Time Machine is a really simple to set up solution (just plug in an empty external drive and it will ask if you want to use it for Time Machine backups). It's also really simple to browse that data, something some older solutions did not offer.
      Being such an easy to use backup solution that can do a basic configuration by itself is what makes it awesome. You doing backups means you are ahead of what, 95% of computer users? As somebody generally responsible enough to set up auto backups, and do some manual ones, i still find it useful. I think a lot of that comes from the UI.
    • BlueStarr, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1DING-DING-DING-DING-DING-DING
  • JARSInc, on 01/14/2008, -2/+20Direct link:
    http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/ap ...
  • pxlpshr, on 09/04/2008, -25/+1genius.

    direct link: http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/ap ...
  • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -12/+23For once I actually respect a mac ad, no more of the standard bashing/false advertising which has turned me away from them.
    • clak, on 01/14/2008, -2/+7You respect ads? Now that sounds kind of strange.
  • joshwehatetech, on 01/14/2008, -12/+10Vista offers something similiar through Shadow Copy (From their Server line which they stole from the Salvage function in Novell). Oddly enough they only the whole system restore through their business line of Vista which is rather useless due to better and more proper imaging solutions for businesses/enterprises.
    • jhaks, on 01/14/2008, -1/+8Previous versions is not stolen from anyone. It is a pretty old concept of a snapshot system. Also you misunderstand what Previous Versions is supposed to be; it is a snapshot/shadow copy system not a backup system. It is not meant to provide backups but a way to take lightweight snapshots of the system.
      • joshwehatetech, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Nod, there is another backup solution on top of Shadow Copy used in the business lines of Vista that do system backups. I guess they call it Windows Complete PC Backup. My point really was that it should of been included in Home Premium since it would have its uses. Outside of small small shops who would use this compares to RIS/WDS/GHOST/etc.

        http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv ...
      • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Both System Restore and the Windows Backup Utility make use of VSS (Which is basically Previous Versions, though I guess it could be said that Previous Versions is just a VSS client like System Restore and the Backup util)

        So while "Previous Versions" may not be used for backup, the system Previous Versions is built on is used for backup.
  • lexdigg, on 01/14/2008, -37/+59Vista has the same feature (with the less spacey name "Previous Versions")..
    • DarkDx, on 01/14/2008, -5/+18wich doesn't register every change made to the file...
      • Cerebral, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3what are you talking about. It makes two copies a day (default). It only makes a copy of the file if it has CHANGED from the last time it was backed up. So I have no idea what you are referring to.
        • timusca, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1Yes, but Time Machine makes infinite backups a day in the same fashion. If I were to change the title of a document 5 minutes from now, it would be backed up in 5 minutes and 1 second as soon as I hit "Save". If I don't like that title, I can rewind to 4 minutes and 59 seconds and get the title back that I forgot.

          Kapische?
          • op12, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Didn't the commercial say it happens every hour? Is that configurable? At any rate I don't think it's change-initiated like you're implying.
          • Refrag, on 01/15/2008, -0/+2No, it happens every hour. It's not configurable. It shouldn't be. The barrier to entry for backups needed to be reduced for a very long time. And not just for the uninitiated user, but also for people that should know better -- like me.

            Keeping it simple makes it much more likely to be used. All you have to do to use Time Machine is plug in an external storage device, and Leopard will ask you if you want to use it for Time Machine. There is no step 3.

            It also means for the vast majority of files, I have a backup of every change I have made to it. I seldom change the same file multiple times within an hour unless an application is auto-saving every n minutes.

            http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/timemachine.h ...
        • Cerebral, on 01/17/2008, -0/+1Well technically you can configure shadow copy service to do this every hour if you wish to do so.
    • BlueStarr, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Can vista back-up only selected folders or partitions? The nice thing about TM is that as soon as a change is made to a single file it also does the same for the back-up copy.
  • Brenner14, on 01/14/2008, -42/+3Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
    Yeah, thanks PC.
  • electricyoda, on 01/14/2008, -22/+19Is it really that obvious that there are people on digg shilling for apple?
    • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -12/+13Is it really that obvious that there are actually Mac users who really enjoy the experience, who want to open the eyes of PC users to try something different?

      Someone I met through Digg did that for me, and I've been Windows free for 3 months, and a Mac owner for a year.
      • Speed, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2"Mac users who really enjoy the experience, who want to open the eyes of PC users to try something different?"
        You do realize that when Christians do it with their religion, we bury them, right? Why should it not be the same for fanboys who are pretty much the same (except I don't necessarily have to pay to convert to a religion)
        • likwidfuzion, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1If you want to be a scientologist, you do technically have to pay to convert.
          • Speed, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Key word: necessarily. While some religions you do have no pay, many you don't.
        • Lyph5, on 01/15/2008, -0/+1Because I'm not asking you to believe in an invisible man in the sky. What I love is real, and I believe it has a better user experience than Windows.
    • goldenratiophi, on 01/14/2008, -2/+3HOLY CRAP DIGG HAS A HUGE APPLE FANBOY POPULATION? WHEN DIDJA NOTICE?
    • rebotfc, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3Well the difference between shill and fanboy is that shills get paid, fanboys on the otherhand pay for the privilledge.

      /mac user :)
    • michaelz92, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Who cares? i dont see any complaining (except myself) about the LEGALIZE IT!@#!@ threads that pop up on the front page 3 times a day.
  • tonich03, on 01/14/2008, -34/+9My parents and I just sealed a deal to get an iMac and I just ordered it. One of the happiest moments in my life.
    • aznhomig, on 01/14/2008, -2/+8lol
    • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -20/+4enjoy your lag, inability to upgrade and often-recalled technology.
    • Jak08, on 01/14/2008, -5/+2don't worry I know what your saying despite the numerous digg downs. Note however that as with everything the anticipation is the best. however you slowly love it more and more, almost an aquired taste and once you have aquired it, you prefer it to anything else.
      • tonich03, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Thanks pal, it should be arriving soon!
    • ziggotron, on 01/14/2008, -2/+0You can die now.
    • m00nmaster, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Step 1. Move out of parent's basement.
    • surfing, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1tonich03 is 43 years old.
  • digirat, on 01/14/2008, -13/+6can i get that in a non-quicktime format?
    • Jak08, on 01/14/2008, -4/+1uhm, you are aware that apple owns quicktime and this is an apple add, so officially releasing it in any other format only supports their competitors?
    • kckman, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1I so agree! I will never again install quicktime on any computer I use or support.
      • manitoba98xp, on 01/14/2008, -0/+31. It's not as bad on Macs as it is on Windows.
        2. There are dozens of other things that play QuickTime. QuickTime Alternative, for instance, or VLC.
  • bdubya, on 01/14/2008, -27/+74..and Vista doesn't?
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv ...
    • ramenite, on 01/14/2008, -5/+27They do make it a side comment that it's available in all versions of Leopard...I guess they are referring to client and server.

      Shadow copy is only on Ultimate, Business, and Enterprise. Most computers shipped with Vista have Home Premium.

      /does not like Apple
      //runs Vista Ultimate 2: Championship Edition Turbo
      • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -3/+3It's also available for use on any share hosted on a Server 2003/2008 machine. 2000/XP/2003 and Vista can all access the Previous Versions stored on such shares.
    • P373Y, on 01/14/2008, -1/+13not all versions of vista
      btw i am a vista user.
      "D. Domain Join, Group Policy support, Windows Fax and Scan, Encrypting File System (EFS), Shadow Copy, Corporate Roaming, Offline Files and Folders, and Remote Desktop are available in Windows Vista Business and Windows Vista Ultimate."
      http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv ...
    • HanSolo69, on 01/14/2008, -3/+21You're absolutely right. Vista doesn't...unless you buy one of the top tier versions of it. Notice how in the ad they make a point to say that Time Machine is available on any Mac, because there aren't 50 versions of OSX.
    • BlueStarr, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Feature available only in Ultimate, Business, and Enterprise editions of Windows Vista.

      It comes standard in every copy of OS X. One version. :P
  • NeoCortex, on 01/14/2008, -66/+129Wow. It's like a SYSTEM that can RESTORE stuff for you. What will PC ever do?
    • crazzy88ss, on 01/14/2008, -17/+8i see what you did there.
      • awhiteflame, on 01/14/2008, -6/+19System Restore only works when your system breaks. Not when something happens to a specific document. The whole point of it, in fact, is to ignore your documents and only focus on system data and program information.
    • bitspace, on 01/14/2008, -5/+39As has been pointed out numerous times, System Restore lets you restore your entire system to a saved point in time. Time Machine is more like a versioned filesystem that allows you to view and restore individual files going back as many versions for as long as you've had the system.
    • EvilAnimator, on 01/14/2008, -2/+30It's not the same feature, smartass.
    • rebotfc, on 01/14/2008, -3/+26The fact that this gets 36 diggs shows people still don't understand the features leopard offers.
      • Campog, on 01/14/2008, -1/+14Or still think SYSTEM RESTORE is actually backing up thier whole system.
      • coolwalking, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1I just dugg him up for the funney. I know it's not the same.
    • celkin, on 01/14/2008, -2/+5Mac IS a PC

      /divides by zero
      • bovox, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Hey smartass, anyone who isn't retarded knows that when one speaks of a "PC", that person is talking about a Microsoft Windows based system.
    • ez12a, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2system restore is nothing like Time Machine. They work differently.
    • wizemanwannabe, on 01/14/2008, -1/+0i believe what you were looking for there was "what ever will PC do"...good effort
  • HerrEisenheim, on 01/14/2008, -9/+22Maybe Apple should FIX the Time Machine corruption issues before they start advertising it. It's far, far to easy to corrupt an entire Time Machine volume, especially if you use the same volume for more than one machine. I should be clear, the volume is still accessible, but Time Machine no longer functions. It's easy to do. Accidently unplugging the HDD without first ejecting is all it takes. There are about 6 other things you can do to cause it to become unusable in TM.
    • jads, on 01/14/2008, -4/+4If you accidentally unplug the HDD without ejecting it whilst it's trying to backup? Of course it's going to corrupt the backup. Here's an Idea, don't use it with another machine - leave it as a time machine drive.
      • HerrEisenheim, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Actually, unplugging while backing up isn't an issue, as long as it's used with a single machine.

        And there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to backup several machines on a single drive. It's a permissions problem with TM making the root folder read-only, instead of the sub-folders, making everything unusable.

        You also shouldn't have to worry about your TM volume simply because you plugged another Mac into the Firewire chain.
    • Virgule, on 01/14/2008, -2/+6What a cheap shot but you are somewhat right.. the system does not put much barriers in the way to prevent LUSERs from messing things up but you can't say unplugging a drive without unmounting it first is a Time Machine "problem".
      Come on, you are trying very hard here.....
  • Uroboric, on 01/14/2008, -28/+13Oh cool, I'm glad Apple is advertising a feature that Windows has had for years. Not to mention that the Windows feature is exponentially more powerful.
    • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -11/+1Yet it actually takes some knowledge to use, typical Mac simple and looks great but how powerful is it.
      • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -8/+2brushed metal != simple
        • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -9/+1Hmm so thats why you bought a mac.... wow.
      • Lyph5, on 01/14/2008, -4/+2"typical Mac simple and looks great but how powerful is it."

        It's BSD, baby.
    • nubnub, on 01/14/2008, -6/+16Buried as inaccurate.
    • salvadorwii, on 01/14/2008, -5/+13Windows? Feature? Powerful?
      im confused...
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3Windows has not had something like Time Machine. Restore points are not the same as a full, incremental backup system that even Grandma can use.

      FAIL.
  • nubnub, on 01/14/2008, -17/+10You do know windows has backup too?
    • andycr512, on 01/14/2008, -5/+8The Vista backup utility is a joke. You can't even select what to backup by folder... Shadow copy may make up for it, but I'm not paying $400 to get an incremental backup system I can get for free anyway and "Ultimate Extras" that aren't happening much anyway.
  • aznhomig, on 01/14/2008, -20/+22Never liked these ads to begin with, but at least it doesn't rely on Microsoft's shortcomings to essentially polish their own turd.
  • aznhomig, on 01/14/2008, -26/+7Never liked these Apple ads to begin with, but at least it doesn't rely on Microsoft's shortcomings to essentially polish their own turd.
    • aznhomig, on 01/14/2008, -6/+4Effing digg, with the double posting.

      -_-
      • amneosis, on 01/14/2008, -6/+3pppphhfttt kindly report to the FAIL chamber
    • bob12321, on 01/14/2008, -2/+3That wasn't Digg's fault you actually submitted it twice. You even change the comment in between them.
  • agent42, on 01/14/2008, -18/+18When are they gonna do an ad about The wireless disconnecting randomly...
    • smpx, on 01/14/2008, -1/+10when apple starts having their wireless disconnecting randomly, I presume.
      • TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2They have, actually. Leopard has some issues to still work out with wireless. I've seen machines that would just randomly drop the wireless connection for no reason when Tiger did just fine. Dunno if it was fixed in 10.5.1, though.
      • rockjunky116, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Ugh my 10.5.1 drops the wireless every 20 minutes. Almost as annoying as listening to a Vietnamese person talk. Should be fixed in 10.5.2, along with stacks. Thank god.
    • michaelz92, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1owned.
  • Defuser, on 01/14/2008, -22/+7Earth to Mac-Dorks: PCs have had "System Restore" for a long time now.
    • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -6/+3system restore, shadow copy, ntbackup.. the list goes on.
      • davepascoe, on 01/14/2008, -4/+4and none of them are equivalent to Time Machine.

        well done, you Avoid Getting the Point for High Ignorance.
        • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Actually the shadow copy service is just as powerful. It's extensible (Any application can register data to be used with it, and later pull that data from a shadow copy), and it can restore any file to a previous version for me.
          • davepascoe, on 01/16/2008, -0/+1does it backup to an external drive? are the previous versions searchable and preview-able via the normal file browser?
      • digitalarcanum, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2exactly, they're superior to time machine. Well done, you get dugg down for being an Apple elitist.
    • andycr512, on 01/14/2008, -2/+7That's for system files......
    • almostadesigner, on 01/14/2008, -3/+8System Restore and Time Machine are completely different!
    • CATSCEO, on 01/14/2008, -3/+8Earth to idiot: System Restore isn't like Time Machine
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Yeah, because System Restore is a complete backup system that backs up your entire drive and is easy enough for Grandma to use. Oh, wait...

      FAIL.
  • MKautz, on 01/14/2008, -16/+9Hi. My name is Windows Server 2003. I've been able to do this for the last 5 years. How are you?
    • awhiteflame, on 01/14/2008, -1/+4You run Windows Server 2003 on your home PC? Why?
    • RaiKitsune, on 01/14/2008, -4/+2Linux has been able to do this since it existed using sh scripts and cron jobs.
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Yeah, because Server 2003 is installed on OEM home machines all the time and has been so easy to use that even Grandma can do it!

      FAIL.
  • binder520, on 01/14/2008, -8/+37Leopard's Time Machine application allows users to selectively preview and restore archive files. This feature, not incremental backups, is what makes Time Machine a unique back up application.
    • klick37, on 01/14/2008, -8/+2You already said this in reply to a previous comment.
      • rdoger6424, on 01/14/2008, -1/+5it needed to be said again
        • cquinnd, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Couldn't he have simple referred to the other post as a backup?
  • journeyman2011, on 01/14/2008, -5/+32See, the whole problem with the Vista implementation is this:
    "Some product features are only available in certain editions of Windows Vista and may require advanced or additional hardware."
    • nabe, on 01/14/2008, -3/+0"...and may require advanced or additional hardware."
      So, Time Machine doesn't?
      • Virgule, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1there is no "may". Its just "require" an external drive. Can get one for as cheap as a DVD-RW tower
      • rebotfc, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3No it doesn't if you partition your main drive you can backup to the other parition, although doing so is pretty dumb.
  • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -14/+7There are plenty of programs for the PC that do the same thing...
    • dancingnacho, on 01/14/2008, -2/+3Yes, but this is an Apple ad... you know, for Apple products.
    • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -1/+3How many are free? How many are as easy? How many automatically offer to make a new drive plugged in a backup volume?
      • SoxFanNH, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3Its not free you paid for the OS....
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Unless you bought a new Mac with it. You could argue that it's still paying for the OS, but then again, if you want to run something on a PC (assuming it's Windows), you have to pay for that too, don't you?
      • smpx, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Free as in it comes with the OS.... I doubt that Microsoft mailed you a copy of Vista when it came out just for kicks.
  • TJATL, on 01/14/2008, -14/+26Yes Time Machine is superior then System Restore. I can go into my Time Machine interface, search for a specific file, browse through all my files and folders with quick view as well, all in the same finder window I'm use too, and find whatever I need to bring it back. All without rebooting. System Restore is lacking in usability and functionality, but that's the norm for windows.
    • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -10/+2Hey wow, sort of like backup...
    • nabe, on 01/14/2008, -6/+6However Previous Versions does all the same things you claim TM does over System Restore. But it doesn't require you to have an external drive (think laptops for example.. ). It doesn't require you to make a full first backup to start making copies of your files. It is way more granular both in time and space.. you can restore a previous change you made on a document within a single hour, wereas TM only makes copies every other hour; and it only stores block level changes, while TM copies the full file again (so if you edit a movie file, you get the full thing duplicated). If you need external backups you can use different media on Vista, while TM forces you to use an external drive.

      The only downside of Vista here is that the full capabilities are not enabled on Home Basic and Premium SKUs, but buying a Mac doesn't solve the cash problem here, since the difference in prices between Vista versions is way less than buying a full new Mac just to enjoy TM "in every OSX copy".
    • deadbaby, on 01/14/2008, -0/+7^^ Can you backup to a different volume? Because that's kinda the whole point. Backing up to the same disk is pointless. Might as well not even bother.
    • avihappy, on 01/14/2008, -2/+5System Restore does NOT backup documents. It only backs up SYSTEM FILES.
    • starkes, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1then theres linux, where i can put a hard drive in without rebooting
      do that ***** on a mac.
  • thatcrazycommie, on 01/14/2008, -14/+7Does PC not know that he's had System Restore for years?
    • RaiKitsune, on 01/14/2008, -1/+7System restore only backs up system settings and a few system-related files, not things like documents and pictures.
      • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Like backup does?
      • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -1/+1Which is why we have Previous Versions and the Volume Shadow Copy Service in Server '03, '08, and most importantly: Vista.
  • gquaglia, on 01/14/2008, -10/+5Sure it looks like a great feature and anyone who knows Macs has heard of Time Machine. No reason for this to be a front page digg story. Buried for lameness.
    PS I have a Mac.
    • ThreeDee912, on 01/14/2008, -2/+2But the ad is targeting non-mac users.
      • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -1/+2No... apples add campaign for as long as I can remember is designed to prevent defections....
      • gquaglia, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1The commercial is fine, but the commercial doesn't need to be digg front page news.
  • CannedMango, on 01/14/2008, -8/+8It's amazing how well they've sustained this line of advertising. Usually a series of ads, no matter how clever they are when they start wind up degrading, getting annoying or just end up repeating themselves.

    These have stayed fresh enough for people to still enjoy them (though many would argue the "Window's Sucks" theme *is* in fact repetitive, people don't seem to get tired of it).
  • and303, on 01/14/2008, -10/+4Mac's continuing deceptive ways of implying to people that Mac has features a PC doesn't without actually saying it and facing more ad suits. Genius, but annoying.
  • mymate, on 01/14/2008, -5/+5i get this feature but i have to say - the reason i delete is to free up space; but with time machine your not really deleting are you? just moving the file? correct me if im wrong
    • DigDugDigger, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2You can delete files in Time Machine like so...
      http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/2655/leopard_time_m ...
    • fyngyrz, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3If you delete a file, it (a) goes away from the hard drive it was on, your working drive. It (b) goes away from future backups on your external (backup) drive. It (c) remains in older backups on your external drive.

      So yes, you recover space on your working drive, space that affects how you work from day to day, how you see and interact with your filesystem, how much room you have for other stuff.

      The time machine volume also uses less space from the time forward that you delete the file -- but not the time backwards. Now, since the time machine volume will eventually fill up, the question is, what happens to the oldest data? The answer is, it is discarded. So eventually, when the lat slice of time that file existed on your drive "falls off", then the file is "really gone." Time machine (by default) backs up every hour for the last 24, every day for the last month, and every week until the backup volume is full.

      It is pretty nice to use. The drawbacks are vulnerability to volume corruption, and an inability to use some types of file servers (you can't back up to a linux or a windows partition, for instance.) Hopefully they'll address that. Leopard has a lot of problems that still need to be addressed, frankly.

      • Virgule, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1there should have a way to flag a file as "never delete"
      • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -0/+5The file system issue actually makes sense when you read about how it works. Time Machine uses "hard linking" where data written once to the hard drive is represented in multiple places in the file system. Thus, if you have a 5 MB file that remains unchanged in 5 time machine backups, those backups will only take up 5MB of space for that file, rather than the 25MB you'd assume. It's kind of hard to wrap your head around, but it's very smart and makes it easy to look inside the backup folder manually should you or a third party app want to rather than using the time machine interface.

        The problem with other file systems is that they might not support the feature of hard linking in the way time machine was programmed. The Linux filesystems wouldn't be an issue, but programming for them would add more settings and features that would complicate things and possibly intimidate users who really should be backing up. Plus, it'd be a feature I don't think many people would use. People who want that sort of set up would want an enterprise backup system rather than a consumer one like Time Machine, elegant as it is.
  • daxsymbiont, on 01/14/2008, -17/+91st, why does digg have to give free advertising to apple.
    2nd, glad to see mac os getting features of the 90s today.
  • cg06vx, on 01/14/2008, -13/+6Windows has had a backup program since windows 95
    Start Menu, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Backup Utility
    • jads, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1The Mac has had it for years as well. This version just makes it simpler for those who have never backed up.
  • KyleMistry, on 01/14/2008, -15/+7Know what I'm surprised at? Nobody's mentioned the Windows Shadow Copy backup system yet. I'm scrolling through these comments, and I haven't seen anyone mention it. Not once. Nothing.
    • DavisCollins, on 01/14/2008, -2/+14Oh, you mean not counting the two or three comments above that talk about Shadow Copy?
  • senatorpjt, on 01/14/2008, -8/+2Strange that I own a mac, love John Hodgman, hate PC's and Justin Long.
    • gquaglia, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Thats because Justin Long is a tool.
  • digitallysick, on 01/14/2008, -6/+3Time Machine is idiot proof. But, its taking up a hole spare 80gb harddrive i have, i think im going to partition it and let it take up maybe 40gb instead. I don't really have a reason to back up that far, because i already have an external HD
    • journeyman2011, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Naw, you can still store files on that drive. TM creates a folder on the external and doesn't use up more space than what it needs. I have a 1 tera backup drive and can still use about 250 gigs for anything else I want.
      • quantumstatejim, on 01/14/2008, -1/+0So from that I can logically conclude that time machine is taking up an astounding 750 GB of space. That is incredible. And to think that I have been using my PC from years with only 40 GB main hard drive and a 10 GB hard drive for my backup. Perhaps the reason is because I only back up my personal data because that is the only thing I would actually use. Of course I guess the disk space taken up by your files is probably fairly large when you keep a copy after every little change you make.
        • journeyman2011, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0Well, no :). I've just been an active youtorrent user the past few days and have stored most of everything on my main HD instead of on an external. The only space "issue" time machine has is, like you said, duplicating a file every time you make a change and it backs it up. I don't do a bunch of video or music editing so it isn't a media duplication problem. I use parallels and have a 10 GB Ubuntu image that Time Machine backs up again in its entirety whenever I make a change to it. If that's what you do or you make frequent changes to any other type of large file, Time Machine can be a bit of a hassle.

          I sometimes revert back to using rsync, a neat little UNIX utility that can make local and network backups. I haven't looked at whether it can make incremental or versioned backups but it updates a backup with any changes made since the last one. That's pretty handy if all you want is a current snapshot. Using rsync to backup over a network connection is painless, fast, and encrypted.
        • Lyph5, on 01/15/2008, -0/+1It does not duplicate files, it cross-links.
    • and303, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Thanks for keeping us posted.
  • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -10/+5Why are you deleting files you need? How do you "accidentally" delete something? And then this means nothing gets deleted on a mac,it just gets hidden from you until your dumbass remembers you need that thing you just deleted.Why bother ever deleting anything? More stupid crap for idiots that dont know how to use a computer.
    • joshwehatetech, on 01/14/2008, -3/+3It might not be deleted, you could accidently "save" over something or you are pruning your folders to get rid of crap and delete something you need. It happens to all of us sadly. That is why backups are useful.
      • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1Right click,undo?
        • manitoba98xp, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Unless you don't realize it immediately. I've never needed such a backup program (thankfully), but come on, people are fallible. A safety net (see: backup system) doesn't hurt, and Time Machine isn't a bad implementation of one.
        • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1CONFIRMATION SCREENS!!!!! Its there for a reason.
    • betrayed, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1You know. I never thought of it like that.
    • vibrokatana, on 01/14/2008, -1/+0You my friend are dumb. I delete old stuff to clean up space, every week I tidy up my documents so they are easy to access. People make mistakes, I almost deleted about 10MB of perl scripts I had made, I would have been pissed if I hadn't remembered them and finalized the deletion
      • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1but you didnt delete it,you hid it from yourself if you have a mac. How much space is this thing taking up? How many gigs am I going to use backing up everything every hour? What if I deleted something yesterday? Is it still there or does it get rewritten every hour for the hour proceeding it? Its stupid and for people that dont make sure they want to delete something,you know that confirmation screen you just ignored? Yeah,that was your chance to make sure you arent deleting important stuff.
    • jads, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2because the average computer user makes mistakes, and stupid ones at that.
    • EvilAnimator, on 01/14/2008, -1/+3No, YOU are the idiot, gradivus. Go back to playing with your xbox and shouting racial slurs.
      • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1I hate xbox. Go bakc to your kiddy computer with the clown face buttons and idiot proof software. I dont need idiot proof computers.
    • rdoger6424, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1not just accidential deletion. Had I used time machine like I should have, I wouldn't have lost 3 gigs of pictures. Also my 8 page term paper. Also everything else.
    • katieedwards, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1brilliant! why didn't we think of this before? Nobody ever does something crazy like lose their important data!! Lets just stop making backups altogether!
      Also, deleting files on Leopard doesn't just "hide things" for you...they get deleted from your computer, just stay saved on external memory..
    • ez12a, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Go you.

      The world doesnt revolve around you, last time I checked.
    • Stirk, on 01/15/2008, -0/+1After reading several of your comments, gradivus, I have come to the conclusion that you do not understand how time machine works. Please read up on the matter and get back to me with an intelligent reply.
  • damndj, on 01/14/2008, -2/+20Time machine is not just for dummies who accidently delete a file AND empty the recycle bin. Consider that sometimes applications get corrupted, or files you're working with become damaged. Time Machine can save a lot of time by just quickly restoring from an hour ago.

    I've used it a few times for instances such as this and I think to myself, "What a nice feature". You may not need it all the time, but when you do, you'll be thankful you turned it on.


    • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -3/+2raid setup?
      • jads, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3For the average consumer... really? Do you really think Jonny Consumer is going to get their first Mac (or indeed computer) and say, right - now I'm wanting to backup so let's get me a RAID system.
      • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -0/+9raid is for redundancy, not backups...
      • MioTheGreat, on 01/14/2008, -1/+6No, that won't help if an app corrupts a file by crashing mid-write.

        But Previous Versions in Vista certainly will.
      • manitoba98xp, on 01/14/2008, -1/+2Costs more, isn't easy for "average" users to set up.
    • rebotfc, on 01/14/2008, -3/+2Or alternatively you open a file, do some crap to it and hit Cmd-S to save.
    • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2Plus, Time Machine makes you more willing to delete files that are unimportant but you might have worried about otherwise. My Documents directory is a whole lot cleaner now that I don't have to second guess myself so much before deleting things.
      • quantumstatejim, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0This functionality was available with the common recycle bin feature. Since the time machine uses at least as much space as the recycle bin when storing the 'deleted' files I don't know why you missed doing this for so many years.
    • smpx, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I don't know, I've had a problem with an app before that I tried to uninstall and reinstall. After reinstall it just stopped working, then I remembered time machine. It was pretty straightforward to restore it and pretty much fix itself.
    • dremelofdeath, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Ever had a typo in a makefile that "cleans" your whole directory? Yeah. rm -rF doesn't have a Recycle Bin.
  • vonskippy, on 01/14/2008, -9/+13Wow, version controlled backups, is there anything Steve Jobs can't invent???
  • jads, on 01/14/2008, -4/+30Good lord, how many comments are stating "Windows or whatever has had backup for years!" - so has the Mac, or any other platform. The difference is that Time Machine requires no user interaction or scheduling, it will just do it. Do you know how many people actually backup? It isn't many, it's estimated at around 4% of computer users regularly backup. That's pitiful. Now that's not just the average consumer taking data for granted, I've seen plenty of failed drives from supposedly 'technical' people who never, ever backed up and were literally in tears when they had the news broken to them that they'd lost all data.

    Apart from the versioning, Time Machine isn't trying to be more than a Backup, it's trying to make it as transparent as possible. People with Leopard now have no real excuse not to backup. You just plug in an external drive, tell Time Machine to use it, then that's it. There's no schedule to set, no folders and files to pick.

    It also has a form of versioning, so if you screw up a picture and save it, you can always go back to the original one even if it was saved months later.
    • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -8/+1Right sort of like when I ran Backup the first time, it just started backing things up every day after that???
      • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -1/+4You don't get it. Time Machine isn't hidden in System Settings/Control Panel. It directly asks the user when they plug in an external hard drive if they want to use it to back up. It makes sure back up isn't scary, by simply offering an "ON" switch and a list of files to exclude. And it makes it useful by letting you restore anything from the entire system to one file. And it makes it fun by using an interface that shows its function via metaphor.

        Time machine is simply an hourly backup of files that have changed with searching between versions of files. But it does this extremely well, so much better than anything that's come bundled with a consumer OS before it. Also, it is the first to make it easy for anyone to do it. I think you could set up a backup with just two clicks using Time Machine.
        • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -4/+1OMG thats lame. My mom uses Backup. They only thing you proved is you are more of a wuss than my mom. Launch Vista backup(type 'backup' into the start bar, no nagging popups when you plug in a new drive), and click next until you click finish. Done.
          When you want to restore a computer, because a meteor hit it, put the vista disk in the drive, and point it at the vista backup image. 20 minutes later you are done. Also, and it is such a small thing, and Microsoft is not prone to hyping up small things the way apple does, Vista premium and beyond have shadow copy built right into the restore agent. So you goofed and changed a file 20 minutes ago. Fixed, done. Better hope your TM had the chance to run your backup again...

          Just sayin since you are splitting hairs about the number of clicks with the mouse.
          OMG lame.
        • jads, on 01/14/2008, -2/+2But does it offer versioning? Or use within applications? If you delete a contact in Vista, can you simply click a button and find that deleted contact without leaving the app? There are features Time Machine has that are similar to Vista, but there are features that Vista doesn't have either too.
          • B1663r, on 01/14/2008, -2/+1Not only does it offer versioning, but it offers better versioning than TM. DUH. Once you getinto the backup restore utility, you get at the shadow copies, which gives you all the different version. Which works better than the once an hour backups that TM gives you.
        • Worldchrisis, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Control Panel is a hiding place now?
    • bovox, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1"People with Leopard now have no real excuse not to backup."

      How about the fact that Time Machine will not work with File Vault enabled? Data Security is more important to me than file versioning. I'm forced to backup the old way and turning Time Machine off.
      • jads, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1Unfortunately there are going to be times when Time Machine isn't going to be suitable. Though if you are running another piece of backup software whilst using FileVault, your backups won't be secure. All FileVault does is encrypt/decrypt your home folder with a random cypher when you login and logout. It literally creates an encrypted disk image. Whilst logged in, any backups you do are not secure. If you forget your password and don't have either the master password to hand or didn't set one, you've just lost all your data.

        Plus, FileVault almosts doubles the size of your home folder as the .sparseimage disk image is always on the machine.
  • Arthaven, on 01/14/2008, -11/+4Mac, please top being so condescending. XP has had this feature under the name of SYSTEM RESTORE for quite some time. It may not be as fancy and pretty but it does the job. I remember when Command + Tab was the newest, awesomest thing for OSX and windows was already doing it in Win 98 as Alt + Tab.
    • EvilAnimator, on 01/14/2008, -1/+6System restore is not nearly the same thing, Einstein.
      • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -6/+2yes it is. Its like claiming starbucks isnt the same coffee as any other over priced $4 latte. It is,get over yourself. Mac is for tards that need to be saved from themselves.
        • DarkDx, on 01/14/2008, -0/+5how is it exactly the same thing? System restore backups system files... not your documents or pictures.
        • Davers, on 01/14/2008, -3/+1When I want to save my documents and pictures, I don't delete them. I guess Mac users don't think that way.
          • jasongdx, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3Accidental overwrites. It happens, maybe not a lot, but it does.
          • TVarmy, on 01/14/2008, -0/+3So, you never, ever screw up? You never accidentally delete a report you thought was old but was actually a current project? I'm amazed. PC users are perfect to make up for their flawed OS.
          • rdoger6424, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2@TVarmy
            don't forget that his disks are made of pure adamantium and thus immune to failure
          • ez12a, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1You might not, but your little toddler sister, or your conniving friends might.
      • BlueStarr, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1gradivus...no it ***** isn't. you've never used Time Machine so you wouldn't ***** know. idiot.
  • ThunkDifferent, on 01/14/2008, -8/+2Time machines takes up quite a lot of hard drive space... another popular digg says that time doesn't exists, hmmm. http://ThunkDifferent.com
  • gradivus, on 01/14/2008, -9/+1 Its stupid and for people that dont make sure they want to delete something. You know that confirmation screen you just ignored? Yeah,that was your chance to make sure you arent deleting important stuff. And did you just empty the recycle bin? Well there was chance number 2 with a confirmation screen. Thanks, but no thanks,I dont need training wheels on my computer.
    • matyrice, on 01/14/2008, -2/+2You're a ***** douchebag. Read previous comments before submitting to avoid sounding like a retard next time.
    • avihappy, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I want to see what you do when your hard drive breaks. Also, you can retrieve files you made unintentional changes to, like a script gone wrong or Quickbooks deleting your Desktop. And when a file gets corrupted, no worry, just get it back.
    • zoom1928, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1If you delete a file on a Mac the standard way, it doesn't get copied to the trash can. You have no way to restore it unless you happened to use a program called Finder when you deleted the file. That program will copy files to the trash can. It sucks that the normal unlink() system call or delete command(rm) in OSX doesn't support the trash can.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 94 of 94 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.