What is Digg?82 Comments
- kurupttek, on 07/24/2008, -0/+32http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,148765 ...
all in one page - Newedge14, on 07/24/2008, -1/+23I feel sketchy about using back-up software, I just put my stuff on my external hard-drive once a month
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -1/+10Use rsync. I have decapitated my Gentoo machine a couple of times and the restoring was easy. Rsync is Free Software. Free in the GNU sense.
- rdhazrd, on 07/24/2008, -4/+13MS Office? I guess there are more features than most people use!
- darny, on 07/24/2008, -0/+9SyncBackSE by 2brightsparks is both great and cheap. It comes with a 30-day free trial. Try it. You will love it.
- BrokenVisage, on 07/24/2008, -1/+9Still have to buy a Mac to use it.
- djs71a, on 07/24/2008, -0/+7I have not tied this, but heard good things about it, DriveImage XML:
http://www.runtime.org/driveimage-xml.htm - teh_spazz, on 07/24/2008, -2/+8No Acronis? What kind of list is this?
- darkzealot89, on 07/24/2008, -0/+6I recommend the following Apps...
SyncToy
SyncBack (Great FTP BackUp)
Jungle Disk (Can't Beat Amazon S3 costs!)
I use SyncToy to Sync across network shares in a LAN. I use SyncBack to copy files to a FTP server, and to back up entire websites onto a local drive. Finally, Jungle Disk is where I back up my media and documents, in case of a major disaster. I highly recommend JungleDisk since the price is great, and users don't have to fool with attaching external HDDs or the eventual failure of the external HDD. - VandyB, on 07/24/2008, -0/+6Well I found it funny.
- michaeldpotter, on 07/24/2008, -5/+10I'm pretty happy with Time Machine on my Mac. I've used it to restore a few things, and it's worked like a charm. And before you start flaming that it doesn't do this, or doesn't do that, I'm just pointing out that it's a good basic backup program that is suitable for a lot of people. And hey, at not additional cost, the price is right.
- pschommer, on 07/24/2008, -0/+5SyncToy 2.0 from Microsoft is good. If you try it, make sure it's the updated version. The first iteration was OK, but 2.0 is much improved. The best improvement is the ability to rename backup entries.
Always on the lookout for something better, I'm now using Comodo BackUp. It works equally well, but it doesn't have the flashy front-end that a newer piece of Microsoft software has.
My needs are simple and they both handle the task of backing up to external drives. Either of these should work just fine for you. It will probably come down to a personal preference. - griz, on 07/24/2008, -0/+4At least you still make an attempt at backup, most people don't ever bother. But I would recommend having a second HD that you back up to and take off site. Especially if you have irreplaceable data.
- netdroid9, on 07/24/2008, -0/+4Most decent backup software do pretty much exactly that; except they skip stuff that hasn't changed since the last backup (IE movies and music and stuff)
- suoicilggiD, on 07/24/2008, -4/+8Copy and paste??
- YourFuzzyGod, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3You may also want to look at Cobain Backup: http://www.educ.umu.se/~cobian/cobianbackup.htm. Very easy to use, free and version 8 is open source.
- griz, on 07/24/2008, -2/+5Does Windows have something comparable to rsync? Sure it takes some learning, but having a cron job run in the background taking care of your backup is a good feeling.
I went one step further on my mac and installed LFTP available through Darwin Ports. It allows you to mirror a local folder from your mac up to an FTP server. I have it back up my entire photo collection to my FTP space. The initial 26GB of transfer was painful, but incrementals take less than an hour and take place in the middle of the night. I sleep much better now. - vypergts, on 07/24/2008, -2/+5WHS and TimeMachine FTW.
- gbob, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3Windows Home Server: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Home_Server
- Newedge14, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3I don't believe MS Office was even in the list, he just pulled a random pic..
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4Worst. Layout. Evar!
The article is crammed between crappy links. I would hate to see what this site looks like without adblock. - jasz, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2blatant comment abuse, here it is on one page:
http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,148765 ...
I ***** despise multi-page articles... - abandonedhero, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2DropBox is nice, but it only supports 2GB of space at the moment (that's even just for the private beta). Something a bit more dedicated for backups would be better.
That being said, DropBox is a great service. It's an easy way to keep a handful of files synced between machines. - Tenoq, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2I love my WHS. It's saved my ass a few times when I've broken a box by fiddling too much. 3 hours later - restored to last night's backup!
- timusca, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3I love Time Machine.
- KyjL, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Or better yet just go with the free version
http://www.2brightsparks.com/freeware/freeware-hub ... - blankoboy, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2True Image FTW!
- jasz, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2I love TimeMachine but what is WHS?
- doshindude, on 07/24/2008, -0/+21. Buy a terabyte external hard drive (doesn't even have to be a TB, just a few hundred gigs or so.). They are relatively cheap these days.
2. Copy all desired files over to it, creating a total mirror image of the files
3. Only plug in drive when necessary, leaving it unplugged otherwise for a totally secure/stable backup
4. ???
5. Profit! - Kelmon, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Time Machine isn't robust enough to be the only backup solution that you use since both master disk and backup are likely stored in the same location constantly. That said, it's better than nothing and has a number of advantages over traditional backup methods. Firstly, since the OS maintains a log of changes that occur in the file system, there's no searching for changes when a backup occurs and so the impact is minimal. Secondly, because Time Machine uses UNIX Hard Links, each backup appears as a complete backup so a restore does not need the usual application of a master backup and a sequence of incremental updates.
Configuration options are limited, but for a simple solution that anyone can use, it's great. Frankly, it's got me out of trouble a number of times when accidentally using the Save rather than Save As command or deleting an email that comes in useful later... - SaadGhouri, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2I agree! list is incomplete without Acronic True Image. One of the best backing up utility.
- chedabob, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Too many good features missing to warrant saving $30.
- DomZy, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2combined with crontab = win (if your backing up from a linux box)
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1Cron is great if your machine is running all of the time. Mine is off 80% of the time so I haven't automated it much. I do have the sync on a launcher. If you do it regularly it only takes a few seconds. I usually back up to an eSata drive under the assumption that I won't lose 2 drives at once. I suppose I should look at Raid mirroring.
- gettarat, on 11/25/2008, -0/+1I love Time Machine.
http://externalharddrivereviews.org/ - michaeldpotter, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1This could probably be better answered if you could expound on what you find incomplete about Time Machine. I know there are some third party tools out there that allow you to tweak how Time Machine behaves.
- rdhazrd, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Ya, I know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor - wwnexc, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1EMC Retrospect is great. It may have a bit of a learning curve to it, but once you've figured it out, it works like a charm.
- B5tKUnT1, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1Easy, free and reliable Sync program: Karen's Replicator
FTW - michaeldpotter, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1Right, and another reason to make that switch and never look back like I did.
- herculez, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1Anyone know of a good backup solution for OS X that's more complete than Time Machine?
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1I have a dos batchfile which runs rar to backup stuff. What gets into the backup is decided by a small text file.
It's been working for the last 5 years.
Rar is the best thing out there...and it works for backups too.... - timusca, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1F*** you Digg comment system. F*** you.
- x2wenty4x, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1batch file with xcopy is less of a headache and cheaper.
- FreddieD, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1This discussion seems to come up every month. So far my favorite by far as been rdiff-backup. It's simply the best I've found in terms of simplicity and reliability. All I want is my files backed up each day to an external disk. I'm not interested in fancy bells and whistles (bacula, amanda) I just want peace of mind that my files are backed up without having to spend alot of time with the actual backup software.
I have also had to do a fresh restore due to a failed disk and it couldn't have been simpler.
One last point in it's favor is that it's completely open source and isn't going away anytime soon, so I am not stuck with some commercial product that may or may not work in the future. It's "engine" is the rdiff protocol which is as ubiquitous as anything out there.
The only sticking point (for some) is that it is linux based, so you will have to have an understanding of linux (or Cygwin if you want to back up files on Windows). - michaeldpotter, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1I haven't used Rsync extensively, but I thought it was more used for keeping an exact point in time copy in another location? For example, if I run Rsync on Monday, I have an exact copy of what things were like on Monday. If I run it again on Tuesday, I have an exact copy of what things were like on Tuesday, but I have lost what things looked like on Monday. I will concede that I may be wrong here, and maybe there are some switches or something that make this more robust.
With Time Machine, you can go back to how things were on a certain day, whether that be yesterday, or two weeks ago (of course depending on how often you let it backup and such.) - MattBD, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Time Vault is a pretty good Linux equivalent, and from what I hear it's quite a bit more powerful and flexible than Time Machine. You can set it up to back up different directories with different frequency (such as once a week for a folder you don't use often, and quicker for ones you use all the time).
- commentbot, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1I use Backup Magic. Works great, and simple.
- DigitalQuartz, on 08/15/2008, -0/+1There are command line options for rsync that will make it work similar to, or exactly like Time Machine.
If you run this on tuesday:
rsync -ab --backup-dir="old/monday" source/ dest
Then for any files that have changed, the new version will be in the snapshot just like a regular rsync, but monday's version of those files will end up in a subdirectory called "old/monday". Here's a quick little script that will give you something closer to Time Machine:
#!/bin/sh
date=`date "+%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S"`
rsync -azP --link-dest=PATHTOBACKUP/current $SOURCE $HOST:PATHTOBACKUP/back-$date
ssh $HOST "rm PATHTOBACKUP/current && ln -s back-$date PATHTOBACKUP/current"
Here, you'll have a symlink to "current" which contains the latest snapshot, and you'll have one directory for each time you run a backup. Each directory contains a complete snapshot of everything. When you run rsync, though, if the file hasn't changed, it will do a hard-link to the old version of the file, so if a file doesn't change, it doesn't get written to the disk again. This is nice, because you can blow away an entire directory without worrying about loosing old files. Takes up a little more disk space, though, because you're probably talking about a lot of hard links. - Tenoq, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Only if you're stupid enough to send unencrypted data.
-
Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is