Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

That is precisely what I was trying to say. Over time I found myself wanting and liking these replacements, but out of the box these machines work very well. CrashPlan is better because it integrates off-site and local backup and lets you manage backup for a bunch of machines (I'm responsible for backing up family computers).



Time Machine: replaced with CrashPlan

Why not use both (as I do)? Local backup is faster; remote backup is ostensibly safer from disaster. Oh, and Time Machine is invaluable if you're upgrading your boot drive or are surrendering your Mac to AppleCare.


Or you can time machine to a linux machine that does remote backups. That's my strategy.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: