"Several users have reported to me that they too have experienced serious problems with Time Machine in 10.15.3, both in making first full backups and in trying to restore from existing backups. At least one of these has been reported to Apple as a bug in Time Machine, and has apparently joined several previous reports of the same problem." (My emphasis)
Clearly there are people who have what I'd call serious bugs, including people in the comments here. But it doesn't seem to me like anyone has proved that there are replicable serious bugs with Time Machine - although of course just because it's unproved doesn't mean it's not the case, and two backup methods are clearly better than one.
I've never had an issue with Time Machine (touch wood) and have found the ability to easily revert to previous versions a godsend sometimes.
At the same time I've got Arq Backup running to back up my code folder (not everything in there is on accessible git remotes for me), but it's very heavy as well given the number of small files (code + git files). But at least it doesn't end up months out of date I guess.
Does anyone have a good backup solution for one's code folder? Large amount of small files (probably tens or hundreds of thousands. It's got a load of node_module folders as well I'm sure)
Unlike Dropbox, iCloud Sync doesn’t version files, so that’s not easily corrected, even if you spot the problem early.
I've been using Duplicacy (along with Arq and Time Machine) which is amazing at speedy backups and deduplication. However, I've found that restores require quite a bit of CLI-fu .
Considering a move to Restic, because they have a killer feature which allows one to mount a snapshot as a FUSE filesystem .
Can't you reducing the retention period so you always have some working space free, or just get an appropriately sized backup disk? Time Machine backups should run in just a few minutes automatically every hour on a well configured system.
Fun fact, rumor on the webs is that a new Arq version is in the works! (Look at their twitter feed for screenshots they sent somebody recently)
I agree with this. I also have (is) `Photos Library.photoslibrary` and (contains) `cache` as my exclusions. The exclusions have made my Arq backups less painful.
Desktop computers also back them up to another disk via backintime (an advanced backup tool built on rdiff).
This gives me realtime replication and two co-located backups. It's fire & forget kind of setup.
I have a local external drive on a usb hub. I also have Backblaze for offsite backup. Neither one requires active management
Relying on a cloud-based system always seems dodgy to me, since they sometimes get "confused" over which is the master.
I also put my code into Fossil for an easy-to-copy and move .db file.
Since then I wrote a simple frontend for Borg Backup for macOS, called Vorta. Use it for local and remote backups. Fast and works on any file system.
I've been looking for something that would let me do what Time Machine does, but to the cloud, for a while. I've been using BackBlaze, but it has poor metadata support and mandatory exclusions for a lot of stuff I want backed up including system configuration. I tried CloudBerry to BackBlaze B2 but the initial backup never completed, even after several weeks on a >250Mbps connection.
Seems a backwards, muddled, confused step (as does Catalina itself!).
APFS has native support for COW and snapshots which is way better than the directory hard links hack. They’re just slow to port Time Machine to APFS targets.
I have never waited for the first backup in Time Machine because it always happens when I am asleep. They probably take several hours. Nothing to see here, esp. since Time Machine is a totally end-user low-touch, simplistic service that, as far as I'm concerned, is one of the last truly well-engineered bits of user experience to come out of Apple. Who ever said it was fast?
Pick a file, hit enter time machine, wait a bit (I still have a time capsule, that I'll miss dearly if it goes), scroll through the history, and restore your file, its so easy.
It is the most advanced backup system I've ever used.
Edit: I think the really great thing about time machine/capsule is I don't know how it works, it's like a toaster, I plugged it in, clicked a couple of things on my Mac years ago and it still works, even after 3 Macs. I remember the days of typing tar cvf > /dev/rmt0 or some such and its a miracle in comparison.
Many consumer NAS devices can act as time capsules so you’ll be able to continue.
yah, and then I'll probably have to reformat the drives because they're ntfs or something, oh but the drivers aren't compatible, just go and download the latest, oh they don't work with this version of the OS, maybe try a different distro, and so on.
Sigh, I like the apple way.
Here's a list I started of just what I've found and could think of readily:
First of all I think old CPU instruction sets should be deprecated in finite time. Secondly I think a decade is a reasonable time frame to do it in. It too fast, not too slow.
I go my first 64-bit mac in 2006. Fourteen years later why should the Mac have to support the older slower way that doesn’t release the potential of the hardware?
I welcome a 64-bit only OS and haven’t suffered any loss from it.
Aside from that, Aperture was abandoned 5 years ago. I would blame Apple for not releasing a 64-bit version of it before dropping it, but not for dropping 32-bit altogether.
It's possible to get it running in 10.15 by removing the references to those frameworks, it breaks some of the features like slideshows but the app will still run: https://medium.com/@cormiertyshawn895/deep-dive-how-does-ret... (the author has also made an app that automates this process, I haven't tried it so I can't vouch for how well it works)
If you go to Windows and use Lightroom, why not stay on your mac?
If you go to Linux and use FSpot or Darktable, you can get them both on a Mac too.
For those of us with legacy 32bit apps and games, having them run ("slower" is in the eye of the beholder, as they perform as well as they always have) is better than not running at all.
When I run a legacy 32bit app, it's not like I'm bothered by the fact that it also loads a bunch of 32bit OS libraries. It's not like I feel like my value for money for owning the machine is restored if clicking the .app icon just shows a "Not supported" dialog box.
Aren't 32bit binaries (when not needing 64bits) slightly faster than 64bit versions due to the smaller pointer size?
But hey, I also think switch to Python 3 gave enough time to everyone to switch too and there's no shortage of people who disagree :)
This will literally NEVER happen and it makes me so sad. Apple would rather drop macOS completely then let this happen. In my opinion this is also the only reason for the T1/T2 security chips on the recent Macs. Yes I understand the other features of the T1/T2 chip (secure boot, touch id, etc) but to me these have got to be bullshit reasons. There is no reason why Apple's special little security chip should be controlling the exposure of your webcam.
So that would seem to be evidence against your theory that Apple is concerned about people running MacOS on generic hardware. While some cryptographic hardware would indeed be needed to reliably prevent such shenanigans, I'm somewhat certain they could sabotage such systems with minimal effort and raise the pain to levels where it's just not worth it.
They don't even bother to, say, check the CPU and refuse to run on AMD. That could probably be done in a single line of sourcecode. Not doing anything like that and instead designing custom silicone just isn't rational behaviour.
Er, yes there is. The custom image signal processor on the T2 enables the face detection feature that drives tone and white balance mapping _on_ _faces_. That requires custom silicon to do in real time. The T2 is a custom ARM chip, so I expect the image signal processor is a subsystem taken from one of the recent iPhone chips, which also have hardware enabled dynamic face detection and mapping.
The Tx chips may indeed spell the end of hackintoshes (I hope not, but who knows) but I’m sure hackintoshes played no role in any decision to use them.
Oh wait it's 2020, sorry, that's not playing anymore. What's this year's RDF spin?
(I expect the problem is that you mainly pay for the hardware, not so much the software. At some Apple found out that if the hardware is nice enough, the software can be a bit shit, and people won't mind.)
And I'm willing to admit that there have been more annoyances in the OS. But having recently tried Windows and Linux again for the first time in over a decade, I can report that nothing much has changed in their relative standings. Just the Windows Activation process alone is a crime against customers. System settings/Utilities/etc are some abomination of cruft accumulated over decades, in a conglomerate of interfaces that seem to try to emulate websites, and sometimes actually are websites that somehow make changes to your system.
Assume user MAIN and user WORK:
1) Open Macbook
2) Login prompt for MAIN shows, "Switch User" button below
3) Click "Switch User", now prompt with logins for MAIN and WORK shows
4) Click and successfully login to WORK, the desktop for WORK now shows
--- Getting weird now
5) Get flashing image of desktop of user MAIN (?)
6) Get login prompt for user MAIN (??)
7) Click cancel, bounce back to login screen with MAIN and WORK (???)
8) Login to WORK again, good to go from here.
Switching between users on macOS is not just weird sometimes but at least it feels downright insecure when I am able to see flashing images of MAIN when I am logged into WORK.
There are just too damn many bugs.
In everything. Operating systems, software, services, built-in apps, even their developer tools and even in their frameworks and the Swift language itself.
I run into at least one bug literally every day. Someone could write a daily blog about this. Core features like keyboard input, text selection, AirDrop, photo picker, iCloud Drive etc. are erratic and unreliable. It's a death by thousand cuts. Apple is no longer the clear best, just the least worst.
I love the 16" MBP though, and restoring it to the exact state as my previous 15" MBP from a Time Machine backup was smooth and effortless. But when I tried to backup the new system, it seemed to ignore the existing backup I had just restored from, proceeding to write 300+ GB all over again and not showing the older snapshots in the UI.
Having said that, I am probably not going to upgrade to catalina anytime soon (at least not until Catalina+1 macOS gets first major patch release).
Why? Well my reasoning is that lots of stuff magically isn’t going to recompile itself from 32bit to 64bit. I can probably help with that while being on Mojave.
I thought I was doing a general software update, half an hour of waiting later and I’ve got Catalina now.
Every time at some point it starts clearing out a corrupted backup history due to some issues its found with its own backup. Frankly, I don't trust it anymore, I just set it up for convenience and every other week I start a restic backup (https://restic.net/).
I'd say Time Machine seems like one of these programs neglected by a vendor.
Solid well-maintained software.
One nice differentiating feature is that it fully supports bootable backups.
the interface is a bit weird but works well enough
Arq is great, but my quibble with it is that, like all third-party backup solutions, it relies on scanning the file system. Any such program, Arq included, will take a very long time to run on a hard drive where absolutely nothing has changed.
What Time Machine does is use macOS's local database of pending changes, FSEvents. On the next backup cycle, it knows what's changed and doesn't need to scan unless the FSEvents database is missing or corrupt.
I'm looking forward to a time when Time Machine can take advantage of file system snapshotting, which apparently was a design goal for APFS. Snapshotting is used for Apple's Software Restore function now, but the Time Machine parts weren't ready for Catalina .
On Linux I use restic, which is also great, but on macOS Arq is just more seamless.
I am fine with using the CLI for setup but unless I closely monitor systemd timers, backups could be failing silently and I would not notice.
I trust my SuperDuper local backups much more though. SuperDuper is amazing.
Backing up to local storage, or through ethernet has worked, but when backing up via WiFi it routinely comes up with the "Time Machine needs to recreate your backup" message.
Furthermore Time Machine insisted (probably still does) on using the deprecated AFP protocol that even Apple no longer maintains.
A backup that cannot be trusted is not a backup, so years ago i switched to Arq Backup (https://www.arqbackup.com/) instead. While not as "polished" as Time Machine (Restore functionality could _really_ use some work) it actually works, and in all my years of using it, i have never experienced a failed repository.
It doesn't look like it works even between macs via SMB to me.
Mind, the laptop is on 10.14 and the desktop on 10.13, so that may be a problem.
(Assuming you mean APFS) Not true. I have Openmediavault running on my raspberry pi 4 and the two drives i use for dual-backup are both ext4. (can really recommend RPI4+OMV for time machine btw)
I suspect that's because the Time Machine solutions for NASes create a sparse bundle that has a HFS+ (or APFS, I'm not up-to-date) partition within.
"The first backup is slow" is not a new bug in 10.15.3. I had that issue in at least 10.14 as well, and who knows which other versions. Time Machine GUI is great; but for backups off the device you need NetAtalk (which has been reverse engineered though). The TM GUI would've been great with ZFS back in the days, if that deal went through. It did not. APFS does not support deduplication.
There's a bunch of Time Machine GUI FOSS applications which are inspired by Time Machine GUI, for Linux. Not sure which one works best, or if they work on macOS.
Painfully I just ran into a serious restore bug with Catalina. I did a clean install of Catalina and migrated from a Time Machine backup using Migration Assistant. The migration hung (no progress after 3h) so I hit the cancel button.
I’m now unable to log in to my box. Migration assistant migrated some of my data over since my profile picture changed from a stock Catalina tennis ball photo to the custom one I used on Mojave. I would have expected cancelling to not move ANY data over. Guessing the partial copy somehow messed up my ability to log in.
Ever worse: I wasn’t using iCloud to reset my password. And the recovery code I threw in 1Password just... isn’t in 1P any longer. When Catalina provides the recovery code it never said that this was the on my way to reset your password if you lose your login pass (or if it locks you out).
I can’t even do another clean install because Catalina asks you for your account password in Recovery mode.
So: can’t login because Catalina messed up a migration, and I’m not using iCloud and don’t have the recovery code.
The solution from Apple support is to take my machine into the Genius Bar.
I’m hating some Catalina product manager (because I cant reset my password) and dev team (because of the migration bug that corrupted my login password) right now.
I was a fervent fan of apple around 2010, with Snow Leopard and iPhone 4. It really "just worked".
Now it just doesn't.
I made full switch over to macOS for my workstations (including laptops) as of 2018 and while it has been better, I've slowly watched macOS degrade. Multiple monitor support has gotten worse, displays over thunderbolt 3 have gotten worse, Time Machine is now unusable, wallpapers reset on reboot. Disk Utility while not as bad some previous versions is still bug-laden. There are also plenty of other issues I can't immediately recall.
I switched to macOS because POSIX on Windows at the time was bad and Linux desktop is still a buggy affair. However I might hit a breaking point soon if Apple can't fix things. Linux Desktop is worse, but not by much.
Some people clearly are having problems however it's hard to get a handle on how widespread this really is.
If I were the Apple CEO, there needs to be a pause in new features in all platforms in order to fix what's broken, rather that just adding new features, ripping things apart and kicking the technical debt can down the road to continue snowballing.
Even gnome isn’t as bad as OS X IMO. If you use a decent DE like fvwm or xfce it’s much better.
The problem everyone has is that their favorite mac software doesn’t have a Linux port and a lot of the alternatives are less sexy (and sometimes way worse.)
It's many times worse, and I say this as a daily GNOME user. Well, perhaps not in terms of bugs ;). Qualms compared to macOS:
- They removed menus (with discoverable shortcuts) and replaced them by stupid hamburger menus that miss a lot of the prior functionality. (If menus bother you, just move them into the system tray.)
- They removed system tray icons. There are extensions, but they only work for a subset of the applications that I use and quite badly.
- Keyboard shortcuts are inconsistent between applications.
- Inconsistent ways to make applications full-screen.
- Removed desktop icons (I use the desktop as a short-term cache of stuff that I want to be able to open quickly).
- A lot of things are not configure through the settings applications. Some additional things can be configured through gnome-tweaks.
- Much worse noise cancellation than macOS.
- Video playback is not hardware accelerated in web browsers (not GNOME's fault).
- The GNOME applications are much less usable. E.g. most (all?) types of remote calendars can not be added to Gnome Calendar. You have to go through some archaic (compared to macOS) setup in Evolution (in my case I had to add multiple calendars from one account one by one). Evince misses a lot of basic operations that Preview support (such as reordering pages in a PDF.
I use GNOME because it is the only traditional desktop environment that has great Wayland and HiDPI support. Linux is great, but the Linux desktop is a tire fire compared to macOS.
Edit: I want to add that the freelance gigs I'm doing are mostly using Ubuntu desktops, and it's been working great in recent years, so for me, 2018 was the year of the Linux desktop. At a FinTech I worked last year, the employer gave the staff the choice of using Mac OS or Ubuntu, and most (myself included) opted for Ubuntu; performed very well as a working horse
Does it work the way you're used to? For me, yes. I'm used to it and used to a workflow using it. If you're used to something else, then no, you're not. The end.
We must be living in different universes ;). I cannot comment on Microsoft Windows, since I have never really used it.
I'm used to it and used to a workflow using it. If you're used to something else, then no, you're not.
For reference: I have used macOS since 2007 and GNOME since before 1.0.0. Mid 2000s GNOME 2 was really awesome. Sure, it had its problems, but from the perspective of usability and completeness it was awesome. For years Sun Microsystems poured money into GNOME 2 usability studies and improvements, because it was supposed to replace CDE on Solaris.
Edit: should add that I am waiting until KDE on Wayland is well supported on NixOS. I have recently tried KDE on X.org a bit and it seems like it would be a leap forward for me.
I used gnome 2 for many years. It's great. Loved it. No desire to go back at all. Did not find Sun moving the main menu item to the bottom left and calling it start a breakthrough in usability at all. I use osx semi-regularly. Not a pleasant change when I do. I use windows almost never and when I do my god the awful.
Try and use any desktop the same way you would use something different and it will be inferior to something different. Good luck.
- It is very quick in comparison to macOS, it makes the 6 year old feel hardware new
- Your experience of bugs depends on what you do of course, but from my personal experience it is much stabler than macOS
- A lot of what I use is terminal based, or electron based, so I really don't have an issue with not finding software
- The install process was seamless. I realise this is truer for old hardware than it is for new hardware, but given that my 2014 air was getting unuseably laggy with macOS, the choice was between buying a new, extremely expensive macbook to get acceptable performance, or using my old hardware with linux. If I were to replace it, I would do so by buying a cheaper, linux supporting laptop rather than paying for a macbook
Despite the great work done on the linux desktop, Ubuntu 19.10 doesn't quite measure up to the 10.5-10.7 "golden era" of stable, elegant, developer friendly macOS for me, but it comes a lot closer than the last few macOS versions have.
Also, I don't think Sway is an alternative for most macOS desktop users.
I'm not using scaling from sway/wayland, but I basically just use emacs, firefox and alacritty, so changing those apps is all I need to do to get scaling done.
It seems to reset itself automatically.
I keep my files organized in specific directories in my homedir, “dev”, and “personal”. I would like those to be backed up and nothing else.
My guess is that something like this would be much less prone to bugs and much quicker to run.
I realize some people have a perfect and/or high complex setup that they want to be able to come back to if their system fails, but my experience over the last 10 years has taught me that restoring from a time machine back up is extremely rare.
I would rather just make sure my important files are backed up (at the click of a button, or automatically) and I can easily rebuild my system by reinstalling things from scratch.
Does anyone know the name of that app in the blog post, looks like some kind of TM health checker?
It was impossible for me host the backups reliably from a Linux computer though.
I had to discover this after wiping my disk and losing three years of personal projects / test / scripts in the process.
Was my own fault for not checking but still ... fun times.
The only thing that got me, is that if you configure Arq to use SSH on Windows, you have to enter disk volumes as path.
For example, if you want your backups to appear on Windows in D:\BigDisk\Backups then configure Arq to back up to /D/BigDisk/Backups. That's not an Arq thing, that's how the OpenSSH server interprets paths on Windows.
Along with iOS Time Capsule. Instead they keep pushing their "Cloud" Solution.
- You may not have all your source code repos synced locally. Maybe you think you do but forgot one.
- You may keep your phone in your computer bag and lose both at once (both your 2fa and your code).
- You may drop your phone in the ground and fail to get access to your password manager.
Having a backup strategy which involves you not breaking a piece of glass (aka phone) you play with while sitting on the toilet is a bit risky.
How can I get all the photos I’ve ever had on my laptop without going through each revision? I wish TM worked like rsync and some added metadata files for functionality. I’m literally having to zip each and every previous version which takes days and unzip those files on a hard drive to eventually have a replica of my current macOS filesystem with all the files I’ve had in the past conglomerated there
I do love Backblaze though. It’s like time machine in the cloud.
I don’t work there and deliberately not posting any referral code type stuff
It appears to back up the state of machine and has allowed me to recover access to old google accounts by formatting the MBP and restoring it to 3yr old TM backup point.
Can backblaze let me restore my MBP to its state (including firefox/chrome logins, keyring/keychain passwords) as it was on Feb 12, 2018?
The Backblaze consumer product is unlikely to be able to do so, with all the files that they automatically exclude: https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217665388-What-...
Everything is a file in macOS.
There's no magic, nothing hidden and nothing special about TM.
Also how do I restore that backup to a blank MBP/disk so that I get the same state of affairs as I had on Feb 12th 2018?
The feature I want is exactly as advertised by TimeMachine : an ability to restore a blank MBP/hdd to a point in time on the Time Machine backup timeline. See: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203981#macos
Apparently, you can pay backblaze $$ and they'll ship you a USB drive assuming you backed up your TimeMachine to backblaze:
So, I might as well have a local USB drive taking TM backups. Point is, Time Machine has a specific utility that Backblaze cannot provide. I am not sure if anything like this is even possible on Windows?
Agreed on other points about offline storage and offsite backups. I just think TM has its place and backblaze/syncthing has its own use case. My argument is you can’t replace one with another.