Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #24185 > unrolled thread

Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> - 2012-04-21 22:35 -0500
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2012-04-22 05:27 +0000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Leonard Blaisdell <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-04-21 22:58 -0700
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-04-23 08:31 +1200
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-04-22 16:12 -0700
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-22 17:57 +1200
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> - 2012-04-22 07:51 -0500
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-04-23 08:31 +1200
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-23 13:42 +1200
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-23 06:47 +1000
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-23 13:32 +1200
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-23 13:30 +1000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-04-22 12:19 -0400
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-23 06:50 +1000
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-23 13:39 +1200
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-04-22 16:21 -0700
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-23 13:47 +1200
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-04-22 18:58 -0700
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-23 18:48 +1200
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-04-23 18:38 +1200
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Michelle <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-04-22 18:21 +0000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Koralatov <usenet@koralatov.com> - 2012-04-22 23:24 +0000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-04-23 16:26 +0200
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Sara <saramerriman@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-23 15:52 +0100
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-04-24 07:32 +1200
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-04-24 11:18 +0200
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-04-26 00:47 -0400
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-26 18:59 +1200
              Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-04-26 19:14 -0400
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-04-26 11:20 +0200
              Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-26 20:24 +1000
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> - 2012-04-22 14:44 -0400
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2012-04-22 13:17 -0700
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-23 06:55 +1000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-04-22 17:42 -0400
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> - 2012-04-22 20:26 -0400
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Ed Anson <EdAnson@comcast.net> - 2012-04-22 21:48 -0400
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-04-22 18:59 -0700
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2012-04-22 18:23 -0400
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Koralatov <usenet@koralatov.com> - 2012-04-22 23:22 +0000
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2012-04-23 16:43 -0600
      Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2012-04-26 00:54 -0400
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-26 18:51 +1200
          Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2012-04-26 06:59 -0400
            Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-04-27 09:31 +1200
              Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2012-04-26 21:37 -0400
                Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2012-04-26 18:47 -0700
                Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-04-27 21:26 +1000
                Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> - 2012-04-27 14:08 +0000
                  Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-04-27 15:26 +0100
                    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-04-27 16:12 -0400
                Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-05-08 03:25 +0000
        Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-04-26 11:24 +0200
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2012-04-23 08:31 +1200
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done Koralatov <usenet@koralatov.com> - 2012-04-22 23:28 +0000
    Re: Backing Up - Why So Often Not Done jdear64 <jdear64@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-23 10:56 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#24286

Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> writes:

> In article <9vhcjmFs7eU1@mid.individual.net>, TaliesinSoft
> <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:
>
>> This incident was by no means the first time I have helped a person set 
>> up a backup routine. My curiosity is what is it that seems to make 
>> people not realize the importance of regular backups?
>
> In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that
> I REALLY can't do without. I do have a Time Machine backup drive now,
> but before that would just occasionally drag my iTunes library onto an
> extra drive if I happened to have one. I don't bother "backing up"
> anything else in my life, so don't really see the need with the
> computer.

Every year when I do my taxes I burn a CD for all the files going back
to 2001, and recently I've also started copying them to a thumb drive.
Very handy last year when my mini unexpectedly refused to boot in late
March.  Addresses and phone numbers all get synced to and from my Palm
(have to find a new solution to that eventually).  Other than that, when
a computer stops working I buy a new one and move on.

At work it's a different story, of course, but once I push something to
the repository it's out of my hands.

-- 
Jim Janney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24401

On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
> In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that

"Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of that 
information doesn't merit the word.

And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph 
owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."

Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files 
or the time to set up a backup system.

-- 
Wes Groleau

   “Grant me the serenity to accept those I cannot change;
    the courage to change the one I can;
    and the wisdom to know it's me.”
                                — unknown

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24403

In article <jnakdq$fif$1@dont-email.me>, none.of@your.biz wrote:
> On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
> > In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> > Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that
> 
> "Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of that 
> information doesn't merit the word.
> 
> And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph 
> owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."
> 
> Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files 
> or the time to set up a backup system.

Much of the time people get over-anxious about having lost all their
"important" files, but after a couple of months they don't even miss 90%
of the stuff they lost. Most people's hard drives have huge amounts of
stuff on them that is never used or looked at ever again.

Helpful Harry  :o)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24411

In article 
<HelpfulHarry-2604121851590001@203-118-187-174.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
 HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:

> In article <jnakdq$fif$1@dont-email.me>, none.of@your.biz wrote:
> > On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
> > > In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> > > Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that
> > 
> > "Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of that 
> > information doesn't merit the word.
> > 
> > And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph 
> > owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."
> > 
> > Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files 
> > or the time to set up a backup system.
> 
> Much of the time people get over-anxious about having lost all their
> "important" files, but after a couple of months they don't even miss 90%
> of the stuff they lost. Most people's hard drives have huge amounts of
> stuff on them that is never used or looked at ever again.

Sure, but what matters is the other 10%.

I'm sure there's lots of stuff in your home that you don't really need, 
and it's just gathering dust in the basement or garage.  But if your 
house goes up in flames, I'll bet there are some things you'll be really 
pissed to lose.  And you probably keep your most important documents in 
a safe deposit box elsewhere.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24429

In article <barmar-C5D641.06594526042012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article 
> <HelpfulHarry-2604121851590001@203-118-187-174.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
>  HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:
> > In article <jnakdq$fif$1@dont-email.me>, none.of@your.biz wrote:
> > > On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
> > > > In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> > > > Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that
> > > 
> > > "Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of that 
> > > information doesn't merit the word.
> > > 
> > > And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph 
> > > owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."
> > > 
> > > Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files 
> > > or the time to set up a backup system.
> > 
> > Much of the time people get over-anxious about having lost all their
> > "important" files, but after a couple of months they don't even miss 90%
> > of the stuff they lost. Most people's hard drives have huge amounts of
> > stuff on them that is never used or looked at ever again.
> 
> Sure, but what matters is the other 10%.
> 
> I'm sure there's lots of stuff in your home that you don't really need, 
> and it's just gathering dust in the basement or garage.  But if your 
> house goes up in flames, I'll bet there are some things you'll be really 
> pissed to lose.  And you probably keep your most important documents in 
> a safe deposit box elsewhere.

There's no things I can think of that are really worth worrying about, and
there's no safe deposit box. You can always buy new things (even though
the greedy insurance companies will worm their way out of paying for as
much as they can and only pay about 20% of what the rest is worth!).

Helpful Harry  :o)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24438

In article 
<HelpfulHarry-2704120931090001@203-118-187-211.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
 HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:

> In article <barmar-C5D641.06594526042012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > In article 
> > <HelpfulHarry-2604121851590001@203-118-187-174.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
> >  HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:
> > > In article <jnakdq$fif$1@dont-email.me>, none.of@your.biz wrote:
> > > > On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
> > > > > In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
> > > > > Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data 
> > > > > that
> > > > 
> > > > "Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of 
> > > > that 
> > > > information doesn't merit the word.
> > > > 
> > > > And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph 
> > > > owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."
> > > > 
> > > > Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files 
> > > > or the time to set up a backup system.
> > > 
> > > Much of the time people get over-anxious about having lost all their
> > > "important" files, but after a couple of months they don't even miss 90%
> > > of the stuff they lost. Most people's hard drives have huge amounts of
> > > stuff on them that is never used or looked at ever again.
> > 
> > Sure, but what matters is the other 10%.
> > 
> > I'm sure there's lots of stuff in your home that you don't really need, 
> > and it's just gathering dust in the basement or garage.  But if your 
> > house goes up in flames, I'll bet there are some things you'll be really 
> > pissed to lose.  And you probably keep your most important documents in 
> > a safe deposit box elsewhere.
> 
> There's no things I can think of that are really worth worrying about, and
> there's no safe deposit box. You can always buy new things (even though
> the greedy insurance companies will worm their way out of paying for as
> much as they can and only pay about 20% of what the rest is worth!).

You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?  That's the 
main reason I got mine.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24439

Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?  That's the 
> main reason I got mine.

You can get officially certified replacement copies from the county
recorder for a quite nominal fee, at least around here. I did so
recently when the escrow agent for a rental I recently bought badly
screwed up my address and the original didn't make it to me. I think it
cost me something like $9. (I later did track down the original after
the post office bounded it back to the county recorder).

I've also got a scanned copy (though that makes it an unofficial copy)
as a pdf, which gets backed up off-site by CrashPlan.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24442

In article <barmar-CED504.21374426042012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?  That's the 
> main reason I got mine.

When I sold a house after decades, I went to the bank and, amazingly, 
they fished it out from wherever they were keeping it safe. Often 
wondered how important the actual paper is. In fact, it is not as 
depicted in old westerns where it is everything, possession being 
crucial. Nowadays, it is more complicated and it is your history that 
counts, it is not the sole evidence of your ownership. 

But still, you go to a lot of trouble without it.

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24451

Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:

>You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?

The county keeps your deed in a safe location.  And that's the only
deed that counts.

-- 
dhs spencer@panix.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24452

In article <jne99b$kqb$5@reader1.panix.com>,
 David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:

> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> 
> >You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?
> 
> The county keeps your deed in a safe location.  And that's the only
> deed that counts.

No it doesn't. The Land Registry has this plot of land registered to me, 
but the title deeds are with my solicitor.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24458

On 2012-04-27 10:26 , Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <jne99b$kqb$5@reader1.panix.com>,
> David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>>
>> >You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?
>>
>> The county keeps your deed in a safe location. And that's the only
>> deed that counts.
>
> No it doesn't. The Land Registry has this plot of land registered to me,
> but the title deeds are with my solicitor.

This varies from country to country and at lower (state/provincial) 
levels too.

-- 
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
  I said I didn't know."
                           -Samuel Clemens.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24970

In article <barmar-CED504.21374426042012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Barry Margolin  <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>You don't keep the deed to the house in a safe location?  That's the 
>main reason I got mine.

Sure, it's on file with the county.


-- 
The problem with socialism is there's always 
someone with less ability and more need.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24407

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:54:17 -0400, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 04-22-2012 14:44, Invid Fan wrote:
>> In the end, for many of us what's on the computer is disposable.
>> Seriously, there's nothing that can't just be reinstalled, no data that
> 
> "Just" be reinstalled?  Repeating the effort it took to get some of that
> information doesn't merit the word.

Hah!  It took me two full days work to reinstall my first NT4 system, 
with all the apps and settings I wanted.
 
> And a ten-year-old scan of a deteriorating eighty-year-old photograph
> owned by someone now deceased can't "just be reinstalled."
> 
> Each person has to decide for himself which is more valuable, the files
> or the time to set up a backup system.

I've got over 500 GB sitting around here.  Restoring that little lot will 
take 6 hours or more.  Fine if I can leave it running overnight, but 
these things aren't always plannable.

-- 
Paul Sture

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24208

TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:

> I recently spent some time with a person who although a Mac user for 
> about 20 years had never performed a backup of his system but finally
> decided to do so. His thought was to do a backup once a month but I 
> convinced him to do one late each evening. I had him install 
> SuperDuper! to backup to a newly purchased external hard drive. The 
> choice of SuperDuper! over other alternatives was simply that it is the
> one with which I am most familiar. Everything is now running fine.
> 
> This incident was by no means the first time I have helped a person set
> up a backup routine. My curiosity is what is it that seems to make 
> people not realize the importance of regular backups?

Usually IME it's simply because a) by random chance they've not lost
anything important yet, or b) they treat losing something important as
something so unlikely it'll never happen to them again, c) they think
backup is too hard or too expensive and amazingly put up with occasional
losses. Or even perhaps d) they're one of those people who never did
store anything important digitally in the first place because they do
next to nothing there any way.

FWIW I'm not sure I'd have used cloning one's HD as someone's only
backup. An incremental backup that preserves changes and deleted files
(for as long the user wants or has space for) seems the best to me -
something like Time Machine or the excellent CrashPlan.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24221

On 2012-04-22, TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:
> This incident was by no means the first time I have helped a person set 
> up a backup routine. My curiosity is what is it that seems to make 
> people not realize the importance of regular backups?

It all comes down to "It will never happen to me" -- that sort of
thinking makes it easy to avoid putting in the time to back stuff up
properly.
      Personally, I've never had a hard-disk fail on me yet, but I *do*
back up anyway.  I'm just very selective about what I back up, which
makes it much easier: I have about 2GB of documents I "couldn't live
without", and about 15GB of photos.  Backing up that much data is pretty
painless, but means I have to be willing to sacrifice my system install
and music and videos if the worst happens.  I'm willing to take that
particular pain knowing that the stuff that matters to me is safe.
      This reminds me, though, that I'm not sure if I'm backing up my
dotfiles since I moved them to a new location.  I'd better check that
out, because I have invested *way* too much time in them to be willing
to lose them.

-- 
    Mike | <http://koralatov.com>
           "A camel is a horse designed
            by a committee." -- Larry Wall

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24266

On Saturday, April 21, 2012 8:35:18 PM UTC-7, TaliesinSoft wrote:
> I recently spent some time with a person who although a Mac user for 
> about 20 years had never performed a backup of his system but finally 
> decided to do so. His thought was to do a backup once a month but I 
> convinced him to do one late each evening. I had him install 
> SuperDuper! to backup to a newly purchased external hard drive. The 
> choice of SuperDuper! over other alternatives was simply that it is the 
> one with which I am most familiar. Everything is now running fine.
> 
> This incident was by no means the first time I have helped a person set 
> up a backup routine. My curiosity is what is it that seems to make 
> people not realize the importance of regular backups?
> 
> -- 
> James Leo Ryan - Austin, Texas

I have a family member that has lost "very important" data three different times now.  Each time there was no backup and they "just had to get the data back".  Each time they never did get the data back.  Each time I would tell them they need to start backing up their data and how to.  They still don't back up their data.  I completely washed my hands of dealing with the issue.

So to answer your question. I have no idea.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web