PDA

View Full Version : software too?


djporter91
10-13-2009, 05:44 PM
hi. i'm looking at upgrading my macbook white's hard drive from a 120 gb to a seagate momentous 500 gb 7200 rpm w/ 16 mb cache. if i use super duper and a sata-usb interface to copy my current hard drive to my new seagate, will i be able to put in my new hard drive and open up any of my existing software and have it work? i.e. logic, reason, switch, firestudio interface,. or, will i have to reinstall all my software all over again? if anyone can answer this, or if any one has done this and wouldn't mind telling me how they overcame this, it would be VERY much appreciated.

thank you,
-dp

dnanian
10-13-2009, 06:04 PM
You'll likely need to reactivate anything that's copy protected...

MacCetera
10-14-2009, 02:26 AM
I've done this many times for clients - with OWC's USB bare drive adapter or their voyager quad interface bare drive dock. SuperDuper will make a bootable copy of your internal MacBook drive, and you will probably need to re-authenticate only a few of the more paranoid and pricier apps if any at all.


Connect the new drive to your USB SATA adapter/dock/whatever...
Use Disk Utility to partition the new drive GUID and HFS+ Extended Journaled...
Use Super Duper to copy your internal drive to the new one...
Restart from the new drive (while still docked) to make sure life is good...
Seven screws later your new drive will be inside your MacBook.


-- Marc

djporter91
10-15-2009, 03:25 AM
I've done this many times for clients - with OWC's USB bare drive adapter or their voyager quad interface bare drive dock. SuperDuper will make a bootable copy of your internal MacBook drive, and you will probably need to re-authenticate only a few of the more paranoid and pricier apps if any at all.


Connect the new drive to your USB SATA adapter/dock/whatever...
Use Disk Utility to partition the new drive GUID and HFS+ Extended Journaled...
Use Super Duper to copy your internal drive to the new one...
Restart from the new drive (while still docked) to make sure life is good...
Seven screws later your new drive will be inside your MacBook.


-- Marc

why do you have to partition it Guid and HFS+ extended??

MacCetera
10-15-2009, 03:37 AM
why do you have to partition it Guid and HFS+ extended??

Ummm... because your MacBook is Intel, thus GUID, and HFS+ Extended (Journaled) is the native Mac format... you do want it to boot, right?

-- Marc

macmon
10-15-2009, 04:44 AM
done it before in upgrading my hard drive from 120gig to 250gig. And it just worked without problems. Although ms office and ilife are my apps that worked okay. Not sure with professional apps.

dnanian
10-15-2009, 08:46 AM
A partition scheme (e.g. GUID, APM, MBR) is not the same as a format (HFS+, FAT32, NTFS). Partitioning divides a 'bare drive' into one or more volumes. Those volumes are then formatted.

Both the partition scheme (which helps the OS and ROM find the volumes) and the volume format (HFS+) need to be correct for a drive to work properly as a startup volume.

RobLewis
10-15-2009, 01:16 PM
I believe a volume must have a GUID partition scheme if you want to be able to boot it on an Intel Mac. The volume is readable on (IIRC) any Mac running Tiger or later, but only boots on Intel machines.

Also, Intel machines, unlike PPC, can boot from a USB drive.

The old Apple partition scheme is readable but not bootable by Intel Macs.

TMay
10-15-2009, 04:02 PM
Rob

I know it risks confusion to say this, and Dave would probably rather I didn't, but sometimes someone may need to know. In fact, often (always, actually, that I've tried) given Intel machines will in fact boot from an EXTERNAL APM drive/volume. Both of mine will consistently, but I do not know that this is 100% for all Intel machines. I also do not know about an INTERNAL APM, as I have not tried it. I suspect it may not work.

Obviously, it would be better and more certain not to and to do it Apple's way, but if someone gets in some sort of jam/situation where they need to, they may find that APM works fine. That does NOT mean anyone should routinely do it.

sjk
10-15-2009, 06:04 PM
I know it risks confusion to say this, and Dave would probably rather I didn't, but sometimes someone may need to know.
I hope Dave doesn't mind our intended clarifications of exceptions to his more conservative (and appreciated) recommendations. :)

In fact, often (always, actually, that I've tried) given Intel machines will in fact boot from an EXTERNAL APM drive/volume.
Works for me (http://www.shirt-pocket.com/forums/showthread.php?p=24819), too. It's convenient having a single external 2.5 FW drive with bootable PPC and Intel volumes on it.

That does NOT mean anyone should routinely do it.
I agree, at least not with the current amount of ambiguous/contradictory/lacking information about what specifically is/isn't supported, as RobLewis' post indicates. Kind of reminds me (on a smaller scale) of how much misinformation is distributed and assimilated about Repair Disk Permissions. ;)

For the record, regardless of my comments on this forum I always respect Dave's recommendations, etc. as authoritative here.

dnanian
10-15-2009, 07:33 PM
My recommendations are trying to anticipate why Apple hasn't just recommended against using APM for Intel, but has taken steps to explicitly disable APM selection in the Startup Disk Preference Pane.

I know it's convenient, sometimes, but there's a reason they've done what they've done, and I'd rather have people do it the way Apple's pointing to do it, rather strongly, and with emphasis.

TMay
10-15-2009, 07:47 PM
Kind of reminds me (on a smaller scale) of how much misinformation is distributed and assimilated about Repair Disk Permissions. ;)

Ahhh, yes. "Repair Permissions." The great Mac OS X parlor game. Used to love how all the 20,000-plus-post boys and girls on the Apple Forums, after first assuring the complainers about new OS bugs (maybe 500 of them or so) that they really COULDN'T be having the problem, because many, including the Guru, weren't. Then they would very aggressively ask them, "well, did you repair permissions before and after installing." :( Wasn't really a BIG deal until Leopard, when the "repair" time on my boot volume went from <5 minutes to > than 20.

Jesus wept.