#10
|
||||
|
||||
Basically, it's not bootable for the same reason a Retrospect backup (as opposed to "Duplicate") isn't bootable. It's not storing it in a bootable format -- it's storing it in a Time Machine format. Once restored it'll be bootable, assuming everything was copied properly (and it was a full backup) but not until.
__________________
--Dave Nanian |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Future of SuperDuper? (in light of Leopard Time Machine) | backerupper3160 | General | 10 | 10-20-2007 10:18 PM |
A SuperDuper Back Up Strategy | Bagelturf | General | 3 | 09-09-2007 01:23 PM |
Why is SuperDuper not running at scheduled time? | Chris_Porter | General | 18 | 07-15-2007 03:33 AM |
Leopard Time Machine vs. SuperDuper | MMM | General | 5 | 07-05-2007 05:20 PM |
write problems after cloning machine | mkrueger | General | 13 | 12-31-2004 07:17 PM |