#8
|
||||
|
||||
We're certainly always working on enhancements, Felix, but there's no real way we can 'integrate' like that with Time Machine -- TM is way too tied into the system.
If you're going to use Time Machine, you'll end up with two totally separate backup schemes. It actually is rather desirable, because they're good at different things, and additional redundancy helps protect your data more, which is the idea, no? As far as image enhancements go, can't promise that in the next release, but there are various things on our list for the future.
__________________
--Dave Nanian |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
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 |