Can SD! be safely used under Leopard if one is NOT using Time Machine?

[fred]

@villaman

Now you know why they say 'ignorance is bliss'.

To be fair though one would not expect something as complex as a bootable clone designed for a previous version of an OS to be compatible with a fundamentally different version.

[Pyezahn]

Originally Posted by dnanian

I'm sorry you're unhappy, villaman.

That's it? No explanation of the company's situation, not even a compassionate expression of concern for his problem - just sorry? Now I'm sorry I ever purchased this product.

[dnanian]

Pyezahn, I've explained the situation over and over in these forums. I even went deeper into explanations in this thread. There's only so much I can say.

[john love]

I have been a faithful user of SD for many years and will do so again when SD becomes Leopard compatible.

However, in the meantime I have been using CCC ... gotta do something in the meantime, or I would cease to be responsible.

So ... under the cover, what are the major technical differences in the approaches taken by SD and CCC.

... and, has anyone successfully used CCC to restore?

Thanks for listening.

[tideman]

Originally Posted by villaman

sdsl, a notification system like the one I mentioned would not need to send anything to anyone. It could simply check the OS version and tell you if it's been tested against that version or not. That's hardly a system audit.

I think that this is a good idea. I don't expect software to check for every conceivable incompatibility, but it would be helpful if major OS incompatibilities were flagged, either automatically or in response to the user asking to check for updates.

Yes it is, on the SuperDuper page. It's not worded so clearly on the homepage though. You can go to that page, read the promo blurb and download the software without ever clicking through to the 2nd page with the warning.

The home page mentions the addition of preliminary support for Leopard, while the SuperDuper! page says that 2.1.4 is not yet fully Leopard compatible. But, from my reading of the warnings from Dave, if you're running Leopard, you shouldn't be using SuperDuper! for backup, period. Therefore, it would have been better to say that SuperDuper! is not Leopard compatible.

Finally, before anyone jumps at me for my criticisms, I add that they're meant constructively. It's about making a great product even better. I'm very thankful that Dave and his team are turning over every rock to make sure that some future critical backup will function as it should.

[sdsl]

Originally Posted by Pyezahn

That's it? No explanation of the company's situation, not even a compassionate expression of concern for his problem - just sorry? Now I'm sorry I ever purchased this product.

I think that's a ridiculous attitude. Get over your little tantrum, grow up and use Disk Utility in the interim to make complete and bootable clones for a few days more ... the Leopard version of SuperDuper is due out in a matter of days now anyway. Most of us purchased SuperDuper because the small cost is well worth the convenience of the interface, the ability to do smart updates, its other helpful features, and its high reliability ... reliability which the developer is making sure persists by making sure it's really ready before releasing the new version.

By the way, the developer has explained the company's situation and expressed concern many times in the forum and in the company blog -- I think you prefer to complain rather than take the time to read those things. Apple doesn't help the situation much with its policy of not releasing the Leopard build to developers until it is released to everyone.

[DeathtoToasters]

Originally Posted by john love

I have been a faithful user of SD for many years and will do so again when SD becomes Leopard compatible.

However, in the meantime I have been using CCC ... gotta do something in the meantime, or I would cease to be responsible.

So ... under the cover, what are the major technical differences in the approaches taken by SD and CCC.

... and, has anyone successfully used CCC to restore?

Thanks for listening.

I did a restore to a new drive. Then replaced the drive in the MCP and there were no issues at all.

[DeathtoToasters]

Originally Posted by sdsl

I think that's a ridiculous attitude. Get over your little tantrum, grow up and use Disk Utility in the interim to make complete and bootable clones for a few days more ... the Leopard version of SuperDuper is due out in a matter of days now anyway

I have not complained once about how long this is going to take, but please don't give out information that you don't know about.

The developer is the one who should tell us when it is coming out. Not a user.

[sdsl]

Originally Posted by DeathtoToasters

I have not complained once about how long this is going to take, but please don't give out information that you don't know about.

The developer is the one who should tell us when it is coming out. Not a user.

I was referring to the SuperDuper developer's web site blog which stated on January 3 that

"We look to still be on schedule, so hopefully you'll have the new version (which, by the way, I've decided will be 2.5, not 2.1.5) in a week or so."

So that's why I stated the new version would be out any day now ... it's the developer who indeed indicated that. I think he was out ill for a few days and that might delay things a little, but I'd leave him alone about this so he can get it done!

[DeathtoToasters]

Originally Posted by sdsl

I was referring to the SuperDuper developer's web site blog which stated on January 3 that

"We look to still be on schedule, so hopefully you'll have the new version (which, by the way, I've decided will be 2.5, not 2.1.5) in a week or so."

So that's why I stated the new version would be out any day now ... it's the developer who indeed indicated that. I think he was out ill for a few days and that might delay things a little, but I'd leave him alone about this so he can get it done!

I hope you are not implying that I am NOT leaving him alone!

[dnanian]

Guys, c'mon. No need to leave me alone or not. As I think I've said elsewhere, and said on the blog, the holdup at present is due to a bug that showed up in late testing. It's taking longer to fix than expected, but not due to lack of effort...