5 ms·

I'm all in the Apple ecosystem, but I'm starting to feel pushed out. First the Mac Pro, then Displays, now this? Is Time Capsule next? My airport extreme is t

by lsadam0 10y ago

I'm all in the Apple ecosystem, but I'm starting to feel pushed out. First the Mac Pro, then Displays, now this? Is Time Capsule next? My airport extreme is the most reliable home router I have ever owned.

tptacek 10y ago
Time Capsule really should be next. Apple doesn't have any real comparative advantage in backup software. The Time Capsule interface is interesting, but it's not what most people need from a backup solution (what most people need is set-it-and-forget-it that works from arbitrary locations).
- m_eiman 10y ago
  On a related note, I've noticed that when running Zerotier (virtual LAN over the Internet, free and nifty) my MBP sees the two servers I'm using as Time Machine destinations whenever it's connected to the Internet and performs backups to them remotely. Not necessarily a good thing when I'm tethering, but neat other times :P
- dsacco 10y ago
  I disagree with this. I think that Apple's time capsule is not well suited to an offsite backup solution, and it probably shouldn't even be the primary. But if you're in the Apple ecosystem anyway, I think it's really convenient to take complete disk images for a full system restore. I think it's cool to use a 3-2-1 backup chain with a backup system image. Granted, this is coming from someone who uses Tarsnap, Arq and Crashplan; but I've used Apple time capsules and I really admire their usability. In a restore scenario I don't have to choose particular files or folders, I just have to choose a date and the entire system is back. This is not without its downsides (no granularity in restore), but it's super convenient if it's what you need. If I were in a decision making position, I'd get rid of the Apple routers like they are doing and double down on time capsules by providing an integrated offsite solution, perhaps marketed with end to end encryption as a nod to privacy advocates.
  - colomon 10y ago
    Huh? I've only ever used Time Machine to grab individual files from backup, which is dead easy. (Okay, I have grabbed all the most recent files when doing a full system restore.)
- lsadam0 10y ago
  The competitive advantage is that it already works and requires barely any setup or input from me. It's been chugging along backing up all the macs in my home for years without issue. I do not want to be bothered setting up a new solution.
- bnastic 10y ago
  Completely wrong in my experience. Time Capsule was the only solution I could use with my less tech-savvy relatives to get them to actually back up their laptops. It is very much fire-and-forget.
- grzm 10y ago
  I believe the Time Capsule is included in this decision. From the article "Apple currently sells three wireless routers, the AirPort Express, AirPort Extreme, and AirPort Time capsule." In my experience, it's always been easy to set up. Actually using the Time Capsule, I've had one Time Capsule die, and one instance where I used a backup over 8 years. Retrieving the data from the backup was easy, without requiring a reference to a manual, IIRC.
- jaxondu 10y ago
  We will know for sure by WWDC 2017 as the next macOS will have a brand new file system, which necessitate major rewrite of Time Machine backup software. I think Apple wants to kill Time Capsule but Time Machine is one major selling point of macOS. So likely we'll get Time Machine for iCloud or Apple partners with NAS vendor Synology etc to support Mac backup.
rebuilder 10y ago
Maybe what they want the ecosystem to be is not what you're in. It seems to me they're focusing more and more on iOS, and maybe the OS X side of things is just a hurdle from that point of view. They did release new Macbooks, finally, but doesn't it kind of seem like they'd rather their customers just use iPhones and iPads?
- newscracker 10y ago
  > They did release new Macbooks, finally, but doesn't it kind of seem like they'd rather their customers just use iPhones and iPads? That's true. Phil Schiller said the following in "The Inside Story of Apple’s New iMacs" [1]: >> Schiller, in fact, has a grand philosophical theory of the Apple product line that puts all products on a continuum. Ideally, you should be using the smallest possible gadget to do as much as possible before going to the next largest gizmo in line. >> “They are all computers,” he says. “Each one is offering computers something unique and each is made with a simple form that is pretty eternal. The job of the watch is to do more and more things on your wrist so that you don’t need to pick up your phone as often. The job of the phone is to do more and more things such that maybe you don’t need your iPad, and it should be always trying and striving to do that. The job of the iPad should be to be so powerful and capable that you never need a notebook. Like, Why do I need a notebook? I can add a keyboard! I can do all these things! The job of the notebook is to make it so you never need a desktop, right? It’s been doing this for a decade. So that leaves the poor desktop at the end of the line, What’s its job?” [1]: https://backchannel.com/exclusive-why-apple-is-still-sweating-the-details-on-imac-531a95e50c91#.r8hqjj1gz https://backchannel.com/exclusive-why-apple-is-still-sweatin...
  - lsadam0 10y ago
    The desktop's job is to enable me to create for the other smaller platforms.
  - rhodysurf 10y ago
    That makes sense except their platforms dont even allow for that. For example, the iTunesConnect website has a ton of functionality that would be really useful to have on an iPad or iPhone becasue its nothing really difficult just basic app management stuff. Yet almost none of the functionality is available in the app. Its bizarre, they have an app you can use on the smaller devices but actively limit the functionality it can have forcing me to use my macbook instead. I wish they would just allow their products to be as useful as they should be.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by lsadam0 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

Time Capsule really should be next. Apple doesn't have any real comparative advantage in backup software. The Time Capsule interface is interesting, but it's not what most people need from a backup solution (what most people need is set-it-and-forget-it that works from arbitrary locations).

m_eiman 10y ago
On a related note, I've noticed that when running Zerotier (virtual LAN over the Internet, free and nifty) my MBP sees the two servers I'm using as Time Machine destinations whenever it's connected to the Internet and performs backups to them remotely. Not necessarily a good thing when I'm tethering, but neat other times :P
dsacco 10y ago
I disagree with this. I think that Apple's time capsule is not well suited to an offsite backup solution, and it probably shouldn't even be the primary. But if you're in the Apple ecosystem anyway, I think it's really convenient to take complete disk images for a full system restore. I think it's cool to use a 3-2-1 backup chain with a backup system image. Granted, this is coming from someone who uses Tarsnap, Arq and Crashplan; but I've used Apple time capsules and I really admire their usability. In a restore scenario I don't have to choose particular files or folders, I just have to choose a date and the entire system is back. This is not without its downsides (no granularity in restore), but it's super convenient if it's what you need. If I were in a decision making position, I'd get rid of the Apple routers like they are doing and double down on time capsules by providing an integrated offsite solution, perhaps marketed with end to end encryption as a nod to privacy advocates.
- colomon 10y ago
  Huh? I've only ever used Time Machine to grab individual files from backup, which is dead easy. (Okay, I have grabbed all the most recent files when doing a full system restore.)
lsadam0 10y ago
The competitive advantage is that it already works and requires barely any setup or input from me. It's been chugging along backing up all the macs in my home for years without issue. I do not want to be bothered setting up a new solution.
bnastic 10y ago
Completely wrong in my experience. Time Capsule was the only solution I could use with my less tech-savvy relatives to get them to actually back up their laptops. It is very much fire-and-forget.
grzm 10y ago
I believe the Time Capsule is included in this decision. From the article "Apple currently sells three wireless routers, the AirPort Express, AirPort Extreme, and AirPort Time capsule." In my experience, it's always been easy to set up. Actually using the Time Capsule, I've had one Time Capsule die, and one instance where I used a backup over 8 years. Retrieving the data from the backup was easy, without requiring a reference to a manual, IIRC.
jaxondu 10y ago
We will know for sure by WWDC 2017 as the next macOS will have a brand new file system, which necessitate major rewrite of Time Machine backup software. I think Apple wants to kill Time Capsule but Time Machine is one major selling point of macOS. So likely we'll get Time Machine for iCloud or Apple partners with NAS vendor Synology etc to support Mac backup.

rebuilder 10y ago

Maybe what they want the ecosystem to be is not what you're in. It seems to me they're focusing more and more on iOS, and maybe the OS X side of things is just a hurdle from that point of view. They did release new Macbooks, finally, but doesn't it kind of seem like they'd rather their customers just use iPhones and iPads?

newscracker 10y ago
> They did release new Macbooks, finally, but doesn't it kind of seem like they'd rather their customers just use iPhones and iPads? That's true. Phil Schiller said the following in "The Inside Story of Apple’s New iMacs" [1]: >> Schiller, in fact, has a grand philosophical theory of the Apple product line that puts all products on a continuum. Ideally, you should be using the smallest possible gadget to do as much as possible before going to the next largest gizmo in line. >> “They are all computers,” he says. “Each one is offering computers something unique and each is made with a simple form that is pretty eternal. The job of the watch is to do more and more things on your wrist so that you don’t need to pick up your phone as often. The job of the phone is to do more and more things such that maybe you don’t need your iPad, and it should be always trying and striving to do that. The job of the iPad should be to be so powerful and capable that you never need a notebook. Like, Why do I need a notebook? I can add a keyboard! I can do all these things! The job of the notebook is to make it so you never need a desktop, right? It’s been doing this for a decade. So that leaves the poor desktop at the end of the line, What’s its job?” [1]: https://backchannel.com/exclusive-why-apple-is-still-sweating-the-details-on-imac-531a95e50c91#.r8hqjj1gz https://backchannel.com/exclusive-why-apple-is-still-sweatin...
- lsadam0 10y ago
  The desktop's job is to enable me to create for the other smaller platforms.
- rhodysurf 10y ago
  That makes sense except their platforms dont even allow for that. For example, the iTunesConnect website has a ton of functionality that would be really useful to have on an iPad or iPhone becasue its nothing really difficult just basic app management stuff. Yet almost none of the functionality is available in the app. Its bizarre, they have an app you can use on the smaller devices but actively limit the functionality it can have forcing me to use my macbook instead. I wish they would just allow their products to be as useful as they should be.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]