|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Time Machine vs Superduper
I have OS 10.5.4 on dvd and have updated to OS 10.5.5 via download from Apple. As I understand to do a complete recovery with Time Machine I have to start up with the OS 10.5.4 dvd. So when recovery is done am I correct in assuming I will be back to 10.5.4 and have to update again to 10.5.5.
If so, this would be a compelling reason to use Superduper because it would restore with any updates installed after the version on the install dvd. Comments and clarification will be appreciated. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I don't think that starting from an older DVD means that version of OS X is what's installed during a Time Machine restore.
But, that said, recovery from a SuperDuper backup is much faster, since you just restart from the backup...
__________________
--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 |
Using SuperDuper for an offsite Time Machine backup | toy | General | 1 | 07-26-2008 12:02 PM |
Time Machine stopped working - SuperDuper involved? | adriansmith | General | 18 | 02-20-2008 03:48 PM |
SuperDuper and Leopard if not using Time Machine | edesignuk | General | 3 | 02-03-2008 06:41 AM |
Will Time Machine make SuperDuper obsolete? | JAC II | General | 9 | 11-07-2007 03:54 PM |
A different angle on SD & Time Machine integration | badlydrawnboy | General | 10 | 10-26-2007 08:37 PM |