• SuperDuper 4

    From Frederick@fred@ypical.demon.invalid to uk.comp.sys.mac on Tue Aug 4 18:07:18 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Hewitt@thewildrover@icloud.com to uk.comp.sys.mac on Tue Aug 4 19:36:06 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so
    held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check
    it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    Cheers
    --
    Andy H

    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Alan B@alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid to uk.comp.sys.mac on Tue Aug 4 19:44:07 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so
    held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check
    it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some
    years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.
    --
    Cheers, Alan
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Old John@watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Wed Aug 5 06:14:31 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so
    held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year. >>
    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check
    it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a weekly backup pretty well automated.
    --
    Classic computing: Computers do what you tell them to do,
    not what you want them to do.
    Modern computing: Computers do what they want to do,
    no matter what you tell them to do.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David B.@David@hotmail.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Wed Aug 5 18:04:24 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 05/08/2026 07:14, Old John wrote:
    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I >>>> think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so
    held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year. >>>
    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check
    it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some
    years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a weekly backup pretty well automated.

    Have you ever USED CCC "in anger", John?
    --
    Kind regards,
    David
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Old John@watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 06:27:29 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 5 Aug 2026 at 18:04:24 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 05/08/2026 07:14, Old John wrote:
    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
    wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I >>>>> think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so >>>> held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year. >>>>
    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check >>>> it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some >>> years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a >> weekly backup pretty well automated.

    Have you ever USED CCC "in anger", John?

    Please define "used in anger".

    If you mean, have I ever done recovery and restore from a CCC backup, then
    yes.
    --
    Classic computing: Computers do what you tell them to do,
    not what you want them to do.
    Modern computing: Computers do what they want to do,
    no matter what you tell them to do.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David B.@David@hotmail.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 10:23:43 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 06/08/2026 07:27, Old John wrote:
    On 5 Aug 2026 at 18:04:24 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 05/08/2026 07:14, Old John wrote:
    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
    wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I >>>>>> think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for >>>>>> holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in >>>>> March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so >>>>> held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check >>>>> it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some >>>> years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a >>> weekly backup pretty well automated.

    Have you ever USED CCC "in anger", John?

    Please define "used in anger".

    If you mean, have I ever done recovery and restore from a CCC backup, then yes.

    That is EXACTLY what I meant, John. :-)

    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    FWIW, I have erased my hard drive, reinstalled my macOS in Recovery Mode
    and then used Migration Assistant to recover data from my Time Machine
    backup disk.

    In what way is CCC superior to that procedure?
    --
    Kind regards,
    David
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Old John@watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 10:08:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 6 Aug 2026 at 10:23:43 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 06/08/2026 07:27, Old John wrote:
    On 5 Aug 2026 at 18:04:24 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 05/08/2026 07:14, Old John wrote:
    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
    wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I >>>>>>> think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for >>>>>>> holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment >>>>>>> provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in >>>>>> March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so >>>>>> held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check >>>>>> it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some >>>>> years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a
    weekly backup pretty well automated.

    Have you ever USED CCC "in anger", John?

    Please define "used in anger".

    If you mean, have I ever done recovery and restore from a CCC backup, then >> yes.

    That is EXACTLY what I meant, John. :-)

    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    Yes.


    FWIW, I have erased my hard drive, reinstalled my macOS in Recovery Mode
    and then used Migration Assistant to recover data from my Time Machine
    backup disk.

    In what way is CCC superior to that procedure?

    Among the reasons I keep a rolling backup is to have a disaster recovery option. So I choose to keep the backup drive in a place where it is less
    likely to be involved in any such disaster. Why not?

    TimeMachine needs to be electronically attached to the computer to be effective. It is therefore marginally more likely to be involved in any disaster.

    I make no claim that CCC is superior to any other technique for recover and restore, and have restored from TimeMachine in the past.

    Whatever floats your boat.
    --
    Vita non est vivere sed valere vita est
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David B.@David@hotmail.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 11:31:42 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 06/08/2026 11:08, Old John wrote:
    On 6 Aug 2026 at 10:23:43 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 06/08/2026 07:27, Old John wrote:
    On 5 Aug 2026 at 18:04:24 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >>>
    On 05/08/2026 07:14, Old John wrote:
    On 4 Aug 2026 at 20:44:07 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
    wrote:

    Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for >>>>>>>> holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment >>>>>>>> provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in >>>>>>> March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so >>>>>>> held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check >>>>>>> it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    SD seems to go head to head with Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased CCC some
    years ago and paid about -u24 for the v6 to 7 upgrade in 2024.

    I've used Carbon Copy Cloner since at least 2012. Itsuits me well, I have a
    weekly backup pretty well automated.

    Have you ever USED CCC "in anger", John?

    Please define "used in anger".

    If you mean, have I ever done recovery and restore from a CCC backup, then >>> yes.

    That is EXACTLY what I meant, John. :-)

    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    Yes.

    Ha! Will you share, please?

    Just wondering! Efye
    FWIW, I have erased my hard drive, reinstalled my macOS in Recovery Mode
    and then used Migration Assistant to recover data from my Time Machine
    backup disk.

    In what way is CCC superior to that procedure?

    Among the reasons I keep a rolling backup is to have a disaster recovery option. So I choose to keep the backup drive in a place where it is less likely to be involved in any such disaster. Why not?

    TimeMachine needs to be electronically attached to the computer to be effective. It is therefore marginally more likely to be involved in any disaster.

    I make no claim that CCC is superior to any other technique for recover and restore, and have restored from TimeMachine in the past.

    Whatever floats your boat.

    Thank you for explaining. I wasn't 'knocking' CCC.

    I once had email correspondence with Mike Bombich and eventually
    persuaded him that he should organise an entry in Wikipedia. He listened
    .... and here it is!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Copy_Cloner

    Did you know that he once worked for Apple?

    https://commandcontrolpower.com/podcast/2023/11/7/540-interview-with-mike-bombich-of-ceo-and-developer-of-carbon-copy-cloner
    --
    Kind regards,
    David
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Kennedy@davidkennedygm@gmail.com to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 12:08:54 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 06/08/2026 11:08, Old John wrote:

    TimeMachine needs to be electronically attached to the computer to be effective. It is therefore marginally more likely to be involved in any disaster.

    I'm using TimeMachine on a NAS in another room. So all via wifi.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Alan B@alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 11:48:20 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 2026-08-06, David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
    On 06/08/2026 11:08, Old John wrote:

    TimeMachine needs to be electronically attached to the computer to be
    effective. It is therefore marginally more likely to be involved in any
    disaster.

    I'm using TimeMachine on a NAS in another room. So all via wifi.

    Pretty much the same here. There's been a debate recently about backups
    on Mr. Oakley's site.

    <https://eclecticlight.co/2026/08/05/how-can-you-back-up-your-backups/>
    --
    Cheers, Alan
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David B.@David@hotmail.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Thu Aug 6 14:38:07 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 06/08/2026 12:48, Alan B wrote:
    On 2026-08-06, David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
    On 06/08/2026 11:08, Old John wrote:

    TimeMachine needs to be electronically attached to the computer to be
    effective. It is therefore marginally more likely to be involved in any
    disaster.

    I'm using TimeMachine on a NAS in another room. So all via wifi.

    Pretty much the same here. There's been a debate recently about backups
    on Mr. Oakley's site.

    <https://eclecticlight.co/2026/08/05/how-can-you-back-up-your-backups/>


    Indeed. EfOe

    Readers will no doubt note that I am one of the few people who have
    "liked" that article! ;-)

    There was a previous article by Howard which resulted in 42 "Comments":-

    https://eclecticlight.co/2021/05/28/why-cloning-big-sur-isnt-as-useful-for-an-m1-mac/
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Old John@watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Fri Aug 7 06:25:39 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 6 Aug 2026 at 11:31:42 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:


    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    Yes.

    Ha! Will you share, please?

    Just wondering! Efye


    They were in no way connected with malware.
    --
    Vita non est vivere sed valere vita est
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David B.@David@hotmail.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Fri Aug 7 08:53:46 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 07/08/2026 07:25, Old John wrote:
    On 6 Aug 2026 at 11:31:42 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:


    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    Yes.

    Ha! Will you share, please?

    Just wondering! Efye


    They were in no way connected with malware.

    Understood! Thank you, John.

    There are only two types of hard drive (or SSD)

    1. Those that have failed, and
    2. Those that are going to fail!

    Gemini AI agrees and said .....

    A universal truth of storage media rCo mechanical platters and NAND flash
    alike all end up in the same entropy bucket eventually.

    The only real variable is whether the failure happens gracefully with S.M.A.R.T. warnings or unexpectedly on a Sunday night right after an interrupted backup. ItrCOs the foundational logic behind the 3-2-1 rule:
    if a piece of data doesn't exist in three places across two different
    media types (with one off-site), it doesn't truly exist at all.
    --
    Kind regards,
    David
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From nospam@nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) to uk.comp.sys.mac on Fri Aug 7 15:12:32 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    David B. <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 07/08/2026 07:25, Old John wrote:
    On 6 Aug 2026 at 11:31:42 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:


    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer?

    Yes.

    Ha! Will you share, please?

    Just wondering! ?


    They were in no way connected with malware.

    Understood! Thank you, John.

    There are only two types of hard drive (or SSD)

    1. Those that have failed, and
    2. Those that are going to fail!

    Gemini AI agrees and said .....
    [-]
    Complete nonsense.
    (which shows again that it often is just an echo well)

    Most disks, spinning or otherwise,
    end up collecting dust in an attic without having failed,
    because they have been replaced by bigger ones,

    Jan
    (still have a huge and working 20 MB one)



    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Old John@watcombeman@yahoo.co.uk to uk.comp.sys.mac on Sat Aug 8 07:44:56 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 7 Aug 2026 at 14:12:32 BST, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    David B. <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

    On 07/08/2026 07:25, Old John wrote:
    On 6 Aug 2026 at 11:31:42 BST, ""David B."" <David@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >>>

    Can you recall the REASON(S) for using it to recover your computer? >>>>>
    Yes.

    Ha! Will you share, please?

    Just wondering! ?


    They were in no way connected with malware.

    Understood! Thank you, John.

    There are only two types of hard drive (or SSD)

    1. Those that have failed, and
    2. Those that are going to fail!

    Gemini AI agrees and said .....
    [-]
    Complete nonsense.
    (which shows again that it often is just an echo well)

    Most disks, spinning or otherwise,
    end up collecting dust in an attic without having failed,
    because they have been replaced by bigger ones,

    Jan
    (still have a huge and working 20 MB one)

    I would be inclined to dismiss it as another astonished discovery of the blindingly obvious.

    Everything that was ever made is destined eventually to fail or be discarded. This goes well beyond hard drives and computers; i myself am getting dangerously close to the failure point.

    So be it.
    --
    Classic computing: Computers do what you tell them to do,
    not what you want them to do.
    Modern computing: Computers do what they want to do,
    no matter what you tell them to do.
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Hewitt@thewildrover@icloud.com to uk.comp.sys.mac on Tue Aug 11 13:47:33 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

    On 04/08/2026 19:36, Andy Hewitt wrote:
    On 04/08/2026 18:07, Frederick wrote:
    A new chargeable version of SuperDuper! has been released.

    The author says it's the first time he's charged for an update, which I
    think isn't entirely correct* but he is offering a 30% discount for
    holders of recent licenses so perhaps that compensates.

    *There was a charge about 18 months ago after a change of payment
    provider.

    Yes, I just checked I originally bought it in 2006, and paid again in
    March this year - I hadn't really been using a desktop for a while, so
    held off the upgrade. I upgraded when I got the Mini M1 earlier this year.

    The fee was just over -u25.

    I'm not sure what it'll offer over what it does already, but I'll check
    it out I guess, but it pretty much does all I need it to.

    OK, full Kudos to Shirt Pocket.

    I had a look at SD4, and downloaded the trial, but also just checked the upgrade price. I put in my SD3 serial, and whoohoo, I get a free upgrade
    to SD4.

    No-brainer there then.

    And yes, it's very quick on a Smart Update copy.
    --
    Andy H

    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2