“The Time Machine 3-D interface for backup and data recovery coming in Mac OS X Leopard is amazing. What’s more astounding is that a 3-D interface really works for users,” David Morgenstern writes for eWeek.
Morgenstern reports, “The Leopard update is due in the “spring” of 2007, Jobs said, which means it could ship anytime during the second quarter. ‘Time Machine is one of the best concepts for a backup utility anyone has ever had and one of the best user interfaces anyone has ever had,’ said Peter Glaskowsky, technology analyst with Envisioneering of Cupertino, Calif.”
“Unlike the System Restore feature in Windows XP that looks at the state of Windows and the Registry, Time Machine provides a granular incremental backup for all bits and pieces of the OS, as well as data files. Users can restore the entire hard drive or just a single file,” Morgenstern reports, “But it was the interface that drew the audience into the program. The recovery window featured a vertical timeline on the right hand side, and two arrows that floated in the frame, one pointing towards the user (the present) and the other into the screen (the past). Of course, the subject of the Time Machine restoration, whether a file or folder window, was presented in the center of the screen and behind it, were arrayed the older versions extending and shrinking into the past.”
“‘It’s the first app I’ve ever seen that has a real reason to have a 3-D user interface,’ Glaskowsky said. ‘We’ve seen this before with application switching and so on. But that’s an OS feature, not an app. This is a real app, and it’s the first one that really needed 3-D to convey the impression of what you’re doing,’ he continued. Glaskowsky is so right. Most 3-D environments have really been terrible. In the 1990s there was a vogue to emulate ‘real’ 3-D virtual environments for productivity, such as desks with drawers that opened, instead of folders and icon views,” Morgenstern reports, “And then there’s Flip3D and context switching. It’s all more of an effect, although Flip3D in Vista is a step forward from Windows XP. It’s just not in the league with Apple and Mac OS X’s refinements.”
MacDailyNews Note: See Microsoft botches another copy job: Windows Vista Flip3D vs. Apple Mac OS X Exposé – June 26, 2006
Morgenstern continues, “Apple can not only make sense of a 3-D interface, but it can make the trains mostly run on time. Since the release of Cheetah, the first version of OS X, Apple has executed on its OS plan. Except for the forthcoming Leopard, which is some three to six months late, depending on how you count, the company has released stable and useful iterations of its Unix-based OS on time to its developers and customers. Despite the resources, Vista is years late and pared down to an almost unrecognizable state. Hello, Redmond! Are you watching?”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Steve Jobs announced Mac OS X 10.5 “Leopard” during his WWDC 2005 keynote presentation on June 6, 2005. According to Jobs’ statement, over 14 months ago, Leopard was due “at the end of 2006 or early 2007.” Yesterday, Apple announced that Leopard is “scheduled to ship in spring 2007.” So, how is Leopard “some three to six months late,” Mr. Morgenstern? What’s the exact definition of “early?” Is March 20th, the first day of spring, not “early” 2007? It must really depend on how you count. Want to know a secret? Talk behind-the-scenes is that Leopard will debut at MacWorld Expo 2007 (Jan 8-12). But, even if it doesn’t – say it matches the official debut date of Mac OS X on March 24 – it’s not “late” by any stretch of the imagination.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs at WWDC 2005 keynote spelled out Mac OS X Leopard’s release date as “at the end of 2006 or early 2007” quite clearly:
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple to unleash Leopard on Microsoft’s Windows Longhorn; Mac OS X 10.5 due late 2006 – early 2007 – June 07, 2005
The only drawback that I see, to Time Machine, is that a person really needs a dedicated hard drive, or at least an external drive, in order for it to really work well.
Since I am constantly travelling with my MacBook Pro, I don’t want to carry an extra hd. And since there may not be enough drive space for those backups it may wind up slowing down my computer.
It’s still a great feature but I don’t know how good it will be for notebook users.
“Hello Redmond! Are you watching?”
…watching, taking notes, back-engineering, skinning, and ripping-off outright.
But with 250 gig hard drives at $100, and 500 gig drives for around $200, how much space does one really need? Hell, my mom’s iMac with 5 years of pictures, something like 50,000+ photos, is not even eating up 1/2 of her 80 gig drive. In fact, I think there was 40+ gigs free on the whole drive (which holds the OS, other docs, etc).
Is space even an issue anymore?
MDN – you don’t have to be an Apple appologist – Spring 2007 is not the same as end of 06/early 07 so just suck it up. It isn’t a disaster. It’s not a big deal.
MDN-
Lose the condescending, petulant tone!
CATCH MORE BEES WITH HONEY, THAN VINEGAR!
I knew before the keynote that OS X 10.5 would be postponed until spring. In case I’m the only one who has noticed, Apple would like there OS to come out AT THE SAME TIME AS VISTA. How has no one else noticed this. In fact once Jobs even said that Leopard would be coming out about the same time as Longhorn (now Vista), then he went on to say that that sould be about fall 06 to spring 07. As it turns out Vista has slipped and Apple is using that time to continue to build more stiuff into 10.5. Apple will hold off as long as possible to release around the same time as Vista.
I like the concept of Time Machine, and hope there is some way I’ll be able to use it, but I have a RAID 1 setup with manual backups (using CCC) approximately once a week to an external Firewire drive. For obvious reasons this drive is most definately not connected except for the period of time to do the backup.
Has anyone at Moscone seen MS engineers bogarting the hall’s copy center machines?
Isnt the interface really in 4D? the 4th dimension is really time…
I mean, graphically, it is displayed in 3D, but we are also taking into account that there is a timeline along with the stack folders…
So its the 1st program that uses a 4d interface
HD space is an issue I was wondering about too. I assume it makes backups of everything until you run out of space and then starts deleting the oldest stuff to make room, but when does it start that delete process? If I have it backing up to an external drive I’d like it to use all the space available, but if its backing up onto my internal HD can I specify how much free space I want? I like to keep 10gigs clear even though OS X will only use 4-6 in virtual memory. I assume Apple won’t fill it up completely but I’m curious about how that decision is made and wether I get to make it. Also does it ever give you a warning that adding a 3 gig video file to your HD is going to erase the backups before date X, or does it just do it automatically and hope you didn’t want to keep those?
Even 3-6 months late would be far better than the 3-6 YEARS late that Microsoft is with Vista.
Brooklyn,
Maybe Time Machine will utilize on the fly compression to keep the drive space needed to a minimum?
UHH Jay, schedule backups with Time machine when the drive is to be conncted, just like you do now. When you need to retrieve a file from the bcakup, connect the drive. What is so hard to understand?
RC: A Slam Dunk!!
this Time Machine thing is a great idea, but what really makes it amazing is how Apple implements their ideas in a way that makes people want to use it.
Having said that, I think it could be a space issue for pros who have more 1-2GB Photoshop files than for the average everyday user. Sure they are likely to have their backups in their professional setting, but if a person uses this technology at home, with large files, I could easily see the need for another HD.
“The only drawback that I see, to Time Machine, is that a person really needs a dedicated hard drive, or at least an external drive, in order for it to really work well. “
How about this one. It’s really popular with Mac users–or so I hear.
As for space, I suppose it depends on how much you want to back up. If you figure you’re going to do your whole 120GB hard drive, I’m willing to bet you’re gonna be SOL. You probably will want to back-up your user directory, which will be quite a bit smaller.
I use a MBP, and carry a small, FireWire drive.
They have those now, you know?
Great idea.
SB
BrooklynNYC:
Yeah, you’re right Time Machine won’t solve everyone’s problems… and backing up on the same HD is no backup. I just got back from pulling someone’s HD out of a fried HP and backing it up onto a new external I had him buy. Brought my own SATA enclosure and stuck his HD in there, put his new 300GB external next to it and backed his stuff up.
My point is, Apple was dead on about backups. NOBODY DOES IT! I’m talking about real people here, not geeks. You don’t think about backups until after you’ve lost everything, sure those of us who’ve been around a long time have been there and done that, but most home users haven’t even considered the possibilities.
Now all you need is an External HD sitting around at home, and when you come in from your long voyages with your laptop, just plug it in and go to bed and you’re all good. Don’t forget how important AUTOMATIC backups are. I lost a good month of data because I wasn’t running Carbon Copy Cloner everyday. Yeah yeah, I could have scheduled it, but there’s that odd bug where it would clone to my own HD if the external wasn’t plugged in. I’m on a MBP too btw.
Also… perhaps this is Apple preparing people for downloading movies. Getting them used to the idea of having a large external HD to store all their massive files on. All in all this is great stuff and is really going to save a lot of people’s butts. As for your complaint that it requires an external HD… hello, it’s a BACKUP. It also can save to network servers if you are so inclined.
Verbose,
Actually I was think that Apple might want to wait till slightly after Vista is released and at the peak of the mostly bad reviews maybe even a few reports of a virus or two. From what I’ve read, Vista will at best be on par with Tiger (we’ll see). Racing to release Leopard ahead of Vista will not steal any thunder from MS as the only thing we’ll hear is a big SPLASH followed (soon I hope) by a FLUSH.
Ken: “So its the 1st program that uses a 4d interface.”
True. And if Apple engineers can squeeze one more into TM, it will play “Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In” while you search.
@macromancer, if you really want a back up, you indeed need another HD. That’s the whole point.
Previously I was hesitating to by an extra HD because of all the manual work needed. With Time machine, you bet I’ll get an extra HD!
They’ll write anything to try to make Apple seem anything remotely like Microsoft.
I’d like to see Time Machine use the Jay Leno effect that’d be pretty cool.
just a thought….
If Apple doesn’t release 10.5 Leopard until Vista is finished then doesn’t that mean we may NEVER see Leopard?
“Racing to release Leopard ahead of Vista will not steal any thunder from MS as the only thing we’ll hear is a big SPLASH followed (soon I hope) by a FLUSH.”
I’m betting on a massive Fist-of-a clog and a HUGE plumbing bill.
I need Time Machine now. I can’t wait for Leopard.
I just bought an external HD and still searching for an easy non geek backup software.
Please give me TM now..
Thanks…
Hey MDN, Leopard is 3 to 6 months late so STFU you losers. I ask you; What’s the exact definition of “early?” Why are you so GD defensive? It’s not that big of a deal.
me:
Um, yeah, SFB, “spring 2007,” which usually starts around March 20, does technically qualify for the latter end of the range Mr. Jobs specified (“early 2007”). At least it can’t be DISqualified.
Here’s how it works, see: The antonym of “early” is “late,” which means (technically) he’s got until June 30 2007. Since he didn’t state HOW early, anything short of that is gravy — a matter of personal interpretation, which is WHY folks making those kinds of announcements often phrase them that-a-way. Now you run on down to the courthouse and argue yourself blue, okay, Barney? (Don’t forget your big belt.)
I would consider anything within the first four months of 2007 as “early.” Clearly January is earlier than April. Then there’s mid-2007 (May-Aug) and late-2007 (Sept-Dec).
Spring, according to the calendar, is late March through late June, but in the minds of many, February through mid-May. YMMV depending on latitude, attitude, etc.
I also feel the launch date is being timed with Vista, as Steve rather directly stated that at WWDC-2005. The question is, however, how long can Steve afford to wait before he has to bite the bullet and ship Leopard anyway?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Mac4lfe: What about the Backup program from Apple? Or is that only for .Mac users?
Buffalo had a good point, but maybe not thought through sufficiently. Given that Vista is competitive with Tiger, there’s no huge incentive to get Leopard out there until Vista is around to compete with and steal the thunder from. OK, there’s all the slavering, howling geeks … I meant an incentive to the business. Why not take the extra <b>3</i> months and get a few more bugs squashed before it reaches Gold? Make 10.5.0 what you expected 10.5.1 would be. You can’t really hold it off until Vista gets out there … that could be another month, or another year, down the road. Three months ‘late’ is just more time for the viral marketing to whip the mobs into a froth. I’m already showing my wife the Mail ‘sneak peek’, knowing this will set HER level of expectation high.
On the HD space issue that seems to be the biggest concern with Time Machine; I think Apple might get around that by doing with backups what they do with Aperture.
In Aperture changes to pictures are stored as a Meta Data file of the changes rather than a full copy of the file. This makes versioning really efficient as meta data takes up hardly any space. Apple could concievably to this with each file on your system by saving each change to a file as a meta data file rather than each version of the file.
This works really well in Aperture and could work really well in Time Machine as well.
@ Peter (most recently) and others in the same vein…
Of course, the cost of a ‘very large’ hard drive (750GB SATA) is now around $399 when purchased as an internal unit, and probably around $500 when purchased as an external triple interface drive from a reputable first tier manufacturer.
In comparison to tape units, this cost is relatively low. Backing up a modern high capacity drive would be painful on anything other than an SDLT/SAIT technology or – at the very least – something like the newly launched AIT-5 format from Sony which offers 400GB native capacity per cartridge and 225GB/hr throughput. These drives will start at around $4000, so that’s a nightmare plus the cost of the cartridges.
In comparison, a RAID set-up from LaCie looks like a bargain.
However, whether you back up to disk or tape, the back-up is most useful if it actually isn’t in your house. Personally, I’d bet dollars to crispy fried doughy snacks that one of the things we discover about Time Machine in the fullness of time is its ability to use .Mac as a storage medium for “incremental” snapshots.
i think time machine looks badass and will have a lot more people backing up! pretty much the only reason i posted was because of the MDN Magic Word.
MW: “space” … need i say more?
“The only drawback that I see, to Time Machine, is that a person really needs a dedicated hard drive, or at least an external drive, in order for it to really work well”
If you think this one through, you might be able to work out that the concept of backing up a hard drive onto itself might have an obvious drawback. Therefore it goes without saying that another storage device will be needed to perform a backup.
I think that Apple need a new product in their range, a Personal Server. It needn’t be anything more meaty than something like a Mac mini in a case that’s big enough for a standard hard drive ( or two ). Alternatively they could build a feature into the next generation of AirPort base stations whereby an external hard drive can be plugged in to provide network storage. But the essential point is that there are now many aspects of using Macs where large amounts of shared data could usefully be accessed by multiple computers.
Look at your iTunes and iPhoto libraries, then take into account movies being distributed digitally and don’t forget shared iCal calendars. All of those things have files which would be better located centrally rather than stored on each specific Mac. It’s something that many households could already use and many more will need soon, so an economical and innovative solution would be very successful. It could also be a very popular solution for small offices, where a conventional server would be overkill.
OK, I’ll say it another way. As nice as Time Machine seems to be, how useful can it be for someone’s backup routine when that person’s backup routine is a routine that cannot be automated? The “Gee, jay, you’re a dumb ass” response for setting an “automatic” backup time, then making absolutely sure you’ve connected the drive at essentially the right time to backup, paying attention to the completion of the backup, and then disconnecting the drive is about as dumb a solution as I’ve ever heard on this site.
Any file I’m astute enough to know I ‘m missing will be in Documents, Music, Movies or Pictures. All fully backed up and easily reacquired one at a time from my full offline backup. Again, nice application, but apparently of no use to me.
Jay,
You are limiting your thinking because you’re not giving enough weight to the actual mechanics of recovering a file. Regardless of whether you backup all the necessary folders, current backup utilities make it hard to find exactly the right backup file to go back to. It’s mostly a hit and miss affair; you miss, then you recover a little further back until you finally get a hit.
It’s a pain in the butt and one of the reasons why so few people every backup in the first place.
What Apple is attempting to do with Time Machine is make both backup and recovery a no-brainer affair. Simply copying your Documents folder from a week ago isn’t good enough, because you have new files in Documents that you don’t want overwritten by the backup. You also don’t want to waste time trying to find the correct version of the backup file, something Time Machine gets around by showing you live previews.
Dedicated backup programs like Backup and Retrospect are nice, but Time Machine is a whole new way of thinking about backups.
A lot of people dismissed iTunes because it automatically cataloged your music, the common excuse being, “I know exactly where my music in my multiple nested folder hierarchies, so why would I want iTunes to organize my music for me.” It seems incredibly silly now to think that anyone would want to waste time naming folder and subfolders and manually organizing their music, but that was essentially the prevailing attitude before iTunes.
Same difference with Time Machine and other backup software.
“If you think this one through, you might be able to work out that the concept of backing up a hard drive onto itself might have an obvious drawback. Therefore it goes without saying that another storage device will be needed to perform a backup.
–> EXACTLY. And that’s what they talk about in the keynote. They make no mention of this working on the primary HD, only an external one. If you’re using TM on your internal/primary HD and it crashes, there is no point in using TM. If you can enable it to work on your main drive, the only benefit will be to retreive files before your HD head grinds into the platter. I don’t believe TM will have the option to use your main drive – it defeats the whole purpose! You WILL need an external HD for TM.
My big question is – will it make a BOOTABLE backup? Because if it doesn’t, it’s a waste of resources and “Time”. Pun intended. Say you own an iMac and use TM. Your internal HD crashes and you need to get some work done – NOW. Can you boot from the TM drive? If not, you’re fucked. You’ll have to get a replacement internal drive, reinstall OS X, then TM your files. I would hope it does, but if TM does not make a BOOTABLE backup drive, it’s missing a MAJOR component, and to me would be worthless. Hopefully it will.
Just a scenerio to think about…
NewType: Now that’s the kind of response that gets my attention. Well, for sure I will not be closed minded about it when the time comes, and I definately will try it out on Day 1 after I get 10.5. I’ll agree that until I can try the real thing on real files and in real time. I am guilty of a limited imagination.
I must add though that I have relatively “clean” Documents, etc. folders. Probably wouldn’t present too much of a problem searching for a particular file. But again, i will need to at least try TM. I’ve only used OS X for 19 months. I think I’m still infected with the doze way of doing things.
^^^ Forgot to add. TM is GREAT for incremental/versioning, but you sure as hell better to be able to boot from that drive…
My brother has a dual 1.8 PM G5 and he hasn’t backed up anything in three years *cringe*. I’ve warned him many a time. He’s due for a cluster fuck any day now. Then he’ll come crying to me.
Apple you got the UI right, but the name stinks.
Dump “Time Machine” for something cool.
Jay….For obvious reasons this drive is most definately not connected except for the period of time to do the backup.
Oh yes,…definately
Two i’s, no a’s….definitely.
ron:
I’m not one to ever speak disrepectfully towards anyone on this forum, but this discussion was a very important one. The only comment you offered in the over six hours of discussion was about my spelling. Is your ego involved here? I’m interested in what people have to say on OS X topics, not your opinion of my spelling. You appear to offer nothing on the topic under discussion. I suspect I share those views with others here as well.
Jay and Others:
I think you guys have slightly missed the point of Time Machine. Yes, it can manage backaups of your work, but its actually much more than that.
The point of Time Machine is that on any given interval, say daily, your whole setup (including installed applications, bash script settings, profiles, network settings, even your Safari bookmarks) is stored. So if you install some application that changes your settings in a disasterous way, you can simply go to Time Machine to the point just before you made that installation and recover your whole system.
This is no retrospect or data archiving tool, its a system snapshotter and a very advanced one at that.
Perhaps you may be able to see that having an aditional drive is not necessarily important, because Time Machine is not just a contingency for hard disc failure, but all sorts of failures.
“Early” 2007 may or may not be Spring. Whether it is or not, the rest of the article summary here seems VERY positive towards Apple and I don’t understand why not even a single word of praise is in MDN’s comments. True, I haven’t read the whole article. Maybe there’s something in there to justify MDN’s slighting the author by only including criticism of this one minor point on which MDN may or may not be technically correct. Seems like an email thanking the author for his solid and positive comments would be more in order than what was done by MDN.
MDN – you don’t have to be an Apple appologist – Spring 2007 is not the same as end of 06/early 07 so just suck it up. It isn’t a disaster. It’s not a big deal.
—
Well, it was supposed to realse around Vista.. so when MS pushes back, Apple pushes back…
It’s interesting that there are no comments about privacy issues. This is one of the first things that struck me about this.
Assuming that you run on an external HD, this might take care of this issue. However, even then, I hope there’s an on/off switch for Time Machine, as I could easily envision a situation where you try to delete sensitive files on your HD only to find that you can’t get rid of ’em.