|
Reformatting my mac...... (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by hexadecimal
Time Machine was designed for morons.
Download Carbon Copy and back everything up with that.
http://www.bombich.com/ |
yeah, but I don't want to copy/duplicate my drive, that's the whole problem in the first place.
I heard you can just copy the users folder, and everything you've ever saved on the internal drive (apart from system components/file) will be saved.
This could be a godsend as I don't mind having to reinstall all the programs again, it's just i really don't want to lose my personal stuff.
Anyone know? |
|
|
| hexadecimal |
Carbon Copy can be used to back up / copy anything you want. Doesn't have to be your whole drive.
It can dump anything you want into a drive image if you want. Makes it easier to keep your backups organized.
Check it out, it's really nice software, and free. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by hexadecimal
Carbon Copy can be used to back up / copy anything you want. Doesn't have to be your whole drive.
It can dump anything you want into a drive image if you want. Makes it easier to keep your backups organized.
Check it out, it's really nice software, and free. |
Actually, this looks really great. Thanks for the tip....
Will let you know how it goes and maybe post a tutorial once I;ve done it for other mac owners. |
|
|
| Cryogen |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
So from your post Cryogen, I understand the Timemachine drive needs to be dedicated and can only host that alone? |
Not at all. It's just that Time Machine demands the drive be formatted to HFS+. You can still drop files onto it like any other drive.
You can also select folders that Time Machine doesn't back up if you don't want to copy the whole OS. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by beniii
Not good at all for producing... it is a lot slower and the like.
p.s. they are called virtual machines. |
I just want to make a correction on a previous statement.
I relayed what you said back to my brother (the computer engineer who recommended using VMs) and he drew out a diagram to explain how they work.
He also showed me the 6 VMs on his computer, and the windows tasks bar to prove how CPU usage is divided.
He said the only things VMs (virtual machines) share is harddrive space, however much you allot to each machine. If I allot 40gigs to one VM, the other VM can't touch it. However, RAM and CPU power is only used as a sum total between what programs simultaneously run on each VM.
If I have FL running on one VM, and FL running on another VM, then CPU usage is spit depending by what is running on each VM and added.
That means it should NOT be any slower at all UNLESS you are running other programs at that same time. Which should go w/out saying. But if that is not the scenario, you get the same amount of CPU power by only booting 1 VM.
Now the *benefit* to having a VM.
If you surf the internet a lot, or download random crap from random places you are exposed to a lot of .
That will slow down you computer over time.
When you have a VM (for people who can't afford 2 seperate computers) if one slows down over time from spyware/installing/uninstalling a VM that is used just for music production will NOT. You can simply delete the VM, and reboot a 3rd that you built but never used.
It would keep the VM that you use running at optimum speed as long as you never go online (which is what I'll be doing). So I had him install 3 VMs on my one pc. One I will use for internet one for just music production, then a 3rd I never boot till the internet one gets raped with spyware/virus's.
I've owned everycopy of the most popular AV programs and can NEVER stop my internet pc from slowing down. So this will be a least interesting to try.
If not he can just delete both VM not a big deal. But I'll let you know how it goes. Also I've never seen this topic on this forum before. |
|
|
| beniii |
Robby... so your brother tells you it works, so it HAS too...
Ive been in IT for around 6-7 i have used MANY virtual machines.
Fire up fruity loops on a VM, report back with how it goes.
EDIT: If you did want to run your theory do it this way.
There is a tool called "snapshotting" you take a snapshot, and then at any time, you can roll back to that point, so if it gets raped by spyware, snapshot, BAM done.
Tell your brother to go back to the textbook. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by beniii
Robby... so your brother tells you it works, so it HAS too...
Ive been in IT for around 6-7 i have used MANY virtual machines.
Fire up fruity loops on a VM, report back with how it goes.
EDIT: If you did want to run your theory do it this way.
There is a tool called "snapshotting" you take a snapshot, and then at any time, you can roll back to that point, so if it gets raped by spyware, snapshot, BAM done.
Tell your brother to go back to the textbook. |
My brothers been in computer engineering for over 25 years.
And look I don't want to argue there is no logical arguement for how a VM would use MORE cpu cycles when only 1 VM is booted.
If you can explain to me where those extra CPU cycles are going, then I'd tend to believe you. Otherwise, I guess I'll have to delete the VMs, its not a big deal.
You just failed to inform me of where these extra cycles are going, when I told by an expert its the same.
Forgive me for deciding on the better explanation. |
|
|
| beniii |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
My brothers been in computer engineering for over 25 years.
And look I don't want to argue there is no logical arguement for how a VM would use MORE cpu cycles when only 1 VM is booted.
If you can explain to me where those extra CPU cycles are going, then I'd tend to believe you. Otherwise, I guess I'll have to delete the VMs, its not a big deal.
You just failed to inform me of where these extra cycles are going, when I told by an expert its the same.
Forgive me for deciding on the better explanation. |
oK robby, look forward to your thread about how it didnt work shortly. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by beniii
oK robby, look forward to your thread about how it didnt work shortly. |
Yeh but if you can't prove where those extra cycles go, possibly you can hypothesize?
If not then yes, hopefully (for you) it won't work (for me). Thanks. |
|
|
| beniii |
Why do you need to know the specifics?
You are emulating a Operating system, an another Operating system.
Its naturally going to be slower... But it could be usuable to a point (keeping in mind your going to loose cycles and RAM)
For you with your IT knowledge (or knowledge in general) i really dont think its the right thing to do.
If i was you, i would learn how to optimise my system, and how to back it up properly.
That way if it stuffs up, you can just restore it. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
Robby, the problems wth VM's are the same with multiple partions; the drive they run off and the chain of processing they rely on
Unfortunately, even on regularly defragmented drives the data is split over several areas on the drive and OS, even in VM land, is placed on several different places.
This means that essentially the drive will have to search for two places at once when trying to access any data and the OS (which is all the time). As you should know, the computer is only as fat as the weakest link in the chain meaning that the bottleneck will slow the DAW down a an unusble speed.
You have to realise that IT people know nothing (and I mean it) about audio apart from whwre to plug in the 3.5mm audio jack to their laptop.
Audio(along with video) happens to be the single most intensive use of a computer so you can't cut corners when it comes to these matters - dedicated, non partitioned drives are a must, and partitions and VM's are a solid non-no. |
|
|
|
|
