Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Michael Kennard]

My two cents.

Since our company has mainly PC's, I wanted to prove that Macs do have a place. 
Unfortunately because of the limitations of the mac server backing up PC's we had to 
end up going for the PC version. DRATS. I'm still working on it because there used to 
be a lot of macs here, that's why I went for the job.

michael

--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Matthew Healey]

*Runs and hides behind a couch with a white flag handy*

I just wanted to know the difference between the two!! :-O

*Ducks as a grenade fly's past*

Regards

Matthew Healey

-- 

Matthew Healey
Western Orthopaedic Clinic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Phone: +61 (08) 9423 8800
Fax: +61 (08) 9381 8800

Suite 213
25 McCourt Street
Subiaco 6006
Western Australia



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

RE: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Edmund A. Hintz]

On 10/25/00 4:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spake:

>We've got a great road-map for the Mac products, and we're very committed to
>them and the Macintosh market. Mac OS X is clearly a major opportunity, and
>we look at its potential with a certain glee. I think Mac OS X is going to
>mark the real marketshare turning point for Apple.
>
>We also know we're finally going to get some competition, and we welcome it.
>But it also means we need to be at least a little bit strategic about what
>we disclose!
>
>Don't think we're neglecting the Mac, now or later. We're not, and we won't.
>Period.
>
>Larry Zulch
>President & CEO
>
>PS: We made it through Apple's rough times relatively unscathed solely on
>Mac revenue. I'm convinced it was because of the passion of the userbase.
>Hell, it sure wasn't because Apple was helping at that point. So thank you!

 Fair enough. If you care enough to write to a forum of geeks (which 
right there says a helluva lot more than many CEOs I've worked with), I 
feel it's only fair we exercise our patience. As long as you're at the 
helm and personally committed, I'm willing to wait it out. 

 Just one request: please don't make us wait too long. I hate using 
Arkeia to backup my linux boxes. It's so...wrong.  ;-)



Peace,

Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
'78 Westy*  Imagine."
 http://www.hintz.org




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

RE: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Larry Zulch]

Hi Ed:

We've got a great road-map for the Mac products, and we're very committed to
them and the Macintosh market. Mac OS X is clearly a major opportunity, and
we look at its potential with a certain glee. I think Mac OS X is going to
mark the real marketshare turning point for Apple.

We also know we're finally going to get some competition, and we welcome it.
But it also means we need to be at least a little bit strategic about what
we disclose!

Don't think we're neglecting the Mac, now or later. We're not, and we won't.
Period.

Larry Zulch
President & CEO

PS: We made it through Apple's rough times relatively unscathed solely on
Mac revenue. I'm convinced it was because of the passion of the userbase.
Hell, it sure wasn't because Apple was helping at that point. So thank you!

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Edmund A. Hintz
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 2:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]
>
>
> On 10/25/00 10:57 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spake:
>
> >Thanks, Ed. I know you wouldn't have posted your thoughts if this didn't
> >matter to you. We appreciate the feedback, and I hope I've
> alleviated some
> >of your concerns.
>
>  I appreciate the reassurance. I understand that you, and doubtless a
> rabid contingent at Dantz, are Mac fans. You don't worry me at all, and
> I'm quite grateful you're there. Here's the scenario that DOES worry me:
> while building the Winbloze version and neglecting the Mac, the momentum
> shifts. At some point, some arrogant pinhead in upper mgmt says something
> like this: "It's going to cost too much to upgrade the Mac version, for
> too small a return, when we already have a thriving NT product. Besides,
> the Mac users will buy an NT box to get all the new features anyway,
> because we're the best solution. After all, the Windows users used to buy
> Macs to run the server, right?" Thus, the Mac version dies. Hell, if
> Motorola can go all NT/Intel even when they design and make the PowerPC
> chips, this scenario isn't even all that far fetched. Because I've seen
> it all before, I'm pretty cynical, and naturally adopt the "show me the
> money" stance. I sincerely hope that the Mac will again be a priority at
> Dantz. A carbonized version of the proud ol' grandaddy of the NT version
> is not, IMHO, a priority. Frankly, I will continue to reserve judgement
> until I "see the money", such as a beta (hell, even screenshots); for now
> it's all vaporware. Again, PLEASE, *prove me wrong*. That's really what I
> want, you know... Show the world I'm a paranoid looney, and I will
> gratefully shut my annoying little craw and celebrate with them. ;-)
>
>  To sum it all up, "once bitten, twice shy".
>
>
>
> Peace,
> 
> Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
> Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
> Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
> '78 Westy*  Imagine."
>  http://www.hintz.org
> 
>
>
>
> --
> --
> To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
>
> For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

RE: OT Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Matt Barkdull]

This can be said about a lot of software though.  Even Windows itself 
must have significant user intervention to be upgraded.

Major issue, but no real solution.

Under WinNT and Win2k you can kill the process and start it back up 
again which works fine.  It's too bad the software won't do this 
automatically for you.
The Mac really cannot handle cleanly killing a process and 
relaunching it, which I feel is one of the major drawbacks to the 
Mac.  Yes, OSX will be able to do this, but OSX is still a ways off 
from being ran on most of the systems around here for the simple 
reason of we don't have G3's and G4's all over the place.

What is hard to overcome when doing enterprise backups is speed and 
time.  You can make a backup solution that goes really fast, but you 
still are limited to one machine at a time and what ever your network 
speed it.  Typically it is either 10Mbit or 100Mbit.

Just going by my server stats.  I'm averaging about 22 minutes per 
workstation on a full backup.

If I wanted to start a full backup on Friday evening at 9:00pm and 
have it stop by 6:00am Monday morning, I could do about 150 machines.

And then throughout the week do incremental backups and start with a 
fresh backup again on Friday.

As you can see, if I wanted to provide that kind of service to 
everyone on the network of 1500 workstations, I would need 10 servers 
doing backups.  Imagine trying to backup 150,000 machines!

I could probably spend a bunch of money and get a tape library system 
that would handle that kind of data and the extra speed out of it and 
possibly double the number of workstations that an single server 
could backup.  I'm just using what I have now as an example.

To think, I used to backup 30 Macs over a LocalTalk network, whopping 
1mb/min if I was really cruising!  lol.  Thank god the hard disk were 
160MB and smaller.  Now the hard disk are 8GB and larger and the 
amount on them is around 2-3GB on a mean average.


>Reality: Enterprise backups of workstations SUCK. There's NO WAY to do it
>well, but Dantz comes closest.



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Edmund A. Hintz]

On 10/25/00 10:57 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spake:

>Thanks, Ed. I know you wouldn't have posted your thoughts if this didn't
>matter to you. We appreciate the feedback, and I hope I've alleviated some
>of your concerns.

 I appreciate the reassurance. I understand that you, and doubtless a 
rabid contingent at Dantz, are Mac fans. You don't worry me at all, and 
I'm quite grateful you're there. Here's the scenario that DOES worry me: 
while building the Winbloze version and neglecting the Mac, the momentum 
shifts. At some point, some arrogant pinhead in upper mgmt says something 
like this: "It's going to cost too much to upgrade the Mac version, for 
too small a return, when we already have a thriving NT product. Besides, 
the Mac users will buy an NT box to get all the new features anyway, 
because we're the best solution. After all, the Windows users used to buy 
Macs to run the server, right?" Thus, the Mac version dies. Hell, if 
Motorola can go all NT/Intel even when they design and make the PowerPC 
chips, this scenario isn't even all that far fetched. Because I've seen 
it all before, I'm pretty cynical, and naturally adopt the "show me the 
money" stance. I sincerely hope that the Mac will again be a priority at 
Dantz. A carbonized version of the proud ol' grandaddy of the NT version 
is not, IMHO, a priority. Frankly, I will continue to reserve judgement 
until I "see the money", such as a beta (hell, even screenshots); for now 
it's all vaporware. Again, PLEASE, *prove me wrong*. That's really what I 
want, you know... Show the world I'm a paranoid looney, and I will 
gratefully shut my annoying little craw and celebrate with them. ;-)

 To sum it all up, "once bitten, twice shy". 



Peace,

Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
'78 Westy*  Imagine."
 http://www.hintz.org




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

RE: OT Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi)]

Reality: Enterprise backups of workstations SUCK. There's NO WAY to do it
well, but Dantz comes closest.

There is a *real* market for Windows backups, especially enterprise backups.
However, even with Dantz's fine Windows product (and I think they'll admit
this, but I've been wrong before!) it simply doesn't scale to the
enterprise, or even past a few hundred workstations.

It was built to be a workgroup product and I and some other companies have
pushed the product beyond what it was originally designed for. We've been
successful, but it has its painful moments...

Currently, if you get over a relatively small number of workstations, your
administrative hassles increase dramatically.

How do you perform initial installations on 1400 Windows workstations, when
Dantz offers no unattended install, yet requires a password on the client?

How do you perform initial installations on 150,000 Windows workstations, if
an *entire enterprise* standardizes on Retrospect?

How do you perform client upgrades of 1400 (or 150,000) workstations, when
you have to either do it from the server, or at the workstation (again)?

How can you upgrade from the server, when most of your machines are
portables and probably won't be available at the time you're upgrading
clients?

How do you keep the Retrospect client name and the actual machine name in
sync? Workstations get renamed all the time, but the client doesn't "see"
the change.

There are other issues as well, but those are some of the major ones I run
up against daily.

Even with these limitations, I can't think of another product that comes
remotely close to filling the bill while not requiring significant
intervention on the part of the users. So, Dantz simply cannot ignore
Windows, IMHO.

Neither, of course, can they ignore Macs. But then, nobody's suggesting
that!

Brad.

-Original Message-
From: Jon Gardner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 1:30 PM
To: retro-talk
Subject: OT Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]


on 10/25/00 12:12 PM, Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi) at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Hard reality is that the Mac itself is relegated to virtually "niche"
> utility.
> 
> Another hard reality is that Mac users are *very much* a minority,
compared
> to Windows users.
> 
> If you were in a business to market products (and make money), which users
> would you target

I would target the group of users who, per capita, buy more computer gadgets
and software, require less technical support, and are more likely to be
vocal about their favorite products.

In other words, Mac users.

In fact, if you will recall, Dantz did rather well even when they were
delivering a Mac-only product. That's a hard reality.

Mass-marketing has its place, but any second-year marketing major would
laugh out loud at the idea of marketing only to the masses.
Industrial-strength backup software is not a mass-market commodity. Ten
percent of any market is hardly "niche" and I think, were you to compare the
number of Mac OS vs. Windows users who understand (and can implement) backup
strategies, your "hard reality" would come up a bit soft.

So, please, do away with the "Mac users really don't matter" tripe. It's
both unfriendly and inaccurate, not to mention off-topic.

<><
Jon L. Gardner '89, Computer Systems Manager <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Texas A&M University Dept. of Food Services <http://food.tamu.edu/>
Tel 979.458.1839 * Fax 979.845.2157 * Hip 979.229.4323
PGP public key available at <http://food.tamu.edu/pgp/jon.html>





--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

OT Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Jon Gardner]

on 10/25/00 12:12 PM, Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi) at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Hard reality is that the Mac itself is relegated to virtually "niche"
> utility.
> 
> Another hard reality is that Mac users are *very much* a minority, compared
> to Windows users.
> 
> If you were in a business to market products (and make money), which users
> would you target

I would target the group of users who, per capita, buy more computer gadgets
and software, require less technical support, and are more likely to be
vocal about their favorite products.

In other words, Mac users.

In fact, if you will recall, Dantz did rather well even when they were
delivering a Mac-only product. That's a hard reality.

Mass-marketing has its place, but any second-year marketing major would
laugh out loud at the idea of marketing only to the masses.
Industrial-strength backup software is not a mass-market commodity. Ten
percent of any market is hardly "niche" and I think, were you to compare the
number of Mac OS vs. Windows users who understand (and can implement) backup
strategies, your "hard reality" would come up a bit soft.

So, please, do away with the "Mac users really don't matter" tripe. It's
both unfriendly and inaccurate, not to mention off-topic.

<><
Jon L. Gardner '89, Computer Systems Manager 
Texas A&M University Dept. of Food Services 
Tel 979.458.1839 * Fax 979.845.2157 * Hip 979.229.4323
PGP public key available at 





--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Nick Scalise]

Ahh, yes. 


Kind of like marrying a woman to put you through med school and then
divorcing her when you get your degree. "Sorry hon, there's so many of these
cute young nurses who want to get to know me better."

Unfortunately Mac users who *supported and built* any long time mac product
can't sue for alimony when that product decides to dump Mac support and
*target* a larger market.

Fortunately there can be some repurcussions - look at what happened to Avid.


I personally believe that Dantz will continue a Mac version of Retrospect.

on 10/25/2000 12:12 PM, Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi)  wrote:

> Hard reality is that the Mac itself is relegated to virtually "niche"
> utility.
> 
> Another hard reality is that Mac users are *very much* a minority, compared
> to Windows users.
> 
> If you were in a business to market products (and make money), which users
> would you target

-- 
Nick Scalise
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Eric Ullman]

Ed,

I understand what it means to be passionate about one's chosen computing
platform. If you look at the header of my emails, you'll see:

  User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509

I came to work here because of Dantz's reputation in the Mac industry.

In addition, it's now very exciting for us to bring Retrospect to the
Windows market! Nothing like it exists, and users have been forced to live
with unreliable, archive bit-based backup applications since DOS 2.1 (or
thereabouts). We have an opportunity here to give an awful lot of people
backup software that they can count on--thanks to our experience on the Mac.

So don't look at Mac Retrospect as the "poor bastard stepchild." It's
actually the proud parent of Retrospect for Windows. We're steadfastly
committed to the Mac platform. If you doubt me, please click on over to
http://www.apple.com/macosx/applications/, and scroll down the left side of
the page.

Thanks, Ed. I know you wouldn't have posted your thoughts if this didn't
matter to you. We appreciate the feedback, and I hope I've alleviated some
of your concerns.

Very best regards,

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development


Edmund A. Hintz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I hope I'm just paranoid. I did live through the dark days of
> Amelio, and maybe I'm too sensitive because of it. I *like* Retrospect on
> the Mac, which is why I get so worked up over the possibility of its
> demise.



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

RE: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi)]

Hard reality is that the Mac itself is relegated to virtually "niche"
utility.

Another hard reality is that Mac users are *very much* a minority, compared
to Windows users.

If you were in a business to market products (and make money), which users
would you target

Brad.

-Original Message-
From: Edmund A. Hintz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 2:57 PM
To: retro-talk
Subject: Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]



 I hope I'm just paranoid. I did live through the dark days of 
Amelio, and maybe I'm too sensitive because of it. I *like* Retrospect on 
the Mac, which is why I get so worked up over the possibility of its 
demise. My company has a sizeable investment in Retrospect, as do I 
personally, which is why these events worry me. I will continue to wait 
patiently, as I have for some time now, for substantial proof of the 
Dantz commitment to it's existing Mac base. PLEASE, Dantz, throw us a 
bone, something tangible like a beta release, and prove me wrong.


Peace,

Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
'78 Westy*  Imagine."
 http://www.hintz.org



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Chris Hoogendyk]

"Edmund A. Hintz" wrote:
> 
> On 10/24/00 8:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spake:
> 
> >Thanks for that one statement Eric...it means a lot ;-)
> >
> >john
> >
> >
> >On 10/24/00 10:31 AM, "Eric Ullman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> One thing, which I forgot to mention...
> >>
> >> It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.
> 

   

>  I hope I'm just paranoid. I did live through the dark days of
> Amelio, and maybe I'm too sensitive because of it. I *like* Retrospect on
> the Mac, which is why I get so worked up over the possibility of its
> demise. 


amazing how worked up someone can get 
over something spun out of their own imagination.


> Peace,
> 
> Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
> Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
> Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
> '78 Westy*  Imagine."
>  http://www.hintz.org
> 



;-)



---

Chris Hoogendyk

-- 
   O__   Network Specialist & Unix Systems Administrator
  c/ /'_ --- Library Information Systems & Technology Services
 (*) \(*) -- W.E.B. Du Bois Library
~~ - University of Massachusetts, Amherst

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

---

The only Mac in a sea of NT.


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Edmund A. Hintz]

On 10/24/00 8:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] thus spake:

>Thanks for that one statement Eric...it means a lot ;-)
>
>john
>
>
>On 10/24/00 10:31 AM, "Eric Ullman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> One thing, which I forgot to mention...
>> 
>> It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.

 Just how much does it mean? I've been more than just a little 
concerned about this NT business. I see lots of talk, but when push comes 
to shove the big changes and features (like that unix client we've been 
screaming for over the past several years) appear on windoze. This thread 
started with a mail glorifying all the wonderful things that NT does, and 
didn't bother to mention these coming to Mac, even as an afterthought-it 
took another message. My cynical side says this was after a few love 
letters from the rabid mac crowd, although I'll concede that the original 
posts are only 7 minutes apart and that it may therefore be a legit 
omission. 

 Worse, the original message states that Dantz is "Carbonizing 
Retrospect for Mac OS X right now". Whoopie. You mean I can run the 
feature poor bastard stepchild on X once it's carbonized? 

**How about the highly touted new architecture?!?! When is THAT being 
carbonized?!** 

Or, better yet, made native to X-if it requires lots of rewrite, this 
would be the time to go Cocoa/YellowBox, or whatever Apple's marketing is 
calling it this week. At the very best, it looks to me like the Mac, the 
very foundation upon which Dantz was built, is now a second class citizen 
to NT. At the worst, the vague assurances will evaporate when NT reaches 
critical mass. From my viewpoint, it appears that Dantz, like many other 
companies, have committed their developer resources to windoze, and it's 
not much of a leap from there to no support at all for the Mac. I've seen 
it all too many times before.

 I hope I'm just paranoid. I did live through the dark days of 
Amelio, and maybe I'm too sensitive because of it. I *like* Retrospect on 
the Mac, which is why I get so worked up over the possibility of its 
demise. My company has a sizeable investment in Retrospect, as do I 
personally, which is why these events worry me. I will continue to wait 
patiently, as I have for some time now, for substantial proof of the 
Dantz commitment to it's existing Mac base. PLEASE, Dantz, throw us a 
bone, something tangible like a beta release, and prove me wrong.


Peace,

Edmund A. Hintz  **|** "You may say I'm a dreamer,
Mac Techie, Linux Geek, *  |  *  But I'm not the only one...
Mac/Linux Consultant   *  /|\  * I hope someday you'll join us,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  */ | \*  And the world will live as one.
'78 Westy*  Imagine."
 http://www.hintz.org




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Glenn L. Austin]

>> Now, take what we know about backup software architecture, and use that
>> knowledge and experience to create a brand new product. This new version of
>> Retrospect would look like the current product, but the architecture would
>> be significantly improved. This is how Retrospect for Windows was built.
> 
> One thing, which I forgot to mention...
> 
> It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.

One thing that I've always appreciated with Dantz, that was not true with
some other companies' backup architecture changes -- Dantz is still
concerned about backup performance in new versions.  Another backup product
that I used to use before Retrospect came out with their "Plus" version, and
slowed the entire backup process down by almost a factor of 10 because of
their "new" architecture.

Go Dantz!

-- 
Glenn L. Austin
Computer Wizard and Race Car Driver
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Matthew Healey]

Yay

I hope that means that I will be able to back up open files

Anyway thanks for the email.

:-)

on 24/10/2000 10:31 PM, Eric Ullman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>> Now, take what we know about backup software architecture, and use that
>> knowledge and experience to create a brand new product. This new version of
>> Retrospect would look like the current product, but the architecture would
>> be significantly improved. This is how Retrospect for Windows was built.
> 
> One thing, which I forgot to mention...
> 
> It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.
> 
> Eric Ullman
> Dantz Development
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> --
> To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives:
> 
> For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Regards

Matthew Healey

-- 

Matthew Healey
Western Orthopaedic Clinic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Phone: +61 (08) 9423 8800
Fax: +61 (08) 9381 8800

Suite 213
25 McCourt Street
Subiaco 6006
Western Australia



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Welch, John C.]

Thanks for that one statement Eric...it means a lot ;-)

john


On 10/24/00 10:31 AM, "Eric Ullman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> One thing, which I forgot to mention...
> 
> It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.

-- 
"For the operators, whom a wise commander uses with great skill and
forethought, and whom the fool throws away in ignorance and contempt."
- Greg Walker (Dedication - At the Hurricane's Eye)



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [addendum]

[Eric Ullman]

> Now, take what we know about backup software architecture, and use that
> knowledge and experience to create a brand new product. This new version of
> Retrospect would look like the current product, but the architecture would
> be significantly improved. This is how Retrospect for Windows was built.

One thing, which I forgot to mention...

It is our intention to bring the new architecture to the Mac product line.

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: Difference Between v4 & v5 [long]

[Eric Ullman]

What are the differences between the Mac and Windows products? Great
question. There are actually two separate areas to discuss: features and
architecture. One you see, the other you don't.

On the features side, the Win version obviously has better (i.e., complete)
support for Win 2000, and it's able to get things like the NT/2000 registry
directly. It can also correctly back up and restore NTFS volumes serving up
Mac files, whereas the Mac version requires one to mount NTFS Mac "volumes"
on the desktop of the backup Mac.

The Windows version of Retrospect has a complete License Manager module.
This allows us to create and give out license codes that unlock certain
portions of the software. One CD is able to install Express, Desktop,
Workgroup, and Server, depending on the code entered. This also lets us
create eval codes that expire after 45 days. The Mac only has limited
License Manager functionality--it understands codes for Retrospect Client
licenses, but that's about all.

Retrospect for Windows also offers slightly different drive support. Most
recent IDE/ATAPI tape devices are supported (there really haven't been any
for the Mac), even by Retrospect Express. Retrospect Desktop Backup for
Windows supports AIT, DLT, LTO, and Mammoth drives right out of the box, but
it won't support a loader with more than eight slots; Workgroup or Server
are required for that. The Mac version, on the other hand, requires the
Advanced Driver Kit (ADK) to operate AIT, DLT, LTO, and Mammoth drives, but
even the Mac Desktop product will handle libraries with up to 80+ slots. For
example, the VXA AutoPak (with 15 slots, I believe) is supported by Mac
Desktop and Workgroup, but would require Windows Workgroup or Server. A
Mammoth 2 would work on Win Desktop through Server, but the ADK would be
required for a Mac to talk to the same drive.

The Windows version has a few more features for tape library operation. It
tracks tapes in loaders better than the Mac version, remembering which tapes
are in which slots between program launches, for example.

Retrospect Server Backup (Win) supports multiple NICs in a box, allowing you
to assign each one to a different subnet. The Server edition also supports
the advanced subnet broadcast and add-client-by-direct-IP-address/DNS-name
capability that the Mac version has, but neither Win Desktop nor Workgroup
have this ability.

Finally, on the feature side, the Windows version is better at backing up
open files on Windows systems.

Retrospect for Macintosh was created in 1989, and it's been continually
upgraded and built upon. Because Retrospect's core was designed with not a
little elegance, we've been able to upgrade it over the years without
breaking it or reducing its streamlined effectiveness. In fact, we're
working on Carbonizing Retrospect for Mac OS X right now. Sure, entire
sections of the program have been added or replaced, but the base design is
still there.

Now, take what we know about backup software architecture, and use that
knowledge and experience to create a brand new product. This new version of
Retrospect would look like the current product, but the architecture would
be significantly improved. This is how Retrospect for Windows was built.

So what, exactly, are the differences? Well, License Manager is new, and
it's quite powerful, but that's something visible from the outside. The
Windows product architecture differences go deeper. Only about 15% of the
program interacts with the OS. That makes much of the code portable. We've
also designed it to support new file systems with the addition of something
like a plug-in. That's why Linux clients will be available for Retrospect
for Windows before the Mac version.

Now, before you v5 owners begin saying, "Well, since the Windows
architecture is easier to upgrade/add to, you should be able to easily...,"
I just ask that you keep in mind that this is backup software we're talking
about. It has to work. Sure there are always bugs in computer software, but
a data loss bug in our line of work is simply unacceptable. New features
require a great deal of testing before they're released as upgrades. So
please continue to send us your feature requests, but remember what our goal
is: perfect restores always. And that's NOT a difference between the Mac and
Windows versions.

I hope this answers everyone's questions about how the products differ. If I
missed something, I apologize, but I think I covered the important
differences. We also have a feature matrix on the Dantz website.

  http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=product_features

Take care,

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development

[Disclaimer: I had not yet opened the caffeine spigot when I wrote this.]


Matthew Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I have been following this list for a while now and have seen quite a few
> references to how the "technology" behind v5 for Windows is much more
> advanced than that of v4 for Mac.
> 
> I was just wondering exactly what the differenc

Difference Between v4 & v5

[Matthew Healey]

Hi All,

I have been following this list for a while now and have seen quite a few
references to how the "technology" behind v5 for Windows is much more
advanced than that of v4 for Mac.

I was just wondering exactly what the difference is and what it means to my
company full of Macs. V4.3 works perfectly for us so why do I see people
saying v5 is so much more advanced.

What's the difference?



Regards

Matthew Healey

-- 

Matthew Healey
Western Orthopaedic Clinic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Phone: +61 (08) 9423 8800
Fax: +61 (08) 9381 8800

Suite 213
25 McCourt Street
Subiaco 6006
Western Australia



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.