TidBITS#624/01-Apr-02
=====================
When was the last time you backed up your Mac OS X machine? The
solution for many people is Retrospect 5.0 - Adam looks in depth
at the new release in this week's issue. Also, Matt Neuburg starts
a two-part examination of Unicode and what it means to you. In the
news, KeyStrokes for Mac OS X provides helpful adaptive technology
for disabled Mac users wanting to use the new operating system.
(And no, we're not making any of this up!)
Topics:
MailBITS/01-Apr-02
Two Bytes of the Cherry: Unicode and Mac OS X, Part 1
Retrospect 5.0 Enables Mac OS X Backups
<http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/TidBITS-624.html>
<ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/2002/TidBITS#624_01-Apr-02.etx>
Copyright 2002 TidBITS Electronic Publishing. All rights reserved.
Information: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Comments: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------
This issue of TidBITS sponsored in part by:
* READERS LIKE YOU! You can help support TidBITS via our voluntary <- NEW!
contribution program. Special thanks this week to Mike Rohde,
Douglas Johnson, and William Bruce Harris for their support!
<http://www.tidbits.com/about/support/contributors.html>
* APS Tech -- 800/395-5871 -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Burn a full CD in less than five minutes with the APS CD-RW
16x10x40 FireWire Plus. FireWire and USB ports let you easily
connect to all recent Macs. Order at: <http://www.apstech.com/>
* Small Dog Electronics: iBook G3/600 128/20 GB/Combo (r): $1299 <--- NEW!
PowerBook G4/667 512/30 GB/DVD-ROM/AirPort (r): $2399. Epson
Perfection 1240u USB Scanner: $79; Flower Power iMac: $799 H&R
Block TaxCut: $15 <http://www.smalldog.com/tb/> 802/496-7171
* Protect Yourself from Internet Intruders! IPNetSentry is the <----- NEW!
intelligent, easy-to-use way to deter hackers from an Internet-
connected Mac. Version 1.3 updated for Mac servers. Just $35
from Sustainable Softworks <http://www.sustworks.com/tb/>
* Bare Bones Software Mailsmith 1.5 -- Extra-Strength Email for
Mac OS X and 9. Imports mail directly from Emailer, Eudora,
and Apple Mail. Powerful filters, robust scripting, and more.
For more info and a free demo: <http://www.barebones.com/>
* DEALRAM'S LATEST RAM PRICE CHANGES! <http://dealram.com/?ref=tb> <- NEW!
512 MB RAM for iMac G4 for $121, down 16%.
256 MB RAM for iMac G3 (233-333) for $64, down 24%.
32 MB RAM for older Macs (SIMM) for $18, down 79%.
* ConceptDraw Special - SAVE 30%!!! Save 30% with purchase of a
5 User Pack of any ConceptDraw software. ConceptDraw: $490,
ConceptDraw Pro: $790. ConceptDraw MINDMAP: $310.
MINDMAP Pro: $470 <http://www.conceptdraw.com/purchase/>
* easyDNS: Need a .CA domain? Get it from Canada's leading Domain <-- NEW!
company. All with easyDNS's world class personal tech support.
Finally, a company that actually puts its customers first!
easyDNS: the way things should work. <http://www.easyDNS.com>
* What's your OS X BACKUP PLAN? Dantz RETROSPECT BACKUP 5.0! <------- NEW!
The #1 trusted backup solution for protecting your data.
Retrospect Backup 5.0 offers perfect restores on Macs and PCs
with unmatched device support! <http://www.dantz.com/up5>
---------------------------------------------------------------
MailBITS/01-Apr-02
------------------
**Keyboard Accessibility for Mac OS X** -- In his TidBITS series
on accessibility for disabled Macintosh users, Joe Clark bemoaned
the state of adaptive technology in Mac OS X. Last week's release
of KeyStrokes for Mac OS X from the Dutch company Niemeijer
Consult could help improve Mac OS X's position in the adaptive
technology world. KeyStrokes displays a graphical keyboard on the
screen; users type by positioning the cursor over letters and
clicking the button of a mouse, trackball, head pointer, or other
pointing device. For those who can position the cursor but can't
click a button, KeyStrokes provides a system-wide "dwell-based"
utility that enables clicking, double-clicking, and click-and-drag
by holding the cursor motionless for a short period of time over
the desired target. Text can be entered into any application in
Mac OS X, even those running in Classic. U.S. and international
keyboard layouts are available and the program supports Command-
key combinations, dead keys (for accents), and modifier key-click
combinations. KeyStrokes for Mac OS X costs $200 and includes a
copy of KeyStrokes 2.2 for System 7.1 through Mac OS 9.2; volume
and upgrade discounts are available. For those who want to try it
first, there's a fully functional demo. [ACE]
<http://www.assistiveware.com/keystrokes.html>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbser=1189>
Two Bytes of the Cherry: Unicode and Mac OS X, Part 1
-----------------------------------------------------
by Matt Neuburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If you're using Mac OS X, a massive revolution is proceeding
unnoticed on your computer. No, I don't mean Unix, preemptive
multitasking, or any other familiar buzzwords. I'm talking about
text.
How can text be revolutionary? Text is not sexy. We take text for
granted, typing it, reading it, editing it, storing it. Text is
one of the main reasons most people bought computers in the first
place. It's a means, a medium; it's not an end, not something
explicit. The keyboard lies under our hands; strike a key and the
corresponding letter appears. What could be simpler?
But the more you know about text and how it works on a computer,
the more amazing it is that you can do any typing at all. There
are issues of what keyboard you're using, how the physical keys
map to virtual keycodes, how the virtual keycodes are represented
as characters, how to draw the characters on the screen, and how
store information about them in files. There are problems of
languages, fonts, uppercase and lowercase, diacritics, sort order,
and more.
In this article I'll focus on just one aspect of text: Unicode.
Whether or not you've heard of Unicode, it affects you. Mac OS X
is a Unicode system. Its native strings are Unicode strings. Many
of the fonts that come with Mac OS X are Unicode fonts.
But there are problems. Mac OS X's transition to Unicode is far
from complete. There are places where Unicode doesn't work, where
it isn't implemented properly, where it gets in your way. Perhaps
you've encountered some of these, shrugged, and moved on, never
suspecting the cause. Well, from now on, perhaps you'll notice the
problems a little more and shrug a little less. More important,
you'll be prepared for the future, because Unicode is coming. It's
heavily present on Mac OS X, and it's only going to become more
so. Unicode is the future - your future. And as my favorite movie
says, we are all interested in the future, since that is where we
shall spend the rest of our lives.
**ASCII No Questions** -- To understand the future, we must start
with the past.
In the beginning was writing, the printing press, books, the
typewriter, and in particular a special kind of typewriter for
sending information across electrical wires - the teletype.
Perhaps you've seen one in an old movie, clattering out a news
story or a military order. Teletype machines worked by encoding
typed letters of the alphabet as electrical impulses and decoding
them on the other end.
When computers started to be interactive and remotely operable,
teletypes were a natural way to talk to them; and the first
universal standard computer "alphabet" emerged, not without some
struggle, from how teletypes worked. This was ASCII (pronounced
"askey"), the American Standard Code for Information Interchange;
and you can still see the teletype influence in the presence of
its "control codes," so called because they helped control the
teletype at the far end of the line. (For example, hitting
Control-G sent a control code which made a bell ring on the
remote teletype, to get the operator's attention - the ancestor
of today's alert beep.)
The United States being the major economic and technological force
in computing, the ASCII characters were the capital and small
letters of the Roman alphabet, along with some common typewriter
punctuation and the control codes. The set originally comprised
128 characters. That number is, of course, a power of 2 - no
coincidence, since binary lies at the heart of computers.
When I got an Apple IIc, I was astounded to find ASCII extended
by another power of 2, to embrace 256 characters. This made sense
mathematically, because 256 is 8 binary bits - a byte, which was
the minimum unit of memory data. This was less wasteful, but it
was far from clear what to do with the extra 128 characters, which
were referred to as "high ASCII" to distinguish them from the
original 128 "low ASCII" characters. The problem was the
computer's monitor - its screen. In those days, screen
representation of text was wired into the monitor's hardware,
and low ASCII was all it could display.
**Flaunt Your Fonts, Watch Your Language** -- When the Macintosh
came along in 1984, everything changed. The Mac's entire screen
displayed graphics, and the computer itself, not the monitor
hardware, had the job of constructing the letters when text was
to be displayed. At the time this was stunning and absolutely
revolutionary. A character could be anything whatever, and for
the first time, people saw all 256 characters really being used.
To access high ASCII, you pressed the Option key. What you saw
when you did so was amazing: A bullet! A paragraph symbol!
A c-cedilla! Thus arrived the MacRoman character set to which
we've all become accustomed.
Since the computer was drawing the character, you also had a
choice of fonts - another revolution. After the delirium of
playing with the Venice and San Francisco fonts started to
wear off, users saw that this had big consequences for the
representation of non-Roman languages. After all, no law tied
the 256 keycodes to the 256 letters of the MacRoman character set.
A different font could give you 256 _more_ letters - as the Symbol
font amply demonstrated. This, in fact, is why I switched to a
Mac. In short order I was typing Greek, Devanagari (the Sanskrit
syllabary), and phonetic symbols. After years of struggling with
international typewriters or filling in symbols by hand, I was
now my own typesetter, and in seventh heaven.
**Trouble in Paradise** -- Heaven, however, had its limits.
Suppose I wanted to print a document. Laser printers were
expensive, so I had to print in a Mac lab where the computers
didn't necessarily have the same fonts I did, and thus couldn't
print my document properly. The same problem arose if I wanted to
give a file to a colleague or a publisher who might not have the
fonts I was using, and so couldn't view my document properly.
Windows users posed yet another problem. The Windows character
set was perversely different from the Mac. For example, WinLatin1
(often referred to, somewhat inaccurately, as ISO 8859-1) places
the upside-down interrogative that opens a Spanish question at
code 191; but that character is 192 on Mac (where 191 is the
Norwegian slashed-o).
And even among Mac users, "normal" fonts came in many linguistic
varieties, because the 256 characters of MacRoman do not suffice
for every language that uses a variation of the Roman alphabet.
Consider Turkish, for instance. MacRoman includes a Turkish
dotless-i, but not a Turkish s-cedilla. So on a Turkish Mac the
s-cedilla replaces the American Mac's "fl" ligature. A parallel
thing happens on Windows, where (for example) Turkish s-cedilla
and the Old English thorn characters occupy the same numeric
spot in different language systems.
**Tower of Babel** -- None of this would count as problematic were
it not for communications. If your computing is confined to your
own office and your own printer and your own documents, you can
work just fine. But cross-platform considerations introduce a
new twist, and of course the rise of the Internet really brought
things to a head. Suddenly people whose base systems differed
were sending each other email and reading each other's Web pages.
Conventions were established for coping, but these work only to
the extent that people and software obey them. If you've ever
received email from someone named "=?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?=,"
or if you've read a Web page where quotes appeared as a funny-
looking capital O, you've experienced some form of the problem.
Also, since fonts don't travel across the Internet, characters
that depend on a particular font may not be viewable at all. HTML
can ask that certain characters should appear in a certain font
on your machine when you view my page, but a fat lot of good that
will do if you don't have that font.
Finally, there is a major issue I haven't mentioned yet: for some
writing systems, 256 characters is nowhere near enough. An obvious
example is Chinese, which requires several thousand characters.
Enter Unicode.
**The Premise and the Promise** -- What Unicode proposes is simple
enough: increase the number of bytes used to represent each
character. For example, if you use two bytes per character,
you can have 65,536 characters - enough to represent the Roman
alphabet plus various accents and diacritics, plus Greek, Russian,
Hebrew, Arabic, Devanagari, the core symbols of various Asian
languages, and many others.
What's new here isn't the codification of character codes to
represent different languages; the various existing character sets
already did that, albeit clumsily. Nor is it the use of a double-
byte system; such systems were already in use to represent Asian
characters. What's new is the grand unification into a single
character set embracing all characters at once. In other words,
Unicode would do away with character set variations across
systems and fonts. In fact, in theory a single (huge) font
could potentially contain all needed characters.
It turns out, actually, that even 65,536 symbols aren't enough,
once you start taking into account specialized scholars'
requirements for conventional markings and historical characters
(about which the folks who set the Unicode standards have often
proved not to be as well informed as they like to imagine).
Therefore Unicode has recently been extended to a potential 16
further sets of 65,536 characters (called "supplementary planes");
the size of the potential character set thus approximates a
million, with each character represented by at most 4 bytes. The
first supplementary plane is already being populated with such
things as Gothic; musical and mathematical symbols; Mycenean
(Linear B); and Egyptian hieroglyphics. The evolving standard
is, not surprisingly, the subject of various political, cultural,
technical, and scholarly struggles.
<http://www.unicode.org/>
<http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/principles.html>
What has all this to do with you, you ask? It's simple. As I
said at the outset, if you're a Mac OS X user, Unicode is on
your computer, right now. But where? In the second half of
this article, I'll show you.
Retrospect 5.0 Enables Mac OS X Backups
---------------------------------------
by Adam C. Engst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Last week we ran out of room to write much about Dantz
Development's release of Retrospect 5.0, the lack of which,
for many people serious about their backups (see our "Backed Up
Today?" series of articles on the topic), was the main obstacle
preventing upgrades to Mac OS X.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=06758>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbser=1041>
First off, I want to explain briefly why we had to wait so long
for Retrospect 5.0, and why making it compatible with Mac OS X was
much harder than it would appear. In Mac OS X, Apple essentially
bolted the classic Mac OS on top of a Unix operating system.
Although Apple did a generally good job of making this connection
invisible to users, the differences between the way the Mac OS and
Unix handle files are glaring to an application like Retrospect
that needs to be able to restore files exactly as it backed them
up. Mac OS files have different attributes and permissions than
Unix files, and Mac OS files can even have resource forks, which
Unix files lack. Plus, in the Mac OS, the only type of links are
aliases, whereas Unix offers several different types of links.
Even case-sensitivity is different between the two.
The practical upshot of these differences was that Cocoa (and
Unix) applications couldn't generally see the Mac OS attributes
and resource forks, and Classic applications couldn't handle the
Unix attributes, permissions, and links. The happy medium had to
be a specially written Carbon application that had been coded to
handle both Unix and Macintosh file information. To address this,
Dantz initially released a free Retrospect Client for Mac OS X
Preview that worked with a plug-in to Retrospect 4.3 under
Mac OS 9 to back up Mac OS X-based machines; it was basically
a hack that worked, but wasn't ideal.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=06395>
Operating system support was necessary as well, and it wasn't
until Mac OS X 10.1.2, released in late December of 2001, that
Apple fixed all the bugs that had previously made it impossible
to restore a working Mac OS X installation from a backup. Dantz
immediately released a free Retrospect 5.0 Preview that ran under
Mac OS X and could back up and restore properly. Dantz then spent
the last few months doing final testing and packaging, leading up
to last week's release of Retrospect 5.0, which can do essentially
everything Retrospect users are accustomed to doing, but with Mac
OS X as well as Mac OS 9 (plus Windows, though I haven't had time
to test Windows-compatibility yet). Aside from this fundamental
compatibility with a mixed operating system environment, there
are a few welcome changes under the hood that make Retrospect
all the more useful. These changes fall into two major categories:
internal changes to Retrospect's backup capabilities and changes
necessary for Mac OS X.
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=06678>
<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=06687>
**New Under the Hood** -- The most interesting of Retrospect's
internal changes is the elimination of a design that severely
limited the utility of backing up to external hard disks with
what Retrospect calls File Backup Sets. In earlier versions of
Retrospect, the catalog that stores the names of the backed-up
files lives in the resource fork of a File Backup Set;
unfortunately, resource forks cannot grow larger than 16 MB.
That effectively limited the number of files that could be stored
in a File Backup Set to between 60,000 to 75,000, regardless of
the size of those files. In Retrospect 5.0, when the 16 MB limit
is reached, Retrospect creates a separate .cat file to hold the
catalog. These two files must be stored in the same folder and
may not be renamed.
With the costs of hot-swappable FireWire hard disks as low as they
are, this relatively small change simplifies the use of hard disks
as dedicated backup media. Retrospect's EasyScript feature, which
helps you build a backup script, now gives you this option as
well. For instance, you could buy three 80 GB hard disks for less
than $700 total, create a File Backup Set on each one, and rotate
between them for a backup system that compares extremely favorably
to tape drive systems. A set of 160 GB drives at $400 each would
be even more cost-effective. Don't forget about archiving for
posterity (I just had reason to recover 400 MB of software from
archived backups from 1995 through 1998), but it wouldn't be
difficult to remove the drive mechanism from a case, swap in
a new mechanism, and store the old one for safe-keeping. More
elegant than buying three separate drives would be getting one
of Granite Digital's FireVue Hot-Swap Drive Systems, with which
you essentially buy only one $230 case plus $30 trays for drive
mechanisms that you swap in and out of the case. I haven't tried
one, but they sound useful.
<http://www.granitedigital.com/catalog/pg26_firewireidehotswapdrive.htm>
For people working with very large files, as can happen when
editing audio or video, Retrospect 5.0 can now back up files
larger than 2 GB. Most people probably didn't run into that
limitation before, but lots of people will be pleased to know that
Retrospect 5.0 now supports all currently shipping Apple optical
drives (see Dantz's Web site for a complete compatibility list).
Since Apple uses drives from various manufacturers, the level of
support varies slightly - with some drives, Dantz was forced to
work around drive firmware errors by requiring that you use CD-R
media rather than CD-RW media (the other option was to not support
the drive at all). Finally, the Advanced Driver Kit is no longer
required for high-capacity tape drives.
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=compatibility_list>
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=osx_apple_opt_compat_dev>
**Mac OS X Changes** -- Obviously, the huge change in Retrospect
5.0 is the capability both to run under Mac OS X (10.1.2 and
later) and to back up Mac OS X files from Macs running Retrospect
Client under Mac OS X 10.1.2 and later. This detail is important -
if you back up a Mac that has both Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X installed
while it's booted into Mac OS 9, Retrospect can't access Mac OS X
file permissions; and although it will back up the files, restores
of those files won't give you a working Mac OS X system. Likewise,
although you can back up files from mounted servers without
using Retrospect Client, privileges won't be saved for later
restoration.
In short, if you want to back up Mac OS X files such that they can
be restored properly, make sure Mac OS X is the active operating
system when backing up, and if you're backing up a Mac OS X
machine over the network, use Retrospect Client rather than
merely mounting the server.
Retrospect Clients have been updated for Mac OS X (Retrospect 5.0
Clients under Mac OS 9 are identical to Retrospect 4.3 Clients
other than the version number), and they work only over TCP/IP,
not AppleTalk. One tip: if an interrupted backup causes a Mac OS X
Retrospect Client to think it's in use when it's not, Command-
click the Off button to stop it, then click the On button to start
it again. The same trick (toggling Retrospect Client off, then on)
works in Mac OS 9 as well, though a normal click on the Off button
will suffice.
Dantz also updated Retrospect's interface to support Aqua, updated
the default selectors that back up specific sets of files, and
changed the location of various files (preferences and logs now
live in Library/Preferences/Retrospect and catalog files now
default to being stored in the current user's Documents folder).
The Retro.Startup extension that launched Retrospect automatically
for unattended backup is now called RetroRun under Mac OS X, and
it's installed in Library/StartupItems. RetroRun can automatically
launch Retrospect even when no user is logged in to a Mac OS X
machine. A memory leak has been reported in RetroRun; I'd expect
to see an update soon (unfortunately, removing RetroRun from
the StartupItems folder won't help for long, since Retrospect
recreates it on launch).
Retrospect 5.0 provides a "Live Restore" feature for restoring a
entire Mac OS X machine. If it isn't already in a bootable state,
you must first install a base Mac OS X system, upgrading as
necessary to bring it up to the same version as you're restoring,
then install Retrospect, and then perform the restore. I haven't
yet had an opportunity to test a Live Restore, though it's an
important one. Restoring can prove a little tricky with regard
to Mac OS X file permissions; I recommend reading Dantz's
Knowledgebase article on the topic and testing some restores
in a non-critical situation.
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=knowledgebase_article&id=794>
I think it's an open question as to whether you should run
Retrospect in Mac OS 9 or Mac OS X if you have the choice. Dantz
says one benefit of running in Mac OS X is that Mac OS X's
improved memory management makes it possible for Retrospect
to back up volumes containing hundreds of thousands of files
(previously, Retrospect could run out of memory scanning those
files). Plus, Dantz says Retrospect runs faster as a background
application in Mac OS X thanks to Mac OS X's approach to
multitasking. I won't quibble with those claims, but for non-
extreme situations, Retrospect running by itself on an older
PowerPC-based Mac under Mac OS 9 may be a more economical and
efficient approach, particularly if you have a slow 10 Mbps
network that will eliminate any performance gained by using
a fast Mac.
**Business Model Changes** -- There's no question that Dantz has
been among the Mac companies that have suffered as a result of
Apple's forced march to Mac OS X. The uncertainty surrounding
Mac OS X slowed Mac sales to large organizations that take backup
seriously and forced Dantz to expend a great deal of back-and-
forth effort with Apple just to make Retrospect work properly with
Mac OS X. These problems have resulted in Dantz starting to charge
for telephone support and making pricing changes in the different
versions of Retrospect.
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=support_matrix>
There are now four different versions of Retrospect with different
capabilities, aimed at different markets:
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=feature_comparison_mac>
* Retrospect Express has a subset of Retrospect's full
functionality, and it no longer works on Macs running AppleShare
IP (or Mac OS X Server). It's aimed at individual users backing
up to CD-R or external hard disks. It lists for $80, is available
directly from Dantz for $50, and upgrades from previous versions
cost $20. It has also appeared in bundles of other utilities in
the past; that may happen again.
* Retrospect Desktop also can't run on servers, but it supports
tape drives (and tape libraries of up to eight tapes) and all
of Retrospect's other features. You can buy Retrospect Clients
separately for network backup, but they can be added only if
they're in the same Class C subnet, such as 192.168.1.xxx.
Retrospect Desktop is sufficient for most small offices. It lists
for $250, costs $150 direct from Dantz, and upgrades are $100.
I suspect you'll find Retrospect Desktop bundled with most new
tape drive purchases.
* Retrospect Workgroup can back up one AppleShare IP or Mac OS X
Server machine if it's installed on that Mac, comes with licenses
for 20 Retrospect Client workstations (which you can add by DNS
name, IP address, or Subnet Broadcast), and supports tape
libraries with more than 8 tapes. Larger offices or installations
needing to back up very large amounts of data should use
Retrospect Workgroup. It costs $500 and upgrades are $200.
* The new Retrospect Server is identical to Retrospect Workgroup
Edition, but can back up multiple servers and includes licenses
for 100 Retrospect Client workstations, making it appropriate
for large organizations. It costs $800, and $350 upgrades from
previous versions of Retrospect Desktop and Workgroup are
available for a limited time.
The primary advantage of ordering directly from Dantz is that
you can download the software and have it immediately, but the
downside is that you'll pay a bit more. Look to resellers like
TidBITS sponsor Small Dog Electronics for significantly cheaper
prices on Retrospect Workgroup and Retrospect Server; other
retailers also seemed to have prices slightly lower than Dantz's
on Retrospect Express and Retrospect Desktop as well. No resellers
had Retrospect in stock yet, though that should change within
a week or two.
<http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=quick_order>
French, German, and Japanese localized versions are scheduled for
release in the second quarter of 2002. International users can buy
an English version today and then upgrade to the corresponding
localized product for free when it becomes available.
**Initial Impressions** -- I've been putting Retrospect, primarily
the Server version, through its paces, and although testing
backups can be a tedious process given the amounts of data that
need to be moved across my 10 Mbps wired Ethernet and (even
slower) AirPort networks, I've come to a few conclusions.
First, and most importantly, Retrospect 5.0 works almost exactly
the same as Retrospect 4.3 did. There was no learning curve; all
of the visible features work as they did in the past. Under
Mac OS X, Retrospect asks for administrator passwords at
appropriate times, and although its interface looks a little
different to support Aqua, I haven't noticed any significant
differences.
On initial launch, Retrospect offered to import settings from
previous versions; it appeared to do that flawlessly, although
I might try a fresh start if I were troubleshooting a problem
with Retrospect, since that would seem to be a place where
subtle corruption could creep in.
As it turns out, I have been doing a lot of troubleshooting in an
effort to help Dantz isolate an internal consistency check error
that I and several other people have experienced. I've also seen
several situations where my Mac crashed while Retrospect was
backing up, although I can't specifically attribute those
crashes to Retrospect. Plus, TidBITS Managing Editor Jeff Carlson
experienced a problem where Retrospect would back up one of his
partitions correctly, but wouldn't compare it. Luckily, as has
been the case with Retrospect over the years, these bugs haven't
caused any data loss in backups.
<http://support.dantz.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=
Desktopworkgrupx&Number=2630>
This sounds somewhat dire, and although I certainly wish I hadn't
experienced any problems, years of using Retrospect have taught me
that it's often an electronic canary in the digital mines. For
those unfamiliar with the analogy, miners used to bring a canary
down into the mine shaft as an early warning system - if noxious
gases caused the canary to keel over, the miners knew to get out.
Because of its need to operate at the highest possible speeds with
unusual storage devices, all without losing a single bit of data,
it's not unusual to see Retrospect throw an error when everything
else appears to work fine. A friend once told me of a story about
a large company that upgraded a Cisco router to new firmware
containing a bug which lost one packet in a million. The bug went
unnoticed until Retrospect started reporting errors, because
although one packet in a million doesn't sound like much, it adds
up to a real problem when you're backing up gigabytes of data.
In the end, for many cautious users (myself included), the
release of Retrospect 5.0 makes it possible to upgrade primary
workstations to Mac OS X. Although a few other backup programs
have appeared in recent months, including FWB's BackUp ToolKit
(the same as Tri-Edre's Tri-Backup), Qdea's Synchronize Pro X,
Randall Voth's Synk, CMS Peripherals' Automatic Backup System,
and PSoft's iMsafe, these utilities are appropriate primarily for
individual users backing up to media that can be mounted on the
desktop (no tape drives). For those who need to back up multiple
Macs to any media, including high-capacity tape drives, Retrospect
5.0 is the only option on the Mac that also provides archiving
and preserves resource forks, HFS+ metadata, Unix permissions
and group ownership, and hard-linked files.
<http://www.fwb.com/cs/btk/main.html>
<http://www.qdea.com/pages/pages-sprox/sprox1.html>
<http://mypage.uniserve.ca/~rvoth/synkx.html>
<http://www.cmsproducts.com/products/abs.htm>
<http://homepage.mac.com/iMsafe/>
$$
Non-profit, non-commercial publications may reprint articles if
full credit is given. Others please contact us. We don't guarantee
accuracy of articles. Caveat lector. Publication, product, and
company names may be registered trademarks of their companies.
This file is formatted as setext. For more information send email
to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. A file will be returned shortly.
For information: how to subscribe, where to find back issues,
and more, email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. TidBITS ISSN 1090-7017.
Send comments and editorial submissions to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Back issues available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/>
And: <ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/issues/>
Full text searching available at: <http://www.tidbits.com/search/>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
