Arq Macarq For Mac

I've just discovered the wonders of Arq, and I'm wondering whether anyone is using it as a Time Machine replacement (i.e. Using it for local backups to directly-attached hard drives)? I've had mixed experiences with Time Machine, I've found it quite flaky at times and the interface can be glitchy (as pretty as it is), and now that I'm an Arq convert, I'm finding myself attracted to the idea of using the one interface for both my local and cloud backups. Is anyone using Arq instead of Time Machine in this way? Be aware that several people have reported that backups made with Time Machine, at least prior to OS X 10.11 El Capitan, may not be complete.

• Arq Macarq For Mac Review
• Arq Macarq For Mac Os
• Arq Macarq For Mac Free

I mentioned that in the fifth (non-bolded) paragraph of, and hestermofet later in the same thread that 'full restores from. Time Machine was a disaster (I don't trust it any more after that).' Rationull by Apple that the 'scenario (c)' adaption of my terminology in bug had been fixed in El Capitan. However, on finalhour's report of a Time Machine disaster under OS X 10.9 Mavericks, rationull said he's switched to Carbon Copy Cloner.

Mar 3, 2014 - One of the best Mac backup apps gets a major update. Website: www.haystacksoftware.com/blog/2014/03/arq-4-is-out ( Cached Version ) New.

Can you imagine Tim Cook making the following announcement? 'Apple, with OS X El Capitan, has now fixed a Time Machine bug that existed from 2007 through 2015. Because of it, your irreplaceable family photos etc. May not have been backed up.

We're really sorry about that, but you can't sue us for more than $50 because of the Limitation of Liability clause in the OS X Software License Agreement.' I can't imagine it, (1) because Apple's reputation would be mud with millions of consumers, and (2) because class-action lawyers would be licking their chops. I also think Tim Cook would exert every effort to make sure that no official statement of any kind containing the substance of that announcement will ever be made by anyone at Apple. So we'll have to hope that the bug has been fixed. In addition, ClarkGoble another long-time Time Machine bug going back to OS X 10.7 Lion.

This one seems to be at least partially hardware-related, and is what I and rationull would term a 'scenario (b)' bug. He's not the first to experience it; previous posters in that same thread have experienced it in OS X 10.11 El Capitan versions at least up through 10.11.2. ClarkGoble ends his post by saying 'This is why I never recommend Time Machine being your primary backup. It's great for convenience when it works. But at a minimum you should always have two Time Machine disks you alternate regularly between.' P.S.: Added fifth substantial paragraph cautioning about additional Time Machine 'scenario (b)' bug from OS X 10.7 through at least 10.11.2. Arq is nice, especially since it's for both Windows and Mac OS.

It's great that it can do local backups and online backups. Can't go wrong with it. CarbonCopyCloner (CCC) and SuperDuper are great Mac-only alternatives if you want a bootable local backup of your drive. I know SuperDuper doesn't do anything in regards to backing up data in the cloud. Not sure about CCC.

Can Arq do truly local backups, i.e. Over a LAN to another computer running no more than OS X Server or an AFP 'server' such as an Airport Extreme? Would seem to indicate that it can't. Maybe, when you say 'local backups', you're referring to a server—which might be a NAS—running something Amazon-S3-compatible such as Basho Riak S2?

I would call that a WAN backup rather than a LAN backup, because—according to the blog post—the server must have an Internet connection. Or maybe you're thinking of CrashPlan Local, which does LAN backups using Code42's central server to provide inter-machine guidance? DavidH, thanks for the insightful previous post. I actually had no idea TM had such big issues. Some of the stuff in those threads you linked to were a little bit above my technical grade, but still an eye opener. I have been backing up my laptops with TM since it was first announced but only once did I use it to restore data back when I moved from a regular hard drive to SSD back in 2010.

That's my only anecdotal experience with TM which is why I said I haven't had issues with it. I have been assuming TM will save me time in case of a hard drive failure so I don't have to reinstall everything from scratch, but I won't be making that assumption anymore. I'm glad I err'd on the side of caution and always triply backed up any important documents, files, and pictures on (1) a TM external drive (2) manual drag-n-drop into a folder on another external drive, and (3) portable flash drive that's placed off-site. If my current drive completely failed today and a TM restoration failed me as well, it would be more of an annoyance rather than a disaster. Can't say the same if any of my family or friends had a hard drive failure. That said, I'll definitely be looking for a TM alternative soon.

Can Arq do truly local backups, i.e. Over a LAN to another computer running no more than OS X Server or an AFP 'server' such as an Airport Extreme? Would seem to indicate that it can't.

Arq Macarq For Mac Review

Maybe, when you say 'local backups', you're referring to a server—which might be a NAS—running something Amazon-S3-compatible such as Basho Riak S2? I would call that a WAN backup rather than a LAN backup, because—according to the blog post—the server must have an Internet connection.

Arq Macarq For Mac Os

Or maybe you're thinking of CrashPlan Local, which does LAN backups using Code42's central server to provide inter-machine guidance? When I said local backup, I meant locally to an external drive.

According to MacStores (and vaguely on Arq's website), you should be able to back up to a folder on an external drive, NAS, local machine aka backup a Mac to another Mac, via SFTP, or any of the cloud services they support. scroll down to see where it says: 'Back up external hard drives, NAS files, whatever you want.

Arq has no limits.' I use Arq to back to my name over nothing more than SMB and a mapped directory.

I also back up to S3, but my NAS acts as my fast backup. While I haven't tried it, based off the setup process, I see no reason why it wouldn't backup to an attached drive. None of these back ups are bootable, but they are versioned. Arq are something like Superduper are complementary utilities in my opinion. When you say 'backup to my name' I assume you mean 'backup to my NAS'.

'is a network file sharing protocol'. A —which I don't own—'is a file-level computer data storage server connected to a computer network providing data access to a heterogeneous group of clients', '. A purpose-built specialized computer.' 'They typically provide access to files using network file sharing protocols my emphasis such as NFS, SMB/CIFS, or AFP.'

It looks to me as if your NAS connects via SMB running on top of, which is 'a core protocol of the Internet protocol suite.' Is 'an unsecured and rarely used file transfer protocol from the early days of the Internet'. It does appear that Arq version 5 will back up to an attached drive. I see no evidence that Arq will connect via, which is what Apple's Airport Extreme and Time Capsule (which is an Airport Extreme with an attached drive actually built into the device) use in conjunction with Time Machine. However Arq version 5 may backup to another Mac running OS X Server, since that seems to handle SMB as well as AFP. DavidH, thanks for the insightful previous post. I actually had no idea TM had such big issues.

Some of the stuff in those threads you linked to were a little bit above my technical grade, but still an eye opener. For background, I should make you aware that I originally got into the merits vs. Deficiencies of Time Machine in a Mac Ach thread I started about 15 months ago. I started it proposing to re-establish a hardware/software backup system I had used from at least 1995 to 2010; the last four pages concerned my intention to use an updated version of the Retrospect backup app. Because of their difficulties (which I was fortunate to never have had) using Retrospect with tape hardware back in the day, and because of a really-buggy Mac version of Retrospect that was released in early 2009 after intra-corporate shenanigans, a number of Ach posters had developed a real hatred of Retrospect.

Arq Macarq For Mac Free

They, especially a frequent poster from Southeast England, were fervently urging me either to use CrashPlan or to buy an Airport Extreme and use it in conjunction with Time Machine. I kept saying that those alternatives wouldn't meet my requirements, which are slightly peculiar, but they ridiculed these. In defense I came across (I'm not going to reconstruct how this early in the morning) rationull's discovery of a Time Machine bug, which I categorized as what became known as 'scenario (c)'. Nobody was able to counter that, and the bugginess of Time Machine has since become apparent to other Ach posters.

Although Retrospect has the AFAIK unique virtues of combining both versioned backup and bootable recovery in one app, I'm not going to suggest it for you. It has the disadvantages of more-or-less requiring a separate computer (running either OS X or Windows) for use as a 'backup server', and also of being somewhat more complicated to set up.

However Retrospect also has the AFAIK unique virtue of reporting on an optional checksum compare of each file backed up in a backup run, and it always reports the number and size of files backed up in a run (this virtue is not unique, but 'push-to-server' backup apps such as Time Machine and CrashPlan don't AFAIK make the report accessible—but 'pull-to-server' backup apps can and ). Thus there is no way that the kinds of bugs people have discovered in Time Machine could have escaped detection had they occurred in Retrospect.

For your requirements, I would suggest a combination of Arq and SuperDuper. I used SuperDuper last year in a few one-shot runs, not requiring scripting and therefore allowing me to use the free version. I've never used Carbon Copy Cloner, so I can't say anything about it. After working 25 years as a Poli-Sci dropout doing applications programming on IBM and Burroughs mainframes, I returned to college to get a minimum-requirements degree in Computer Science. I then continued work as a mainframe applications programmer while getting a non-PhD-track Masters in Computer Science in the early-to-mid 1990s. I then worked for 8 years doing applications programming on desktop computers, some Windows machines and some Macs. Thus comparative analysis of backup systems is barely within my technical grade, especially when it involves truly understanding the user's requirements—which some Mac Ach posters seem to have trouble doing.

P.S.: Added fourth paragraph, outlining my technical qualifications for analyzing backup systems. P.P.S.: Added fact that Arq 5—as a 'pull-to-server' backup app—now keeps session logs (whose detail it can now e-mail to you, BTW. As Retrospect has been able to do for several years) to parenthetical note in next-to-last sentence of second paragraph. When I said local backup, I meant locally to an external drive. According to MacStores (and vaguely on Arq's website), you should be able to back up to a folder on an external drive, NAS, local machine aka backup a Mac to another Mac, via SFTP, or any of the cloud services they support. scroll down to see where it says: 'Back up external hard drives, NAS files, whatever you want. Arq has no limits.'

I just setup a backup to a USB attached drive and it worked just fine. Also ran the same test over AFP to my NAS without a problem. Arq really can backup to just about anyplace. It can't create bootable backup drives, but that isn't a drawback for me as I have been using SuperDuper or CarbonCopyCloner for years.