Several Time Machine backup locations

[nbriders]

gday.

i dont know if this has been dealt with anywhere - i have done a search all over the place and couldn't come up with a solution. i know there are time machine hacks and apps that allow to change the backup frequency. what i would like is to have a possiblity to change backup 'setups' completely, i.e. change the disk and list of excluded files, depending on my location.

let me explain. in my office, i would like to be able to back up my office files on the network (from my macbook pro, i should say). at home, i would like to backup all the rest, including my pictures etc to my external harddrive. the former, i would like to limit to the folder containing my work stuff, both because i dont want to leave all my personal files on the network, and because the network doesnt want many GBs of data from me. on the contrary, at home i would like to backup once a week, but everything.

i was wondering if anyone knows a solution. of course it can be done manually, by changing the timemachine prefs each time - but that is a bit painful, it would seem. i picture some kind of 'time machine library' just like the 'iphoto library manager' app that allows to maintain and quickly switch several iphoto libraries.

thanks for any hints.

[baseballboy828]

rooSwitch might do it for you if you wanted to flip the switch manually. If you wanted the changes to be made automatically running a script to rotate the preference files from an app like MarcoPolo might work, depending upon whether the Time Machine prefs are loaded at login or when starting the backup.

[nbriders]

@baseballboy Thanks a lot, i will try the two options.

[goobimama]

I wish Apple releases a Time Machine Pro for something like $30 with loads of customisation options.

[Yuiichi]

Originally Posted by goobimama

I wish Apple releases a Time Machine Pro for something like $30 with loads of customisation options.

I don't really think that fits in with what Apple envisions Time Machine as. It's really "backup for the rest of us". There are a couple of fantastic apps out there that do backup on the Mac with loads of customization, such as SuperDuper! and CarbonCopyCloner; I believe that anyone who wants more customizable backup is using one of these or should look into using one of these. Other than that, just stick with Time Machine.

[baseballboy828]

As Yuiichi says, Time Machine is supposed to be an easy way of backing up, it's no SuperDuper, CarbonCopyCloner, or Retrospect. It is designed to be a simple backup solution with no hassle. For more complex backup schemes, you'll have to buy a more complex backup app. The chances that Apple will offer Time Machine Pro for more money is about equal to the chances that it decides to scrap 10.6 Snow Leopard and start bundling Windows with Macs in the next year. However, there is a chance Apple will add some more customization options to Time Machine is OS 10.6 Snow Leopard, maybe a special prefpane that can be enabled via the terminal or something. But until then, anyone looking for serious customization should turn to 3rd party apps.

[goobimama]

Originally Posted by Yuiichi

I don't really think that fits in with what Apple envisions Time Machine as. It's really "backup for the rest of us". There are a couple of fantastic apps out there that do backup on the Mac with loads of customization, such as SuperDuper! and CarbonCopyCloner; I believe that anyone who wants more customizable backup is using one of these or should look into using one of these. Other than that, just stick with Time Machine.

That is exactly why Time Machine Pro should be a separate software that someone actually buys. While Carbon Cloner and all those others do backups, none of them are integrated into the system as Time Machine is. Besides, the interface is also super cool. So giving a pro version for intelligent computer users would be excellent.

[baseballboy828]

That would be nice, but that's not the way Apple works, and I'm glad it isn't. Can you imagine buying Leopard and going through an experience like Windows, which versions with bigger feature-sets than others? Buy Leopard Basic, with the regular features and less eye candy. Buy Leopard Premium with more eye candy and no extra features. Buy Leopard Ultimate to get the most features. It would be a disaster and would be something Apple would never do.

If a 3rd party developer could figure out how to add a lot of new features and sell the app, then that would be great. They'd make plenty of money. But your only hope is a 3rd party dev. Don't count on Apple offering that for a fee. It will either be built into a new OS, or it won't be available from Apple.

[Yuiichi]

Originally Posted by goobimama

That is exactly why Time Machine Pro should be a separate software that someone actually buys. While Carbon Cloner and all those others do backups, none of them are integrated into the system as Time Machine is. Besides, the interface is also super cool. So giving a pro version for intelligent computer users would be excellent.

Ask yourself this: why would Apple need to do this?

If you ask that same question for the many other Apple developed applications there are, there is usually a simple answer: this app fills a niche that is either not being filled by a 3rd party application or would work better if built into the OS. Time Machine filled a niche that was not currently being filled by a 3rd party application. The fine backup utilities that were being made by 3rd party developers were for an entirely different audience; the power-user, like you or I. As I mentioned in my first post on this subject, Time Machine is "for the rest of us"; it's Apple's solution to get everyone to be aware of the importance of backing up their data and providing an easy way to do so. Time Machine is built with the average user in mind; backup for my mom, basically.

I don't think Apple would ever create this "Time Machine Pro" because they don't need to. CCC and SuperDuper! do a great job of servicing those users who want a more comprehensive backup solution. These people don't need applications to be "integrated" into the system, as they have no trouble going out and finding them. Integration within the OS in terms of a backup utility only serves the purpose of making it more accessible.