Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About boomcha

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

264 profile views
  1. I no longer have to maintain a huge archive of old work backed up with those versions for someone else but still use Retrospect for my one man retouching show, but I think that you are proposing makes sense. This way you would be able to pick and choose what gets restored and actually verify that it's working and still there. The only thing that you would lose would be all the different versions of files if you needed them because of the incremental backup.
  2. I'm still struggling with this as well. I don't have anything fancy in my little network, all through Cat 6A and standard consumer/home office grade gear that works perfect otherwise. I believe this bug was introduced in 14.6 as I never had any issues before. I have a ticket open and as of the latest beta version in Retrospect 15 it wasn't fixed yet. I don't want to pay for version 15 if this is something that they broke in 14. Essentially my issue is that Retrospect server won't see the clients and thus errors out in -530. Locating the device finds it again and it works until the next time the machines are rebooted and then its busted again.
  3. I'm getting this pretty consistently and it's a bit annoying, updated the clients a couple of times and still the same.
  4. Just choose your drive using the Backup process and then browse it and manually select all the stuff you need to back up (it should say Manual Selection at the bottom) and then go through the wizard and double check it again (in Browse) before you press start.
  5. boomcha

    When Sh**t happens

    Another vote for LTO. I like HP drives.
  6. Perhaps you can do half of the files (not sure how you are structured), and then do the rest in folder increments, this way you can narrow down what is missing. Of course this works best if you have everything in folders already or something.
  7. I agree, this is a major major major screwup and a bit of BS. Retrospect should spend the time and money and fix this issue for all of us that have used this software since the 90's. Rebuilding these version 5 and 6 catalogs takes A LOT of time since the media is fragile. I just spent half a day installing Parallels and installing OS X 10.6 Server so that we don't have to boot up off a 10.6.8 installation (interrupting work) to retrieve old work that is sometimes required. My Parallels idea didn't work since Parallels doesn't access SCSI or Firewire devices. The idea of old software on old hardware is a great one but if said machine dies and you have a few 10's of terabytes (all on 25GB AIT tapes, do the math) it becomes an exercise in futility. Come on Retrospect get with the program and fix this. You are a back up software company.
  8. Any updates on when a revision is coming? I need to upgrade to 10.8.3 and this is the only issue preventing us from doing so.
  9. How are you running 10.7.4 on a G5? You can't install Lion on a PPC G5 machine. And with Lion Apple removed the ability to use Rosetta to run PPC apps so you can't run Retrospect 6 on Lion. That's why you have to upgrade to Retrospect version 9.0 or run something else. I agree that the docs showing version 8 is amateur hour though. Version 9 is update from 8 so a lot of the stuff is shared but still a bit discomforting to see that they didn't bother to update the docs properly.
  10. Hi everyone, was wondering if anyone got 6.1 and 9 to co-exist in the same machine at the same time. I'm just concerned about making triple sure that our daily backups are reliable and would like to do a backup in both versions for a small period of time. Any experiences with this?
  11. Thanks for the replies everyone. Finally getting around to testing an upgrade path and I'm liking R9 so far.
  12. Can someone answer at Retrospect answer this question please?
  13. Hi there, I need to know the answer to this question before we go ahead and upgrade our working backup system. 1) Can I read storage sets created in v6.1 (or earlier) in version 9? Do retrievals actually work?