BUSlink/TEAC CD-W516EB

[mattrk]

(Some of this was posted to the Mac OS 9 forum for device & hardware compatability. New information has been added.)

 

 

 

I've been running Retrospect for about 10 years now, with a Python tape drive hooked to a Quadra 700. Now I'm running a PowerMac G4 DP/450 with OS 9 and OS X; I've been transferring all my files to a second Mac and backing up to the same tape drive. However, this is time consuming and cumbersome, taking several hours if not the better part of a day. My Sony Spressa CD-RW is only a 2x - way too slow for backup as well.

 

 

 

I saw a Universal BUSlink FireWire CD-RW with 16X write speed on sale and picked it up, not realizing that Retrospect has more compatability issues with CD drives than tape (apparrently), and that this drive was not listed as supported or non-supported by brandname. After realizing that the drive was not on the list, I did some poking around. It seems that both Toast 5 Platinum (the drive comes with Toast Lite) and Retrospect see the drive as a TEAC CD-W516EB drive mechanism, which is also in three approved FW CD-RW drives for the Mac: an EZQuest Boa, an Ikebana Fireblaster, and a QPS Que! Fire. Some web searching revealed that this drive does NOT use packet writing, one of the operations that Retrospect desperately needs in CD-RW drives to be effective. This is a mechanism feature, not a case or software feature. Then why is this mechanism approved in three other drives?

 

 

 

The problem this particular drive had was when I set up an immediate backup. Retrospect would recognize the drive and ask for media and almost begin writing. Thirty seconds later, Retrospect would ask for another disk, saying it would be called "2-(hard drive) Backup" - without anything being written on disk 1. Just for giggles, a second disk was used, and that one was spat out after thirty seconds, with Retrospect asking for a third disk. Retrospect was acting like this was a viable drive and it was busy writing data to the disks, but no such luck. I've tried CD-R, CD-RW, and four different brands of media (Maxell, Memorex, TDK and Sony); none of these work.

 

 

 

I also tried a workaround suggested at Macintouch - using Disk Copy in OS X to make CD-sized images, backing up to the images, burning the disks through Toast, and testing the set to see if I could get a file from the backup. No joy there - Retrospect said the time of the backup and the disk were different, and recreating the catalog didn't work.

 

 

 

I realize this is long-winded, but my frustration is coming to a point, and I need to take action on a backup strategy rather soon. Here are my questions:

 

 

 

1) Why would Dantz stress a need for packet writing when a drive has been approved that seemingly doesn't have it?

 

 

 

2) What is the difference between this BUSlink CD-W516EB and the other three of different vendors?

 

 

 

3) Was the BUSlink drive even tested?

 

 

 

4) Does the "not writing anything but acting like it" situation show another problem rather than drive compatability?

 

 

 

If Retrospect doesn't work with this drive, my options are to: find another backup strategy that doesn't use Retrospect; or sell the drive at a loss and get one that should use Retrospect. I would prefer to use Retrospect, but if I gotta move on, I'll find something else.

 

 

 

In the future, could Retrospect get makers of approved drives to put big neon stickers on the boxes that say "Retrospect Ready", or catalog/web sellers list it on product descriptions? In this day of 24-hour special sales, I usually don't carry a list of approved drives around.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Matt

[AmyJ]

Firewire drives may have the same internal mechanism, but different external bridges which allow communication with the computer. This drive is currently in testing, however there are no guarantees when, or if, it will be qualified. Most drives on the market these days support some form of packet writing. I'd be surprised if the Buslink drive does not support this method of access.

 

 

 

Depending on a drive that is unqualified, and appears to maybe work, is not suggested. Worst case scenerio is that you'll have no data, or corrupted data, when it comes time to restore.

 

 

 

Many brand new drives will not work properly with Retrospect right out of the box - that is why we, and other software vendors, quality test drives for compatibility. Sometimes we need to work with vendors to improve the packet writing ability of their drives, sometimes we have to build/tweak our own custom drivers, sometimes the drive just doesn't meet the quality standards to reliably backup your data. There are many factors involved, which is why qualification can take weeks or even months for particular drives. Even then, they may never pass our quality tests.

[mattrk]

Followup to my post above:

 

 

 

According to TEAC (which, they admit, have crummy support for the Mac on their web site), that specific mechanism does have packet writing.

 

 

 

A tip from a tech at BUSlink (who also admits the same crummy Mac support on-line) was to quit everything, insert a blank CD-ROM, and let Disk Burner open up. Let it prepare the disk for burning by naming it. Open Retrospect and do an immediate backup of only as much data as will fill the disk. Let Retrospect "burn" to the CD (actually, store it in its cache). Eject the disk. At this time, Disk Burner will ask you if you want to burn the disk; say yes. After the disk is burned, test it with a retrieve. This seemed to have worked! However, I would like to prepare several disks at one time, then burn the entire backup for session retrieval purposes.

 

 

 

While getting an approved burner is the way I really wanted to go, there is one problem: the same drive model can hold several kinds of mechanisms, and usually these mechanisms are not listed on either the box or at web catalog vendors. The chances are quite high that you can get an approved drive - with the wrong mechanism. Also, compared to the number of drives out there, the process of approving drives is very, very slow. I went to a well-stocked MicroCenter yesterday with a sharp sales team, and brought the latest list of FireWire drives approved for Retrospect. None of their drives were approved, or the list was not clear enough to make a choice worry-free (even with a 30-day return policy).

 

 

 

I fear that if the current climate persists, Retrospect will be known as that good product that no one wanted to risk a drive towards. Pity - it's an elegant, simple solution to a heavy problem.

 

 

 

Matt