drharry Posted March 6, 2006 Report Share Posted March 6, 2006 Does Retrospect 6.1 desktop work with Intel Based Macs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPaikos Posted March 6, 2006 Report Share Posted March 6, 2006 I am using it on my new iMac G5 with the intel chip. It works, but I've noticed a few little things. Errors that I get now but never used to. Error -34 (Volume Full), thats my current issue. But I dont get that error every time. I back up to both an external hard drive and an ftp site. All in all, im backing up over 2.5 Gigs of data. Most of the time it runs smoothly, but every now and again one of my scripts will send back an error holding the rest of my scripts up. As soon as I say OK, the rest of my scripts run perfectly. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2006 Report Share Posted March 8, 2006 I don't know about Retrospect desktop but I'm running Retrospect Server 6.1 on my 20" Core Duo iMac and it runs better than I expected. The setup was migrated from my previous backup server, a dual 1GHz Quicksilver G4. I have given up backups to tape because of the cost, and using DVD+/-R instead. For regular backup of my LAN, I alternate between two sets, with large video and audio files excluded and backed up separately, I am up to around 20+ segments (DVD disks) per set. I've had one failure so far, and I don't blame this on the fact that Retrospect is running under Rosetta. And I've done a number of restore tests to make sure that the backup data is legitimate. Aside from the obviously longer initial startup time (about 10-15 seconds, 3-4 seconds subsequent re-launches), all Retrospect tasks seem to run actually faster than on my G4 or even my dual G5! Overall I'm very confident with the new setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonaldL Posted March 8, 2006 Report Share Posted March 8, 2006 Here's the official statement about the Intel Macs: http://kb.dantz.com/article.asp?article=8322&p=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssevenup Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Quote: Does Retrospect 6.1 desktop work with Intel Based Macs? More importantly, does the client work, and when will it be a Universal binary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Quote: More importantly, does the client work, and when will it be a Universal binary? Reports in the field indicate that the Retrospect Client software works well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maser Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 We are not having any issues with the Retrospect client on the Intel Macs we have here (two iMacs, one MacBook and one intel Mini...) But this is just with backup and file restore. I wouldn't be in a position to try a *full* client restore. FWIW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etiffany Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Are your intel macs being backed up to a Mac server or a Windows server? The just-released statement regarding Retrospect "support" for intel macs notes > Backing up an Intel-based Mac to a Windows-based Retrospect backup server is not supported. but I'd like to know if people have actually tried this and what is the deal. ET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maser Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Yeah, I saw that too: > Backing up an Intel-based Mac to a Windows-based Retrospect backup server is not supported. What would *not* be supported by this configuration? If the Mac server app can back up an Intel Mac client, why couldn't the Windows server app do the same? It's the same "client" version. What's different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Quote: It's the same "client" version. What's different? I have no specific idea, but Retrospect<->Client interaction is a two way street. Much of the heavy lifting is done by the application, which downloads code to the client in advance of the backup process. Just a data point to ponder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayoff Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 My understanding is that the Windows application has troubles communicating with the client on an intel Mac. We will try to fix this, but I don't know when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeDave Posted April 12, 2006 Report Share Posted April 12, 2006 In the compatibility announcement, it states (in part) Quote: When a volume being protected by Retrospect is renamed in Mac OS X, Retrospect assumes it is a new volume instead of an existing volume. This is new language in regards to Retrospect. What exactly is "a volume being protected by Retrospect"? Is this simply referring to volumes that show in the Volumes Database window? On a PPC Mac, a change to a volume name in the Finder, or to a folder that has been defined as a Subvolume, is immediately reflected in Retrospect's Volume Database window (and all associated scripts). Does this meant that on an Intel based Mac, a change made in the Finder (to a logical volume) will result in the Volume Database showing a grey icon for the original name, and a new icon showing for the new name? And that a change made to a folder that has been defined as a Retrospect Subvolume will cause the volume to be grey in the Volume Database window, and no new listing until the user re-defines the renamed folder as a new Subvolume? Does changing the names back again return them to their previous status? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveluscher Posted April 24, 2006 Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 EMC Insignia, Do you plan on releasing a Universal Binary version of Retrospect, and if so – when? Thank you, Steven Luscher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.