Bootable Target Disk backups between different Macs?
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: AES on 6 Jul 2010 11:38 I've posted in the past about how I have two 2007-era MacBooks; make a bootable clone from the primary MacBook, running Tiger and using SuperDuper!, to the internal HD in the standby MacBook started up in Target Disk mode; and the standby MacBook then boots "from itself" just fine, giving me in essence an immediately-available hot standby machine. I'm about to acquire a new 15" MacBook Pro with Snow Leopard pre-installed and switch to it as my primary machine. Am I likely to be able to play the same trick, making a bootable SuperDuper! clone of the new MacBook to one of the older MacBooks, then booting the older machine from it? (I'm not counting on doing this, just asking for predictions . . . David Dempson, or anyone else?) (If I instead make a bootable SuperDuper! clone from the new MacBook Pro to an external HD, is one of the older MacBooks likely to be able to boot from it?)
From: David Empson on 6 Jul 2010 12:22 AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> wrote: > I've posted in the past about how I have two 2007-era MacBooks; make a > bootable clone from the primary MacBook, running Tiger and using > SuperDuper!, to the internal HD in the standby MacBook started up in > Target Disk mode; and the standby MacBook then boots "from itself" just > fine, giving me in essence an immediately-available hot standby machine. > > I'm about to acquire a new 15" MacBook Pro with Snow Leopard > pre-installed and switch to it as my primary machine. Am I likely to be > able to play the same trick, making a bootable SuperDuper! clone of the > new MacBook to one of the older MacBooks, then booting the older machine > from it? In principle, yes, but there is a technical catch, and a licensing catch. First the technical issue: You must be running a generic version of Mac OS X which is NEWER than the version originally supplied with both computers. I have one of the current 15" MacBook Pros. It was supplied with a custom build of 10.6.3. That particular build of Mac OS X might not work properly on an older Mac (I haven't tried and wouldn't want to). A copy of Snow Leopard installed on another Mac and updated to 10.6.3 will NOT include the additional or updated files required to support the current 15" MacBook Pro. The system might boot but it could be unreliable or missing features. If either computer is updated to 10.6.4, the resulting system becomes a generic one able to support all models that predate that system release. Therefore after you get your 15" MacBook Pro, make sure it is updated to 10.6.4 before doing your cloning trick. (The mid 2010 Mac Mini is a special case: it was released so close to 10.6.4 that Apple had to release a special build of 10.6.4 to update that model. It won't have a fully generic system until 10.6.5.) The licensing issue: software included with the new MacBook Pro is not licensed for use on another Mac. In particular, if your older computer is still running Tiger or Leopard, you have not paid for the right to run Snow Leopard on that computer. If you are on Tiger, you should buy the Mac Box Set for the old computer (or retail Leopard and Snow Leopard); if it is on Leopard you should buy the retail Snow Leopard. Once you've at least licensed the operating system for each computer, it is only semantics as to which installated copy you are using. Similarly, the copy of iLife included on the new MacBook Pro is not licensed for use on the old computer. If the old computer currently has iLife '08 or earlier you should buy iLife '09 for it (included in the Mac Box Set). Third party applications are likely to have the same issue. > (I'm not counting on doing this, just asking for predictions . . . > David Dempson, or anyone else?) > > (If I instead make a bootable SuperDuper! clone from the new MacBook Pro > to an external HD, is one of the older MacBooks likely to be able to > boot from it?) No difference to cloning directly onto the other computer's hard drive. It is the system software build which is the issue. -- David Empson dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz
From: AES on 6 Jul 2010 16:10 In article <1jl8rgd.rlzmud1c5tq2rN%dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz>, dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote: > A copy of Snow Leopard installed on another Mac and updated to 10.6.3 > will NOT include the additional or updated files required to support the > current 15" MacBook Pro. The system might boot but it could be > unreliable or missing features. > > If either computer is updated to 10.6.4, the resulting system becomes a > generic one able to support all models that predate that system release. > > Therefore after you get your 15" MacBook Pro, make sure it is updated to > 10.6.4 before doing your cloning trick. Thanks very much. A subtlety I would otherwise never have known about. > The licensing issue: software included with the new MacBook Pro is not > licensed for use on another Mac. > > In particular, if your older computer is still running Tiger or Leopard, > you have not paid for the right to run Snow Leopard on that computer. If > you are on Tiger, you should buy the Mac Box Set for the old computer > (or retail Leopard and Snow Leopard); if it is on Leopard you should buy > the retail Snow Leopard. Thanks again; understand the point. We a have family 5-pack of Snow Leopard around the house; I may be able to make use it. > Third party applications are likely to have the same issue. Sure hope not. Much of my software is older vintage, and on newer ones the only issue I've ever encountered is if I try to run them on two machines _at once_ (usually accidentally, not intentionally); and this is detected because the two machines are on a common Airport WiFi net. > No difference to cloning directly onto the other computer's hard drive. > It is the system software build which is the issue. Thanks still again -- I think I grasp the issue (now, that is).
From: David Empson on 6 Jul 2010 20:46 AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> wrote: > In article <1jl8rgd.rlzmud1c5tq2rN%dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz>, > dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote: > > > The licensing issue: software included with the new MacBook Pro is not > > licensed for use on another Mac. > > > > In particular, if your older computer is still running Tiger or Leopard, > > you have not paid for the right to run Snow Leopard on that computer. If > > you are on Tiger, you should buy the Mac Box Set for the old computer > > (or retail Leopard and Snow Leopard); if it is on Leopard you should buy > > the retail Snow Leopard. > > Thanks again; understand the point. We a have family 5-pack of Snow > Leopard around the house; I may be able to make use it. There is no technical difference between the cloned copy of Snow Leopard and one which was installed from the family pack. Ownership of the family pack means you are allowed to have Snow Leopard installed on up to five computers that normally live in your house, PLUS on each newly purchased Mac which came with Snow Leoaprd preinstalled. > > Third party applications are likely to have the same issue. > > Sure hope not. Much of my software is older vintage, and on newer ones > the only issue I've ever encountered is if I try to run them on two > machines _at once_ (usually accidentally, not intentionally); and this > is detected because the two machines are on a common Airport WiFi net. Assuming you have a single licence edition of an application: The licence agreement for many applications only allows a single installation, no matter how you actually use it. (Some are so draconian that even having a backup of your hard drive is sufficient to be in violation of the licence agreement, but whether that would hold up in court is another question entirely.) Some allow two installations with specific restrictions such as a work computer and a home computer, or a work computer and a laptop which is taken elsewhere. Some allow any number of installations from a single licence, as long as they are being used by a single person (possibly only one in use at a time). Activation mechanisms (e.g. in recent Adobe CS versions) are a method of enforcing the licence so that you cannot have more than a specified number of working copies of the application installed. Network checks are another method used by some applications (e.g. Microsoft Office and FileMaker Pro) to ensure you aren't running two copies at the same time (on the same network) with the same licence key. Even if the software doesn't use these methods, its licence agreement might specifically forbid having two usable copies of the application installed on different computers, unless you've paid for a second licence or a multi-use licence. Whether you choose to honour that is up to you, of course. I think your position of "only run on one computer at a time" is perfectly reasonable (with the exception of things like system software which need to be running simultaneously, or which are licensed to a specific computer). I approve of the concept of Apple's very reasonably priced family packs, which allow me to install any version of Mac OS X, iLife and iWork on all of my computers without worrying about the licence. -- David Empson dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz
From: Frank Haber on 7 Jul 2010 11:31
David, thanks for your valuable posts. PC guy here (have a IIci and an ibook G4). Couple of questions. Was the shift to generic builds around the 10.6.4 level a conscious "further de-copy-protecting" move on Apple's part, do you think? I've always admired Apple's attitude on this. Is the original DVD still a bit non-kosher, to avoid disk copying? Are all drivers really lurking on all installs? Could you SuperDuper! restore from a laptop to a Mac Pro, for instance? And a totally off-the wall set of questions: What's the last OSX version that could read an EXT2/3 (Firewire only, I presume) external? Where would one go for installable file systems for a recent Intel Mac? |