Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Carbon Copy Cloner - Users Thread - Yosemite to Mojave to Big Sur - and after

Erasing the target drive has always been the first step I take when creating a backup boot drive.

Lou
 
Mike Boreham said:
You should be able to get a bootable clone on an Intel Mac if you start with an erased destination. CCC will offer you choices.
M1 macs have been on and off for bootable clones. Currently not on M1 for me.
Data volume only clones can be converted to bootable by installing a system onto them.
I am quite happy with data volume only clones. I don't need to be be able to carry on in minutes (and anyway bootable clones need a lot of sorting and resuming when first booted). I much prefer to reinstall and migrate.
Click to expand...
OIC, THANKS. I think I agree with you. I don't really need to be up and running right away either. I think this is the correct route for me as well. thanks again!
 
flowrider said:
^^^^Nope not for the M1, but then again neither does SD work for the M1.

Lou
Click to expand...
I may assume that the difference is not in the hardware (M1, M2 ...) but in the new kernel modules
that serve the M-series CPU's, so I expect that in due course even on M-series a bootable backup
will be possible without erasing. I wonder if APPLE slows down the publication of the needed software
because they are afraid of new security problems. In my opinion the M-series were not only created
to be independent, but also because published weaknesses in the Intel chips were never solved.
;JOOP!
 
CCC Version 6 beta has this in its Help section:

Screenshot 2021-05-08 at 10.38.32.png
 
  • Wow
Reactions: DotCom2
Apple_Robert said:
I agree with Bombich. It just isn't worth the time to try and find a sustainable method when all your user files etc. are already being backed up.
Click to expand...
So best method: re-install OS followed by migration of user files? Just wondering .....
 
I use Time Machine as a regular backup of all files.
I use CCC as a general clone of my drive before any major update etc. SafetyNet is turned off since I had ethe TM backup should I need any previous files.
 
Nowadays all your personal settings and preferences should reside under your login directory,
so a full backup is not needed to restore your workplace, except for applications you installed.
Formerly both in MSWindows and UNIX those data were spread all over the system.
So, today, you do not need a bootable image backup of your entire system.
;JOOP!
 
Weaselboy said:
If you are on Big Sur, TM is not backing up the OS any longer, so you will be stuck with Internet recovery. Which is fine for my purposes.

View attachment 1771947
Click to expand...
Your reply triggered my memory. Speaking of TM, I was going to do a TM this morning (to test) on my new MacBook only to find out there was nothing there. I have since turned it off.

Thanks for catching my mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weaselboy
I'm quite the novice when it comes to the latest stuff, so please excuse what might seem to be a dumb request for advice.
I spend time between my home and my daughter's place across town.
I've been using CCC to clone my iMac onto an external ssd and startup from it on my daughter's iMac when I stay there.
This has enabled me to continue working without interfering with her setup.
Will I not be able to continue doing this?
 
Mike Boreham said:
CCC Version 6 beta has this in its Help section:

View attachment 1771812
Click to expand...
Giving up on bootable backups takes away the main selling point of CCC which is fast (immediate) recovery in the event of some hardware and/or software problems.

With this change, CCC6's functionality is much the same as TM. For both, recovery requires re install of macOS and restoration of files from the backup.

Whilst I can understand that the CCC interface and flexibility is better than TM, it becomes hard to justify its cost when, at heart, it has the same functionality as TM.

I do run CCC5 to make a bootable backup, but will think twice before considering an upgrade to CCC6.
 
Just my experience: TM is designed to run constantly and CCC can be programmed to certain times
and frequency. TM is slow and does not show why. I'll stick to CCC.
;JOOP!
 
gilby101 said:
Giving up on bootable backups takes away the main selling point of CCC which is fast (immediate) recovery in the event of some hardware and/or software problems.

With this change, CCC6's functionality is much the same as TM. For both, recovery requires re install of macOS and restoration of files from the backup.

Whilst I can understand that the CCC interface and flexibility is better than TM, it becomes hard to justify its cost when, at heart, it has the same functionality as TM.

I do run CCC5 to make a bootable backup, but will think twice before considering an upgrade to CCC6.
Click to expand...

Good points. I will use both for my boot drive, having experienced migration problems from TM in the past (although much better since it went APFS in Big Sur). I also use CCC for backing up big data drives that would not be appropriate for Time Machine.
 
Last edited:
Sciuriware said:
Just my experience: TM is designed to run constantly and CCC can be programmed to certain times
and frequency. TM is slow and does not show why. I'll stick to CCC.
;JOOP!
Click to expand...
If you have not tried it, give TM a try under Big Sur with both the source and target drive formatted in APFS. Much faster than it was with a HFS+ drive.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gilby101 and Blowback
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back