M1 Bootable Backups!

[Rodan52]

superduper supports bootable backups from 11.4

Yes, a bootable backup but is it subject to the same caveat as CCC? That is, after that one full backup can it be relied upon after subsequent macOS updates? Or do we have to erase and re clone each time thereby losing any changes.
Bombich clearly states that if an M1 boot partition fails you will not be able to boot from an external source even if its viable.

 

[Rodan52]

Really this initial statement covers it, at least for CCC: "Copying Apple's system is now an Apple-proprietary endeavor; we can only offer "best effort" support for making an external bootable device on macOS Big Sur. We also do not generally recommend that users attempt to make their backups bootable — you can restore all of your documents, compatible applications, and settings from a standard CCC backup without the extra effort involved in establishing and maintaining a bootable device.

 

[Mike Boreham]

superduper supports bootable backups from 11.4

CCC ver 6.0 b4 also makes bootable clones.

So did CCC 5.1.26 beta 4, but capability was removed in 5.1.26 release because of some KPs.

But there are problems, like not appearing in Startup Pref pane, Disk Utility warnings, the Startup Security setting in the M1 chip security enclave do not apply when booted from a clone.

I think it remains to be seen whether Apple are really going to fully support bootable externals or not.

 

[Mike Boreham]

Really this initial statement covers it, at least for CCC: "Copying Apple's system is now an Apple-proprietary endeavor; we can only offer "best effort" support for making an external bootable device on macOS Big Sur. We also do not generally recommend that users attempt to make their backups bootable — you can restore all of your documents, compatible applications, and settings from a standard CCC backup without the extra effort involved in establishing and maintaining a bootable device.

Thanks, I haven't seen that, though not surprised and very much in line with what is happening. Where is that? .......Cancel that found it in CCC ver 6 Help.

I think it worth showing a bit more of that article as it contains an excellent summary of the state of play:

 

[SuperMatt]

Yes, a bootable backup but is it subject to the same caveat as CCC? That is, after that one full backup can it be relied upon after subsequent macOS updates? Or do we have to erase and re clone each time thereby losing any changes.
Bombich clearly states that if an M1 boot partition fails you will not be able to boot from an external source even if its viable.

The CCC developer is attaching a lot of quid pro quos. I’m not seeing the same from SuperDuper. Good to be skeptical at this point, but also not good to assume that just because Bombich hasn’t figured it out that it’s not possible.

 

[neilw]

As a current CCC user with daily bootable backups, and a new M1 iMac on order, this topic is of great interest to me. It is giving me second thoughts about the value of bootable backups.

On the new Macs, the SSD is completely integrated into the motherboard. Is it more likely than any other component to fail completely? I'm not entirely sure why it would be. This may not be a change on the laptop side, but it is on the desktop side, where the drive has been a separate packaged component and important failure point, especially if it spins.

Only when the M1 machines have been out for a few years will we start to find out whether catastrophic drive failures are truly a thing that we need to be protecting against. (even calling it a "drive" at this point seems stupidly anachronistic).

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer to have a bootable backup if I could. But is it terrible not to have one with one of these new Macs? I'm starting to think maybe not.

 

[Weaselboy]

On the new Macs, the SSD is completely integrated into the motherboard. Is it more likely than any other component to fail completely? I'm not entirely sure why it would be. This may not be a change on the laptop side, but it is on the desktop side, where the drive has been a separate packaged component and important failure point, especially if it spins.

I'm just going anecdotally based on forum posts, but I recall very very few posts from members with newer Macs that use soldered in flash storage reporting drive failure.

I use CCC to backup the Data volume but don't bother trying to make a bootable clone any more.

 

[Ben J.]

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer to have a bootable backup if I could. But is it terrible not to have one with one of these new Macs? I'm starting to think maybe not.

I returned my 8/256 M1 mac mini yesterday after trying it out for about ten days. A very nice experience, very snappy general performance and feel. Most things working, it seems, better than on intel, even thru Rosetta2. But not all. Some plugins in Pro Tools and some other minor stuff simply would not run. Only two TB ports. But most importantly, without running into real problems, it just felt wrong with only 8gb un-upgradable ram. I like to have Pro Tools and Lightroom Classic running all the time and a whole buch of other stuff. There was a 3-4 week wait if I were to get the 16gb version, so I dropped it.

So now I'm back on the Mini in my signature and I'm not looking back. I think I'm sticking with Intel and Catalina for a year or two and await Apple silicon native apps and new generation of chips and models.

And I'm back with bootable backups. I'm happy. Only thing I miss is how the M1 mac stayed soo cool! That is really amazing.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I think we are all coming, albeit slowly, to the realisation that the convenient, bootable clone backup is a thing of the past.
I remember my wife running her 2011 MBP for about three weeks from her CCC clone while awaiting delivery of a new HD after her old HDD died. When it arrived and was installed we formatted from DU on the clone then reverse cloned the CCC backup onto the new SSD. All back to normal in a few hours.?. Never again I fear.

Agree. If the internal drive dies, we are dead in the tech water (on M series) until we can get it repaired. As long as I have my personal data backed up via Arq, Wasabi, and CCC, I am not going to waste time on the bootable clone merry go round.

 

[Daniva]

CCC Version 5.1.27 (6196)

 

[SuperMatt]

For anybody interested in some of the technical details on booting from external disks on M1 Macs…

Booting an M1 Mac: external disks and local boot policy

How an M1 Mac can start up from an external bootable disk, and how that can fail. All about boot security policy, and how that’s applied.

eclecticlight.co

 

[Apple_Robert]

For anybody interested in some of the technical details on booting from external disks on M1 Macs…

Booting an M1 Mac: external disks and local boot policy

How an M1 Mac can start up from an external bootable disk, and how that can fail. All about boot security policy, and how that’s applied.

eclecticlight.co

I don't see much use for a bootable backup anymore with the M1. If we could use a bootable in the event the internal drive went down, that would certainly change my tech tune.

 

[SuperMatt]

I don't see much use for a bootable backup anymore with the M1. If we could use a bootable in the event the internal drive went down, that would certainly change my tech tune.

There are a lot of things that can go wrong on the boot drive other than it completely dying. So having a bootable backup could really come in handy.

 

[Fishrrman]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like that even if one could create a bootable external clone, once the internal drive on an m-series Mac fails, it will no longer be bootable from any "physical" drive.

That means, the Mac won't ever boot again.

For all practical purposes, if the drive on an m-series Mac fails, the Mac itself has "failed" and can be of no further use unless the entire motherboard (which contains the CPU/RAM/drive all in one "unified" assembly) is replaced.

Talk about "planned obsolescence"...

 

[neilw]

For all practical purposes, if the drive on an m-series Mac fails, the Mac itself has "failed" and can be of no further use unless the entire motherboard (which contains the CPU/RAM/drive all in one "unified" assembly) is replaced.

True.

This is also true if the memory or the CPU fails, or anything else on the motherboard.

 

[drsox]

the fact that M1 Macs can't boot from a clone if the internal drive has failed

So what does the user do to recover their files ? Only use Time Machine to maintain an immediately reinstallable mirror copy ? What about moving an existing installation temporarily to another Mac ? Time Machine allows cross Mac installations ?

 

[Mike Boreham]

So what does the user do to recover their files ? Only use Time Machine to maintain an immediately reinstallable mirror copy ? What about moving an existing installation temporarily to another Mac ? Time Machine allows cross Mac installations ?

A Data only clone or Time Machine backup can be used as a migration source, or browsed to recover from on another Mac.

 

[drsox]

A Data only clone or Time Machine backup can be used as a migration source, or browsed to recover from on another Mac.

Thanks. I never use Time Machine but a Data clone solves some of the problem. Creating a "temporary use" Mac is still a problem.

 

[neilw]

Thanks. I never use Time Machine but a Data clone solves some of the problem. Creating a "temporary use" Mac is still a problem.

That is really the #1 value of a bootable backup these days. If one has another Mac but can't do a full data restore to it, is there a reasonable way to use it as a temporary Mac, just accessing the data clone externally? That is something I've not tried to do.

 

[Mike Boreham]

That is really the #1 value of a bootable backup these days. If one has another Mac but can't do a full data restore to it, is there a reasonable way to use it as a temporary Mac, just accessing the data clone externally? That is something I've not tried to do.

Yes, a data-only clone behaves like an ordinary external HD when attached to another Mac. All your stuff is accessible and usable like any other drive. Launch apps from it, drag data to or from it, etc

 

[panjandrum]

I think we are all coming, albeit slowly, to the realisation that the convenient, bootable clone backup is a thing of the past.

And it's exactly this kind of thing that makes those of us who have been with Apple a long time despair. It's simply unacceptable that using Apple equipment gets more and more like the terrible fight it's *always* been with Windows machines over the years. NOT being absurdly difficult for no good reason (like Wintel machines) is why so many people chose Apple over Wintel in the first place, even though there are other drawbacks. It's inconceivable that Apple now fails to recognize and protect one of the key differences that set them apart and made their products desirable. I guess once you learn you can sell sell sell as much as you want based solely on the 'lifestyle' appeal of your brand, you really don't have to worry about much else, at least in the short-term.

 

[leman]

As a current CCC user with daily bootable backups, and a new M1 iMac on order, this topic is of great interest to me. It is giving me second thoughts about the value of bootable backups.

Bootable backups were alway a niche gimmick with questionable value.

On the new Macs, the SSD is completely integrated into the motherboard. Is it more likely than any other component to fail completely?

No, it's as likely to fail as any other electronic component (which is not very). It's not an excuse not to do backups of course.

And it's exactly this kind of thing that has those of us who have been with Apple a long time despair. It's simply unacceptable that using Apple equipment gets more and more like the terrible fight it's *always* been with Windows machines over the years. NOT being absurdly difficult for no good reason (like Wintel machines) is why so many people chose Apple over Wintel in the first place, even though there are other drawbacks. It's inconceivable that Apple now fails to recognize and protect one of the key differences that set them apart and made their products desirable. I guess once you learn you can sell sell sell as much as you want based solely on the 'lifestyle' appeal of your brand, you really don't have to worry about much else, at least in the short-term.

You are being overly dramatic for no reason. The simple fact is that bootable backups were never a first-class supported feature and have very little real-world utility. Just because they were fashionable with a small group of Mac users does not make them a must-have feature. Apple gives you a state of the art backup utility integrated in the macOS itself. Your complains are absolutely unfounded. Implementing a viable and reliable backup strategy is much more straightforward with a Mac than with any other system out there (including Windows and Linux) and a computer can be fully cloned/restored within half an hour if your backup media is fast enough.

 

[panjandrum]

You are being overly dramatic for no reason. The simple fact is that bootable backups were never a first-class supported feature and have very little real-world utility. Just because they were fashionable with a small group of Mac users does not make them a must-have feature. Apple gives you a state of the art backup utility integrated in the macOS itself. Your complains are absolutely unfounded. Implementing a viable and reliable backup strategy is much more straightforward with a Mac than with any other system out there (including Windows and Linux) and a computer can be fully cloned/restored within half an hour if your backup media is fast enough.

No, I am not. Your post is both wildly inaccurate and breathtakingly naive. Sure, the average home-user does not need a bootable backup, but even then it was historically so easy to get one that many Mac users had one. But for mission-critical systems; those things need to be switched-over and back up up and running ASAP, and simply having a RAID with redundancy & fault-tolerance isn't enough because the mission-critical system may not have a hardware failure; maybe a borked update, maybe malware, maybe sysadmin error, who knows. Got a bootable backup and you are back working, albeit with reduced performance, immediately. And these aren't systems that restored in an hour, even with fast backup media. We might be talking overnight in the case of 8 or 10 or 12 TB of data (and that doesn't included installing the damn OS again in the first place before you can even begin the restore).

The fact is, unfortunately, that there is simply no substitute for a good bootable clone for certain types of mission-critical systems (well, that's not entirely true, you can do entire system mirroring and fail-over, but that's hugely expensive and complex compared to the simple expedient of having a bootable clone).

It's something that's long been frustratingly difficult in the Windows world, and it's a shame to see the Mac world going down that route after decades of being so much better.

(Also, do NOT rely solely on Time Machine for your backups. It is by no means 'state of the art.' It's hands-down the least reliable backup software I've ever seen, especially in network solutions. It *routinely* fails. Mind you, it's *vastly* better than it used to be, and far better than no backup at all, but you *really* do not want to rely solely on it for anything that's truly precious to you (i.e. family pics) or mission-critical at the business level. It's simply not up to the task.)

 

[leman]

No, I am not. Your post is both wildly inaccurate and breathtakingly naive. Sure, the average home-user does not need a bootable backup, but even then it was historically so easy to get one that many Mac users had one. But for mission-critical systems; those things need to be switched-over and back up up and running ASAP, and simply having a RAID with redundancy & fault-tolerance isn't enough because the mission-critical system may not have a hardware failure; maybe a borked update, maybe malware, maybe sysadmin error, who knows. Got a bootable backup and you are back working, albeit with reduced performance, immediately. And these aren't systems that restored in an hour, even with fast backup media. We might be talking overnight in the case of 8 or 10 or 12 TB of data (and that doesn't included installing the damn OS again in the first place before you can even begin the restore).

It seems to me that you are talking about some sort of niche systems with very special requirements. I don't see why you would use a Mac as a mission-critical component like that, it's not what these systems have been designed for. Also, aren't you contradicting yourself? There are no Macs with a 8 or 10TB drive... so you are already using some sort of external storage system for the data. How is a bootable backup going to help you in this case?

For a mission critical system you describe, you ideally want to keep the base system as small as possible, so that it can be replaced quickly. You also want to have a storage system with regular snapshots and failsafe replication, to protect you from scenarios you describe. Which means — all data on a professional external storage that is build to your demanding specification and a disposable computer as a control center/workstation.

And finally, all of this is moot point anyway, since Apple does actually support bootable backups on Apple Silicon. They have added the functionality to asr on 11.4, isn't that what this very thread is about?

(Also, do NOT rely solely on Time Machine for your backups. It is by no means 'state of the art.' It's hands-down the least reliable backup software I've ever seen, especially in network solutions. It *routinely* fails. Mind you, it's *vastly* better than it used to be, and far better than no backup at all, but you *really* do not want to rely solely on it for anything that's truly precious to you (i.e. family pics) or mission-critical at the business level. It's simply not up to the task.)

TM might have had some issues in the past but since Big Sur it's operating on a filesystem level and directly synchronizes APFS snapshots. Of course you should have a diversified backup strategy for important data, that goes without saying. That said, APFS is not any less reliable than rsync that CCC and similar tools ultimately use under the hood...

 

[drsox]

Yes, a data-only clone behaves like an ordinary external HD when attached to another Mac. All your stuff is accessible and usable like any other drive. Launch apps from it, drag data to or from it, etc

This I did not know. Does this still work if the "other" Mac is an Intel based version ? And I suppose that the "other" Mac has to be at the same version of MacOS ? (Which a bootable external obviated)