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

simeezee

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 18, 2009
88
0
I have a 11inch base model MBA. I'm thinking a 80GB external HD should be enough to back up the contents stored on my 64GB SSD by using Time Machine.

I did a price check and found out a 320GB external HD is not that much more expensive than a 80GB one. So I'm just wondering if I format the bigger storage HD to use it for Time Machine, can I use the leftover space to store other stuff? Or the external HD has to dedicated to my MBA backup only?

Thanks in advance.
 

KPOM

macrumors P6
Oct 23, 2010
18,311
8,326
I have a 11inch base model MBA. I'm thinking a 80GB external HD should be enough to back up the contents stored on my 64GB SSD by using Time Machine.

I did a price check and found out a 320GB external HD is not that much more expensive than a 80GB one. So I'm just wondering if I format the bigger storage HD to use it for Time Machine, can I use the leftover space to store other stuff? Or the external HD has to dedicated to my MBA backup only?

Thanks in advance.

I'd partition the drive using Disk Utility. Time Machine starts overwriting space when your backup drive starts running out of room. That said, it will take a long time before 320GB are filled by a backup of a 64GB drive. I'd give Time Machine half the drive.

Also consider using something like Carbon Copy Cloner. It creates a bootable copy of your Mac's main drive.
 

MarkMS

macrumors 6502a
Aug 30, 2006
993
18
Yes, you can put other stuff on the drive and not just Time Machine back ups. I do it all the time. Also, even though you only have a 64GB SSD ... 80GB isn't much for an external drive. Heck, even 320GB is kinda on the small side. The more space that's available, the more files Time Machine can hold on to as it will begin to delete older back ups/files when it gets full.

EDIT: KPOM beat me to it. Partitioning the drive is a great idea.
 

Boston007

macrumors 6502
Apr 9, 2010
458
145
I think SuperDuper is better than TimeMachine, but others have pointed out good advice here
 

DarwinOSX

macrumors 68000
Nov 3, 2009
1,660
193
I think SuperDuper is better than TimeMachine, but others have pointed out good advice here

They do different things. both Carbon Copy Cleaner (free, ad supported) and SuperDuper ($27.5) clone the entire contents of your drive and allow you to boot from the cloned drive. I have both and prefer Carbon Copy Cloner. Time machine of course does incremental backups on a regular basis. Time Machine will retain versions of data for longer periods of time. i use both Time machine on one external drive and CCC on another external drive.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.