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

Status of SuperDuper! and Big Sur

Thank you, I use SuperDuper and am running Big Sur, and like it a lot. Dave's recommendation is incredibly short sighted IMHO. I have found it to work well with all my apps that are current and uptodate. I have ten SSDs in my NcMP. four of them are assigned to start up duty and therefore are slated to contain OS's. Two of them are clones of each other and are running Catalina. If something "bad" happens with Big Sur, I can easily restart with Catalina. Currently I have Big Sur on another SSD, and since I can not yet make a backup of Big Sur, the fourth SSD remains MT.

Lou
 
Post yesterday from Dave:

"I'm going to keep this short and to the point.

It's never a good idea to update to a just-released major OS version unless you have to. Nobody knows how reliable Big Sur is going to be for regular users. Let someone else find out before you take the jump.

On our end, SuperDuper! will not be compatible with Big Sur on day of release.

As I indicated on twitter, the first time we were able to make a successful bootable copy of Big Sur at all was November 5th. As of this writing, that was six days ago.

Until that point, it wasn't possible.

So, it's going to be a while. Until then, if you must move to Big Sur, use Time Machine."

Again, short sighted IMHO. CCC is far ahead:

"With the announcement of macOS Big Sur, Apple has retired Mac OS X (10) and replaced it with macOS 11. As the numeric change would suggest, this is the biggest change to macOS since Apple introduced Mac OS X roughly 20 years ago. The system now resides on a cryptographically sealed "Signed System Volume"(link is external). That seal can only be applied by Apple; ordinary copies of the System volume are non-bootable without Apple's seal. To create a functional copy of the macOS 11 System volume, we have to use an Apple tool to copy the system, or install macOS onto the backup.

Can CCC copy the macOS System volume?​

We're adding support for this in CCC 5.1.23, which is currently available for beta testing. Apple's APFS replication utility was not working correctly with the Signed System Volume until Apple posted the 11.0.1 update. When we have had adequate time to test this version of macOS, we'll post the 5.1.23 update."

I may be switching over, though I don't like the CCC interface as much as I like SD.

Lou
 
flowrider said:
Post yesterday from Dave:

"I'm going to keep this short and to the point.

It's never a good idea to update to a just-released major OS version unless you have to. Nobody knows how reliable Big Sur is going to be for regular users. Let someone else find out before you take the jump.

On our end, SuperDuper! will not be compatible with Big Sur on day of release.

As I indicated on twitter, the first time we were able to make a successful bootable copy of Big Sur at all was November 5th. As of this writing, that was six days ago.

Until that point, it wasn't possible.

So, it's going to be a while. Until then, if you must move to Big Sur, use Time Machine."

Again, short sighted IMHO. CCC is far ahead:

"With the announcement of macOS Big Sur, Apple has retired Mac OS X (10) and replaced it with macOS 11. As the numeric change would suggest, this is the biggest change to macOS since Apple introduced Mac OS X roughly 20 years ago. The system now resides on a cryptographically sealed "Signed System Volume"(link is external). That seal can only be applied by Apple; ordinary copies of the System volume are non-bootable without Apple's seal. To create a functional copy of the macOS 11 System volume, we have to use an Apple tool to copy the system, or install macOS onto the backup.

Can CCC copy the macOS System volume?​

We're adding support for this in CCC 5.1.23, which is currently available for beta testing. Apple's APFS replication utility was not working correctly with the Signed System Volume until Apple posted the 11.0.1 update. When we have had adequate time to test this version of macOS, we'll post the 5.1.23 update."

I may be switching over, though I don't like the CCC interface as much as I like SD.

Lou
Click to expand...
No, CCC is not necessarily far ahead. In fact, it is risky.

Look at this article I saw earlier today:

tidbits.com

Big Sur Is Here, but We Suggest You Say “No Sir” for Now - TidBITS

Apple has released macOS 11 Big Sur, but we advise delaying upgrades to production Macs thanks to significant behind-the-scenes changes.
tidbits.com tidbits.com

And now look at what is specifically stated about CCC in that article:

"However, we can’t recommend upgrading to an operating system that requires a beta release to make bootable duplicates."

Talk about accuracy! Dave Nanian is wise not to pursue a similar approach. Given that SuperDuper! is just one of my 5 critical applications that is not yet compatible with Big Sur, I have no problem waiting. Even if all those apps were compatible with the initial release, it would still not be a wise move to move/upgrade to Big Sur right away, as the article so correctly points out:

"We always recommend delaying major macOS upgrades until Apple has had a chance to address early problems, and Big Sur has several big behind-the-scenes changes that are causing more headaches than usual."

I've been saying that all along!
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddyOh
honestone33 said:
No, CCC is not necessarily far ahead. In fact, it is risky.

Look at this article I saw earlier today:

tidbits.com

Big Sur Is Here, but We Suggest You Say “No Sir” for Now - TidBITS

Apple has released macOS 11 Big Sur, but we advise delaying upgrades to production Macs thanks to significant behind-the-scenes changes.
tidbits.com tidbits.com

And now look at what is specifically stated about CCC in that article:

"However, we can’t recommend upgrading to an operating system that requires a beta release to make bootable duplicates."

Talk about accuracy! Dave Nanian is wise not to pursue a similar approach. Given that SuperDuper! is just one of my 5 critical applications that is not yet compatible with Big Sur, I have no problem waiting. Even if all those apps were compatible with the initial release, it would still not be a wise move to move/upgrade to Big Sur right away, as the article so correctly points out:

"We always recommend delaying major macOS upgrades until Apple has had a chance to address early problems, and Big Sur has several big behind-the-scenes changes that are causing more headaches than usual."

I've been saying that all along!
Click to expand...
CCC has always been ahead of SuperDuper. It was with Catalina previous and now Big Sur. Really using a Adam Engst (Tidbits) to say its risky. Been using Big Sur for weeks as a beta, it been stable, along with using CCC when it couldn't use APFS Boot Volume was a easy work around of updating the system on it also until Mike verified Apple had improved APFS utility was mostly fixed. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mikzn
Realityck said:
CCC has always been ahead of SuperDuper. It was with Catalina previous and now Big Sur. Really using a Adam Engst (Tidbits) to say its risky. Been using Big Sur for weeks as a beta, it been stable, along with using CCC when it couldn't use APFS Boot Volume was a easy work around of updating the system on it also until Mike verified Apple had improved APFS utility was mostly fixed. :)
Click to expand...
But makes no difference who is ahead of who. SuperDuper! has always worked flawlessly. In fact, on Thursday had an issue with my Mac Mini. Rebooted from my most recent SuperDuper! backup, did a fresh, clean installation of the latest version of Catalina, OS 10.15.7 (also contains the latest Supplemental Update), and then migrated/copied needed files, folders, apps, settings. etc. from that backup. Whole process took only an hour, and I was back in business.:):)

And what beef do you have with Adam Engst? As it is, that article was accurate, especially with many folks here having issues with this initial version. And he did not write that article. Also, there are still quite a few third party applications that are not yet compatible with Big Sur. The article also states something I have consistently mentioned: the first few versions of a mac OS always contain bugs.

Finally, regarding CCC, you said it yourself: "until Mike verified Apple had improved APFS utility was mostly fixed. ". Well, it's not completely fixed, and I truly suspect that is why David Nanian is taking a cautious approach, which is the right one.
 
Having a issue with a computer and having to replace the entire system from a snapshot backup is not at all normal. You must have had something that caused this. On one older laptop running 10.15.7 I have never had to do that.

You should spend more time diagnosing your problem and figure out the cause, otherwise it could just reoccur. Have you ran Apple diagnostics, boot from a USB with MemTest86 and run disk utility from Mac repair mode chosen when rebooting.

10.15.6 suffered from a nasty kernel memory leak for some situations, until a supplement fixed it by going back to a older Darwin kernel, 10.15.7 has seen minor kernel changes.

If your having system issues with your Mac mini you might reconsider Big Sur as it uses a newer kernel, and use Time machine.
 
The issue happened after I updated Firefox, Google Chrome, and Opera. I did it via clicking on "About (insert browser name)", and then doing the update via the download process. Maybe I should have first downloaded each new version of the software, and then do the installation myself.

In actuality, the issue might have reared its ugly head last Saturday, when I ran Tech Tool Pro. Two of its tasks are Volume Structures (Tests a volume for directory corruption) and Volume Rebuild (Rebuild and repair a volume's directory). When I applied those two processes to the Data and System Volumes on my Mac Mini, it ran definitively slower, taking an awful long time (WAY longer than I have ever seen). Both Tech Tool Pro and Disk Utility did not indicate anything was wrong with those volumes, so it would have been difficult to pin down.

On Tuesday, I did run ClamXAv to check for any viruses/Malware (ran Malwarebytes also), but nothing nefarious was found (that's always the case for both of my Macs).

In any event, after I had the issue on Thursday (machine started up real, real slow after applying those browser updates), I thought it would be best to do a clean, fresh installation of the latest version of Catalina, followed by a migration/copying of needed files, folders, apps, settings, etc. from the SuperDuper! backup I did last Saturday. (I make full, complete backups ever time, not snapshots). Today everything went very smooth with Onyx, Tech Tool Pro, and SuperDuper!. In fact, the machine feels snappier. (To be safe, I have not applied any of the browser updates, including the one for Brave (my primary one)).

I actually had no issues with OS 10.15.6, and until the Supplemental Update for OS 10.15.7 arrived last week, no issues with OS 10.15.7., I wonder if the Volume-related issues Tech Tool Pro was "dealing with" last Saturday had to do with that Supplemental Update.

I think I'll run Tech Tool Pro on the two SuperDuper! backups I made earlier today, just to insure things are OK. Seems good so far, though.
 
I have on a few times used malwarebytes to find malware, but never found anything just because I run browsers using private mode, except when you need to run something like Netflix that needs a non-protected mode. All instances of unsolicited software actions are denied.

These TechTool Pro, Onyx, and like I found aren't terribly useful no matter what they claim. Disk Utility, Apple Diagnostics run from startup, and MemTest86 that really does find bad memory that other utilities miss is really all one needs besides knowing a few terminal commands. Macs need no defragmention because the APFS file system prevents fragmentation and automatically defrags files if necessary.

I only use Safari and Firefox. Chrome is allowing Google to see all your activity. (cloud based) I have no opinion on the current Opera. Firefox has a large following and makes numerous privacy/security changes as versions go.

It sounds like Tech Tool Pro processes is at fault. I would suggest next time to boot to MacOS repair mode and run Disk Utility first aid on both your system, and data volumes if you think something needs to be repaired. You can't really check/repair the boot volumes APFS structure if its being used and Tech Tool Pro shouldn't allow that to be done while you are running MacOS. Enjoy. :)
 
I do find Onyx and Tech Tool Pro useful. And I did just run the two Volume-related tasks for both of my volumes on the SuperDuper! backups I did earlier, and it found no errors. And for further verification, I restarted my Mac Mini from each of those backups, and had no issues. So, do not think the processes for Tech Tool Pro are at fault.

Yes, Tech Tool Pro does not "directly" allow doing some of its tasks while running the Mac OS. But when I start Tech Tool Pro, I then use it to restart each of my Macs from the eDrive feature provided by Tech Tool Pro. That works fine.

I think what I will try is to restart the Mini from one of those just completed SuperDuper! backups and run Disk Utility from there to check out the health of the Data and System Volumes. I am betting nothing is found, especially after running Tech Tool Pro on those SuperDuper! backups, which are exact copies of everything on the Mini (same is true for my Mac Book Air).

Also, yes, I have known for a long, long time that optimization tasks are no longer applicable, as I have been using SSDs. And now with APFS, it's true even more.
 
OK, just completed re-starting the Mac Mini from one of the just completed SuperDuper! backups, launched Disk Utility from there, and ran First Aid on the System and Data volumes on my Mac Mini's internal SSD. All checked out fine.

Tech Tool Pro said the same thing, so there is definitely nothing wrong with it.
 
Has anyone tried creating a backup of Big Sur using SuperDuper! 3.3.1? Does it fail? If it finishes "successfully", is the backup bootable?
 
PeterHolbrook said:
Has anyone tried creating a backup of Big Sur using SuperDuper! 3.3.1? Does it fail? If it finishes "successfully", is the backup bootable?
Click to expand...
Do not try it! I use SuperDuper!, and Dave Nanian of Shirt Pocket Software strongly recommends not using it yet:


I also have 4 other critical third party applications that are not yet compatible with Big Sur, and thus have not moved to it yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeterHolbrook
Thanks for that. I have a Mac Pro 5,1 with five operating systems right now: Catalina (my main system), Big Sur, High Sierra, Snow Leopard and Windows 10.
 
honestone33 said:
Except for Big Sur and (I suspect) Catalina, do you use SuperDuper! to make backups of your High Sierra and Snow Leopard systems?
Click to expand...
I created backups of Snow Leopard and High Sierra long ago. I use those systems as a failsafe precaution and to try some new things on them, but no longer have valuable data in them. For Windows I use Winclone. For Catalina, SuperDuper! 3.3.1.
 
flowrider said:
^^^^CCC FAQ:

bombich.com

Frequently asked questions about CCC and macOS 11 - Bombich Software

bombich.com bombich.com

SD is still WAY BEHIND the times. Sad that this product is still being neglected👎

Lou
Click to expand...
It's not WAY behind! To make such a statement indicates tunnel vision! Actually had an EMail discussion with Dave Nanian yesterday, and they are working on it. Remember, CCC is only "1/2" useful, and only on Intel-based Macs. However, a new version of Big Sur, V11.1, will be arriving soon. But I'm willing to bet that it will still have bugs/issues. Not sure why folks are in such a big rush to move to Big Sur. Still full of bugs/issues, and even more complexity needing separate versions for Intel-based versus M1-based Macs.

Again, and for the millionth time, I myself see absolutely no need to move to Big Sur yet. Besides stability issues, I still have 4 critical programs that are not yet compatible. And it is NOT a sign of laziness on the part of the developers of such software. They just want to make sure to get the most stable, compatible version available. Nothing wrong with proceeding with that in mind. In fact, I welcome it!

And then finally there is really nothing "earth shattering" in Big Sur that would compel me (and others) to upgrade now. Catalina is working just fine, is stable, and rock solid. Why move away from it to Big Sur, when there are still issues?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kretek
Thanks for the update. I've used SD for a long time and it has been very reliable. Apple threw a large monkey wrench into the game. I hope the devs can get a workaround.
 
  • Like
Reactions: honestone33
jimbo1mcm said:
Thanks for the update. I've used SD for a long time and it has been very reliable. Apple threw a large monkey wrench into the game. I hope the devs can get a workaround.
Click to expand...
You're welcome! And yeah, definitely dependable and rock solid.

I am confident Dave will have a fix, and either it will be applicable to BOTH versions of Big Sur, or have separate ones.

I am also confident the developers of my other 3 apps (Thunderbird, Onyx, and Tech Tool Pro) will have appropriate updates. Again though, am in no rush. Catalina is just fine, thank you very much.
 
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