It's no secret that most of you aren't exactly
pleased with Apple's decision to charge $20 to add in Mail, Maps, Stocks, Weather, and Notes to the iPod touch, but there's another segment of Apple users feeling burned by last week's announcements: Airport Extreme owners. Seems like Apple's only enabled network support for Time Machine when used with Time Capsule,
not for USB disks connected to the Airport Extreme -- even though early Leopard promo materials promised such support. Of course, it's an
easy hack to enable NAS support (although it's probably pretty risky), and who knows what'll happen when 10.5.2. is released, but for now, it certainly seems like Airport Extreme owners just got a raw deal.
posted Jan 21st 2008 2:32PM
DO NOT use Time machine over the Airport Extreme unless you have the Time Capsule.
As with any application that sends or receives information over a network, Time Machine relies on the packets of data that are being checked in to be actually 'checked in'. As far as I'm aware (after reading several articles), although you can hack a drive to be used as an airport disk, time machine doesn't actually check in the packets. What you're doing in the hack is fooling Time Machine to think that the airport disk is a local disk (and therefore doesn't need to have the extra packet checking required for network data).
So, when you do a time machine backup, all may look well, but if any packets don't get through, Time Machine won't alert that a backup is failed as it isn't coded to work this way and do the checking. Your backups will appear to be fine, but you can bet that some of the packets don't get through and therefore your backup won't be successful.
Unless you're using the new time capsule I'd strongly recommend NOT hacking to get this to work.
If you really want to use Time Machine with a network, take a look at Drobo+DroboShare (www.drobo.com). I believe their NAS system actually checks in packets correctly and therefore would be suitable to use time machine.
Or, why not use an alternative such as the free ibackup? Not sure if this has the same problems though.
Yes it is a great shame Apple won't allow us to use the Airport Extreme to do time machine backups. At the end of the day Apple wants to make money and by crippling one device and bringing one out that does support it, Apple is going to make more money.
Personally I've already chewed up 200GB in a couple of months, backing up a Macbook Pro's 80GB drive onto my Drobo using time machine (a lot of PSD files that change a lot). There's no way I could consider a time capsule as the 500GB limit isn't going to be enough; using the Drobo affords me piece of mind that I can keep going and going with my backups if I want to. In this way, the time capsule is very limiting and boo to Apple for not understanding the needs of their users once again.
I find it funny that Microsoft can have a class action lawsuit against them because they added stickers to computers saying they're "Vista Capable" when they were only able to run the most basic version of Vista - YET - Apple can get away with selling Airport Extreme saying it will be Time Machine Capable. Where is the justice for Airport Extreme users who spent $250 just because they were told by Apple it would be "Time Machine Capable"?
What happen to customer service? At least Bill Gates give free upgrades to Vista even if it's not all that great until SP3.
Yeah, just like Apple gives free software updates for it's current version of OS X. (For you Mac illiterate people, OS X is not the operating system. It's a collection of operating systems. The operating systems are Tiger 10.4 , Leopard 10.5, etc. not Mac OS X.)
And so you know, Apple's customer service is great. I had to use it once to get a Might Mouse replacement (Yeah, the scroll ball -while being a great design concept- sucked balls [lololol]) and I must say that Apple Customer service was very helpful and understanding about the whole situation. Although, where most people go wrong, is that they start off being angry with the guy on the other end of the phone for something that's not his fault and thus they don't get as great customer service as the guy who is polite - they're only humans after all...
got mine working last night. no hacks. no time capsule. just an airport extreme base station and an old lacie 250 giger.
here's the key .... you ready
set the time machine up with the drive physically connected to your computer, THEN connect it to the base station. when you mount it time machine will backup.
you do have to still mount the drive tho. NLA incorporated into the scheme [maybe through automator] would automount the drive. its actually backing up right now... wirelessly... from my couch.
yeay.
i also think its wicked i can backup my Vista desktop to this same hdd, its hfs+ formatted.
Standing up for Apple gets a low ranked post? Whoda thunk it? -_-
There is a reason for the lack of support.
I'm so pissed about this. Airport Extreme users have been getting the shaft more than anyone else lately, and for a variety of reasons. First of all, I buy an Airport Extreme for the purpose of using it with Leopard's Time Machine. I buy the Airport Extreme, and two days later, Airport Extreme with Gigabit Ethernet comes out. Not a big deal, but still kind of lame. Leopard comes out, and they silently pull the plug on Airport Extreme Time Machine support! It took a while for Apple to even acknowledge the problem, leaving the discussion forums over on the Apple website up in arms. To add insult to injury, the 7.2.1 update of the Airport Extreme firmware rendered AirDisk completely useless to people who upgrade to Leopard. Many Leopard users on MacBook Pros discovered that after putting the computer to sleep, the AirDisk is no longer accessible upon waking up again UNTIL YOU FRIGGIN RESTART THE BASESTATION. Bullshit. Complete bullshit. So far, Apple isn't even acknowledging the problem and the only way to solve the problem is to downgrade to firmware 7.1.1.
So now, after all of this, I find that they're abandoning Airport Extreme for Time Capsule! WONDERFUL. Thanks Apple!
jacob:
Now here comes the real fun:
Wait two days for the disk sharing on your Airport Extreme to stop working.
That's what kills me. I don't care about Time Machine. I want to use mine as a home server and it crashes on me repeatedly.
I just bought an airport extreme just before the time capsule was released. I am getting a macbook pro after the next rehash (multitouch trackpad and all that, whenever that is) but it is a while until so i wasnt too bummed when they released the time capsule and decided to keep the extreme when it came cause i would want a real raid-5 nas for storage and backup anyways to get even more security. And knowing there was a "hack" to make it work when i finally got a mbp.
but what really annoys me is that i just had to disconnect the two 320gb discs i had cause the extreme died and took everything with it.
Can I plug a USB HD into Time Capsule and use it for Time Machine backup instead of the built in drive? Does a USB HD plugged into Time Capsule show up as a share on the network at all?
I'm so confused. Thanks Apple.
Yes you can.
Cry me a river. Still kicks Vista where it hurts.
Vista users can backup to anything they want. In this regard, this is a disaster.
In fact, i can backup to a USB drive on an Airport Extreme!
"Vista users can backup to anything they want. In this regard, this is a disaster.
In fact, i can backup to a USB drive on an Airport Extreme!"
Now there is some irony for you...
"Vista users can backup to anything they want. In this regard, this is a disaster.
In fact, i can backup to a USB drive on an Airport Extreme!"
In fact, we have been able to do this as a (get this) FREE FEATURE (how much did you pay for your OSX service pack aka tiger again) of windows since windows 95.
'Cry me a river. Still kicks Vista where it hurts.'
Ha. I use *nuchs. And as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft's Black Night and it's mere flesh wounds aren't really a place to talk about pain from.
Yes. Horrible joke. Really though, Canonical is awesome.
That wasn't my point- my point is despite this failure, over all, having used both, I would say Leopard is more intuitive and problem free over all.
Vista users can back up wherever they want sure, but still are more prone to strange failures. I still use XP, but on my Macs I use Leopard. This is far from a "disaster" for the common user. Besides a backup over wireless is NOT the fast way to get 'er done.
That is your opinion, not gospel. I use vista and have yet to have an issue (besides the Overclocking issues i cause). Leopard on my iBook, on the other hand, is an absolute disaster. Random color tearing on screen, slow as hell, Time Machine is unusable on that machine due to slowdown, and im ready to go back to Panther.
See, what you like might not be what others like. Because you had problems doesn't mean everyone did.
yep, and just because you have had no issues with Vista, does not mean millions have not.
I never said I was writing any more than my opinion, but many agree with me, demanding reverts to XP.
The truth is, Vista won a few worst of the year awards and I agree. As for my personal exp., it crashed my machine hard, needing several reinstalls. When it was working, the settings/prefs were implemented terribly, and I had absolutely no reason to bear the pain, so I sold it on ebay.
I was so upset with this because I bought an airport extreme for this exact purpose because it was advertised this way. Now they have done this in another device it would seem to me it is possible with a firmware upgrade.
If it's not I'd just like them to tell us why it won't work from a technical perspective.
Greedy Apple.... greedy indeed
As much as I'd like my extreme to support Time Machine, I'd *much* rather it work on any mappable drive. I have an infrastructure of Linux machines to support my development work and use Samba to do quick transfers and backups. Oh well, I guess I stick with rsync (and keep the money I would have given to Apple for 10.5).
This is pure conjecture at this point. The software to support TimeCapsule is in Mac OS 10.5.2, which hasn't been released yet. Mac sites are reporting that the software enables TimeMachine for any networked drive, including the TimeCapsule. This article assumes it will enable TimeCapsule only. Why not wait until there are facts, rather than fanning a rumor like this? Ah yes... The Dvorjak Effect. Won't someone think of the poor starving advertisers?
This is no lie.
What??? Engadget reporting something negative about Apple? Unheard of...
even if the article can be seen as negative to mactards such as yourself, it doesn't make it any less true. apple promised support, never gave it. however, if you would like to pay more for our exclusive model with that feature that should have come with it anyway...
that's apple all right.
Apple has to stop doing negative things for Engadget to not report something negative about Apple.
They have been dishing out some piles of sh*t lately.
You guys obviously didn't get it did you...Engadget always holds Apple in such high regard for some apparent reason and hardly ever reports anything negative about them because of it. I found it surprising that they actually reported something negative when they get paid off by Apple constantly. I don't even own any Apple products so I don't see how I can be a "mactard".
I guess everyone always assumed that Engadget was paid off by Apple. The fact is that they are just Apple fanboys, and the fanboys are the loudest, most bitchy technology fans out there, yet when the time comes, they give up and pull down their pants for another dose of Apple love.
sinai wrote, "apple promised support, never gave it."
They haven't given in yet and never gave it are two different things. We've only had one update to Leopard since the retail release. The developer builds did allow for network use of Time Machine but it was very buggy.
Even Engadget acknowledges that it may come with 10.5.2. One thing is for certain, Even if you had a Time Capsule right now you could use it for Time Machine backups until this 10.5.2 comes out. The ability just isn't in 10.5.1 yet. This does point to a good chance that it will enabled for all remote drives soon, and if it isn't a simple hack will surely trick Time Machine into thinking it's a valid remote drive.
Either way, I think we should hold off our torches and pitchforks until 10.5.2 comes out.
Promised support? It was listed on their website before it was released with a note saying "features subject to change". Before it was released it was taken down. That is not a promise where I come from.
@ Sinai
Are you an Apple shareholder REALLY (REALLY) unhappy with the drop in Apple stock price? Because my god you are acting like one.
"even if the article can be seen as negative to mactards such as yourself, it doesn't make it any less true. apple promised support, never gave it. however, if you would like to pay more for our exclusive model with that feature that should have come with it anyway...
that's apple all right."
Using the dictionary widget on my dashboard, "Promise" is: A declaration or assurance that one will do a particular thing or guarantees that a particular thing may happen.
Saying that they had a feature before Leopard was released then pulled it isn't "promising" you anti-Apple twit. Look at Vista!
"Seems like Apple's only enabled network support for Time Machine when used with Time Capsule, not for USB disks connected to the Airport Extreme -- even though early Leopard promo materials promised such support." -- Engadget
""Promise" is: A declaration or assurance that one will do a particular thing" -- kizorblade
if a company prints literature saying it will do it, then that is a DECLARATION. therefore, it said it will do something and then didn't deliver. that's a broken promise to me.
"Features subject to change" - Apple
Missed that important quote, sorry.
so i can go ahead and put out a press release and promise everything, take a bunch of preorders and not deliver cuz i had "subject to change" in the fine print? gtfo.
companies put that on ANY unreleased product to come. it's common practice. what's NOT common practice is when companies promise things and then not deliver citing "subject to change." the fact remains that it was promised, and not delivered. you'd be cheesed if you bought a new car and it didn't have any airbags because on some previous press release, they noted "subject to change."
but then again, you're living in the steve jobs reality distortion field.
Actually, I actually check what I'm getting instead of, you know, running out to the store without doing any research. I'm sorry but I just do not see how putting "Features subject to change" on the page is a promise.
I am a so-called "Apple Fanboy," but mostly because I got used to the "I got screwed by Apple again!" feeling years ago. As Apple expands its user-base, more and more people are coming out of the woodwork every year that claim to feel betrayed by Apple.
Sorry, but people that use Apple products (by choice, of course) are going to have to get used to it. Apple has an ingenious marketing strategy; no other company in the tech world can hold a candle to the Apple hype machine. Unfortunately, it fosters a dubious relationship with some customers.
Sorry if my initial post missed its mark; I agree with most of the other posters here. My point is that Apple has a history of screwing its customers.
Customers? Apple is screwing the entire open source community, and the entire IT market.
They should be forcibly split into a software company, and a hardware company, and the evil TPM should be banned from use in the EU and Japan.
...then Google should port sketchup to *nix with WINE libs and cosign Ubuntu.
Yes, I'm in this boat. To say I'm annoyed is to put it mildly.
This sort of 'planning' from Apple encourages hacking of their products. Maybe that's their secret plan?
Nah, Apple's plan is to encourage you to think "Oh well, I could use another base station in order to bolster/extend my network anyway...I might as well buy a Time Capsule." Even if they do issue an update in the next few months, the number of people who bought a Time Capsule under this rationale will be worth it for Apple.
Yeah, you're probably right.
My initial reaction to Time Capsule was "Neat - I want one of them!" until I realised I'd already brought a product which I thought would do exactly the same thing (and can, with a little hacking).
Must... resist...
pr0n
although i agree with a previous post that 10.5.2 will probably enable time machine to work with a normal networked drive connected to an airport, i still have something to say about this...
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH CONSUMERS THESE DAYS!?!
when you buy a product, you get what you paid for... that's it. if a company releases future updates to fix things for free, great, but when a NEW VERSION (as in hardware) of your product is released with new features, GOOD GOD STOP COMPLAINING. that's how technology works! welcome to the 21st century! (or hell, even the 20th century)
i'm not an Apple fanboy at all, in fact the only Apple products i own are an iPhone and iPod, but it's not hard to realize how stupid the argument is that apple should instantly upgrade everyone's hardware to the newest version because we happened to buy it before the new release.
ridiculous! can you imagine buying a 2007 model of a car right before the 2008 models come out, and then demanding that the car lot refund you or exchange your model for the newest? or even worse, SUING the car lot for not warning you of the 2008 release?
does no one else understand this?!
What the hell is wrong with is us that this is such a trivial piece of functionality that it really feels like Apple is trying to screw us when we just paid $150 for an AEBS 6 months ago. The fact that they were originally advertising exactly this as a feature of Leopard, only to pull it right before releasing a product that does exactly the same thing and costs $200+ makes it look like they intentionally dropped this feature as a way to try to wring more cash out of us. This feature is not rocket science, it's probably just as simple as adding the Airport Disk to the list of supported devices.
What I hope Apple with figure out is that I'm not going to pay $200+ to replace a perfectly good Airport Extreme just so I can make network backups. Even worse (for them), I've got no real incentive to upgrade the Macbooks in the house to Leopard now, since it seems like Time Machine is the only real compelling new feature here, so by pulling this, they're missing out on my upgrade dollars.
Yes, I hear what you're saying. But respectfully, regarding this issue - no.
I brought an Airport Exteme and USB disk for the wireless NAS functionality. Wired NAS/Wireless NAS - really, there shouldn't be a difference from an operating system and user perspective. That's the whole point! Why shouldn't it work as a Time Machine disk, network throughput issues being equal?
Is there honestly any significantly different hardware in the Time Capsule compared to an Exteme and attached disk? I don't know for sure, but I doubt it. And that's why I'm surprised as a relatively well-informed consumer when my existing hardware doesn't work with a much-touted feature for an operating system I've paid good money for.
You don't expect to have to buy a new printer with every OS release, for instance, right? The functionality comes from the OS, not the hardware.
Hopefully this'll get fixed, and per my earlier comment, there's always the hacks.
i suppose my comment was aimed more at consumerism in general that with this specific issue. as i said before, i would assume apple would "unlock" the NAS functionality with future updates (i think it would be suicide for them not to). but i guess my main point is, at launch when you buy a product, it does what the apple site/box says it's supposed to do... AT LAUNCH. there are plenty of products that change or have features removed/added before the final product. once again, it's just how technology works.
i can see how people think the original airport SHOULD have support NAS. the fact is, when it was released, it didn't, and that was made known for anyone who spent 30 seconds looking into it. (that's why i didn't buy the extreme when it came out)
@Max:
Listen, Apple did not remove the feature. It is still listed in Apple's Radar issue and bug tracking system as open, which means it is being worked on and should be released in 10.5.2, if not then sometime soon thereafter.
Thanks for your patience.
Absolute drivel. The damned product was advertised as being the perfect way to backup using Time Machine and then it never happened. Worse, the product itself just doesn't work properly and they've never fixed it. We're currently up to firmware 7.2.1 and the unit still won't enable reliable access to a powered USB drive for transferring files of a reasonable size. I don't care if Apple releases new products that make mine obsolete as long as what I bought does what it says it should do. Now, is that too much to ask for?
"You get what you paid for."
EXACTLY. I paid a premium for a router that advertised supporting backups to an attached USB drive. Then, one day, without mention, they release an update that takes away that very important feature. This is NOT what I paid for.
For those who don't quite get the issue, there's a thread in the Apple forums with more detail
feed://discussions.apple.com/rss/rssmessages.jspa?threadID=1342133
I'm not inclined to believe that Apple pulled support for Airport Extreme disks from Time Machine at the last minute because some marketing genius walked into Steve's office with the idea for Time Capsule. It seems more likely to me that they found some bug in the Airport Extreme/USB disk combo that they have been unable to fix. Long before Time Machine I had considerable difficulty getting an Airport Extreme attached disk to work with SuperDuper.
I doubt it. They are trying to figure out how to "not" allow a user to use a NAS device as a backup device, but somehow allow the AirportExtreme Only (since its just a router paired with NAS capability) as well as the Time Capsule.
Keep those doors closed, Apple.
That doesn't follow from the facts. If Apple was trying to keep things as closed as you describe, it would actually be a step *up* for me, because I have an Airport Extreme that cannot reliably be used as a NAS. In fact, I think that people had better be careful with these hacks that enable the use of Time Machine with the Airport Extreme. I am not the only one who has had problems with its disk support, so I wouldn't dare trust it with Time Machine at this point.
You're closer to truth than you think. I'll leave it there.
What Apple did this time with the Time Capsule has changed the way I buy things from them anymore. I can no longer trust anything their marketing or website say about ANYTHING. If it weren't for the user reviews I would have no faith in any of their products for that matter.
The current Airport Extreme doesn't even support USB Disks as it is. Anyone who has one knows you can connect to it once, but let your laptop go to sleep and you have to restart the base station to connect to it again...
Time Capsule supports wireless Time Machine backups... I'll believe it when someone buys it, uses it for a few weeks, and talks about it in their support forums. Shame on Apple for lying about what their products can do.
They did lie about what there products can do. The bugs with USB AirDisks will be fixed.
As far as Time Capsule not working with Time Machine, that a bit ridiculous...
Yah, aple is constantly screwing people. BAD APPLE!
"it certainly seems like Airport Extreme owners just got a raw deal."
No, we DID get a raw deal.
I didn't read whether someone has said this or not, but even though you can back up wirelessly after setting the drive up with it directly connected to the Mac, there is still the problem of restoring wirelessly. After reading experiments, tries, failed, attempts, etc, you're still not getting full features wirelessly.
Just to clarify, the Airport Extreme does support wireless NAS with an attached USB disk on Leapard.
It *doesn't* currently support TimeMachine to a wireless NAS straight out of the box (which is what this article is all about).
IT DOESN'T WORK RIGHT.
Read some of the other posts. Apple said Airport Extreme could share a disk, but then never made it work right. And now apparently their solution is to just announce a new model without ever making the one people already paid for work right.
I'm a relatively new Mac user (since Aug 07) and I've been frustrated with Tiger and Leopard's poor networking ability. I bought an Airport Extreme thinking it'd be better, but it's not. I finally gave up on Time Machine altogether (even connected directly I had problems).
Now I'm booting to Windows XP using VMware Fusion and backing up over the network to my Windows XP desktop and everything works great!
Windows networking is so much more reliable than OS X. Once you get it working it just works! And a mounted network drive works just like a physical drive, so you don't have to worry about software (like Time Machine) not supporting a network disk!
10.5.2 solves all.
http://babygotmac.com/a/leopard-1052-update-adds-dvd-sharing-better-stacks-translucent-menu-bar-and-remote-backup/
It's fixes nearly every problem with Leopard! Translucent menu bar, NAS, Stacks has a folder view and adds some new features like DVD sharing.
Everyone complaining saying they bought a airport + USB HDD before leopard to use a "promised" feature.. shut up, nothing was "promised" it was on a list of features that clearly stated at the end that they are subject to change. So they never promised anything.
Really? Did they say "features subject to change" on the Airport Extreme web page when it was released? Or was that, in fact, only stated on the Leopard preview site. I think you'll find that the Airport Extreme web pages made no such disclaimer and that the product was misrepresented.
How anyone, particularly a Mac user, can not be annoyed at this is beyond me. I hate the stereotypes of Mac users being sheep but at times I honestly believe that some are and I hate defending you. We're not all idiots but apparently some are.
Time Capsule is not an effective backup solution... it only has a single disk that is (by nature of being a single disk) prone to failure. No redundancy!
The really cute thing is that when it fails, you lose all your backups from multiple machines.
If you are serious about backup to disk minimum you should be considering mirroring, preferably a raid solution.
Time Capsule is not an effective backup solution... it only has a single disk that is (by nature of being a single disk) prone to failure. No redundancy!
The really cute thing is that when it fails, you lose all your backups from multiple machines.
If you are serious about backup to disk minimum you should be considering mirroring, preferably a raid solution.
Well, the thing is, you do have redundancy-- you have the copy on the machine you're backing up from, and the copy on the backup volume (Time Capsule).
- If your machine dies, you get a new one and pull your backups from Time Capsule.
- If Time Capsule dies, you get a new one and back up again from your machine.
It's no different than what you would have with mirrored drives-- if one died, you'd replace it. If the other dies before you get a chance to replace the other, you're screwed.
I would think that as soon as the time capsule ships the airdisk time machine backup will work. Time capsule is nothing more then a airport extreme with a HD, so if time machine works with time capsule it will work with airdisk.
There is a huge (400mb) update coming addressing a lot of issues. I feel like Apple being Apple will correct the situation for us airdisk guys and try to make some money by selling a "new product" at the same time.
I can understand people being upset over the touch update, but this is ridiculous. AirEx customers bought a fancy router, that's what they got. The time capsule doesn't change that. Apple came out with something new, tough s*** guys.
When you buy something, try to realize that chances are it will always perform the same functions and something better will come out.
I apologize in advance if the answer to this question is obvious, or already been stated...
I don't have an Airport Extreme. What I have is an iMac, and a macbook pro, and 1TB external HD. Up to now, my plan was to partition the drive, and hook up directly via USB to the imac. Use Partition 1 as Time Machine for iMac, and hopefully share Partition 2 as wireless drive to macbook pro, which would use partition 2 as its Time Machine drive.
Will this work now? (pre 10.5.2?) Is it just AEBS connected drives with the issue? Or any wireless networked drive (my hypothetical above included)?
Thanks in advance!
Welcome to the world of Apple. Apple abandoning and shafting loyal customers goes back to the Apple II to IIgs to Mac transitions.
Seems like apple wants to sell the new product ditching old product...Like they did with Macbook Pro and upgrade kit...in the end...airport extreme users are screwed...
Just kidding...heheheh
backup and changing the home folder location to a networked drive/computer is a downfall of apple's for sure. still the best overall, and i could forgive it if i could hook up a drobo to the usb on my airport extreme. add me to the list of pissed off people!