Top
Best
New

Posted by rcarmo 5 days ago

TIL: Apple Broke Time Machine Again on Tahoe(taoofmac.com)
231 points | 150 commentspage 2
fmajid 5 days ago|
I never trusted Time Machine, my primary line of defense is rsync to a server running ZFS with hourly snapshots, and weekly rotations of offsite drives. For bootable backups, Carbon Copy Cloner.
wlonkly 4 days ago||
I am a long-time CCC user, but bootable backups haven't been supported for a while now, basically since Big Sur -- if you're counting on that, make sure you're testing it regularly.

https://bombich.com/blog/2024/12/19/bootable-backups-have-be...

chmaynard 5 days ago|||
+1 for Carbon Copy Cloner. Rock-solid reliable and well-supported.

https://bombich.com

itchingsphynx 5 days ago||
+1 for TM to ZFS - although over samba. A ZFS snapshot at each successful disconnection means any occasional corruption is simple to rollback. Also I’m using nightly Arc backup to B2 of critical files.
TMWNN 5 days ago||
Tahoe backups to UnRAID's native Time Machine backup system (as described at <https://docs.unraid.net/unraid-os/using-unraid-to/manage-sto...>) does not work in UnRAID 7.2.3. It is not (solely) caused by Tahoe, however, because it did work in 7.1.4. <https://forums.unraid.net/topic/195091-time-machine-backup-d...>

mbentley's Docker image version of Time Machine—which I began using back when native Time Machine support was completely broken <https://www.reddit.com/r/unRAID/comments/16x3ddm/my_experien...>—which the post mentions is unaffected, and continues to work with Tahoe without configuration changes.

ndegruchy 5 days ago||
I use the same setup and was able to restore some files I recently deleted. My SMB settings in Synology were set to what the recommended settings were already. Not sure what happened in this person's case, but it also seems like he backed up and didn't test the restores. Which isn't good practice.
Aurornis 5 days ago||
> but it also seems like he backed up and didn't test the restores. Which isn't good practice.

For a professional devops person managing a custom backup solution, I agree.

For someone using mainstream consumer technology on a consumer laptop, it's not realistic to expect this. It needs to just work.

ndegruchy 5 days ago|||
I'm not in devops. I don't even have a server aside from the basic usage I get out of my Synology.

However, I have lost data in my lifetime. If you value your backups, check on them.

Also, if you're the kind of person who has a Synology, it means you had to buy a NAS, drives, and setup all the associated machinery for Time Machine over your network. Therefore, I feel it's not outside of the expectation that you can check on your backups. Even if it's just a quick test of a restored file or folders.

Aurornis 5 days ago||
> Also, if you're the kind of person who has a Synology, it means you had to buy a NAS, drives, and setup all the associated machinery for Time Machine over your network

I don’t understand why people think this is complicated or limited only to highly technical people.

NAS units are popular with consumers now, not just tech people. They buy them with drives installed and they come with instructions to set up backups with Windows and Mac.

ndegruchy 5 days ago||
I get what you're saying. I will only quibble that the consumers in the market for a NAS, regardless of ease-of-setup, is still bordering technically inclined. My mother-in-law has enough trouble with her iPhone, let alone a server-type-device that she needs to administer.

I would imagine a more typical consumer would be buying a USB or Thunderbolt connected drive and following the prompts to set it up.

My impression is that companies like Backblaze and other backup-as-a-service solutions are more consumer-popular because it externalizes the complexity and pitfalls like the author is experiencing.

Marsymars 5 days ago||
> I would imagine a more typical consumer would be buying a USB or Thunderbolt connected drive and following the prompts to set it up.

The problem is that the typical consumer with a laptop never uses it in a docked configuration and just plugs it in to charge.

You may as well tell someone they need to regularly plug a USB hard drive into their iphone to back up their photos.

roadbuster 5 days ago||||
> For someone using consumer technology on a consumer laptop

Mounting an SMB share on a Synology NAS to use as a Time Machine backup target is not what most users would consider "consumer technology."

crazygringo 5 days ago|||
To the contrary. Time Machine is for consumers. Most people use it either with an external hard drive (good for iMacs that stay in one place) or a NAS (good for MacBooks). Apple even sold the AirPort Time Capsule at one point. Since that was discontinued, Synology NAS is the main consumer-friendly alternative. It comes with dedicated Time Machine support. It's supposed to be easy setup and forget. That's the whole point of using Synology instead of alternatives that require more technical expertise, that aren't designed for Time Machine support straight out of the box.
roadbuster 5 days ago||
> [Synology] comes with dedicated Time Machine support

Your umbrance is with Synology, not Apple.

Apple raised security default configurations in Tahoe. That led to a config breakage with NAS devices which rely on relaxed security configurations.

I agree Apple should publish a technical note / changelog of config changes such as this one, but Apple has never implied to users they'd carry a support burden for any/all third-party hardware vendors. To the contrary, they've notified users that you're meant to consult with your NAS vendor for configuration steps:

> Check the documentation of your NAS device for help setting it up for use with Time Machine

https://support.apple.com/en-us/102423

crazygringo 5 days ago||
I wasn't even assigning blame, did you mean to reply to someone else?

I was just replying to your point that a Synology NAS "is not what most users would consider 'consumer technology.'" It's firmly in the consumer technology category.

Aurornis 5 days ago|||
That’s definitely in the range of what consumers do these days.

The consumer NAS business is large. These are popular items with average consumers who understand the importance of backups.

It’s reasonable to expect it to work properly.

tapete1 4 days ago|||
This is true. If the user was capable of testing his backups, he would not be using a Mac in the first place.
PunchyHamster 5 days ago|||
> Not sure what happened in this person's case, but it also seems like he backed up and didn't test the restores. Which isn't good practice.

Regardless he should've gotten alert if backup target is unusable, not silently break

ndegruchy 5 days ago||
100%

My biggest gripes with Time Machine are the lack of visibility, the silent failures and the inflexible scheduling. I know there are methods to work around the last one, but the first two are paramount. It does do consistency checking, at least as far as the logs say, but it says nothing about the health of the backup container.

While most users don't really want to know about this stuff, I feel like it's important enough to have a more comprehensive UI to provide some insight into the feature and the associated health.

rcarmo 5 days ago|||
Hi! OP here. No, that was not it. Time Machine just quietly failed to do any backups and I failed to notice they weren't happening.
fmajid 5 days ago||
I use a self-hosted healthchecks.io watchdog timer instance to monitor jobs like these and alert if they don’t complete. Of course TimeMachine doesn’t have a way to signal successful completion, unlike, say, Carbon Copy Cloner. Given Apple software quality’s accelerating downward trend, I’d suggest switching to rsync/rclone instead, or Borg/Kopia if you want GUI-driven restores for non-technical members of your family.

It’s long past time you flipped the bozo switch on Apple, the title of your blog notwithstanding.

rcarmo 5 days ago||
I am using Borg Backup on Fedora, so that’s coming.
fmajid 5 days ago||
Yes, just saw your post on Vorta. I myself am ditching Apple platforms due to creeping enshittification, but I doubt my wife will.
gghffguhvc 5 days ago||
Time Machine is for the everyday person. The everyday person doesn’t have a few thousand dollars to buy a second machine just to properly test a full restore backup periodically.
MBCook 5 days ago|||
They don’t cost that much. And there are cheaper options.

Most computers Apple sells are laptops. By a huge margin.

So what am I supposed to do? Put my laptop in the same spot every night, plug it in, plug in the drive, and then the next morning carefully make sure the drive is unmounted before I move my laptop anywhere?

That’s kind of ridiculous. Network storage works. Apple has supported it for years.

If they don’t want to support this, don’t let the OS do it. Until then, don’t break my backups.

ndegruchy 5 days ago||||
I don't have a second machine to do a full restore. I just do spot checks every month to see if I'm able to restore files from various locations. It's not scientific, but it's helpful to know if a spot check fails, that there may be a larger issue.

Time Machine is absolutely for the layman, and something I feel can be improved upon with a bit more visibility in to the status.

ndegruchy 5 days ago|||
Just as a quick follow up, I completely forgot about the tool BackupLoupe[1]. It allows you to slice into your existing Time Machine backups and find out all manner of information on what's going on, what is backed up, when and what is taking up so much space.

[1]: https://www.soma-zone.com/BackupLoupe/

grandinj 5 days ago||
I suspect that Time Machine is no longer used by a sufficiently large % of their customer base for them to care, and they are slowly sunsetting it. They are quite aggressive about that sort of thing, so I expect it to to deprecated in favour of iCloud soon.
fragmede 4 days ago|
That's not a backup.
tonyedgecombe 5 days ago||
Time Machine has always been a bit ropey on SMB shares. I think it’s in part because it creates a disk image on the share then writes to that. This creates a lot more work and potential for things to go wrong.

If you want to backup across the network then it’s probably best to choose some third party software.

jonhohle 5 days ago||
What is Apple’s QA process? Do they rely on some random set of manual tests that may or may not get run each release? There have been so many things that seem like one of the most valuable companies in the world would include in tests, but yet break or remain broken.

As an experiment, open Console and filter just errors and faults. Dozens to hundreds of “errors” will scroll by representing the normal operation of the system. (Either they’re not really errors and no one cares or they really are errors and Apple just leaves their systems broken). How can anyone think this is OK?

I haven’t upgraded to Tahoe. I have been a Mac power user for over 20 years, and it becomes less interesting every release. I came for Unix, the script ability, and 3ᴿᴰ party applications. Unix is an afterthought, script ability is all gated behind security gates, and modern apps seem like such a huge regression.

heavyset_go 5 days ago||
> What is Apple’s QA process?

"Does this increase iCloud subscriptions or not?"

downrightmike 5 days ago||
Ding ding ding we have a winner!
senderista 5 days ago|||
A colleague joined the team for one of the most visible features in MacOS a few years ago and told me they had no automated testing.
danpalmer 5 days ago||
Two things are almost always true about Apple:

1) Every team does something different because none of them talk to each other. There are very few horizontal programs across engineering there. As a result, processes and results vary greatly.

2) They're very "traditional" in many ways. They're not a fast moving engineering led company, they're a slow moving business and marketing led company. Engineering is not their secret sauce (except perhaps some bits of hardware engineering). They are sometimes the sort of org that says why both with automated tests when we have a QA team.

m463 5 days ago|||
I think they mostly test in an all-apple environment.

With third party stuff, maybe you'll get lucky, but no guarantees...

3rd party monitors, or keyboards, or mice (what's a mouse?) or ...SMB devices

alsetmusic 5 days ago|||
They didn’t have qa for MacOS when I might have known someone who could speak on that. Was a shocker then, but no surprise now.
runjake 5 days ago||
Most macOS teams have unit testing. The quality of which varies greatly.
Squids4Cows 4 days ago||
Also running Tahoe. Also backing up to SynologyNAS. Also have lost 'many' backup to unknown reasons (was it a new beta? Was it a new OS? , the NAS crash of 2025) whatever.

Also, I don't even have an /etc/nsmb.conf or /etc/smb.conf file on the mac ( Tahoe 26.3)

I think the last time I configured Time Machine for SynologyNAS I followed as many tutorials as I could and basically everything is working for both mine & my spouses machines. - until it crashes & I lose everything.

theden 5 days ago||
This happened to me and I finally ditched time machine for BorgBackup https://www.borgbackup.org/

Not as nice UI-wise, but at least it's stable

k2enemy 5 days ago|
Vorta is a pretty nice GUI for borg on mac. Not as simple as Time Machine, but easier than creating launchctl entries.

https://vorta.borgbase.com

userbinator 5 days ago||
Apple has always had problems with SMB since they switched from one of the open-source implementations to one it internally developed, many yaers ago.

Then again, SMB especially in its newer versions seems to be a protocol developed by MS with one of its goals being to make third-party implementations as difficult as possible.

bsimpson 5 days ago|
As someone from Tahoe, it makes me sad that the release with the worst reputation is named after my home region.
More comments...