OOSHNOO  This software is awful. Haven't been able to get a single backup since I installed it, as it always locks up when loading a tape. The Retrospect Engine then hogs the cpu at over 90% and when you try and force quit the engine, the whole server locks up. This was installed on a brand new fresh installation of Leopard server, so I know the system is fine. POS software.  
(Version 8.1.662.1)

DER~BOT~HAUS  So advanced it is years beyond HD's. Doesn't know what they are. Can't connect to LTO3/LTO4's either as they are also "not advanced". Can't recover to a computer reliably either. My company has used Retrospect for years. It has always kinda sucked. But it got the job done, slowly. Now it can't get the job done and I am starting to think about the cloud as a "quicker" way to backup. And I am saying a T1 is faster than this. How many thousand of dollars in maintenance have I spent on this turd? Way too many money's.  
(Version 8.1.662)

MARK BURGESS  Why is the preference pane still 32-bit? Come on!  
(Version 8.1.662)

JAN13  As I do agree 100% with STEVE HOWE, I did try this new version and it works just fine on my SONY Tape Drive ( SCSI on Mac G5 ).... I think, that I am going to be brave and spend some $$$ for BluRay DVD drive from LaCie as source for backups.

50 Gig will be much more then my SONY Tape drive and I am crossing fingers that it is going to work ...

I will post my result as soon as I find out ...   
(Version 8.1.526)

STEVE HOWE  Too little too late.

Having come from a Retrospect background in the past, I always try to be agnostic in the backup tools I use, well you have to be. No single product can do every job, so, a wide knowledge of tools to do the many different jobs that various clients may require is fairly essential.

From offsite duplication, archival, synchronization, de-duplication, DLM/ILM systems, Disk to Disk to Disk or Disk to Disk to Tape, Virtual Tape Libraries and devices, SAN's and NAS systems, backup and recovery, backup plans, redundancy or resilience even Legal and Data Compliant systems including Sarbanes and international data transmission compliancy. The requirement list is endless but I have yet to find one product that can do everything for everyone and do it ALL exceptionally well.

For me Retrospect originally sat in the home to SMB market, for those people that might have a tape drive or library, it never really got any further.

BUT that doesn't mean it can't do it! up until now I have seen it backing up clients, servers, RAIDs in all sorts of manners and do it well, the Mac community took this product far beyond its original vision but it handled the punishment well, the problem is other products came along and offered more or the same and were much more simple to backup, why send an engineer out for half a day 'tweeking' retrospect to do AB & Z when you can deploy a solution in fraction of the time with a product designed to meet the modern needs of a backup solution.

So Retrospect came, and never really went, it lingered, in my opinion it was that guest at the party that didn't know when to leave, the guy that talks about a load of crap and consumes the free food and drink but doesn't really have anything to offer in return.

Retrospect became dormant, many mac support companies were stuck with it, but didn't know of any other option, they had either invested so much time in getting to know the product that anything else was too much of an investment or risk, or they didn't believe any other product was available for the Mac that really delivered on what it offered.

The updates slowed, and devices stopped working.

More and more alternatives came along, PresStore, Atempo, NetVault (Bakbone) and many other contenders, none of which seemed to take advantage of the situation, yet many offer competitive cross grades! I bet you may not have known that.

They all offer different solutions and alternative features, but most can easily replace Retrospect if you let them, yes you have to let them into your company first before they can help.

So along comes Retrospect 8 and what do we have?

To be honest an application which has some nice ideas but fails in so many ways, that it didn't come as a surprise.

It's fundamentally an unstable product that manages to over complicate things.

Remember backup should be simple, know your Data, know its Information and back it up!

It can be enough to write a backup strategy for a client

If your looking at a Retrospect 8 box right now or you have installed it, then good luck, I am sure EMC will eventually release enough patches to make it at least stable enough for prolonged use. But at the moment having seen it consistently crash on both clean (new) and existing machines. No warning, no reporting option and even on occasions no log entries on the system to tell you it crashed!

I have seen it crash and wipe out its plans, forget it's sources and even completely screw existing plans up. Crashing during backup and corrupting a catalogue, even not crashing and deciding to recycle a backup when I didn't ask it too!

If it was stable then we get onto the over complicated areas of the product, you specify both destinations and sources in the sources section! why I have no idea, file paths are not clear so if you have 2 folders with similar or the same names (backup/backups/backup etc) you will need to double check them as Retrospect has enough quirks to make you question your own sanity.

Then we have the excellent way that you start creating a script but then you close it to define it further, with the very dangerous fact that you can modify scripts in a list without actually opening them!!

If you were one of the early ones to move away from Retrospect being your only product of choice then you will be pleased to hear that you, like me made a wise decision.

If you were contemplating it, but never did or where clinging onto the slim hope that EMC may actually take their product and market serious enough to warrant releasing a product worthwhile, then carry on with your hope or look at alternatives because you will be waiting for quite some time.  
(Version 8.1.150)

MIKEEVANGELIST  Like many others, I've been waiting for years for an overhaul of Retrospect. Version 6 and its crashy behavior and clunky interface with (seemingly) hundreds of separate windows drove me crazy every time I had to reconfigure or use it.

Retrospect 8 is a huge improvement in almost every way. The interface is much easier to navigate. The separation of the 'engine' from the control console is a great idea (once you get used to it). Setting up scripts and monitoring what's happening is infinitely easier. And so far for me, it just works.

But perhaps best of all, after years of neglect and stagnation, it appears that EMC is actually taking this product seriously. They've moved quickly to fix bugs and respond to criticism of the initial release.

I also commend them on having reasonable upgrade pricing; it's so rare these days.

Retrospect is a powerful backup tool. If you're looking for one-click backups, this ain't for you. But if you have multiple computers and terabytes of data to backup and keep track of, it's a great too.  
(Version 8.1.150)

ITTY  They really are trying hard to make me not buy this upgrade. Still no DVD support. I have a bank of DVD burners just for Retrospect. But this new version still does not support optical media and will not, apparently, any time soon.  
(Version 8.1.150)

DELUGACH  I have used Retrospect in various forms and versions since November 1998. I abandoned it about a year ago and have never looked back. I always suspected that it may be suited for sysadmins in very large enterprises, but more and more it seemed a clunky and confusing solution to the (important) general backup problem. Its only really valuable feature was compressed backups to save space.

I use Time Machine and Super Duper and don't really seem to need anything else. Yes, compressed backups would be nice, but not worth the hassle of figuring out how Retrospect works. An unpredictable or confusing backup is worse than none at all. I'm sure the Retrospect folks have a perfectly clear concept in their minds but it was never clear to me. Sorry.  
(Version 8.1.148)

ITTY  They seem to be going out of their way to get rid of small-size users. I've been a customer since the '80's when the original product was called DiskFit.

But now the single-user has to jump through hoops to make what should be a simple installation. Then there's the overly complex interface.

Chalk me up to another customer lost to ChronoSync.  
(Version 8.1.148)

JIM WEISBIN  As of version 8.0736, still does not work at all on my Mac Pro running OS X 10.5.6 (Leopard) server. I used the "wizard" to start an immediate backup either to File or to Disk. It appears as though something's "happening" (a yellowish "blob" "swings" into the "activities" bar from somewhere unknown - very Microsoftish), but no script actually runs. Also, the date of the "scheduled" backup for that run is 1969 - huh? Tried to schedule it on the server itself, as well as from another computer running OS X 10.5.6 Leopard (not server), same thing, nothing happens.

I was able to get something to happen on my machine which is not running server software, but after it starts the script it immediately crashes. In addition, the interface is dreadful. For example, say you are setting up a File type backup and are prompted as to where to store the catalogue. You want to make a new folder? Go ahead, but you have to make it, then close out of that dialogue and go back to actually use that folder. The disclosure triangles to the left of folders are sometimes invisible, and the interface does not look anything like Mac OS X. For example, if you want to get to your desktop folder, you have to navigate to /Users//Desktop. Ugh!

I called tech support and was told that I get one "free" service call. They gave me a ticket number and then put me on hold for 45 minutes. I gave up after that.

Probably the worst "release" version I have ever seen, ever ever evr.  
(Version 8.0.736)

ADONSA  I've been using Dantz Retrospect off and on for years. I don't do any of the feature stuff, I just back up, and get done, and it works.

Below this comment are a lot of 1 and 2 star postings/complaints. Above this email, and dated more recently, is a long list of bug fixes. Are those of you who posted complaints, going to bounce your complaints against the bug fixes and revise your comments/ratings?

Now that I'm running System Leopard, I'd like to get back into Retrospect, if I can figure out what Retrospect Express is upgradable to.

Although quite a good application, Retrospect has gone through a wierd, convoluted history - specifically, various versions and upgrade for money schemes. Well, it's Dantz-Retrospect, right? Or did they change ownership AGAIN? How many owners has retrospect had so far? Is the owner change history longer than the version revision history? Just kidding. But, it might be nice to know who the next owner will be.   
(Version 8.0.733)

STUGOTS  I've used Retrospect for years, and tried most of the 8.0 Betas. Retrospect 8.0 is *not* yet ready for production use. It was rushed to market. Check their support forums (there are two, one for general questions and one for bugs), you'll see it has a lot of problems. Network performance is extremely slow, optical devices don't work, scripts get randomly mangled, and it crashes a lot for some users.

When they've debugged it, this may be a great product. They've dreamed up some nice new features, and the new UI may one day be great. But for now, stay away.  
(Version 8.0.608)

FILCHESCAT  It looks like this is still 8.0608.1, which has been available to the public since 4-8-09. As mentioned by others, user interface is different (change is good?) than the old reliable version 6 iterations, but the product itself is still beta quality. I've had problems with it silently quitting, not recognizing configured backup locations, especially on network storage devices. EMC tech support is fairly responsive, but looks to be overwhelmed by similar complaints. They like comments sent to their forum where they are kicked around by other uses, as if a group session will help solve problems - like a beta test group. Keep trying, EMC, is all I can say.  
(Version 8.0.608)

EAN  Tested version 8.0.608 (newer than what is listed here) with a single server and several clients. Can't import scripts from former versions (v6). Can't connect to any clients--before or after updating client software. Forget about updating clients from the server. Had to downgrade the client machines I tested as v6 displayed some weirdness with the newer clients. Since I couldn't actually connect to clients, I can't review script creation or execution. All in all, it feels like an early beta. Despite the problems with v6, it's definitely not worth upgrading at this point. Besides, the upgrade to v8 with 20 clients is nearly what I paid for v6 with 10 clients some years ago. The multi-threaded engine could make it worth the price, but I am unable to test it if I can't actually connect to clients...  
(Version 8.0.594)

VICTORB  I used Retrospect and Remote for years.

The fact is, it has grown stale. Try Personal Backup from Intego. It goes well beyond in functionality and reliability.  
(Version 8.0.594)

LYLEHM  I've only just recently installed 8.0.594. Ultimately, I'll test this will multiple Mac and Win servers backing up to a 9TB FC-RAID. I'm just so impressed by the new GUI, I wanted to mention it now instead of waiting for the test results.

EMC waited quite a while do anything with Retrospect Mac after it was purchased from Dantz. However, once the public beta started, the speed of bug fix releases was spritely. From that pace, and the lively interactions on the EMC beta forum, it's apparent they are taking this product seriously. I'm cautiously optimistic and look forward to posting some real world results.  
(Version 8.0.594)

NAOH  For what it's worth, Retrospect is still receiving commitment from EMC2.

However, the 'old' Retrospect will soon be retired and Retrospect X will take over. (That is what they plan to call it, according to the blog written by the chief developer.)

The plan is to integrate the Retrospect product into EMC2's other backup products.

A PDF that outlines the planned features can be found at the following link: http://www.emcinsignia.com/assets/ds_retrox_en.pdf  
(Version 6.1.230)

FHALS  Using it back to System 7, Retrospect saved my life for more times than I can count.

I think, everybody who uses this product in a Mac environment with a lot of machines and professional tape libraries has no other choice.

Frequent driver updates include all actual storage products one can use.

Simply become the king of users asking you for the origin of a file they have accidently altered weeks ago.

Switch back to a mountable volume before some major problems went in.

Get log files about any possible problem during the backup.

Scan terabytes of backups for specific files and retreive the one of a special date.

Easily build backup scripts around a whole network, daily differnt, multiple file selectors, encrypt the traffic and a whole bunch more of features.

Don't know, why so much people are bashing this product (is it, because there is no choice?).

By the way: How much commercial apps served a free upgrade from Tiger to Leopard?

Only con: Sometimes get stuck in a reload of a new tape library and needs the actual tape reloaded manually (depends on the library product).

If you need a cheap single desktop backup on another disk hang on CCC, if you need more, Retrospect is your friend.  
(Version 6.1.138)

ABATES25  I've been using retrospect as the backup solution with all my clients, ranging from single-user consultants to 70+ person organizations, and have always been thrilled with it.

Unlike others here, I don't upgrade any mission critical machines to the newest OS release until after the first couple months in the wild and, by following that mantra, have never had any problems. It can connect to a host of clients through a variety of methods, the backup sets can be modified as I need, and the device compatibility list grows by the week.  
(Version 6.1.138)

LEIAANGEL  Check out CrashPlanPRO Server, it's been working well for us. They supported Leopard on release day unlike Retrospect.

The server product is free. More info at http://www.crashplanpro.com  
(Version 6.1.11.101)

AMT  I've been using retrospect since version 3. I'm still using it for daily backups to a firewire drive. It's been fine.

Where I have trouble is that I am unable to retrieve files burned to DVDs for the last 2 years. My new DVD drive isn't one that is recognized by the retrospect driver. Does anybody know of a recovery program that will ignore retrospect and just retrieve files?  
(Version 6.1.11.101)

GYAWITZ  I was VERY down on Retrospect with constant kernel panics and freeze ups after the latest OS update.

I tried everything to no avail and then I figured it out.

If you have an Intel Mac and this sounds familiar go to library/preferences/retrospect and remove all the files named devicexx.rdi. I had 15 of them. Put in the latest driver update and then restart.

As soon as I did that Shazam it works like a charm and I am back in business.  
(Version 6.1.11.101)

TERSKAC  I have been using Retrospect for at least 11 years to backup a small network of 6 Macs. This is a complicated program to use but it has not failed to save me when I needed to restore anything from a backup. My storage sets are about 300 GB nowdays. I use 3 drives that I rotate every day.

Retrospect is a difficult program. You have to be careful when you use it and you have to monitor what it does. If you do those things in my experience it will do what it is supposed to do.

FYI there is a Yahoo Widget that will will monitor the Retrospect log file for you and display warnings.  
(Version 6.1.11.101)

D9  This has become the worst! What really is the crime is that Retrospect continues to be recommended by quasi-knowledgeable Mac support as the best backup solution. It lives on its earlier success and reputation.

Well, it's not!

We have faithfully backed up using Retrospect for years. Now when finally need to retrieve files from a corrupted hard drive, nearly 2/3 of the files are corrupted. The old drive had better success than Retrospect did!! No fore warning, no error messages...just simply retrieved the back up files and they are corrupt and/or damaged.

Restrospect SUX!!! (I don't know how better to describe my disdain)

/  
(Version 6.1.10.100)

DONMONTALVO  retrospect for mac is obviously no longer being developed. a shame, but not a problem. check out bru. the unix toolset is proven for over 20 years on the unix side. they ported to mac as a result of a request from nasa. the gui is maturing, and hopefully it'll soon reach the incredible level the underlying toolset.

emc is simply milking this cash cow.

don  
(Version 6.1.10.100)

LACWBO  EMC-Dantz has to get their heads out of the sand and:

1. Write it as a universal application for the Intel Macs and

2. Allow bootable copies to be made.

Until then there are many others which cost less and make bootable copies and are universal applications.

I own Retrospect but no longer use it.  
(Version 6.1.10.100)

FOULGER  Me too! Very unsatisfied - Time they got their heads out of the clouds (or out of a darker place) and made a rewrite in UNIVERSAL BINARY.  
(Version 6.1.8.101)

FREEINTONGA  I can only repeat and underline all the negative comments made by the other reviewers here. If Retrospect was useful in any way I'd be using it everyday but since it's inception it's use has been so full of problems, I ended up using alternatives like SuperDuper I'm very happy with those.

Too bad they never improved or really cared for this software  
(Version 6.1.8.101)

ENGELE  Retro has proven to be unreliable and problem prone. I talked to Dantz at macworld and they told me that my issues were known issues. That was a year ago and I still have the same issues despite Retro updates. My support contract has been expensive, incremental backups never are incremental, catalog files frequently go corrupt, It often will save the directory of the files I want but will skip the files. It takes about a full day on a gigabit network to do an incremental backup of twenty-five macs, and then I try to restore and it fails. Clients are constantly going offline. I can never tell if I have a good backup unless I look at it every morning... and after over a year of daily monitoring I have had one successfull backup... with errors. There is nothing to like about this archaic software. If there is an alternative I would love to know what it is. This app is worse than useless.  
(Version 6.1.7.101)

MAKAI  As I've found out the hard way, Retrospect had never backup up a couple of files on which -- for whatever reasons -- the Other privilege was set to No Access. I changed this permission flag to Read, and voila, on the next backup they got saved as well. I double-checked it's running as root, so it *should* backup items regardless of permission.   
(Version 6.1.7.101)

WIZARD2  As a long-time, heavily vested user of Retrospect, I have given Retrospect every chance I can since their belated and ill-fated conversion to OS X. NO MORE.

(1) Old storage sets are are unusable by current

versions.

(2) Scheduled backups are often incompete and

cannot be used reliably to replace lost files.

(3) Support if you can call it that, is almost useless.

ANY BACKUP UTILITY THAT PROVES BUGGY AND UNRELIABLE IS WORSE THAN NOT DOING BACKUPS.

It gives one a false pretense that all is okay in a

disaster, when it is not at all.

AVOID RETROSPECT. Apple's own Backup is far better. And ChronoSync is also excellent.

Retrospect's day has gone. And since DELL's EMC has gobbled up what is left of Dantz -- I have abandoned all hope of things getting better.

SO LONG RETROSPECT -- I KNEW YE WELL.

Good riddance.  
(Version 6.1.7.101)

DRBONES666  Retrospect exists only because of a lack of similar products. It never works right. It makes your Mac run slower than Windoze on a Dell.

I backed up 18GB of data and that took most of a day. I then did a subsequent back up and it wanted to backup all 18GB AGAIN!!

Piece of junk.  
(Version 6.1.6.100)

BALDYAULDEEJIT  I used to be happy with Retrospect but, in the last few years, I've experienced more and more problems. The latest, and most frustrating, is hundreds of "bad sector header" errors when archiving to CD. I've wasted hours, and tens of CDs, trying to sort out this problem. I've also wasted hours searching the manufacturer's knowledgebase(?!), where I found a distinct lack of information on the subject (but what's new?), and their forums, where I found plenty of other disgruntled users but no solution.

Retrospect has, sadly, degenerated into an inferior product that is, frankly, best avoided. Now to find a replacement...  
(Version 6.1.3.101)

BBQ-ALLSTAR  Here's an email that I sent Dantz the other day...anyone else having problems with Retrospect and MacIntels? I am running Tiger 10.4.4.

Hello,

I just wanted to let you know that I tried Retrospect (6.1.126) on my iMac Intel Core Duo with Tiger 10.4.4 and it seemed to work well until it copied about 5 GBs and then my computer popped up a message that said the computer was running out of space and that I needed to delete files to make more room. However, I was backing up my computer onto an external hard drive Ñ so this shouldnÕt have been an issue Ð also along with the fact that my iMac has a 250 GB HD. The weird thing was that when I ÒGet InfoÓ or checked out the space remaining on my iMac Ñ it stated that I only had about 40 GBs left Ñ somehow 150 GBs was being used. I immediately stopped Retrospect, canceling the backup, and restarted my computer Ñ everything (the disk space) appeared to be back to normal...

Are you at Dantz aware of this issue on the new MacIntels?

I really like the backup application, but this issue scared me not to use it again...  
(Version 6.1.3.101)

MISCHIVO  Why does THIS crash every time I attempt to open it, and why does the original full version that came with my Maxtor OneTouch II also crash when I attempt to open it? This blows :-( for me.   
(Version 6.1.2.102)

LOREN SLAFER  Retrospect is my BEST tool to be able to easily duplicate/backup my System and User data onto external hard drives or tapes etc  
(Version 6.1.126)

BLUEFLY  Is there an alternative to Retrospect that allows one to back-up clients to an AIT drives?  
(Version 6.1.126)

BJöRN HENNING  I installed version 6.1 (posted 12th of October) to my backup computer which successfully backup Mac OS 9, Mac OS X and Windows clients with Retrospect version 6.0. When trying to backup a Mac OS X client (6.1.107) the communication was VERY slow and massive number of "Net Retry" was displayed. This version of Retrospect is unusable in my setup. Reverting to 6.0 returned "normal behaviour". Be careful!  
(Version 6.1.126)

PAULD  I'm very suspicious of the comment below by AVFolk. He's posted a very, very similar message trashing Restrospect in the comments of the article about version 6.1 on macworld.com : http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/10/03/retrospect/index.php  
(Version 6.1.126)

ANONYMOUS  The below comment is useless to you if you need a cross platform solution.  
(Version 6.1.126)

AVFOLK  This WARNING is from a long-time Retrospect user:

-> Data may not be backed up correctly

-> Logs may not correctly reflect errors

-> Errors shown may not be actual errors

-> Your data may not be safe as archived

(We have had numerous FATAL errors on recover)

-> Dantz support for OSX is haphazard at best

We have paid of numerous 'upgrades' that each promised to fix know bugs in the previous release.

NONE of the bugs or problems were addressed, and Dantz dodges the issues in support forums, emails and calls.

DO NOT TRUST RETROSPECT -- we maintained our loyalty to a GREAT OS9 product -- and have paid dearly for our decision.

We no longer use any Dantz products -- and instead use ChronoSync, which is far more flexible, reliable, and user-friendly -- they also respond to users!!!! (What a concept) GOODBYE DANTZ.  
(Version 6.1.126)

COSTANTINO IMBRAUGLIO  I got Retrospect Express purchasing an external Maxtor Drive: this happened in march and I got version 5.

At that time my computer was an Apple Powerbook running Mac OS X 10.3 (aka Panther). Retrospect Express seemed to work, but it was extremely slow, clumsy and at the end of each backup there was always a list of files that could not be backuped.

In July I decide to upgrade to Mac OS X 10.4 (aka Tiger). Retrospect Express didn't work anymore. So I tried to get in contact with Dantz in order to see what I could do apart from spending $89 to purchase a brand new version of a software that I did purchase only 3 months before.

I never got any answer from Dantz. Guys, think twice before wasting your time and money with this software!!!  
(Version 6.0.212)

XCHO  From my experience, Retrospect is a convoluted, tortuous mess of nonsense that should be removed from the marketplace until maybe it is overhauled by left-, middle-, or right-brainers, perhaps! This software has never worked and the interface is azoic. It seems that the people that wrote the documentation, the program interface, and the program were pachydermatous to people really concerned with the welfare of their investments in software, creative projects, time, etc. (I used certain lingo because Retrospect used the word "advanced.").  
(Version 6.0.212)

ANONYMOUS  Where is the option to email backup notifications? I've found how-tos for now to get Retrospect to do this, but they're all for Windows.  
(Version 6.0.212)

ANONYMOUS  As a long time customer, I must now admit that I am looking for another solution than Dantz Retrospect. The product update is not up for use with Tiger. The customer support is not free unless you just bought the product 30 days ago, you have to pay. For a home office there are other solutions DejaVu and other I do not know of. The support for external DVD RW writers is limited, you need to know exactly which mecanism is inside the drive you intend buy not easy task.

My advice buy an extra HD and another software.  
(Version 6.0.212)

SCOTT  Bought Retrospect to back up my mac to network drives. Retrospect won't do a direct file backup of anything over 2GB even though I am backing up to NTFS drives. So after much frustration I tried the ftp solution but oh no, that doesn't work either. I get a error 225. I can use a normal ftp client to successfully upload files but for some reason Retrospect can't. Can't believe I spent so much money on this pathetic software!  
(Version 6.0.212)

PAUL  I've been using Retrospect for some time. The manual was one of the most articulate (for the layman) I've ever seen and it needed to be. However it seems to have got flakier over the years and as the Mac OS gets better and better Retrospect gets worse and worse. I'm now considering migrating to a reliable system. My last e-mail form Dantz tech support said of my problem "This is a known issue!"  
(Version 6.0.212)

ANONYMOUS  These days Dantz has introduced Retrospect 7 for That Other OS.

I wonder when they'll schedule the Mac version 7?

Total neglect of our beloved friend.  
(Version 6.0.204)

STEVE PRICE  If anyone can help would be much grateful

i have retrospect on the a mac G4 blue tower doing manual backups from a lacie external drive, all seems good does the backups with no error occuring, the problem i have came across is when restoring a certain folder of pictures not all is there that is on the lacie, i have found out why it hasnt backed up the whole folder; is because the same filename has been backed up in another session another folder, the problem with this is the picture involved in different folders could have changes made to them without changing filename so you wont have the latest changes, i hope this makes sense.

if any one knows how to back up everything without comparing form other sessions emails would be most grateful. steve.price@fantasy.co.uk  
(Version 6.0.204)

COLIN JOHNSON  Review by Colin Johnson

: I have been dissapointed by Dantz's Retrospect. The server software is crash prone and does not allow simultaneous executions (the PC version does), nor can the software wake OS X machines from sleep (requiring you to leave machines running constantly, or utilize a workaround). Further, "Selectors" (for choosing which files to backup) are not documented clearly enough - I've had to create test scripts to ensure the proper files / folders would be backed up. In addition, the "Selectors" from one machine can not be exported for use on another machine. The AppleScript support is a hack, and unquestionably poor. The upgrade process from version 5 to 6 was troublesome. Lastly, I found support was poor, and the Dantz forums were ill frequented and not particularly helpful. If a worthwhile alternative arrives on the scene, by all means take a look. (11/11/2004, Version: 6.0.103)  
(Version 6.0.204)

CHRIS D  What I can't for the life of me figure out is the absolutely idiotic file numbering system that Dantz uses.

In JUST one window on MacUpdate there are version numbers 6.0.204, 6.0.178,5.0.105,5.0.236 and 6.0.109 referred to... what an asinine numbering system they use.

I have version 6.0.193 on my computer but when they release a driver update FOR VS. 6.0 it is numbered 5.8.103

Are these people nuts or what. Can't they use one simple numbering system like 6.1 and 6.2 and then a driver update that works with 6.1 or 6.2.

They use driver version for a release in 6.0 that are still in the 5.8.103 numbering system.

Every time I download something I cringe that I am downloading the right file and not going to screw something up or wonder if I have the "Actual" latest file because I don't have a clue.  
(Version 6.0.204)

GARY  I was alarmed when I realized that the 6.0.204 exactly described the settings I use to archive my music library. In checking I discovered that, sure enough, files were missing. Fortunately I also archive to CD's so I restored the files. However, just look at the problems this update claims to solve. These are VERY BASIC and this begs the question as to what other BASIC functions are goofed up. This is the last straw. I am done with this software entirely. I am going to go to SuperDuper or one of the other programs.   
(Version 6.0.204)

T. OHNHOF  Dont use this software or you are in real danger of loosing data. It randomly can destroy disk directories. Doesn't work well with SCSI.

Especially true for version 5 and OS X.

Did run better under OS 9 but if you need correct UNIX permissions this no option.

Maybe give 6 a try but be aware - you will have to convert your backupsets and 6 can't read older backups from 5 or 4 tapes.

As long as it works it is a good tool - but when your backups grow you are in absolute danger. Strange but true this seems to be a Mac only problem - dantz seem to take more care for windows than for mac.   
(Version 6.0.193)

ANDREAS  Since upgrading I've had a nightmare, but with this new version I can finally start using Retrospect again. The problem was the lack of support for older backup sets, but this update fixes this with the option of using New Media. The fix isn't perfect but at least it works.  
(Version 6.0.193)

DEMILE  Just came in mail. Was looking forward to using it. First attempt failed. Where is the frigging load and eject command. Why won't it load the next DVD? When I quit Retrospect, eject works with all other programs. Toast 5 also on drive. With Retrospect loaded, Toast says there's no CD/DVD drive installed.

On first night, I wasted money and two hours on a nightmare.  
(Version 6.0.193)

ANONYMOUS  Best software backup utility available, and has saved my ass-embly language many a time. :-)  
(Version 6.0.193)

PORFIRIO DIAZ  Where did all these ridiculously bad reviews come from? Why the lies?

Retrospect has always been able to backup to a file destination -- my scripts do it every day. It doesn't demand an entire volume to be somehow reserved for it. And who cares about multitasking in a file backup app -- it would slam the disk head back and forth, doing the job slower than unitasking does.

I depend heavily on Retrospect, and have no real complaints about it. Now if they could just lower the price a bit....  
(Version 6.0.193)

ANONYMOUS  "...bug that prevented tape autoloaders and fibre channel tape libraries from working"

And this was released as a working version with this bug? I am REALLY glad I didn't spend any money on it. I'll stick with my old version that works adequately (now that I am familiar with it's bugs and can work around them).  
(Version 6.0.193)

MICHAEL  I first used retrospect 7 years ago. Imagine my surprise to find all the same problems in the latest version! Retrospect constantly hangs taking down the server with it, so badly on one occasion that the server HD required reformatting. Retrospect cannot multitask unlike every other piece of mac software developed for the 21st centuary....oh yea thats right, retrospect isn't. Retrospect still demands sole use of the entire backup volume, a lot of space doing nothing in case you are backing up to a large HD.

The GUI is not intuitive and remains unchanged from its earliest incarnation. In fact, I am amazed that Dantz can legally call each subsequent release a 'new' version. Retrospect is antethisis to a mac. It is the Microsoft of backup, unintuitive, buggy and characterised by lazy programming and development.

The only good thing I can report about Retrospect 6 is that, aware of its reputation, I 'borrowed' it off the internet and am very glad I did not waste any money on this terrible product. If we all did the same, then perhaps Dantz would stop marketing its rubbish for mac altogether and let someone else have a go.  
(Version 5.2.101)

CALIøS  Dantz, I've been following your product for a long long time, and I've registered it in the past. Back in the days when a backup application could proprietise an entire volume for its backup destination and you didn't mind so much, because a volume was likely to be a Zip 100 Disk, or another modest-sized drive. Or even a shoebox full of floppy disks (shudder).

But I think its time for you to grow up, and give us the option nominating a protion of a volume for backup use. Is there any other backup applicatoin out there that insists on owning the whole volume?! I have a 240G external firewire drive that I want to use for backups. But I don't want to give the entire drive to Retrospect to fill up as it chooses. With 240G, don't you think I could put just a little of my other data on there as well? Pretty pulease?

You know, I think it took me years to decipher how to actually use this application - a combination of craving a Mac-like intuitive user experience, and a total lack of intelligible support and documentation by Dantz...) And now I can work it, its useless to me. Call me stingy, but I'm not allocating 240G of expensive drive space to this application just because its designers are too mean to bring their application into current reality.

Dantz have been charging TOP DOLLAR for years, and like so many of the biggies, they think past market share gives them the right to sit on their proverbials. Retrospect gets my SHAME nod for this week, along with Apple's iSync.  
(Version 5.2.101)

ANONYMOUS  Do NOT, do NOT, do NOT buy this software. It seems to run well at first, then the errors start showing up. It will happen.  
(Version 5.2.101)

WHITNEY JOHNSON  I used be be like No. 1. Used Retrospect since it first came out. And loved it. Now it is total crap. Can't backup anything without 100s of errors. Even freshly formatted drives to freshly formatted drives. Huge wast of money. Make sure you give it a full work out in your first 30 days.  
(Version 5.1.103)

ROB  Don't know why others seem to be having problems with Retrospect 6.0.1... I just bought two new 80-gig HD's (the second as my back-up HD) and was able to COMPLETELY copy my old 40-gig HD without a single glitch. EVERYTHING works perfictly! (I've a G4 and have also just upgraded to 10.3.) As I've experienced a lot of problems in the past, I was truly expecting all kinds of problems. But none came! Retrospect did everything it claimed. A very cool and easy to use program... At least around here!  
(Version 5.1.103)

DTP  Absolute marvel in back-up utilities! Run's like PORSCHE!  
(Version 5.1.103)

AVFOLK  Dantz still does not get it. This latest 'update' fails to fix the numerous bugs that result in 'dropped host errors', network freezes, and missed backups.

As a Retrospect Workgroup user and regular upgrader... I have spent many $$$ and still all I have is TRASH. By ANY other shareware program -- even the $5 ones are better!  
(Version 5.1.103)

NO. 1 FOR ME  Geez, I've not had the problems other have had and I'm running 10.3.2. I've used Retrospect since its inception and I for one am glad they are still with the MAC world. I know of no better way to backup than Retrospect.  
(Version 5.1.103)

ANONYMOUS  retro 6 update is totally useless because it is NOT backwards compatible with existing catalogs. we regularly back up to separate client archives and have done for 12 years. its ludicrous to think we could start new catalogs  
(Version 5.0.105)

BEN  It looks like some people dislike Retrospect. Be glad you have options. I would suggest to some of critics to read the manual and documentation before charging the makers of software. Moving from Carbon to pure Mac OS X has its price. To backup in native format is maybe good but incremental backups are difficult in this technic.   
(Version 5.0.105)

ANONYMOUS  This software is trash. It backups in proprietary file format. If it goes haywire on you, like 5.1 and 6.0 did for me, all my backups are rendered useless.

I went to Data Backup X. It backups files in Finder format.

Praise be!  
(Version 6.0)

BPDF93  Dantz has decided that paying for the Workgroup edition is not enough. In addition to having to pay for bug fixes to make Retrospect run properly on Panther, Dantz now requires that Mac OS X Server users pay for Retrospect Server if they want to be able to back up their machines.

That's right: you can buy a $500 operating system and then have to pay $800 for the backup software. The 100 clients included with Retrospect Server will come in handy for backing up the 10 users the OS supports.  
(Version 6.0)

ANONYMOUS  Don't bother.

You are better off backing up Manually.

This product is cr@p.  
(Version 6.0)

TIM  It's pretty pathetic that a supposedly major software developer is 403'd to its knees by simple demand for its products. Are there reall that many people clamoring for a Retrospect upgrade, or can't their servers handle more than three simultaneous sessions? Bleah.  
(Version 6.0)

MADOG  I think someone held a lot of animosity towards Dantz's business practices. Unless of course their site being down is their fault =\  
(Version 6.0)

ROBERT PAEGE  We stopped paying for Dantz bug fixes. Some of the bugs should NEVER have been happened in the first place and there is NO WAY we were going to throw more money at slipshod programming of a critical application. Version 5 is a mess, with serious though often subtle errors that cause critical backups to fail. Unless there is a guarantee, and I see none, that this version is rock-solid reliable they'll be getting no bug-fix protection money from us.  
(Version 6.0)

ANONYMOUS  Dantz makes you pay for Bug Fixes. Very annoying. Waited a long time for bugs to be fixed only to find out I have to upgrade to the next version : (  
(Version 5.1)

DANIEL VALDEZ  I use 5.0.238 everyday to backup (and occasionally to restore) to tape drives, hard disks, and ftp sites. I have not had any problems running it on OS 9.1, 10.2.x or 10.3.x, except using outlook express to send automated reports does not always work and sometimes the asip server crashes if you do not launch retrospect at startup (versus a few hours later when it launches automatically.)  
(Version 5.1)

ANTI  well...

Retrospect gets worse and worse...

crashes all my computers frequently...(have to force restart)

and their upgrade policy...

i mean:

what motivates the upgrade fee from 5 to 5.1 ?

how about "Not crashing your computer" ?

Nope...still does.

This app is like a bad beta...

one of the worst apps i have used on the mac platform...

useless & a ripoff...

Backup software is supposed to save my day not ruin it...

UI-what a joke...

(10.3 & desktop 5.1)  
(Version 5.1)