Back to Carbon Copy Cloner page
Carbon Copy Cloner free download for Mac

Carbon Copy Cloner Reviews

5.1.13
19 October 2019

Easy-to-use backup/cloning utility.

Stevie24
25 April 2019

Most helpful

I run QRecall on all of my Macs plus recommended it to all of my customers. It's fast and the deltas are very small. I use it instead of time machine since these backups run seemingly forever and copy huge amounts of data.
In addition to QR I run CCC for bootable alternative device and managing local filesystem snapshots as they are possible in APFS. Never had any problem and it saved my ass may times..
The most important data is saved additionally to the cloud via Arq.

This triumvirate is my favourite combination to save my data.
Like (3)
Version 5.1.8

Read 329 Carbon Copy Cloner User Reviews

Rate this app:

iMacWare
20 October 2019
CCC (Carbon Copy Cloner) is probably the easiest of the tools I have used to clone my drives. I have also used SuperDuper! and Disk Drill.
Like (1)
Version 5.1.13
andrew-likes-mexico
28 September 2019
i realize this isn't a troubleshooting forum, but i've tried about 10x now to clone my hard drive to a new drive using CCC and keep running into the same problem. After a certain amount of time - between 10 min and 30 min of data transferring - data transfer is interrupted with an error message claiming that the i've disconnected the new drive. the new drive disappears from my desktop, so it is as if it had been unplugged (when of course, it hasn't been). Don't know if this is a bug in CCC, or whether something else is causing this.
Like (1)
Version 5.1.11
1 answer(s)
Mcr
Mcr
10 October 2019
Is the new drive external? In my experience almost always with external drives, disconnects are the result of either a bad cable or the drive is pulling more power than the USB can provide (if it is a powered via the USB port). during intense and sustained disk transfers, this power drain can pop it's ugly head. Note, this is likely not an issue with your USB port, but with the external drive. AS a test, try SuperDuper and see what happens, or just manually in Finder copy and paste the entire disk structure from the root folder to the target root. Oh, if you are using a USB hub, especially unpowered, well, don't. Always use a powered hub (i.e. one that comes with it's own power cord) or plug directly into Mac usb port.
Like (3)
Version 5.1.12
Stevie24
25 April 2019
I run QRecall on all of my Macs plus recommended it to all of my customers. It's fast and the deltas are very small. I use it instead of time machine since these backups run seemingly forever and copy huge amounts of data.
In addition to QR I run CCC for bootable alternative device and managing local filesystem snapshots as they are possible in APFS. Never had any problem and it saved my ass may times..
The most important data is saved additionally to the cloud via Arq.

This triumvirate is my favourite combination to save my data.
Like (3)
Version 5.1.8
iMacWare
24 April 2019
Carbon Copy Cloner 5, along with the use of Time Machine, is amazing. Have you ever unintentionally messed something up on your drive? Maybe your external drive died and your time machine failed... You can use CCC 5 to clone your drive to any external drive (try using Thunderbolt for best results).
Like
Version 5.1.8
Dgerzeeboy
16 March 2019
I downloaded this app two days ago because I needed to duplicate a large group of files to an external HD and my usual go-to duplication/backup software was no longer current. Based on the reviews here and the fact that the developer is generous enough to offer a weeks-long trial period with no restrictions before purchase, I gave it a try. I found it well designed, inuitive, fast and powerful. And it got the job done in good time. Bought it immediately. So should you.
Like
Version 5.1.8
SaJe
15 March 2019
CCC has saved my bacon more times than I can count. I've been using it since I got my first Mac in the mid-Nineties, and it's one of the first things I install when I upgrade. hardware. A true example of "set it and forget it," it runs flawlessly and when Murphy takes a hand, I have a bootable backup waiting for me. Thanks and kudos to Bombich Software!
Like
Version 5.1.8
Aeschylus
27 February 2019
Powerful, reliable, and regularly updated to take into account Apple's updates and Apple's bugs. You might not want to spend time making backups. But if you do, this is rightfully the most highly regarded program to do so. I've never once second guessed my purchase.
Like
Version 5.1.8
Sampler
14 December 2018
I wanted to transfer just three OS 9 apps that I use in Sheep Shaver to another computer. I tried simple transfer via the network, but the sizes of the transferred apps were wrong and they wouldn't open. I then tried SuperDuper over the network with the same result. Finally, I set up the transfer in CCC, hit "Clone" and the apps transferred correctly.

I've had several questions over the years for Mike Bombich and he's always answered quickly with a helpful explanation or solution. A superior app with superior service!
Like (4)
Version 5.1.7
artie505
24 October 2018
Just OUTSTANDING! Performance and support are unequaled.
Like (3)
Version 5.1.6
JohnF1664
28 August 2018
I don't understand all the excitement about this software. Was using it from time to time during past several years and always faced three major flaws: 1) It always brags about something, there's always some kind of error or warning or message during operation or startup or just popping up randomly about what's going on. But what's going on is a simple backup. Please just copy files! 2) When you replace the hard drive you will have to recreate ALL TASKS FROM SCRATCH. Because your hard drive's serial number is now different and CCC doesn't show you previous choice of your backup for a new hard drive. 3) When you add folders to the root of your hard drive being copied - CCC adds new folders to the backup. Did I ask about that? Never! CCC is like a part of CyberNet with its own AI very very hostile towards human beings. And it talks to you without any respect or understanding.
Like (2)
Version 5.1.4
3 answer(s)
Lvdoc
Lvdoc
31 August 2018
Which alternative cloning program DOES show you your previous choice of backup for a new hard drive with a new serial number? I assume there must be one if you're going to use that as a ratioinale to knock stars off the rating for CCC.
Like (7)
Moxiesozo
Moxiesozo
18 September 2018
John,
I would recommend contacting the developer and posting (in a civil tone) your concerns and questions. I expect every issue you mentioned can be adjusted or explained to your satisfaction.
Like (7)
artie505
artie505
24 October 2018
There are logical, reasonable explanations for all 3 of the things that are bothering you, and under any circumstances, THEY SIMPLY DO NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A 1/2 STAR REVIEW!

I might respect your opinions were they attached to a 3 1/2-4 star review, but your complaints are about procedures in the face of IMPECCABLE, ALWAYS UP TO DATE PERFORMANCE, and, quite simply, they warrant neither 1/2 star nor respect.
Like (6)
june8
30 July 2018
Best in its class.
Like (1)
Version 5.1.4
RoXXXy
25 July 2018
CCC.. Since Day 1 Has always been Full Proof.. Look no Further..Reasonably Priced Stays up on Updates.. Awesome Cusomer Service!! Best Buy on the Planet!!
Like (4)
Version 5.1.3
Nontroppo
27 April 2018
V5.1 is a stellar update, now supporting APFS snapshots natively, and with a beautiful snapshot viewer. This along with the already existing powerhouse of cloning and backup features makes CCC an essential purchase. In particular I would emphasise CCC has the best documentation I've ever read. The help is comprehensive yet concise, and it is like having an expert sat next to you guiding you you through every process. For example for snapshots, it gives you the best practices and balances what you will gain, and why you would still need clones, and the relative performance merits of each across SSDs and HDDs. Excellent!
Like (4)
Version 5.1
Tomq
26 April 2018
Excellent; used for many years (along with TM and SD :-) ) CCC has added many new features lately and especially incorporating the new Snapshot features with Apples new file system.
Like (4)
Version 5.1
ben-stamp
18 February 2018
I am a customer for a very long time. Though, I do not use it that frequently nowadays. Timemachine is taking care of my data.
Like (2)
Version 5.0.9
bpelka
15 February 2018
Super!
Like (3)
Version 5.0.8
robfol
31 January 2018
Very Powerful, flexible, easy to use and IMHO the best backup app there is. Been using for many years. V5.0 has no problem with High Sierra all the way to 10.13,4 beta. Remember to rotate a couple of external drives and keep one offsite. Just Buy it!
Like (7)
Version 5.0.5
1 answer(s)
iMacWare
iMacWare
24 April 2019
I use SuperDuper! to clone my Time Machine since CCC won't let you. I just purchased this and I'm wondering why I didn't before!

It's not hard to use, do not be intimidated!
Like
wrcemail
11 January 2018
I'm updating my review on 1/7/18 to 5 stars (I can't change the star rating). Everything seems to be working great now. I swear, it seems sometimes even digital systems can "meld" itself together ... I now have an external drive that can boot and CCC in case my internal SSD blows up (well, sort of) . lol
Like (1)
Version 5.0.5
wrcemail
07 January 2018
I've been using CCC (or SuperDuper) for decades. Having trouble getting either to work well on my iMac Pro with OS 10.13.2 . They have a new file system and new security. I'm not sure who's "fault" it is, but I hope things get worked out because CCC is key to my backup strat. (I'll redo my rating once this gets fixed.)
Like (1)
Version 5.0.5
Laurent-Grisel
24 September 2017
A BIG THANKS for this essential software (the most important for my Mac) and for the suppesion of the historical (as I had requested)
Like (1)
Version 5.0.2
Macs007
23 September 2017
Still my favorite system backup tool.
Like (1)
Version 5.0.2
frans-3
16 September 2017
Every time at startup the main app starts! It is not under my startup items but for some reason the complete app starts (with interface) instead of just the menu. Very, very annoying! Version 4 did not do this...
Like
Version 5.0
Thinking-Differently
14 September 2017
Version 5 contains some very significant upgrades, particularly if you have a sophisticated backup configuration, or backup remote Macs. Pros Version 5 allows the creation of Task Groups. A task group can contain an assortment of tasks to be run in a particular sequence and scheduled as a group. By option dragging a task from one task group into another, multiple Task Groups can contain the same task. The old approach, chaining tasks, was limited because chaining required that the sequence be the same each time or you couldn’t reuse it. This meant that you had to create different tasks that were identical, except for the task they called to run after them. Task Groups free one from these issues. So you no longer have to do some of those ugly workarounds like running your tasks in less than desirable orders, or figuring out how long each task will take so you can “choreograph” them by careful selection of starting times. For copying remote Macs, you now have a really nice GUI interface for filtering what you copy, and what you don’t, that is very similar to what you have for filtering the copies of local volumes. So you don’t have to become an expert on rsync filter rules. ;-) Not Yet Perfect: While it is very, very good. And well worth the upgrade price, there are still some ways in which 5.0 is a “dot zero” release. AFAIK, there I no way to nest Task Groups. That is you cannot put one task group inside of another. The option dragging is a bit tricky. It doesn’t work well if I release the mouse button with the task directly on top of the task group. It seems to work best if I drag the task just to the bottom of the task group. With a bit of practice, you will master it. There are some things that you still cannot do in task groups. For example, if you want to run a script first thing, you cannot set that up in a task group. You must instead set it up in the first task. And it would be really nice if one could use Carbon Copy Cloner to backup to a NAS device, such as a QNAP or a Synology via rsync. But AFAIK, this is not yet supported.
Like (1)
Version 5.0
bazlane
26 August 2017
I've used several cloning apps over the years and CCC has been the best of the bunch. Had a small problem once and Mike Bombich responded almost immediately and sorted it out within - if I remember it correctly - around ten minutes. A great app and quite brilliant support. I'm giving it five stars because I'm not permitted to give it 25.
Like
Version 5.0
Funjoy
26 August 2017
Solid app. More comprehensive (and complicated) than SuperDuper! which costs $13 less, but both make excellent cloned backups. I own both. Where CCC pulls ahead is in its ability to clone an internal drive's tiny internal boot partition, and its ability to more easily deal with multiple drives and backup schedules (for a family, for example). I will continue to upgrade to both CCC and SuperDuper (SD is much simpler to use, and my copy is currently used by my parents for scheduled backups on their internal drive to a connected external). In fact, the morning Bombich announced this v5.0 version I upgraded. If you need a simple cheap bulletproof backup SuperDuper! will mostly do what CCC does, for less. But CCC is best if you want your clone to contain Apple's boot partition, and/or you have sophisticated or complicated backup needs re scheduling or multiple drives, then you probably want to take a look at Carbon Copy Cloner.
Like (1)
Version 5.0
1 answer(s)
lacwbo
lacwbo
26 August 2017
Also; CCC has the safety net which I find invaluable. I see no need to use any backup other than CCC. Much easier to restore from than TimeMachine.
Like (1)
Rick6
26 August 2017
it's great software!
Like (1)
Version 5.0
B-Jefferson-Le-Blanc
25 August 2017
OK, I'll be the first to venture a review of this new version of Carbon Copy Cloner. First off, this may not be an essential upgrade unless you want or need the new features in version 5. For instance, version 4 is listed on the Bombich web site as High Sierra Qualified. At the same time version 5 is described as being designed for APFS and High Sierra, macOS 10.13. Which means, I think, that it can handle the new file system in Sierra appropriately. So one reason I upgraded was to be on the safe side in that regard, though I won't be using High Sierra right away (as it's still in beta testing as of this post).

Among the new features I find useful is an improved file filtering window which, instead of just noting unchecked files, lines them out in red to make them easier to find in a long list, which can be helpful in custom backups. Just as helpful to me is the ability to group tasks into groups, which shortens my rather long task list. There are some additions that will help new users, including Guided Setup and Restore, which can walk you through the cloning and restoring process. There is also a Cloning Coach that can locate issues and offer advice.

Check out the new features page at https://bombich.com/features, which includes a side-by-side feature list so you can compare versions 4 and 5. I found this particularly helpful in making my decision to upgrade.

That said, I've been using CCC since the old days when you could run it for free indefinitely. I started paying for it when I began using it more regularly. The upgrade from version 4 is 50% off the regular price, which is a better deal than you get with many expensive apps.

If your backup needs are more basic, SuperDuper! is easier to use and costs 25% less. Though for $12 more you get a whole lot more power with Carbon Copy Cloner. Among other things, unlike SD, CCC can back up over a network. Then again, version 5 has a Simple Mode that makes basic backups easier to visualize and manage so you don't actually have to be a propeller-head to use it.
Like (2)
Version 5.0
Mac-Ct
21 August 2017
A stunning piece of software. Never ever had a problem with it. Looking forward to Version 5 :-)
Like (2)
Version 4.1.18
Pat-Geerts
25 July 2017
Best of its class.
Like (4)
Version 4.1.17
2 answer(s)
AnnL7456
AnnL7456
20 August 2017
Pat-Geerts wrote: "Best of its class."

What does "of its class" mean? To what "class" are you referring? This confusticates the issue.
Like (1)
RavenNevermore
RavenNevermore
21 August 2017
@AnnL7456; seriously? If you look up the phrase "Best in Class" you get:

"The highest current performance level in an industry, used as a standard or benchmark to be equaled or exceeded."

In this case the "class" is backup apps.
Like (3)
lacwbo
29 June 2017
CCC is definitely the best backup app that I have used. The SafetyNet feature is one that I have used often when one of my files gets corrupted. Much easier to use than Time Machine when a file has to be replaced. Also the support from the developer is fantastic.
Like (7)
Version 4.1.16
RavenNevermore
28 June 2017
The best of its kind, and for a very long time.
Like (3)
Version 4.1.16
1 answer(s)
AnnL7456
AnnL7456
21 August 2017
What makes it better than ChronoSync? -- Before you respond, see my replies to Tlance first.

Thanks.
Like
Astraloid
28 June 2017
Minor issue with scheduled backups under El Capitan. Great support: got beta 4.1.16, that fixes the issue.
Like (3)
Version 4.1.15
bin104
21 May 2017
I have been relying on this application for so long. I donated when it was free because I wanted to support the developer. This is the first application whenever I make a new system volume. Big thanks to the developer.
Like (4)
Version 4.1.15
Tlance
18 May 2017
Don't be fooled by the 4-star rating. Look at the reviews and you'll see the less than stellar reviews are form people that had issue with a policy or some other non-application itself issue. CCC.Is.The.Best. Period. I used SuperDuper! for ages. It's developer is one of the most responsive/helpful folks around. But CCC is SD! on steroids. I have three machines each doing a variety of CCC Tasks on a variety of schedules, some tasks simple cloning, some limited/structured data incremental backups, with different ways volumes are handled before and after tasks are run. It's so complicated I had to draw a detailed flow chart for each computer and then merge them so as to manage home network usage. Yes, CCR is a wonder when it comes to doing stuff over a network. And the support is beyond excellent. Couldn't be more prompt nor more detailed and thorough.
Like (19)
Version 4.1.13
4 answer(s)
AnnL7456
AnnL7456
20 August 2017
Tlance wrote: "CCC Is The Best. Period."

Why don't you mention ChronoSync in your review? Isn't that the main competitor to CCC? Having a myriad of features that allows the user full control of which files and folders are backed up and/or synchronized and when; features that CCC doesn't seem to have (?) and features that make ChronoSync the first choice among network administrators who need to reliably back up and synchronize a large number of machines. I think you should rather compare CCC with ChronoSync instead of the simple SuperDuper!

I'm not saying that ChronoSync is better. I just expect that someone who is writing a review and says "CCC is the best. Period" would at least mention the main competitor and tell the readers why it is inferior.
Like (2)
Tlance
Tlance
20 August 2017
Mostly because this is a CCC review. MacUpdate has never really been a place for comprehensive critical reviews, rather it's been for personal experiential reviews, glorified comments if you will. MacUpdate gives readers other choices and said readers are free to see reviews there. BTW, CCC does allow "the user full control of which files and folders are backed up and/or synchronized and when". Also, I have tried CS several different times and have each time found it faulty at some point and/or unintuitive. More, CCC has 740,764 downloads to CS's 200,818 - yes, partially due to time of initial offering, CCC being the first, but not by all that long a time.
Like (3)
AnnL7456
AnnL7456
21 August 2017
On Aug 20, 2017 Tlance wrote:
"MacUpdate has never really been a place for comprehensive critical reviews, rather it's been for personal experiential reviews, glorified comments if you will."

Instead of writing endless eulogies, we should strive to include as much facts as possible.

Tlance wrote:
"BTW, CCC does allow "the user full control of which files and folders are backed up and/or synchronized and when". "

You are right, of course. I should have been more specific. What I meant was, for example, can CCC back up only my Rich Text Files (with an extension .rtf) where the modification date "is within three days of" August 15, 2017? Or the modification date is/is not/is before/is after/ is today/is yesterday/is within one day of/is within two days of/is within three days of/is within one week of/is within two weeks of/is within three weeks of/is within one month of/is within two months of/is within three months of/is within six months of …[certain date]. The above mentioned options are all accessible via pull-down menu.

Or only back up files where the Filename Extension is/is not/contains/doesn't contain/starts with/doesn't start with/ends with/doesn't end with … [filename extension]?

ChronoSync has also a 'SafityNet', it just has another name for it (archive.) ChronoSync offers also a so called "Trial synchronizations"; the program analyzes all the files but doesn't actually synchronize. Instead, a list of file changes are displayed so you can see what happens before it happens.
The options that ChronoSync offers can be quite complex. In CCC one usually only clicks one button, and off you go. CCC offers less options and is therefore easier to use, but saying that it's therefore "better" is not utterly convincing.

Tlance wrote:
"Also, I have tried CS several different times and have each time found it faulty at some point"

That's the information everyone would like to hear more about, because backup software being "faulty" is absolutely unacceptable.

Tlance wrote:
"and/or unintuitive."

I agree, to a certain point. One definitely needs to read the manual very carefully to understand and learn to appreciate all the options.

Tlance wrote:
"More, CCC has 740,764 downloads to CS's 200,818 - yes, partially due to time of initial offering, CCC being the first, but not by all that long a time."

CCC was free for many years and may have gathered a large loyal fan base that way. ChronoSync offers life-long free updates which makes it, in the long run, cheaper than CCC.

I'm not trying to disparage CCC. Just reminding people that there are more good backup software available for the Mac than just CCC and SuperDuper.
Like
cig0
cig0
13 September 2017
CCC4 used Rsync as the backend (you can see the process spawn when a task is launched), do you know if it's still used?
Like
bazlane
30 January 2017
I've been using CCC for several years now and only ever had one issue, which the vendor addressed and fixed within (if I remember rightly) two hours. It's worked perfectly ever since and I continue to rely upon it on both my Macs. I can't comment about alternatives (I did try SuperDuper but chose CCC instead), but CCC works perfectly for me.
Like (4)
Version 4.1.13
B-Jefferson-Le-Blanc
18 January 2017
As it says in to description of Chronosync on this web site, it is a professional backup tool. If you need maximum utility in a backup app, Chronosync is the way to go. That said, Carbon Copy Cloner is very capable as well and does everything I need it to. You might say it hits the sweet spot between Chronosync and Superduper! In my experience CCC is too complex for average users who shy away from complicated programs. For them I recommend SuperDuper! which requires a minimum of configuration. Absent that I try to get my clients to use Time Machine, which is as simple as it gets and costs nothing beyond the price of an external drive. Each of these backup utilities serves a slice of the Mac user base.
Like (4)
Version 4.1.13
Itty
15 November 2016
CCC is a very well crafted app. Logical, easy to use. It's Recovery Partition features make it indispensable. I've been using SuperDuper! for over a decade and while it has been a reliable backup solution, CCC has surpassed it in every way. CCC is well worth the price. Although it does not have the depth and power of ChronoSync, (nothing does) CCC is a great, fast Cloner with incremental backup. I recommend a complete daily, weekly, monthly, backup routine that includes CCC, ChronoSync and Time Machine,
Like (3)
Version 4.1.10
1 answer(s)
Mcr
Mcr
10 December 2016
Ive had people ask what is better CCC or Chronosync. Like Itty, I use both, plus Time Machine and keep telling people it is not an either/or choice. TM is great for quick retrieval of previous versions of specific files. Quick to find, quick to restore. Chronosync is great for selective archiving, of entire disk or folder structures, with ability to create extensive rules for fine tuning and if you have multiple machines, keeping files in sync. CCC is great for full partition cloning, partitions that can be quickly restored in the case of catastrophic failure or if you need quickly get a new Mac up and running without reinstalling everything from scratch.

All three serve their purpose, all three in their own way have saved my butt when i really needed it. For people that balk and having to buy more than one 'backup' program, ask yourself what is the cost to you to lose a file that you really need? What is the cost to you if your machine or HD fails catastrophically and you have to reinstall MacOs and all your apps and data from scratch? How much time do you spend keeping your data on multiple machines in sync? Storing all your stuff in the cloud is not feasible or desirable for all situations or people.
Like (1)
Melusina
08 November 2016
This is an excellent program, and has saved my data on more than one occasion. I've been using it for years - since it was free, and had no problem paying for it when it changed. It lets me customize all of my backups as well as making a bootable backup. I've never had any problems with it - it just works, and flawlessly.
Like (3)
Version 4.1.10
Harry Flashman
20 July 2016
I am just using the trial of this and it does look very good so far. My only hesitation is that £31 seems very expensive for a backup utility, especially when I have SuperDuper! that has been working pretty much perfectly since 2005 without ever being charged for an upgrade.

If there was cheaper option to bring over SuperDuper! customers I might be more inclined to purchase a licence.

Like
Version 4.1.9
1 answer(s)
B-Jefferson-Le-Blanc
B-Jefferson-Le-Blanc
22 September 2016
I used to use SuperDuper! and still recommend it to people who need an easy to use backup solution. But Carbon Copy Cloner is far more capable than SuperDuper!. If you don't need the additional features, then stick with SD. But my backup tasks have become more complex in recent years and CCC is vital to my workflow. Among other things, it can create a Recovery HD partition with the backup of a bootable OS X drive/partition if the original has one. CCC may seem expensive, but the price is not excessive for a product I consider to be best in class.
Like
mzulgis
03 July 2016
While I acknowledge that this is a good product I had an issue with this vendor in 2014 (they wanted a large upgrade fee just 5 months after I bought it - see below) and subsequently ignored my emails complaining about it. Let the buyer beware.
Like (2)
Version 4.1.9
4 answer(s)
Mcr
Mcr
10 December 2016
Not bitter are you? 1/2 star rating for something that happened back in April 2014? So you plan to come back to this page every so often and post a bad review so you can continue to 'stick it' to Bombich and make yourself feel better because you feel you were screwed?

I read the old posts, you were not cheated. Bombich did not 'make' CCC incompatible with Yosemite to 'force' people to pay for an upgrade. Apple's MANY and DEEP changes to Yosemite is what made CCC version 3 incompatible, like a ton of other apps that also had to be fixed when Yosemite came out. CCC 4 was major rewrite, requiring tons of development effort.

You had a five month window between the time you made your purchase of version 3 and when Yosemite was released requiring an upgrade to CCC 4, which was offered at 50% discount because you fell just outside the 4 month grace window period offered by Bombich to get a free upgrade. IMO, a 4 month grace period window was very generous; many companies only offer 30-60-90 day windows.

You CHOSE to upgrade to Yosemite before confirming CCC 3 would work. That is on you, not Bombich.

To look at the whole picture, there have been two more MacOS releases since then, and no upgrade charged for CCC version 4 users. So your argument that Bombich uses MacOS upgrades as an 'excuse' to charge for CCC updates hasn't held up. And even after nearly 3 years, Bombich is STILL offering 50% off for CCC version 3 users to upgrade to CCC 4.

Me thinks no matter what grace period window Bombich offered for CCC 3 users to upgrade to CCC 4 for free, if you fell outside that window, you would be unhappy.

I've been in tech A LONG TIME, unfortunately in these version upgrade situations where vendors charge for an upgrade and offer a grace period window, there are and will always be users who will fall in the cusp, and no matter where the line is drawn some people will always fall on the outside looking in, and some on the inside looking out. That's just the way it is; you have to draw a line somewhere.

If you feel Bombich should have made an exception for you, purely on the basis that you bought version 3 ONLY five months before version 4, then he has to make that exception for everyone then? So if he pushed it back to 6 months, you would be happy but the next guy who bought 7 months before would have the same argument you are using, so if he pushes the grace period back to 7 months, then the guy who bought 8 months before is still unhappy, if he pushes it back to 8.....you see where this is going???

I see people who bought an app when they were using Snow Leopard, complaining that they have to pay for an upgrade that is compatible with El Cap. I see Windows users complain about paying for an upgrade to software they bought when using XP, because it won't run on Windows 10. I mean....REALLY?!

I'm not saying you aren't entitled to being upset, but there is no conspiracy here. Let it go..... Again, Apple has released two more major releases of MacOS since Yosemite, both of which have had MAJOR changes under the hood which Bombich has had to devote significant resources to keep CCC compatible; there has been no upgrade fee for CCC 4 users.

No upgrade fee, no conspiracy, nothing to see here folks, move along....move along...
Like (6)
mzulgis
mzulgis
09 July 2017
Mcr - I'm not bitter at all. I come back periodically to warn people about this vendor - why exactly does that bother you? I do not "feel" I was "screwed" as you delicately put it, I was cheated and so were others, and if you don't like me having an issue with that it changes nothing.
Do you suggest that people get Bombich's permission to upgrade their Macs? Your reasoning leads me to believe you have an interest, financial or otherwise, in this company. Your lengthy diatribe above certainly suggests that you do.
I will come back and share my negative experience with this vendor as often as I please and if you have a problem with that that's that's of no consequence to me whatsoever.
Charging $40 dollars after owning a product for 5 months is out of order, no matter how you look at it.
Stay here - I'll be back.
Like (1)
Mcr
Mcr
10 July 2017
i have no association or business interest with the product or the developer other than being a user of the product since 2003. My only communication with Bombich is as an end user through email for support.

It should not bother you that I should express a counter opinion to your assessment of the product and its developer. I sympathize with your situation, but also forum readers should know that other people have had good experiences with the product and with support. People can read your posts and mine, and then come to their own conclusion. It works both ways, That's the beauty of a having an OPEN, PUBLIC forum, isn't it?

I suspect you have been a Mac user for long time; Mac users know Apple releases a new macOS just about every year. Many users have learned that there is always a risk of buying software in the time leading up to a new macOS release, usually in the fall, that it may require an upgrade.

When it comes to computers and software there will ALWAYS be some who will fall in the grey area between when a new release comes out and the grace period for upgrading software without charge. In this case, you happened to fall just outside the period, in other cases you may not. In my experience, over time, it tends to balance out. Seriously, it does balance out.

In my 13+ years of using CCC, I've made a donation (back when it was donationware), an initial purchase of 3.0, and one upgrade at half price to 4.0. Amortized over 13+ years, my out of pocket cost compared to the number of times CCC has saved my butt in time and effort, has been well worth it. If you are lucky enough to have not needed CCC to come to your rescue, great. If on the other hand, you have had to rely on a CCC backup to save you tons of time and effort, can you honestly say that $40 for an upgrade isn't worth it? And that's not just CCC, but ANY backup type app. If a backup saves your butt even once, it's already paid for itself.

Peace be with you. (I mean that, not intended as sarcasm).
Like
mzulgis
mzulgis
12 July 2017
Thanks for your perspective Mcr. To clarify, I have acknowledged time and again that CCC is a very good product. I am in no way disputing that. However, and this is the thing; to expect people to pay for an upgrade 5 months after legitimately buying and paying the full price for a product, and to then have the temerity to ignore a paying customer's emails falls short of what I would call good customer service no matter how you dress it up.

I have no problem with you (or anyone else for that matter) airing your views and I am sure that you reciprocate. I also acknowledge that many people have had good experiences with the product, though sadly this does not negate my and others' bad experiences.

Were Bombich more astute and in touch with their client base, and if they had a realistic perspective on customer service, they might have handled these issues differently, but of course this was not the case. I hope they might learn from this experience and improve how they handle customer grievances. Perhaps they won't ignore customers' emails in future hoping problems will magically go away. And perhaps they will implement a fairer upgrade strategy thereby keeping their customers loyal.

In my case I have migrated to SuperDuper which I have been using happily since deciding to stop using CCC. To be honest I did not expect the move to be seamless, but seamless it was and I have no regrets at all. I can clone disks, and schedule smart backups with no problem.

The moral of the story here is, treat your customers with respect; we’re not sheep.
Like
BosseGuitar
15 June 2016
This is one of my most important programs! Safety first!
Like (1)
Version 4.1.9
Macs-Pain
23 October 2015
Since El Capitan the backup is no longer bootable. Apple logo appears but then the screen stays black and nothing more happens. Tried everything on the help page but nothing worked. So there must be an issue with El Capitan or in this version of CCC.
Like (1)
Version 4.1.4
2 answer(s)
Mcr
Mcr
02 December 2015
@Macs-Pain
Here are some things to look for, not saying any of these are the issues, but since many of us are using CCC on El Cap with no problem, it is likely something specific to your setup.

1) After a clone, CCC rebuilds the kext cache of the clone target using the kext utility of the system CCC is running from. In other words, if you are booted into Yosemite and run CCC to clone a El Cap partition, it uses the Yosemite kext functions to rebuild the kext cache on the El Cap. (at first it seems odd, but if you think about it, there is no other choice, CCC can only use what is currently available in the system it is running from.) I have had issues in the past when running CCC from an older version of OS X than the source/target, especially in combination with modified kexts. workaround is to try to boot from the same or later version of OSx than the source/target being cloned. This especially can be a problem with the last three versions of OSX, Mavs, Yosemite and El Cap because Apple has changed the way it handles kext validation in all three versions

2) Yosemite enforced kext signing. If you boot into Yosemite or El run CCC and clone a drive, if there is a modified kext, it may not get copied over when CCC invokes the kext rebuild function, because the kext fails the test for valid signature. Note, the file may still get copied, but the kext cache is rebuilt without the kext being included. If that kext is critical for booting, then the cloned target won't boot. This happened to me and others when using any of the TRIM enabler programs in Yosemite which modified the kext that controls disk functions. Yosemite (with kext signing turning on) and El Cap (with SIP enabled) MAY NOT include the kext when rebuilding the cache

3) If you have SIP disabled on the source then modified the system in some way (like running any of the system mods like cDock, TotalFinder, etc) , then clone, then take that clone and try to boot another system where SIP is still on, you can have issues. This is not a CCC issue...it's a factor of how SIP flag sticks with the hardware system, not the partition being booted.

The safest approach i have found is 1) don't disable SIP, learn to live without your system mods, and accept it. 2) Don't use any non signed kexts, or modified kexts. 3) try to run CCC from the same or newer version of OSX than the version of the source/target you are trying to clone.

If you must use modified kexts or system mods, and the clone is just for archival purposes, another solution might be is to back out any mods, clone it, boot from the clone and re-enable the mods. If you have multiple Macs and are trying to move boot partitions back and forth, make sure the SIP flag is set the same on all systems that you want to move partitions back and forth with, so there is no mismatch.

Good luck.
Like (2)
markjamesdaly
markjamesdaly
24 January 2016
Do i need to purchase a separate copy of Carbon Copy Cloner for each of the two Mac minis I have?
Like
LuukLuuk
14 September 2015
Well worth the money, considering it duplicates the drive with ease, making a bootable backup. I've used it for some time now without any problems.
Like (1)
Version 4.1.4
1 answer(s)
LuukLuuk
LuukLuuk
05 October 2015
Also no problems since updating to OS X 10.11 El Capitan
Like
Paul-Jones
02 September 2015
A must-have for backups. Easy to configure, powerful when you need it to be, and the customer service is quick and helpful. Pay this man for his work. He deserves it.
Like
Version 4.1.4
Macinman
01 September 2015
I can confirm that this new update is working on El capitan I'm running public beta 6, and installed this update today.
Like
Version 4.1.4
Nanajana
20 July 2015
Excellent product. And I give them 50 bonus points for their wonderful tech support. I recently asked about getting back the little ding sound that used to tell me when a copy was finished. Within a day I had an answer that involved a shell script. I am only an average user and this was not too difficult. Oh, why can't all software companies give such support?
Like (1)
Version 4.1.3
ric0ric
06 June 2015
Having moved on from the slightly troublesome and raging Synchronise Pro I am delighted with Carbon Copy Cloner. It is simple to setup, informative when running and a delight to use.
Like (1)
Version 4.1.3
Three-Purrs
27 May 2015
CCC has been and remains the absolute leader for storage backup. Ease of use and unwavering reliability makes CCC a must have to keep your system and precious data safe from catastrophic disk failure. The negativity expressed here seems to be discontent with the author asking to be paid for his work. I don't know where this attitude that software (and the work that goes into it) should be free. Let he that demands others to work for free, be the first to tell their employer that they will work for free too. (Just as I thought--hypocritical silence)
Like (2)
Version 4.1.3
Aklein3876
06 May 2015
Current version is 4.1.2, not 4.1.1.
Like (1)
Version 4.1.1
Aklein3876
06 May 2015
Current version is 4.1.2, not 4.1.1.
Like (1)
Version 4.1.1