Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 29th Jan 2008 18:45 UTC, submitted by Nemilar
Linux A review of the new TimeVault program, a backup utility for Linux similar to Apple's Time Machine. Covers installation, configuration, usage, and discuses some of the advantages and limitations of its backup abilities. "TimeVault finally offers a complete, easy-to-use, intuitive backup system for Linux. While advanced and experienced users have been able to schedule backups using rsync, cron, and other tools, new users will find Timevault a comfort; knowing that their files can be easily and safely backed up, and reverted to an older state if necessary. The interface is relatively intuitive, and although the configuration could be a bit simpler, beginners should have no problem setting up TimeVault to keep their files safe."
Thread beginning with comment 298273
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

Now we see a projects whose main goal is to play catch-up, making clones of MS and Apple products.


Reimplementing good ideas is far more important to an OS than "innovating". Because, face it, I don't care how talented your people are, the rest of the world is going to come up with more true innovations than any single project. Oh, you can do the Microsoft thing and trumpet every little thing you do as an "innovation". But then you are just lying to yourself. Far more benefit comes from looking at the best of the ideas developed by other projects, even, or perhaps *especially* by competitors, and reimplementing them in your own domain. A software project doesn't... *can't* live by innovation alone.

So enough of this wasted time talking about "project B just copied from Project A". It's worse than useless. It's misleading. And it's counterproductive.

We would all be the poorer if we disallowed ourselves to copy others' good ideas. NIH syndrome is every bit as damaging as a bad patent, because it has exactly the same effects.

Reply Parent Score: 6

bm3719 Member since:
2006-05-30

"Now we see a projects whose main goal is to play catch-up, making clones of MS and Apple products.


Reimplementing good ideas is far more important to an OS than "innovating".
"

This comment was meant to disprove the OP's claims of originality.

But since you mention it, I would nevertheless say that the projects that copy off of everything that Apple and MS does don't really get us much. I don't want a free version of Windows or OSX. I wouldn't pay $200 for Windows, and I wouldn't pay $0 for it, and I don't care what its source code says.

I'm willing to accept the fact that a lot of people really do want that. If so, great, go forth and code boring GUI-only desktop applications. But, I remember a vague Unix philosophy where Windows apps would be considered anathema. Now, Linux-users are tripping over themselves to be the first project to port the latest desktop app (with varying levels of competence).

Reply Parent Score: 2

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Read the OP again. You completely misinterpreted it.

And shouldn't you be busy innovating for us instead of wasting time complaining about other people's work?

Reply Parent Score: 3