Forum: Author Hangout

Try this: https://mactakeawaydata.com/partition-wd-my-passport-for-mac/

Great!

Thanks.

2 TB certified refurbished from official WD store on eBay $34.99. Same store has 1TB for $26.99. Is it really worthwhile to partition it?

My MacBook Pro has 4 ports (total). One if for my power cord. One is for my ethernet connection. One is for my hub which has several things in it. That leaves one port.

The WD guy told me not to plug the external hard drive into a hub. I was going to do that because my hub has a power supply and the drive doesn't (gets power from my computer). But he was adamant about that. So I don't have another port for a second external drive.

ETA: I actually was thinking of two external drives. It's not great to have all your eggs in one basket.

Time Machine doesn't requires a dedicated partition.

What does that mean?

Since it doesn't need it's own dedicated partition, there is no need for you to re-partition the drive to do what you want to do- use it for Time Machine and for your own backups and data storage.

Not according to Apple. The first thing Time Machine does is format the drive for it's own use (and no other use).

Not according to Apple. The first thing Time Machine does is format the drive for it's own use (and no other use).

That is because it requires HFS or APFS to operate.

And to be honest, I tend as a general rule to distrust such mandates and do not use them. Because you are placing your trust in a proprietary system that is not an industry standard.

I have seen systems like that come and go, and it can be a huge pain in the butt when someday in the future it may change or the company go away, then what you archived is no longer able to be recovered easily.

I would suggest just trusting yourself to backup manually on occasion (or find a software only system that does not rely upon special formatting). That also makes the data saved more transportable. Say if in the future you get another computer platform. It should be able to read the drives and data just fine, so long as it is not in some proprietary format scheme.

Each platform has its file systems. There is no such thing as cross platform standard file system.

Actually, there was for over a decade. While Microsoft made FAT, it was used by almost every company in the industry. Even with other operating systems and computers like Commodore and Digital Research.

That really only went "proprietary" with NTFS as FAT did not allow for any kind of security and extended file names (IBM used a similar system called HPFS). And even Fat32 was compatible with older versions of FAT, the names simply looked funny as older versions only understood 8.3 filenames with no spaces. So you got THISFI~1.DOC instead of THISFILENAME.DOC. But even FAT16 would read it just fine.

Linux is it's own thing, because its source predates the others. It is several generations removed from UNIX, and like all of Linux is just a recreation of Unix filesystem from the 1960s. So unlike the other OS typical of the era, NOS features had to be built in.

And like LINUX, DOS and everything Microsoft did was essentially just a clone of UNIX. Although to be accurate, DOS was a clone of CP/M which was a clone of UNIX. And why their first NOS was an almost direct clone of UNIX. And side note, one can not open a native XENIX partition in Windows. But it could be read in older UNIX or first gen Linux systems. Because that ability was pulled from most versions of UNIX and LINUX decades ago.

However, once again this is why I specify the ability to be read on other platforms. Apple has always been almost rabid about not playing well with others, and this is no exception. Anybody can use FAT, FAT32, NTFS, etc without issue. That is why it can be read on so many systems, including Atari, Commodore, etc, etc, etc. But Apple wants to keep everything for themselves alone, which makes transporting data a major PITA.

And yes, I know the current EXT4 can not be read in Windows. Primarily because a hell of a lot of flags in that OS are not used in Windows. Because it descends ultimately from a dedicated NOS, where as Windows descends from a single user desktop system with no security at all.

But Linux still reads NTFS just fine. When I build a Linux box, I do use EXT on the boot drive. But all others get NTFS or FAT32 for the ease of moving data from one system to another. And the only time I have heard of a "file system" being trashed is ultimately user error (like when people were crazy for the compression ability years ago). I have used it reliably both at home and for business for over 2 decades without an issue.

Apple has always been almost rabid about not playing well with others, and this is no exception. Anybody can use FAT, FAT32, NTFS

Mac can use NTFS. My old WD drive that I used with my PC was readable and writable with my Mac.

Anybody can use FAT, FAT32, NTFS

In fact, I was wondering why I need to buy the Mac version of the WD My Passport that uses the Mac file system. It's $10 more. The PC version uses NTFS which works on a Mac.

Time Machine reformats the drive anyway. And if I was going to partition it, I would re-format it under Mac. If I didn't go with the Mac version, I could get a 1 TB drive (minimum Mac version is 2 TB). The only advantage to getting the Mac version is that it comes with an adapter cable (for the USB-C) which probably costs more than $10.

Time Machine reformats the drive anyway.

And that tends to be my issue.

Although I admit, I am an "old fart" when it comes to computers. And I tend to distrust highly proprietary systems. If for some reason my home burned down tomorrow but I saved my drives, I like knowing I can plug it into any system and know it will work. PC, Linux, even a Chromebook, tablet or phone. Just as I avoid hardware formats that are only dedicated to a single platform. Give me an "industry standard" any time, over a solution that only works on one.

Yes, EXT is only for Linux, but all variants of Linux use it because it is based on UNIX. NTFS was created by MS, but they allowed anybody to use it so moving data from it to another is a piece of cake. I distrust any system where one company wants to hold a monopoly on it.

And there are times (mostly at work) where I have had 4 or more systems on my desk. And it was just nice to work out some scripts on my PC at home, take it to work and throw it into the LINUX box to upload to the server, then plug it into the Mac to upload via email to the company database for the tech support in India.

Hell, I even got used to many laughing at me because I had 2 monitors on my Mac, and used a 3 button mouse and PC keyboard. I just never could understand why somebody would use a 1 button mouse today (its no longer 1984), or use those horrible chicklet keyboards.

But I can also blame that on my background. Learning to type on Selectrics, keypunch machines, and dumb terminals. I see a "modern keyboard", and just think back to the COCO and TI-99/4 and horrible we all thought they were.

or use those horrible chicklet keyboards.

I have a 15" screen on my MacBook Pro and I'm now blind in one eye and reading with my other eye isn't great so I was thinking of attaching a large monitor to it. But I'd have to lower the screen on my laptop which would block the keyboard from me. I want to continue using the laptop's keyboard for one reason — it has a fingerprint identifier that I use all the time to sign into apps. There are some other nice things on that row of the keyboard, but giving the fingerprint reader up is a show stopper for me.

I have a 15" screen on my MacBook Pro and I'm now blind in one eye and reading with my other eye isn't great so I was thinking of attaching a large monitor to it. But I'd have to lower the screen on my laptop which would block the keyboard from me.

Oh, there are other options. Like setting the book to the side and just using the keyboard to log on with. That is what I did the last time I worked at a place that used Macs. Hell, my "small" monitor is 24", my other is a 40" TV to the right of my display (and a 32" TV on the other side).

I understand about vision, and using a larger display. But once again, an issue I have with Mac is that adding an extra display is normally really expensive, back to the problem with a proprietary system that nobody but them uses.

I know there are also stands that will support the monitor and you can slip the Mac under it. I have used those in the past without a problem if space is an issue.

Are these systems specifications open sourced and standardized by a standard body other than MS? (All I can find is reverse engineered specs.)

Yes.

All versions of FAT were always Open Source, as MS intended it to be a kind of "Industry Standard" from the start. That is why FAT16 was used by almost everybody, from Norton, Commodore, Sperry-UNIVAC, Apple, IBM and Digital Research, to AT&T, to almost everyone else.

And MS did not even "invent" it, it was in QDOS when they bought that OS, and was then known as FAT12. Which was in turn lifted from MS FAT8 system.

To be honest, most formatting schemes in the last several decades were made primarily by MS, simply because nobody else cared to do so. There is no money in it, and for compatibility it is simply easier to use one already existing than going through the nonsense of recreating one that only you can use (other than Apple).

But even back then, they were not "Made by MS", but by a consortium. FAT8 was MS and NCR (with some coming from SCP). FAT16 was MS, IBM, DR, and Novell. Fat 16 was again MS, IBM, DR, and Novell. FAT32 was MS and Caldera (who owned DR-DOS and was part of the Novell team to create a successor to Novell-86).

NTFS was actually the first one they created entirely by themselves, and it was also the first NOS they made entirely by themselves (XENIX as I already said was based on UNIX so used a clone of the UNIX system of the time).

MS was actually highly involved in that era of standardization. Like the formal name for "Expanded Memory" was formally known as LIM-EMS. The LIM standing for Lotus-IBM-MicroSoft. And "Extended Memory" (XMS) came from MS, Lotus, Intel, and AST.

Almost all of those kinds of standards from the 80s to early 90s were by consortiums that often included MS< Intel, and IBM because they mostly created the X86 systems we still use to this day. With others joining in as they went along as needed.

And the industry is littered with instances where a company went on their own and did not use the "standard". Like IBM with the XGA (an improved VGA), which failed. MicroChannel Architecture (the IBM only 16 or 32 bit interface), which also failed.

Much of our jobs back then was helping customers walk the minefield of incompatible standards.

But as for "reverse engineered", that is all you will find even though it was a consortium that made it. I doubt that you will find many 8080 systems around that would work on single sided 5 or 8 inch disks. Because that is what the original FAT was designed to work with. Everything after that was largely a modification to maintain backwards compatibility. Another thing MS insisted upon from the early days. So any modern rendition is just a reverse-engineered spec based on a system that is over 45 years old.

And Apple used it until MFS in 1984. Then APM in 1992. APFS is just the latest in a series of Apple only allocation systems.

I have really had to dig for some of this, as I am having to dredge up over 30 year old memories that have not mattered in years. But yes, all the FAT systems were standards by a consortium, as IBM would have wanted it no other way. And MS got its start doing such work for other companies like MITS. Then selling their BASIC to almost every one of the early computer companies. So compatibility and ease of exchange was always a key part of their projects.

I would suggest just trusting yourself to backup manually on occasion

Aha, that's the reason I wanted to partition the external drive. I would have Time Machine do it's automatic backups of things that change (which also gives me versions of the changes) and me do my own backups in addition to that.

I have very little data to back up. I have a 250gb hard drive on my MacBook Pro with 191gb available. What I back up on my own are basically Word docs (mostly my writing which includes GIMP files and images for covers) and spreadsheets. I currently manually back those up on a thumb drive plugged into my hub. And the thumb drive is 15.51gb with 15gb available.

So, as you can see, even a 1tb drive is overkill.

I have an old WD external drive that I used with my PC years ago. It has more data on it than my laptop. It has all my photos, for example. That drive, which has its own power btw, seems to be going bad. I was going to move all that data to the partition that I would use to manually back up to in a new external drive.

The WD guy told me not to plug the external hard drive into a hub. I was going to do that because my hub has a power supply and the drive doesn't (gets power from my computer). But he was adamant about that. So I don't have another port for a second external drive.

That is because the drive gets it's power from the USB port itself. And most USB hubs are not powered. And that covers "USB hubs" that are built into other devices, like keyboards, monitors, etc, etc, etc.

In most devices, the USB hub is passive. It will operate things like keyboards, mice, and printers. But not anything that actually requires power from it (like a camera, microphone, or storage). But even then, it can be hit or miss. I can plug a USB stick into the back of my Logitech G15 keyboard, and it will not see it. Yet, I can plug in my phone and it will charge (at about half the speed of being plugged into the wall) and it will transfer data.

But in cases like this, it really is a case of YMMV. But a good rule of thumb, is that if you get an external hub to always get a powered one.

And remember, in most cases the "tech support" guys you get ahold of anymore are not really "technicians". They read from scripts, and are trying to deal with the lowest common denominator of users. So they are talking to those technical luddites that could not identify a powered USB hub if hit in the face with one.

But with the cost of storage today, I would not even bother partitioning and just get a second drive. If's not like storage costs $10 a megabyte (or more) anymore. To be honest, I can't even think of the last time I partitioned a hard drive not for a network server other than that brief era when we had no choice because DOS could not recognize the nice new 40 MB drives hitting the market.

And if power might be an issue, look at something like the full size drives that come with their own power brick. They are larger, but I find them more reliable than most of the thin ones, and in my experience last longer. I currently have 2 large bricks, and 3 slim ones on my rig. And both of the large ones have powered USB ports themselves which makes adding new drives even easier.

And if power might be an issue, look at something like the full size drives that come with their own power brick.

I chose the WD My Passport because of the recommendations here. I would actually prefer a drive with it's own power supply. Any suggestions?

I chose the WD My Passport because of the recommendations here. I would actually prefer a drive with it's own power supply. Any suggestions?

My newest is a Seagate Backup Plus Hub 8TB drive. I like it because it has 2 USB ports on the front, which is where I normally plug my flash sticks if I have to move data around.

Needless to say, my computer setup is rather unique. 3 internal drives, 5 external drives, 2 monitors, and a slew of other things that makes my desk look like a mess (a TV, 2 laptops, XBone, Bose Wave Radio, and an additional TV on the wall behind it). A few years ago I was reduced for several months to operating only from a laptop, and just a single screen about killed me.

I somewhat agree, but I'm not a beginner. As an ex-DBA and someone who ran the worldwide DBA organization for a very large company, I'm aware of a backup/recovery strategy. My experience was on a mainframe, though.

I want to use Time Machine. Auto backups plus versioning. I needed the second external drive because I wanted additional manual backups plus I wanted something to replace an old external drive.

I felt the price for them was cheap. I bought them on Amazon for around $51 each and got them the same day. As long as I'm happy with the price, I got a good price.

I don't trust the cloud. For both security reasons and reliability.

Thanks again.