So, the hard drive on my Mac died. Disk Utility won't fix it, Techtool pro just throws up its hands at the 2,000 bad blocks on the drive, etc, etc.
That kind of sucks, but at least I have relatively recent backups to restore from. Or, maybe I actually don't. I've been using the .Mac Backup program to do backups for the last year or so - prior to that, I was just bulk-copying stuff by hand to an external hard drive. The Backup program is a lot more convenient, and makes much better use of the space on the external drive.
I figured that surely, now that Backup is at version 3.1, it'll be rock-solid reliable, right? I mean, once they fixed that awful crashing bug I reported back in the 1.0 days, I hadn't noticed any problems, so everything is OK, right? Well, as it turns out, Backup 3.1 is no more reliable than the old Backup - it just has different bugs. Now, instead of crashing on backing up large numbers of files, it crashes when trying to restore them. If I was given a choice between these two behaviors, which do you think I would have chosen?
The one saving grace is that inside the broken Backup file package is a more-or-less standard Mac OS X disk image file. So, I can mount those files (one from the last full backup, and one from each of the incrementals), and hand-copy the files over from them. Let's hear it for unreliable backup software...