Originally Posted By: Virtual1
Free candy!

http://vftp.net/virtual1/temp/MFIF/Klone_2011.09.23.A.zip

let us know how this compares with CCC. wink

Sorry I've been so slow to get to this.

The first thing I learned about Klone is that, unlike CCC, it does not permit cloning your boot volume.

So I booted into my 10.5.8 partition and...
  1. I erased the partition in which I store my clone.
  2. I cloned my boot volume using Klone.
  3. I erased the partition again.
  4. I cloned my boot volume using CCC.
Results (I've saved copies of Klone's Terminal window, CCC's log, and assorted disk usage info from Disk Utility in case you're interested in seeing it.):
  • Sat Oct 22 23:29:04 EDT 2011 Starting Klone...
  • Sat Oct 22 23:41:53 EDT 2011 -15584976 KB remains, 00:0-5:0-45:0-24 at 752 KB/sec current, 00:00:0-41:0-2 at 6329 KB/sec average

    Klone finished with return code 1, stopping scoreboard... Terminated
    logout

    [Process completed]
  • CCC: 10/22 23:59:51 Time elapsed: 00:09:51.
As you can see, Klone and CCC took 13 minutes (plus the time it took to boot into my Leopard volume and back into my boot volume) and 10 minutes (in total), respectively, to complete the same task.

I didn't boot into the Klone cloned volume to confirm this, but judging from volume sizes as reported in Disk Utility it looks like Klone maintained HFS+ Compression as does CCC.

Edit: I forgot to mention that my boot volume is about 5.5GB in size.

Last edited by artie505; 10/23/11 05:01 AM.
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire