The demise of Bootable macOS Clones?

[krs]

A couple of things struck me when reading the AppleInsider article:
1. It states:

While this article is more about making it possible to have an M1-based Mac that has more primary storage, the same principle can be used to create a bootable drive for emergencies. If the main macOS installation fails, using an externally-bootable drive will allow a user to quickly get their Mac up and running without touching the internal storage.......

With the tight integration of the M1 SoC processor, RAM and storage, I don't think that is necessarily true.

2. The other part is that this thread is about making a bootable clone to recover from a storage failure of the main drive, unfortunately I don't see anything in the AppleInsider article that adresses that. Just being able to boot off an external and booting into a clean installation of BS is sort of useless unless without the data.

 

[Lifeisabeach]

A couple of things struck me when reading the AppleInsider article:
1. It states:

While this article is more about making it possible to have an M1-based Mac that has more primary storage, the same principle can be used to create a bootable drive for emergencies. If the main macOS installation fails, using an externally-bootable drive will allow a user to quickly get their Mac up and running without touching the internal storage.......

With the tight integration of the M1 SoC processor, RAM and storage, I don't think that is necessarily true.

There is plenty of reporting that you can boot these off an external Firewire Thunderbolt drive. I'm going to trust that they know what they are talking about, seeing that they actually did it. I was a bit confused by Macworld's comment about a native 3.1 drive needed and thus my experiment with what I have, but I think that was an editorial flub.

2. The other part is that this thread is about making a bootable clone to recover from a storage failure of the main drive, unfortunately I don't see anything in the AppleInsider article that adresses that. Just being able to boot off an external and booting into a clean installation of BS is sort of useless unless without the data.

That's why you'd use CCC to clone your data. They can only do the data partition, but they are very clear that a bootable clone is possible.

 

[krs]

There is plenty of reporting that you can boot these off an external Firewire drive.

One can boot with a Mac M1 off an external Firewire drive?
Mac M1's don't even have Firewire ports, nor do my latest Intel Macs

That's why you'd use CCC to clone your data. They can only do the data partition, but they are very clear that a bootable clone is possible.

How exactly is that supposed to work?
I would end up having a "Data" clone on a USB 3 external using CCC and a TB3 external that boots up in BS per the AppleInsider article. Then what?

BTW - The point I'm trying to make with point #1 in post #41 is that AppleInsider tried booting off a TB3 external using a fully functional MacM1 -and that worked fine, but then they extrapolated and assumed booting off the external would also work if the storage on the Mac M1 had failed.

 

[MacInWin]

Here is a pretty good read on booting an M1 from external disk: Booting an M1 Mac: external disks and local boot policy

and this:

How to boot an M1 Mac into an older version of Big Sur

How changing a volume’s boot policy can let you boot in older macOS, and update, if you wish. For anyone who uses external bootable disks with an M1 Mac.

eclecticlight.co

No mention of Thunderbolt (or Firewire, but I seriously doubt Firewire as Apple basically abandoned that interface a looooooonnnnnnnng time ago).

 

[Lifeisabeach]

One can boot with a Mac M1 off an external Firewire drive?
Mac M1's don't even have Firewire ports, nor do my latest Intel Macs

My bad. I meant Thunderbolt.

How exactly is that supposed to work?
I would end up having a "Data" clone on a USB 3 external using CCC and a TB3 external that boots up in BS per the AppleInsider article. Then what?

The developer of CCC has instructions on what to do. I even pasted the relevant details in a prior post.

BTW - The point I'm trying to make with point #1 in post #41 is that AppleInsider tried booting off a TB3 external using a fully functional MacM1 -and that worked fine, but then they extrapolated and assumed booting off the external would also work if the storage on the Mac M1 had failed.

It's speculative as to whether or not it will work in such an event. Should we assume it's not possible and just not have a bootable copy, or act on the assumption that maybe it will and do have one? This is just my opinion, but hoping for the best and being prepared covers you either way. If it turns out you can't boot off a bootable external in the event of a failed internal, then you made a backup that can't be booted. At least the data is on it. If you don't make a bootable backup and it turns out it COULD have been bootable in spite of a failed internal, well yer out of luck.

I see value in having a bootable backup in the event of some sort of corruption to the system volume that renders it unstable or unbootable, yet a solid bootable backup can still be used because the hardware is still good. It's a bit inconvenient that new hardware is required to have a bootable backup, but on the other hand this may imply that a proper Thunderbolt external drive will be seen as the same as an internal drive and thus will contain the cryptographically signed system volume that is required for booting. It's speculation on my part, but guys... remember that Thunderbolt connects directly to the system bus (if I'm saying that right) and anything connected via Thunderbolt operates at full speed as if it was an internal device. Installing Big Sur may well mean that the cryptographically signed system volume is created. I've installed macOS to external drives before, but the prompt I got to select an existing admin user on the boot volume is a whole new one to me.

EDIT: I just ordered an external Thunderbolt drive from OWC. I can't prove if it will be bootable in the event of a failure of the internal SSD, but by golly I'm going to make it bootable otherwise!

 

[Jim40]

That's not true according to our many members who are in the UK. Actually, UK members have enjoyed a greater level of support regarding warranties and repairs than members here in the US or Canada.

It is true based on my experience of Apple UK Tech Support. I have been a UK Mac user since 1992, using a Mac LCIII, with just 2MB of memory and 160 MB RAM. I, have amongst other Macs, a 2019 MacBook Air Retina bought from PC World in UK at £250 less than Apple UK was charging in 2019. This MacBook Air Retina is less than a year old, but Apple UK Tech Support have continued to sort out a Mac Mail problem, so eventually I sorted the problem out myself. So, because I didn't buy my MacBook Air Retina from Apple or an authorised Apple provider, I'm treated like some kind of "second class citizen"

As the EU brought out legislation to cover Macs for 5 or 6 years, some time ago, as we are no longer in the EU, we cannot use that legislation.

 

[Jim40]

This is the directive I'm referring to :

CONSUMER RIGHTS DIRECTIVE Issued June 2014.

British consumers will have more time to return an item bought online, by phone or at home under a package of tougher rights that come into force on Friday.

In what is being hailed as the biggest shakeup of consumer protection laws in a generation, shoppers will be given 14 days, rather than the current seven, to return an item. They will also no longer be forced to pay premium rate phone numbers when telephoning retailers' customer service phone lines about something they have bought. Retailers will now have to offer a number that is charged at standard call rates.

The Consumer Rights Directive will apply in all 28 EU member states from Friday 14/6/14. The new legislation aims to clarify information rights and cancellation rights, and to prohibit some hidden cost practices when consumers buy certain goods and services.

"The Consumer Rights Directive will give people greater protection against rogue traders and strengthen their rights when shopping online," said Which? executive director, Richard Lloyd. "These changes, coupled with the new consumer bill of rights, will give people more power to challenge bad practice."

In the UK the directive is being implemented through the Consumer Contracts Regulations and replaces the Distance Selling Regulations and Doorstep Selling Regulations. They are separate from the consumer rights bill – which contains further protective measures – currently going through parliament.

Further changes in the new regulations include a ban on "pre-ticked" boxes for payment of additional services, such as travel insurance, when buying a holiday, and on excessive "administrative" credit and debit card surcharges on flights and concert bookings. However, some contracts are excluded from the scope of the new regulations – notably financial services, package travel and gambling.

Consumer minister Jenny Willott said: "What we want to see are empowered, savvy shoppers who know their rights, look around for the best deals and drive competition."

Justin Edgar of London law firm Harbottle & Lewis added: "The regulations herald the beginning of what it is expected to be biggest shake-up of consumer protection laws in a generation. They will put considerable new responsibilities on traders in relation to just about everything in the business to consumer relationship.."

James G. Allison
retired Welfare Rights Lawyer
UK only

 

[IWT]

It would be ludicrous and impolite of me to challenge the experience of others; but I can only say that since 2009, I've contacted Apple Support (UK) on many occasions and they have never failed to sort me out.

I recall one particular event where it was necessary to Boot into Recovery or Safe Mode, whatever, and because I only had a wireless KB, this would not work. They sent me a brand new wired KB, subsequent to which, we got the matter fixed.

Everybody's experience varies.

Ian

 

[pm-r]

This is the directive I'm referring to :

CONSUMER RIGHTS DIRECTIVE Issued June 2014.

Good grief man, that directive is almost seven years since it was issued.
I understand that quite a few related things have changed over there since then.


- Patrick
=======

 

[Lifeisabeach]

So there's a major new development with bootable backups. Bombich just released an update to CCC, which per the release notes:

Apple has partially resolved the issues between Apple Silicon Mac storage and its ASR replication utility, so we're now able to offer this functionality within CCC. Note that CCC will not automatically start copying the System volume on your Apple Silicon Mac. If your backup disk does not already have an installation of Big Sur, reselect "Macintosh HD" as the source to your backup task if you would like to create a bootable backup. Or don't do that. Instead you can continue to maintain a feature-rich, Data Only backup on these Macs, which is our primary recommendation.

So for laughs, I tried this again on my current USB 3.1 drive. I wiped it and let CCC make a full clone. Including the system volume requires letting CCC erase the backup drive first... you can't just update it. It completed the task just fine. I was unable to select the external drive as a startup disk from the System Preferences. In fact, it wasn't even present as an option. So I powered off; waited a couple minutes; then pressed and held the Power button to get to the startup options. I was able to select the Backup disk. At one point I was prompted to enter the admin password before continuing to boot, and what I think was named the Boot Recovery Utility popped up, but it continued on and started up just fine off of my external drive. Since this was a USB 3.1 drive and NOT a Thunderbolt drive, that drives a stake into the theory that a Thunderbolt drive is required. This backup booted up fine using either a Thunderbolt cable or a USB-C cable.

I will say it was quite a bit sluggish compared to booting off the internal drive, though that's likely attributable to the much slower WD SSD in use. I also thought it was interesting that I couldn't select an alternate startup disk from the System Preferences. When booted off the internal, only the internal shows. When booted off the external drive, only the external was presented as a startup disk option.



I am completely baffled as to why my previous attempts to make a bootable clone with Bombich's instructions using the last version of CCC failed repeatedly. I suppose maybe I did "something" wrong, or maybe it was an incompatibility with 11.3.1. /shrug

 

[chscag]

That's good news. And we thank you for the extensive testing that you did. I'm sure this is going to help our other members who have purchased a new silicon Mac.

 

[pm-r]

This backup booted up fine using either a Thunderbolt cable or a USB-C cable.

+1 on the Good News, for those who might be needing it and wanting to use the feature.

I guess the next thing is to be sure and confirm which cable one is actually using...

Is it a Thunderbolt cable or a USB-C cable???...

Google Search

www.google.com

'Is Thunderbolt the same as USB-C?': What you need to know about Thunderbolt 3's high-speed connectivity, in relation to USB-C cables

Thunderbolt 3 has adopted the USB-C format, so all Thunderbolt 3 ports are able to use ordinary USB-C cables.

www.businessinsider.com

- Patrick
=======

 

[MacInWin]

I was unable to select the external drive as a startup disk from the System Preferences. In fact, it wasn't even present as an option.

Does this explain what you experienced? Booting an M1 Mac: external disks and local boot policy

 

[krs]

Does this explain what you experienced? Booting an M1 Mac: external disks and local boot policy

I had read this article earlier.
Member Lifesabeach didn't change any security setting from what I read - just used a different method (hold down the power key) to be able to select the external to boot from.

 

[Lifeisabeach]

+1 on the Good News, for those who might be needing it and wanting to use the feature.

I guess the next thing is to be sure and confirm which cable one is actually using...

Is it a Thunderbolt cable or a USB-C cable???...

Google Search

www.google.com

'Is Thunderbolt the same as USB-C?': What you need to know about Thunderbolt 3's high-speed connectivity, in relation to USB-C cables

Thunderbolt 3 has adopted the USB-C format, so all Thunderbolt 3 ports are able to use ordinary USB-C cables.

www.businessinsider.com

Not the same at all. I guess Thunderbolt is functionally a USB-C cable when not attached to a Thunderbolt drive, which my drive is not. I did for laughs mainly due to some confusion from how the Macworld article was written.

 

[Lifeisabeach]

I had read this article earlier.
Member Lifesabeach didn't change any security setting from what I read - just used a different method (hold down the power key) to be able to select the external to boot from.

Correct. I thought I might have to change the security setting, but nope, it came up fine.

 

[Jim40]

Good grief man, that directive is almost seven years since it was issued.
I understand that quite a few related things have changed over there since then.


- Patrick
=======

Yes, it is seven years old, but it was a foregone conclusion that the GB would leave the EU. Therefore, the UK Government introduced legislation which would give UK citizens the same protection as the Directive. In 2014. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 approved by both Houses of Parliament, and given Royal Assent in June 2015, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted.

 

[MacInWin]

This could be good news. Not trivial, but at least it seems to work for him: M1 Macs running Big Sur 11.4 support external disks fully

 

[krs]

This could be good news. Not trivial, but at least it seems to work for him: M1 Macs running Big Sur 11.4 support external disks fully

Is there any official Apple documentation that this is the way it's supposed to work.
I'm always leery when people "fiddle" and get something to work that maybe the company didn't intend to work that way, ie it's actually a bug, and then the bug gets fixed and the method described to longer works (since it was ever intended to work that way).

I read not more than a few weeks ago, also in one of the publications covering the latest technical aspects of the M1 Macs and associated software, that preventing booting of the M1 Mac from an external drive was done on purpose.
Rationale was that if the M1 Mac was lost or stolen, Apple supposedly wanted to prevent a third party from booting up that Mac using an external drive, then use that to wipe the internal storage (which is part of the M1 SoC) and thus make that lost/stolen Mac usable again.
But of course that was just that author's opinion.
Made a little bit of sense to me, but just a little.

 

[MacInWin]

Is there any official Apple documentation that this is the way it's supposed to work.
I'm always leery when people "fiddle" and get something to work that maybe the company didn't intend to work that way, ie it's actually a bug, and then the bug gets fixed and the method described to longer works (since it was ever intended to work that way).

I read not more than a few weeks ago, also in one of the publications covering the latest technical aspects of the M1 Macs and associated software, that preventing booting of the M1 Mac from an external drive was done on purpose.
Rationale was that if the M1 Mac was lost or stolen, Apple supposedly wanted to prevent a third party from booting up that Mac using an external drive, then use that to wipe the internal storage (which is part of the M1 SoC) and thus make that lost/stolen Mac usable again.
But of course that was just that author's opinion.
Made a little bit of sense to me, but just a little.

Not sure of the logic of that last paragraph. You could do the same thing with an Intel Mac and any internal drive, even the ones that were soldered to the logic board. It makes no sense to me to deliberately stop a boot that way. Apple created the capability for a firmware password to prevent that kind of gambit on Intel systems. Apple says to achieve the same thing in an M1 Mac, use FileVault.

That said, I do understand that the problem still exists that if the reason you need to boot from external is that the storage on the M1 has failed somehow, it won't boot. There is a bit of code on the SoC storage that MUST be there, even if you try to boot from an external. So the old reason for an external bootable that you could recover from a drive failure and be going again still won't work in the M1 machine.

And it's speculative, but I wonder if FileVault protects that required boot information on the M1 storage? If so, you can protect yourself from someone doing what that author suggested by using FileVault on an M1 system.