feature list comparison with RollBack Rx [Archive]

Peter2150

June 19th, 2007, 11:11 PM

{QUOTE-> Frankly, I don't even understand why it should be that hard. They only have to copy the image byte per byte from the beginning of the harddisk until the last byte is written and the rest is free space.

It's obvious to me that it doesn't work that way and that's why RBRx isn't restored completely.
Also the Recovery CD of ATI and SP failed after a killdisk attack, which is also unlogical. The only thing a Recovery CD has to do is to replace the corrupted harddisk with an image, byte per byte.
The only reason why a restoration shouldn't work is a physical damaged harddisk. <-QUOTE}

The problem with the first statement is how do you know when the rest is free space. So the only thing you can do is copy all the sectors of the drive. Most imaging problems record sectors but also keep track of the files, within the image. They get that from the windows file system. Rollback uses a separate system to keep track of whats where with the sectors, so the only thing the windows file system knows about is the current snapshot.

As to the recovery CD issue, Erik you aren't paying attention. I'll re post this once more. The imaging programs, as a first step examine the disk structure, particularly the partitions. They all use the same Microsoft routines do do this. Those routines have no problem if there is no partition table(blank disk) or a valid table present. But the routines fail when the partition table is invalid, and thus they can't pass any information back to the imaging programs, so these programs can't function past that point.

To anyone wondering about the difference between Rollback and FDISR, I would suggest doing a lot of reading of posts and the program websites. They work very differently and as such are probably going to be used differently. It is important to understand the differences, and honestly that is more than anyone person is going to feel like typing.

Pete

EASTER.2010

June 20th, 2007, 01:33 AM

{QUOTE-> It's hard to find an image backup software that restores ALL snapshots of RollbackRx. Usually they restore only the baseline snapshot or the current snapshot. FDISR doesn't have that problem.
If you don't care about losing snapshots during restoration, RollbackRx is good for you. <-QUOTE}

Frankly i'm one of those who find infinite benefits with COMPLETE snapshots (FD-ISR) and not working off of a single baseline snapshot like Rollback Rx only does. To me that's crucial and can spell disaster and myriads of lost effort & time.

FD-ISR doesn't put the users data at risk but on the extreme contrary and to Leapfrog's credit :thumb: , institutes SEVERAL reliable scenarios from which to return-to-working-base completely intact for ALL of your compliment of snapshots .

Snapshots 10, plus unlimited archives of those 10 or more ;D if you delete any after archiving ;) and create different ones (oh Joy!) make for a formidable fail-safe method to preserve your system (S) 100%.

Now in retrospect, Rollback Rx currently drastically IMO, limits a way out as useful as what FD-ISR provides irregardless if it does allows for referencing 1,000,000 + snapshots, but this is not to detriment of Rollback Rx, it's just that some people prefer it to do just what it offers and expect nothing more or less.

For me, i need to have my cake and eat it too. ;D

kennyboy

June 20th, 2007, 03:17 AM

{QUOTE-> Frankly i'm one of those who find infinite benefits with COMPLETE snapshots (FD-ISR) and not working off of a single baseline snapshot like Rollback Rx only does. To me that's crucial and can spell disaster and myriads of lost effort & time.

FD-ISR doesn't put the users data at risk but on the extreme contrary and to Leapfrog's credit :thumb: , institutes SEVERAL reliable scenarios from which to return-to-working-base completely intact for ALL of your compliment of snapshots .

;D <-QUOTE}

Totally agree.

Having learnt from this forum, I now rely on FDR completely by using a 2 snapshot setup, one primary and 2nd Basic snapshot is for emergency booting only, to enable an image restore if necessary. Then have 2 archives on 2nd disk and alternate the copy update between them. This setup was prompted by the way Peter uses his system, and I feel much safer this way than relying on 1 baseline snapshot as I understand Rollback does.
Yes, FDR takes up more space, and is probably slower, but the amount of times this setup has saved me outweighs this.

EASTER.2010

June 20th, 2007, 03:48 AM

{QUOTE-> Yes, FDR takes up more space, and is probably slower, but the amount of times this setup has saved me outweighs this. <-QUOTE}

And i totally agree with you too kennyboy.

Theres always some trade-off between programs similar in nature but operate distinctively different in their respective methods to accomplish their means.

In FD-ISR the creating of snapshots AND archives (complete ones i might add) DOES require some time from start to finish but is not unreasonable by any stretch. Thereafter the updating is literally Seconds! on my machine, and boy some of my snapshots fly. That may have to do in part with defragging with UD but FD-ISR definitely contributes in some way to this also although i'm at a loss to explain how, but just tickled pink that it does help make my system run better.

Indeed that benefit far outweighs any speed factor because if Rollback happens to choke for one reason or another like happened to me, the only alternative is to either switch or uninstall back to only 1 lowly snapshot and the rest after that point are history, and down the drain goes all that work & effort in one full swoop.

The feature in FD-ISR that stands out most for me is where you can SAVE actually BOTH snapshots AND archives, but i save only archives and update them regularly then transfer them to safe storage on alternative media be that hard drives or even DVD's if theres enough room.

I'm looking forward though to Rollback Rx to finally impliment a similar feature now that they've teamed up with Leapfrog Technologies. This can't spell anything but SUCCESS & SATISFACTION all the way around for the both of them and all of us too IMO. :thumb:

ErikAlbert

June 20th, 2007, 04:13 AM

{QUOTE->
As to the recovery CD issue, Erik you aren't paying attention. I'll re post this once more. The imaging programs, as a first step examine the disk structure, particularly the partitions. They all use the same Microsoft routines do do this. Those routines have no problem if there is no partition table(blank disk) or a valid table present. But the routines fail when the partition table is invalid, and thus they can't pass any information back to the imaging programs, so these programs can't function past that point.
<-QUOTE}
I do pay attention, I just don't understand why it can't be fixed by StorageCraft.
The Microsoft routines examine the disk structure, which results in 3 possibilities :
1. Valid partitions, which isn't a problem
2. No partitions, which isn't a problem either
3. Invalid partitions, which is a problem, because the Microsoft routines fail.

If the Microsoft routines indicate invalid partitions, the Recovery CD has to act differently and inform/ask the user what to do. Two possibilities :
1. Cancel the operation.
2. Erase the harddisk first, which creates a situation, that Microsoft routines do understand and then restore the image.

ErikAlbert

June 20th, 2007, 04:57 AM

{QUOTE-> Frankly i'm one of those who find infinite benefits with COMPLETE snapshots (FD-ISR) and not working off of a single baseline snapshot like Rollback Rx only does. To me that's crucial and can spell disaster and myriads of lost effort & time.
....
<-QUOTE}
You don't have to explain it to me. I use FDISR since March 2006 and I'm fully aware of the possibilities of FDISR and I know how to use it.
In case you didn't notice, I was never interested in RBRx.
RBRx is a child, that needs to grow up and you can do only one thing with a child : PLAY.
How can I entrust my two permanent snapshots to a software like RBRx ? I would be worried constantly of losing them.
I never considered speed and less space as an advantage, other users do that, not me. :)

kennyboy

June 20th, 2007, 06:04 AM

{QUOTE-> I use FDISR since March 2006 and I'm fully aware of the possibilities of FDISR and I know how to use it.

How can I entrust my two permanent snapshots to a software like RBRx ? I would be worried constantly of losing them.
I never considered speed and less space as an advantage, other users do that, not me. :) <-QUOTE}

It is just that.............the "POSSIBILITIES of FDISR" that make the software so invaluable. It can be tailored to suit ANYBODIES way of working, and no one way is the "correct" way. This is what makes it such an amazing piece of software, and Rollback would need to emulate this interoperability as well as the astonishing reliablilty of FDR to make me look at it further. FDR isn't bullet-proof, but it is the closest thing I have ever found, and personally, I am very grateful to Leapfrog Software for doing what Microsoft should have achieved long ago.

Speed and disk space are irrelevant. Consider the time you would spend trying to get out of a crisis WITHOUT FDR!! ....Disk space??....... Get another drive!

How much more adventurous have you become since having the re-assurance of FDR? Personally, I have learnt so much from being able to be a little more brave testing software/system configuration since having FDR to save me from my own, or others folly.

Peter2150

June 20th, 2007, 10:38 AM

{QUOTE-> Totally agree.

Having learnt from this forum, I now rely on FDR completely by using a 2 snapshot setup, one primary and 2nd Basic snapshot is for emergency booting only, to enable an image restore if necessary. Then have 2 archives on 2nd disk and alternate the copy update between them. This setup was prompted by the way Peter uses his system, and I feel much safer this way than relying on 1 baseline snapshot as I understand Rollback does.
Yes, FDR takes up more space, and is probably slower, but the amount of times this setup has saved me outweighs this. <-QUOTE}

Hi Kennyboy

Actually I am using Rollback with in the structure you also are using. Instrumental in my usage though is I don't desire to keep previous Rollback snapshot on a permenent basis. So day to day I use Rollback, but I also keep my FDISR archive up to date. There is no problem updating the FDISR archive from the current system within Rollback. Should there be a problem, I just restore my most recent Shadowprotect snapshot. Now all trace of Rollback is gone, but my system is out of date. I update with the FDISR archive, which puts Rollback back on the system in a sort of uninstalled state, as it's not in the MBR. I then uninstall Rollback and reinstall it, and life goes on. Note between the uninstall and reinstall of Rollback I'll defrag and do a new image. Works like a champ, and gives me the best of both worlds.

Pete

Peter2150

June 20th, 2007, 10:51 AM

{QUOTE-> I do pay attention, I just don't understand why it can't be fixed by StorageCraft.
The Microsoft routines examine the disk structure, which results in 3 possibilities :
1. Valid partitions, which isn't a problem
2. No partitions, which isn't a problem either
3. Invalid partitions, which is a problem, because the Microsoft routines fail.

If the Microsoft routines indicate invalid partitions, the Recovery CD has to act differently and inform/ask the user what to do. Two possibilities :
1. Cancel the operation.
2. Erase the harddisk first, which creates a situation, that Microsoft routines do understand and then restore the image. <-QUOTE}

Okay. In essence what happens is sort of the first one. Just the program see's the messed up partition. If I remember right SP showed the partition, but couldn't work with it, and ATI, just never showed the disk at all.

So could they say, okay, Microsoft is showing a bad partition table, erase the disk and go on. Probably so. But then one other nasty issue comes into play. Economics. They had never even seen this issue until silly me starts playing with Killdisk trojan, and discovers this problem. Given their client base, the odds are it may never be seen again. So how much priority, time, and money do they spend to solve the problem.

Same thing when I really got into trouble and none of the recovery stuff would even boot. That clearly showed them it was a bug in the microsoft routine. They could as a developer go to Microsoft with a bug report, and try and get microsoft to fix it. But they would have to develop a test case, build the supporting data, to do so. Yes they are interested, but again, its a resource issue. How much time can they afford to spend.

Erik, let me bring the above home to you. Sandboxie. You tried it, and it didn't work on your machine. You could have worked with the developer, to try and resolve the conflict and get it working. You made a choice, that it wasn't worth it to you, and ditched the program. That may well have been a very wise choice for you. Both storagecraft, and acronois, if they were aware of the problem, have to make the same choices.

Pete

grnxnm

June 21st, 2007, 08:10 PM

I'd like to throw in my opinion on this one too. From observation (and a fairly detailed understanding of the windows kernel storage stack) my guess is that this BSOD is being caused by ftdisk.sys (or perhaps disk.sys) - I'd have to hook up the kernel debugger to know for sure, but it's definitely being caused by a Microsoft driver. However, I can also tell you that if/when we open an incident with Microsoft to address this issue, it may very well take them at least a year to actually *decide* if they are going to fix it (and longer to actually implement the fix, and longer before you see the fix in a service pack, if ever (it may only end up in a private hotfix which you would have to personally request)). I've tackled other issues like this before and from first-hand experience I can tell you that it can be excruciatingly difficult to get MS to fix issues with some of its kernel components. If we decide to tackle it, I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that some other engineer has to tackle it, because I don't want to be the sucker that has to wade through 8 levels of support in four countries via hundreds of emails over many months just to get them to fix a Windows bug that in reality will affect few (more likely zero) customers. Oh, and by the way, I should also point out that Microsoft will also perform an assessment of the damage being caused by their bug and if only a handful of people are affected they won't bother to fix it. Worse yet, this assessment will only take place after I've negotiated with them for 6 months to try to get them to fix it. Okay, I'm venting now, please forgive me. I'm just reliving the nightmare that occurred the last time I reported an issue in a kernel component. <shudder>

Chris12923

June 21st, 2007, 09:02 PM

Most of the people that have posted are purely basing their opinions on version 7 of Rollback (not version 8) and are not really helping you. I'll try to be clear as I can and please if anyone notices anything wrong in my post please let me know.

1. Rollback can take scheduled snapshots at the time you specify. Including per reboot or a certain time you wish: hourly,daily, weekly, monthly.

2. Rollback can save up to 60,000 snapshot.

3. Rollback is not affected by things that destroy your data like the killdisk virus.

4. Rollback does rely on files from other snapshots...but just like FDISR it can save a full image to a backup disk not just relying on other snapshots.

5. Rollback takes images quicker.

6. Rollback restores images quicker

7. Rollback takes less space.

8. Rollback can recover individual files from previous snapshots.

9. Rollback does support multi boot systems unlike someone said earlier. unless I read their post wrong.

10. Rollback works with 9x, Me, NT, 2000, XP & VISTA.

11. Rollback has admin account and access control if you wish to use them.

So there are some other features that Rollback has that FDISR does not but this list covers most of the main features. FDISR is a good program but you are asking for comparisons. i hope this helps make your decision easier and if you have any questions please ask. peter2150 is also very knowledgeable of the products as well.

Thanks,

Chris

Peter2150

June 21st, 2007, 10:03 PM

Excellent post Chris.

I think it is important to understand the two programs work radically differently. FDISR keeps full independent snapshots using the standard windows file system. Rollback uses it's own file system with a database of clusters in use, and passes the file information thru a kernel driver to it's database.

Since I've put version 8 on my system Rollback has worked flawlessly, but knowing it's design and past problems, I am still cautious. FDISR makes an outstanding back up. Combining them with Shadow protect, I have the best of all the worlds.

One needs to understand how these programs work, what they each do, and decide how you are going to use them. That will go a long way to determining what is best.

Pete

EASTER.2010

June 22nd, 2007, 12:02 AM

{QUOTE-> Speed and disk space are irrelevant. Consider the time you would spend trying to get out of a crisis WITHOUT FDR!! ....Disk space??....... Get another drive!
How much more adventurous have you become since having the re-assurance of FDR? Personally, I have learnt so much from being able to be a little more brave testing software/system configuration since having FDR to save me from my own, or others folly. of FDR? Personally, I have learnt so much from being able to be a little more brave testing software/system configuration since having FDR to save me from my own, or others folly. <-QUOTE}

Excellent post! Many like yourself already have experienced first-hand how very far advanced FD-ISR is compared to the mediocre routine of Rollback Rx as well as dependable in a real crisis.

{QUOTE->
So day to day I use Rollback, but I also keep my FDISR archive up to date. There is no problem updating the FDISR archive from the current system within Rollback. Should there be a problem, I just restore my most recent Shadowprotect snapshot. <-QUOTE}

Yeah, but Pete, really. That's NOT a very acceptable scenario for most. There should be no problems with Rollback Rx that would force a user to have to turn to your imaging program + image to recover from it's mistakes. It's unacceptable to many including myself to release a program that you can't really rely on it's features to return (ALL OF THEM=snapshots) system/data to their previous good/safe state but only 1. Everything after a Rollback Rx change of snaps is subsequently discarded forever, so why bother wasting time creating even 6 or 10 snapshots when if you need to revert back in time, EVERYTHING afterwards is toast. That concept like ErikAlbert alludes to is nothing more than PLAY, and serious users don't play with protecting their data but rather PRESERVE those long hours & efforts. This is where FD-ISR is INFINITELY MORE RELIABLE!!!

{QUOTE->
However, I can also tell you that if/when we open an incident with Microsoft to address this issue, it may very well take them at least a year to actually *decide* if they are going to fix it (and longer to actually implement the fix, and longer before you see the fix in a service pack, if ever (it may only end up in a private hotfix which you would have to personally request)). I've tackled other issues like this before and from first-hand experience I can tell you that it can be excruciatingly difficult to get MS to fix issues with some of its kernel components. <-QUOTE}

So what else is new?
..... besides of course ShadowProtect Version 3 which we are all awaiting with great anticipation btw.

{QUOTE->
So there are some other features that Rollback has that FDISR does not but this list covers most of the main features. FDISR is a good program but you are asking for comparisons. i hope this helps make your decision easier and if you have any questions please ask. peter2150 is also very knowledgeable of the products as well.

Thanks,

Chris <-QUOTE}

Chris. So what if you can manufacture 100 million snapshots? When something goes awry either with buggy Rollback Rx or another issue jams you & prevents your booting up at all, all snapshots AFTER your selection to boot to are HISTORY. Correct me plz if i'm wrong about that, so that puffed up idealology with Rollback Rx you can make snapshots till the cows come home doesn't hold much water for more knowledgable and experienced users.

FD-ISR is NOT a good program, it is however a MAGNIFICIENT and extremely beneficial, innovative technology that can 100% guarantee to PRESERVE & ROLLBACK any system to a previous good state WITH ALL DATA INTACT!

Let's say FD-ISR somehow gets corrupted and HAS to be uninstalled to make way for a reinstall. AND, let's say all it's snapshots plus archives in the $ISR room are trashed beyond recovery. If you were a wise and prudent FD-ISR user/customer like many here are, you have storaged at least that same compliment of archives as snapshots over to some alternative external media and they are at the ready to be transformed once again into EXACTLY what you had previously in those corrupted ones that met some fate, and so your FULL Data Recovery is 100% assured by reinstalling FD-ISR and converting the archives back into snapshots again.

Is the current version of Rollback capable to recall ALL your snapshots/archives in the same manner? I think not.

I challenge any other rollback program short of an imaging app to offer such of this same reliability.

danny9

June 22nd, 2007, 12:23 AM

EASTER.2010,

You complimented another user for an excellent post.
I think your last post should be given the same acknowledgement.
Very informative and easily understood.
Kudos. :)
Dan

Chris12923

June 22nd, 2007, 01:03 AM

I think the titile of this thread is "feature list comparison with RollBack Rx" Not please give all your sales pitches for FDISR. I really could care less which one the OP chooses. They are both good products. I have never said otherwise. One just has more features and the current version and according to at least myself and peter have been stable to this point. I have never said otherwise. FDISR has had it's problems in the past as well and I even think peter2150 can vouch for that (KAV) I think it was. Correct me if I am wrong Peter. I'm sure there are other issues that it has had as well. Also Rollback version 8 can store full snapshots offline just like FDISR. Oh and please tell me easter and kennyboy what part of rollback 8 didn't you like? Did it crash on you? Did you not like it's tons of features. Have you even tried it? Also as far as not worrying about disk space heres two things you can try since everyone can afford more drives please read this post http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=974675&postcount=16 . So besonen Sorry to go off topic but I had to respond since even according to easter he has not much knowledge in this area http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=974931&postcount=29 . So please listen to people that have used and tested the products thouroughly before making your decision. Either one is a great purchase. I hope I have given you some feature list comparisons in my above post. Again if you have any questions again please feel free to ask.

EDIT: Removed remark about Kennyboy that at first I thought applied but after his post below did not. Sorry kennyboy. No bad intentions just trying to give inisght to the OP.

Thanks,

Chris

EASTER.2010

June 22nd, 2007, 02:02 AM

{QUOTE-> FDISR has had it's problems in the past as well and I even think peter2150 can vouch for that (KAV) I think it was. <-QUOTE}

{QUOTE-> So besonen Sorry to go off topic but I had to respond since even according to easter he has not much knowledge in this area http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...1&postcount=29 <-QUOTE}

FYI that post in which you are trying so desparately to discredit my experience/intelligence with is dated if you bothered to check it out is on March 31st, 2007, 02:06 PM.
That was 3 long months ago and a lot of information plus helpful discussion has been exchanged AND learned since then, including the differences between Rollback Rx & FD-ISR.

That my member is nothing more than picking for proverbial straws in a vain attempt to spar over your choice compared to mine.
Besides Chris you are already aware yourself that the benefits and features found in FD-ISR eclipses anything Rollback Rx can offer in it's latest version, and i must stop right there because i'm in no way against it but rather am more encouraged than before that now with the merger of Leapfrog in partnership, i expect better results from Rollback Rx in the future than what is been experienced so far.

I hate to disappoint your loyal support of it, but like i also said earlier, if it works for you, great, but for my data it would have spelled disaster if i had not taken the liberty to test it first on a test machine of mine, in fact several hard drives.
In retrospect, my confidence in FD-ISR was not so suspicious and upon the reviews i gathered right here made the decision to not install FD-ISR on a test bed, but straightway installed it into my production/work units without so much as a single hesitation.
You might say i have an uncanny sixth sense about software programs which feeds on actual user reviews and their experiences.

danny9

June 22nd, 2007, 02:14 AM

{QUOTE-> I think the titile of this thread is "feature list comparison with RollBack Rx" Not please give all your sales pitches for FDISR. I really could care less which one the OP chooses. They are both good products. I have never said otherwise. One just has more features and the current version and according to at least myself and peter have been stable to this point. I have never said otherwise.

Chris <-QUOTE}

I agree, they are both good products.
I have BootBack, switched from FD-ISR as soon as Raxco dumped it, and now have EAZ_FIX, pro v.8. Always liked the idea behind it.
Still learning the ropes but I like it. They both have strong points, but EAZ is much easier to use for trying out new programs. No copying files back between snapshots.
Take a snapshot, a couple of seconds, try the program, don't like?, reboot to that snapshot. That's it. In a few minutes your on your way.
I like both programs and will keep both, learning the strong points in each and using accordingly.
By the way, thanks for the info you provide about RollBack. Learned alot from it.;D
Dan

Chris12923

June 22nd, 2007, 03:39 AM

{QUOTE-> That my member is nothing more than picking for proverbial straws in a vain attempt to spar over your choice compared to mine. <-QUOTE}
I am not trying to spar. You started bashing Rollback in this post http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1028884&postcount=25 talking about Rollback having a medicore routine and the other stuff in same thread.

{QUOTE-> Besides Chris you are already aware yourself that the benefits and features found in FD-ISR eclipses anything Rollback Rx can offer in it's latest version, and i must stop right there because i'm in no way against it but rather am more encouraged than before that now with the merger of Leapfrog in partnership, i expect better results from Rollback Rx in the future than what is been experienced so far. <-QUOTE}
Umm..please post a link to where I said that the benefits and features found in FD-ISR eclipses anything Rollback Rx can offer in it's latest version. Yes a benefit of FDISR is that it stores full file snapshots...but Rollback has way way more features than FDISR and Rollback 8 can store full archive snapshots the same as FDISR. So not sure where you are getting your info about FDISR having more benefits and fetures but thats dead wrong. This is why I linked to your post earlier about your knowledge. Not to harm you but to let the OP not to take your statements to seriously.

{QUOTE-> I hate to disappoint your loyal support of it, but like i also said earlier, if it works for you, great, but for my data it would have spelled disaster if i had not taken the liberty to test it first on a test machine of mine, in fact several hard drives. <-QUOTE}
So it crashed on you? If so you have a right to feel the way you do. Maybe you posted it somewhere and I missed it. If that's the case I totally understand your thinking on stability. But also programs do crash/not work sometime. For instance when I tried to beta test Power Shadow it BSOD on my system :( But I don't say it's a bad program.

{QUOTE-> In retrospect, my confidence in FD-ISR was not so suspicious and upon the reviews i gathered right here made the decision to not install FD-ISR on a test bed, but straightway installed it into my production/work units without so much as a single hesitation.
You might say i have an uncanny sixth sense about software programs which feeds on actual user reviews and their experiences. <-QUOTE}
I did the same with Rollback and never had an issue that I can recall that made me lose data. I have an issue now that I reported to them recently that they are working on. But i still lost no data. I think this poster has a lot of new reading :) Both are good eenee..meenee...minee...mo :)

Thanks,

Chris

EASTER.2010

June 22nd, 2007, 04:25 AM

It's very obvious in those replies that your thinking lies in only 2 dimensional context only so i'll spare this great forum and membership anymore of this needless & foolish ping-pong response back n' forth since even any reasonable reply or facts regarding benefits or limitations seem to only incite to generate more of the same useless babble above in some endless revolving cycle that does nothing whatsoever to encourage or benefit membership understanding here.

As for as bashing? ANY program that bashes your data and/or system irregardless of cause & affect is fair to be deemed unacceptable.
Ask ErikAlbert.

Destroying data in any fashion is totally unacceptable and especially when unexpected. I don't read anywhere where FD-ISR warns against LOSING data/snapshots after simply changing snapshots let alone just running normally. Only if you abort during a Copy/Update and even then you simply redo over again. No data loss.

Can the same be said for your prize possession? Hardly.

And what about that ridiculous chkdsk issue?

You don't favor FD-ISR and that's your choice but not for the same reasons which i experienced resulting from bugs in the current Rollback Rx versions.

I think you have a lot to learn yourself. Plus it may even help you to discover for yourself how infinitely better FD-ISR is if you focused more on the importance of preserving WHOLE DATA and not just some arbitrary reference to a single snapshot.

Faster? Pfffftttt!!! Of course, because it's snapshots lack authentic files/folders.

kennyboy

June 22nd, 2007, 04:35 AM

{QUOTE->

EDIT: Heres a post from kennyboy showing his lack of knowledge in this type of software as well http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1028343&postcount=136

Thanks,

Chris <-QUOTE}

Errr........ Chris. Think you are getting a bit confused here.
That post is about RETURNIL, NOT Rollback OR FDISR!!

Unless you are saying RETURNIL and Rollback are "THIS type of software."

In case it escaped your notice, Returnil is a VIRTUALISATION type of program and Rollback is a RECOVERY program. Not even close I am afraid!!

Chris12923

June 22nd, 2007, 05:09 AM

{QUOTE-> As for as bashing? ANY program that bashes your data and/or system irregardless of cause & affect is fair to be deemed unacceptable.
Ask ErikAlbert. <-QUOTE}
True. Although I think I have asked this question once maybe two times and you have yet to answer it. Did you lose data using Rollback?

{QUOTE-> Destroying data in any fashion is totally unacceptable and especially when unexpected. I don't read anywhere where FD-ISR warns against LOSING data/snapshots after simply changing snapshots let alone just running normally. Only if you abort during a Copy/Update and even then you simply redo over again. No data loss. <-QUOTE}

Your right and again maybe I missed it and if I did I'm sorry but Did you lose data using Rollback?

{QUOTE-> Can the same be said for your prize possession? Hardly. <-QUOTE}

I can say I have not lost any data that I can recall using Rollback

{QUOTE-> And what about that ridiculous chkdsk issue? <-QUOTE}

I probably missed the posts about chkdsk issue in Rollback 8. If you have a chance can you post the link so the OP and myslef can look at this issue please

{QUOTE-> You don't favor FD-ISR and that's your choice but not for the same reasons which i experienced resulting from bugs in the current Rollback Rx versions. <-QUOTE}
I like FDISR but do not like it more than Rollback. Can you please post a link to the bugs you found in version 8 of Rollback. If you found some bugs in it I can again see why you prefer FDISR

{QUOTE-> I think you have a lot to learn yourself. Plus it may even help you to discover for yourself how infinitely better FD-ISR is if you focused more on the importance of preserving WHOLE DATA and not just some arbitrary reference to a single snapshot. <-QUOTE}
I agree I have a lot to learn. Don't we all. That's why most of us are here. I do see the importance of keeping whole data snapshot. But if I have not lost any data with linked data snapshots of Rollback it's not to important to me. Especially when I can archive whole data snapshots from rollback to another disk. Again Did you lose data using Rollback?

{QUOTE-> Faster? Pfffftttt!!! Of course, because it's snapshots lack authentic files/folders. <-QUOTE}
True. Then again since I have not lost any data do I need authentic files/folders :)

{QUOTE-> Errr........ Chris. Think you are getting a bit confused here.
That post is about RETURNIL, NOT Rollback OR FDISR!! <-QUOTE}
Sorry I saw some questions regarding FDISR and imaging programs. So I was thinking this had relavence. My apologies. I'll try to edit it out of the above post.

Easter, you bring up many good points. Not sure why you keep saying I don't like FDISR because I do. I didn't say good or bad about it it my first post. I just listed facts. After reading our posts now the OP will either have an easy decision or a hard one but no matter he will make a good decision because both are good products. And the next version of both will be even better I can hope. Hope we didn't get to OT.

Thanks,

Chris

kennyboy

June 22nd, 2007, 06:01 AM

{QUOTE-> EDIT: Removed remark about Kennyboy that at first I thought applied but after his post below did not. Sorry kennyboy. No bad intentions just trying to give inisght to the OP. <-QUOTE}

No problem Chris. We are all here to try and help. Goodness knows, I have had a lot of help and guidance here.

Regards

Ken

ErikAlbert

June 22nd, 2007, 06:09 AM

I'm not interested in RollbackRx, not even in combination with FDISR.
FDISR v3.20 and RollbackRx v8 and FDISR is still better than RollbackRx.
How many versions will RBRx need to reach the level of FDISR ?
I need permanent snapshots, not throw-away snapshots and when I backup my harddisk, I want it back as it was. I can't do that with RBRx or I would lose at least one of my two snapshots. That's unacceptable.

I don't need RBRx for testing softwares either. I test most softwares in my frozen snapshot and if one of these softwares corrupts FDISR, I restore an image that gives my two snapshots back.
ShadowProtect does it almost 3 times faster than ATI, but SP cannot restore RBRx-snapshots completely, which is already proven.
RBRx might be faster, but how long will it take to re-install one of my snapshots completely, because RBRx lost it.

Why 60,000 snapshots, if only ONE can be restored ? I don't see any logic here. 60,000 snapshots is nothing, I can create 200,000 archived snapshots with FDISR and more, but I will never do this, because I'm already lost with 5 snapshots. If I create one RBRx-snapshot per day, I have 60,000 snapshots at the age of 165, but I have to start when I'm 1 year old, so I need to be a wonderchild too. :)

nanana1

June 22nd, 2007, 08:58 AM

{QUOTE-> I'm not interested in RollbackRx, not even in combination with FDISR.
I tried FDISR and is also not interested in it.

FDISR v3.20 and RollbackRx v8 and FDISR is still better than RollbackRx.
Not better, just different

How many versions will RBRx need to reach the level of FDISR ?
Why reach, they are different software.

I need permanent snapshots, not throw-away snapshots and when I backup my harddisk, I want it back as it was. I can't do that with RBRx or I would lose at least one of my two snapshots. That's unacceptable.
That's why you should stick with FDISR, I don't need permanent snapshot
and 5GB for a FDISR snapshot is unacceptable for me too, let alone use 30mins or more to create it.

I don't need RBRx for testing softwares either. I test most softwares in my frozen snapshot and if one of these softwares corrupts FDISR, I restore an image that gives my two snapshots back.
Frozen snapshot is such a drag to use and to create that frozen features, you need to use twice the diskspace for that snapshot and now that is unacceptable to me.

ShadowProtect does it almost 3 times faster than ATI, but SP cannot restore RBRx-snapshots completely, which is already proven.
RBRx might be faster, but how long will it take to re-install one of my snapshots completely, because RBRx lost it.
Have you lost any data ?

Why 60,000 snapshots, if only ONE can be restored ? I don't see any logic here. 60,000 snapshots is nothing, I can create 200,000 archived snapshots with FDISR and more, but I will never do this,
With 5GB per snapshot in FDISR, it will be insane if you do 60,000 snapshots.

because I'm already lost with 5 snapshots. If I create one RBRx-snapshot per day, I have 60,000 snapshots at the age of 165, but I have to start when I'm 1 year old, so I need to be a wonderchild too. :) <-QUOTE}

Now that's the wonder of Rollback ;-)

Peter2150

June 22nd, 2007, 09:00 AM

Easter, I agree with you in principle. I guess what makes me a bit unique is all I care about is preserving the current state of the machine. When I install or uninstall it is nice to be able to change that, but after a day or two, I don't care as much. Right at the moment, I have about 6 snapshot in Rollback, but if I wanted I could update the baseline and it wouldn't matter. Rollback is much quicker and easier to use, but in the back of my mind there is that little nagging question about reliability. It is nice to have current and available archives of all my FDISR snapshots. That way if easy to use breaks, reliable kicks in and does it's job.

I agree not for most folks, but it's been great for me. Point is it's doable, and combined with rock solid imaging is outstanding.

Pete

silver0066

June 22nd, 2007, 10:00 AM

{QUOTE-> True. Although I think I have asked this question once maybe two times and you have yet to answer it. Did you lose data using Rollback?

Your right and again maybe I missed it and if I did I'm sorry but Did you lose data using Rollback?

I can say I have not lost any data that I can recall using Rollback

I probably missed the posts about chkdsk issue in Rollback 8. If you have a chance can you post the link so the OP and myslef can look at this issue please

I agree I have a lot to learn. Don't we all. That's why most of us are here. I do see the importance of keeping whole data snapshot. But if I have not lost any data with linked data snapshots of Rollback it's not to important to me. Especially when I can archive whole data snapshots from rollback to another disk. Again Did you lose data using Rollback? <-QUOTE}Chris,

Apparently you have not been following these forums. The "chkdsk" problem has been reported here and in other (Software and Services) forums at Wilders and at the Horizon Rollback forum many times with early versions of 7 and with the current V8. I am using both FD-ISR and Rollback v7 in the same manner as Pete.

I lost both partitions on my system drive due to chkdsk problems using Rollback v8. This happened on two of my computers. I switched back to V7 because it is more stable. I would not use Rollback without FD-ISR and a good imaging program because of this.

It just is not that stable and you should be aware of all of those posts before over-hyping Rollback. It is a good program because of the fast snapshots.....that's all.

It would be foolish to use it without a good imaging program because the "chkdsk" problem, which occurs very infrequently, trashes the whole system hard drive and all partitions on that drive.

The backup snapshot portion of V8 only backs up one snapshot and it does that very slowly as compared to other imaging programs.

I use it only for quick snapshots and I do like that part of it very much. However, I would never use it alone without other ways to protect my data.

Silver

chrome_sturmen

June 22nd, 2007, 11:01 AM

holy jeez- a rollback rx vs firstdefense isr showdown :P

TonyW

June 22nd, 2007, 11:47 AM

{QUOTE-> Correct me plz if i'm wrong about that, so that puffed up idealology with Rollback Rx you can make snapshots till the cows come home doesn't hold much water for more knowledgable and experienced users. <-QUOTE}Who says you have to have a zillion snapshots? If I was to use RollBack Rx again as I have once before, I'd probably still have the same number of snapshots as I do for FD-ISR now.

At the end of the day, it is how one uses either product that counts. To quote Peter:{QUOTE-> One needs to understand how these programs work, what they each do, and decide how you are going to use them. That will go a long way to determining what is best. <-QUOTE}

TonyW

June 22nd, 2007, 11:58 AM

{QUOTE->
I lost both partitions on my system drive due to chkdsk problems using Rollback v8. <-QUOTE}It's also worth noting not everyone has multiple partitions on their system. I don't, for example.

EASTER.2010

June 22nd, 2007, 10:35 PM

{QUOTE->
{QUOTE-> Originally Posted by EASTER.2010
As for as bashing? ANY program that bashes your data and/or system irregardless of cause & affect is fair to be deemed unacceptable.
Ask ErikAlbert. <-QUOTE}

True. Although I think I have asked this question once maybe two times and you have yet to answer it. Did you lose data using Rollback?

{QUOTE-> Destroying data in any fashion is totally unacceptable and especially when unexpected. I don't read anywhere where FD-ISR warns against LOSING data/snapshots after simply changing snapshots let alone just running normally. Only if you abort during a Copy/Update and even then you simply redo over again. No data loss. <-QUOTE}

Your right and again maybe I missed it and if I did I'm sorry but Did you lose data using Rollback? <-QUOTE}

Indeed Chris, data was completely destroyed.
That is the underlying basis behind my total mistrust in it, and not just on one system, but i installed it to a small group of drives and it returned the same results. Perhaps that ChkDsk issue was behind it, who is to say with any certainty. What is certain is that i'm not the only one who is lost partitions with it. There is definitely been a bug in it.

If you can't rely on a program to preserve/return your data 100% of the time then theres a lot of complaint that is completely justified against it IMO.

But let's not pick at the issues of Rollback Rx here even though they DO still exist as evident by many others and not just myself.

What is more important then focusing on the issues everyone is already aware of, and which will be to BOTH supporters mutual advantage is that "NOW" Leapfrog and Rollback developers have reached a concensus to team up together.

So we can now expect much better satisfaction and positive results.

EASTER.2010

June 23rd, 2007, 12:57 AM

{QUOTE-> Easter, I agree with you in principle. I guess what makes me a bit unique is all I care about is preserving the current state of the machine. When I install or uninstall it is nice to be able to change that, but after a day or two, I don't care as much. Right at the moment, I have about 6 snapshot in Rollback, but if I wanted I could update the baseline and it wouldn't matter. Rollback is much quicker and easier to use, but in the back of my mind there is that little nagging question about reliability. It is nice to have current and available archives of all my FDISR snapshots. That way if easy to use breaks, reliable kicks in and does it's job.

I agree not for most folks, but it's been great for me. Point is it's doable, and combined with rock solid imaging is outstanding.

Pete <-QUOTE}

Your reply is some food for thought and is help me re-evaluate the process of routinely using an imaging program (mine's PARAGON).

I always considered that a restored image should not have to be repeatedly relied on as a routine method to correct problems when some program or system failure makes for a serious interruption or worse, BUT, innovation and technology is propelling this usefullness beyond what used to be considered only emergency recovery.

To rethink this procedure (at least for me), is prudent and good sense now that imaging programs have advanced to a point where FULL restores can be successfully performed in much less time than before, so with that in mind, we can depend on it almost in the same manner as a rollback recovery app i suppose.

TonyW

June 23rd, 2007, 09:26 AM

{QUOTE->
What is more important then focusing on the issues everyone is already aware of, and which will be to BOTH supporters mutual advantage is that "NOW" Leapfrog and Rollback developers have reached a concensus to team up together. <-QUOTE}It'll be interesting to see what happens, but I get the impression the people behind RollBack are only acting as resellers, but will provide some support in much the same way Raxco/Software Pursuits have done.

Peter2150

June 23rd, 2007, 09:26 AM

{QUOTE-> Your reply is some food for thought and is help me re-evaluate the process of routinely using an imaging program (mine's PARAGON).

I always considered that a restored image should not have to be repeatedly relied on as a routine method to correct problems when some program or system failure makes for a serious interruption or worse, BUT, innovation and technology is propelling this usefullness beyond what used to be considered only emergency recovery.

To rethink this procedure (at least for me), is prudent and good sense now that imaging programs have advanced to a point where FULL restores can be successfully performed in much less time than before, so with that in mind, we can depend on it almost in the same manner as a rollback recovery app i suppose. <-QUOTE}

For sure. Sometimes when my choice is restore image or restore fdisr archive, I'll just restore the image. It is almost as easy.

EASTER.2010

June 23rd, 2007, 02:58 PM

{QUOTE-> feature list comparison with RollBack Rx <-QUOTE}

OK, here is one of mine. Rollback Rx prides itself on the feature to create multiple, nearly unlimited snapshots, but only from a single reference point though, and that suits many just fine.

One of my wish list for upcoming FD-ISR versions would be to increase the amount of snapshots to umm, maybe 20? 30? whereas of course as always a disc would need ample space to support the additions.

But i would like to see more than 10 snapshots as default. I manage a workaround for the 10 snap limit by archiving some of them, then also either copying some to alternative media and deleting the snaps in favor of creating new ones again within the 10 limit range of course. So in essence i have more than 10 snapshots, just that some of them are out of the $ISR directory.

As far as Rollback Rx.
Fix, fix, fix the bug with the ChkDsk problem and establish at least 3 FULL baseline snapshots from which to revert back to, or to change via archives the baseline snapshots.

Is anyone listening? ::)

@Chris Courtesy Horizon DataSys Inc.

{QUOTE-> Benefits & Features Of FD-ISR
Ability to create and maintain up to 10 "point-in-time" system snapshots. Each snapshot is bootable with no rebuild required.

Differential (changed files only) copy engine for fast snapshot updates.

Data Anchoring feature makes data files available to any snapshot that is booted.

Ability to create a compressed snapshot using NTFS file compression for a significantly smaller snapshot.

Ability to archive snapshots to another device, i.e. partition, disk drive, network location. Archives, although not immediately bootable, safeguard the OS and Applications in case of disk hardware failure.

Ability to export and import archives to multiple files for storage on CD/DVD media.

Password-protected snapshot groups; to restrict snapshot users.

Capability to return (freeze) the system to the same state every time the system boots.

Control FirstDefense-ISR from a remote location using the command-line interface.

Scheduling of snapshot or archive updates.

Simple installation without the need to create additional partitions or other modifications to the system.

For Windows 2000 and situations where Microsoft's VSS is not preferred, a proprietary open file technology; allows the creation of true point-in-time snapshots of the system volume, even if files are in use.

More Features... <-QUOTE}

danny9

June 23rd, 2007, 03:36 PM

Easter, you mentioned this:

"As far as Rollback Rx.
Fix, fix, fix the bug with the ChkDsk problem and establish at least 3 FULL baseline snapshots from which to revert back to, or to change via archives the baseline snapshots.

Is anyone listening? "

I'm by no means as knowledgeable as some of you in the area of these type programs but I am using them and trying to learn them better.
You said Rollback should have the capability to make at least 3 baseline snapshots.
I don't see the need at this time.
After changing my system around with new programs etc., and of course if I'm satisfied, I just take a new snapshot and make that the new baseline.
Keeps it current that way.
If I am wrong on this, please let me know.
By the way, I'm using BootBack and EAZ-FIX pro, v.8
Dan 8)

EASTER.2010

June 23rd, 2007, 04:01 PM

Well danny9, that is just my own wish list for Rollback because one baseline for me would not be enough in case the baseline itself became unreachable for Rollback.

I understand though that with Rollback we can fashion the active system in any way with new programs etc. and like you say make that one the baseline, but i would prefer more than one baseline JUST IN CASE that baseline became corrupted. That stems from problems i already experienced with Rollback not being able at one point of doing anything but Uninstall, meaning it couldn't even get back to the baseline. That was the worse issue i experienced and one that gave rise to my doubts over this app. The other times i was able to revert back to another snapshot but i don't want to have to be confronted with that unexpected again. :( I did nothing at all to encourage Rollback to not boot on a simple restart, i mean i had installed no new programs before this occured.

I did at another drive defrag which also caused a problem but Peter2150 confirmed why that happened and it was a bug/issue.

All in all, with FD-ISR i don't need Rollback Rx or any problems booting normally.
I have not experienced a single glitch with FD-ISR aside from once i done something that knocked the FD Manager out of the taskbar and so i just simply uninstalled and reinstalled again with ease and everything proceeds as usual to this day.

TonyW

June 23rd, 2007, 06:44 PM

{QUOTE->
After changing my system around with new programs etc., and of course if I'm satisfied, I just take a new snapshot and make that the new baseline.
Keeps it current that way. <-QUOTE}If I was to use RollBack Rx again, I'd probably have a Current snapshot, a Rollback snapshot and possibly a Test snapshot. Once satisfied with the system, I'd make new Current and Rollback snapshots then delete the previous two. The Current would be the one I'd always be in. Obviously I'd have the option to test things out in Test or any other snapshot I'd create.

The baseline I'd consider to be a fresh start, a point in time I'd go back to, kinda like starting back at the beginning if need be.

Wait a minute - this sounds a bit like how I manage FD-ISR anyway. LOL (I have 4 snapshots in FD-ISR - Fresh OS Install, Main, Rollback and Test.)

danny9

June 23rd, 2007, 07:36 PM

To Easter and TonyW.
Points well made.
Thanks, Dan :)

EASTER.2010

June 23rd, 2007, 09:05 PM

{QUOTE-> To Easter and TonyW.
Points well made.
Thanks, Dan :) <-QUOTE}

Yours too danny9.

When something works well for you theres no sense in changing it. Just some permanant bug fixes would be nice in Rollback Rx. The rest is my ideas but not neccessary since FD-ISR does it all for me.

Longboard

June 26th, 2007, 04:25 AM

Hello
Guess this thread has pretty much played out...
I haven't had Rollback installed for some time...been going with FDISR as safety net. The release of V8 (heh with the 50% discount is making me think again about how I can include this utility to my benefit...

Chris 1293
{QUOTE-> I lost both partitions on my system drive due to chkdsk problems using Rollback v8. This happened on two of my computers. I switched back to V7 because it is more stable. I would not use Rollback without FD-ISR and a good imaging program because of this.
It just is not that stable and you should be aware of all of those posts before over-hyping Rollback. It is a good program because of the fast snapshots.....that's all. (EDIT : YES)
It would be foolish to use it without a good imaging program because the "chkdsk" problem, which occurs very infrequently, trashes the whole system hard drive and all partitions on that drive.
The backup snapshot portion of V8 only backs up one snapshot and it does that very slowly as compared to other imaging programs.

I use it only for quick snapshots and I do like that part of it very much. However, I would never use it alone without other ways to protect my data.
<-QUOTE} This is an issue/are aspects that have not gone away.

@Peter
{QUOTE-> My FDISR installation, is the primary working snapshot, and a very stripped down secondary, that I only use for booting into. I also maintain an off disk Archive of my primary snapshot. So if I am gong to test something, I'll update the archive, and go ahead and test. If there is a p roblem I boot to the secondary, and refresh the primary from the archive.

I installed Rollback in the primary snapshot, and use it as advertised. I don't keep lots of snapshots, my only goal is to be able to undo recent changes, and once the change confirm good, I don't care about the older snapshot.

What I do is use Rollback as the primary tool, with FDISR, and ShadowProtect imaging program as a fall back.

I don't image with Rollback installed, but I can keep my FDISR archive updated from within the current system.

My standard usage is using Rollback for normal working stuff. If for any reason Rollback gets in trouble, then plan B comes in. What I do(this has been tested) is restore a Shadowprotect image, which may be several weeks old. It has FDISR in it, but no Rollback. I then boot to my secondary snapshot, and update the primary from the archive. This brings the primary up to date, it contains a non working version of Rollback. It's installed, but doesn't think so because it's not in the mbr. I then do an uninstall of Rollback, followed by an installation of Rollback and all is back normal.
In the interim without Rollback, I defrag, and take a current image. <-QUOTE}

Heh: I know you love testing, and we often benefit: but :o
Lets see a batch file for that !! :D

I know you have predicated this with "if I have a problem" but, forgive me, this seems incredibly complex and prone to ( in my case anyway :gack: ) wetware failure. Too many clicks in the correct sequence at the wrong time of the day = ...oh buggrit.. :ouch:

How is this better than VMWare, fdisr and BING SP ?, or combo of same. You have tested FDISR to extremes. Rollback does NOT image well.
I can see the advantage of superfast snaps.

There seems little doubt that RBRx and FDISR have their uses,
on balance to my way of thinking:
FDISR:
Cons: space issues, speed of new snaps, recent support issues.
Pros: Reliability, saves wetware by default.

RBRx:
Cons: messes with MBR, file indexing system not amenable to most imaging tools, RARE but catastrophic failure, s l o w offline snap save. (Prolly only BING/IFW/IFD in 'raw' copy mode ( ?Paragon) could save multiple snaps?) Imaging utility needs to save from track 0 to save RBRx intact.
Preboot recovery: but to where?

Pros: FAST, multiple snaps = very cool (could be a con if you got lost :dry: )
New version seems more stable.

Obviously both tools have their uses and supporters.

@silver 0066: what else do you have installed for recovery and how is it configured. ??

Maybe VMWare and RBRX in several copies of base line vm will be a top solution for testing ??

...bumbling along as usual...2c here and there

Regards.

Chris12923

June 26th, 2007, 04:42 AM

@Longboard

Sorry to hear your troubles. I have used Rollback version 7 and 8 both on Xp Pro and Vista Home Premium. None of the configs have lost data. But again any program including FDISR and others (ATI) can have issues to cause data loss. So although unforunate data can be lost by many programs. *please no FDISR comments like yea but I can store snapshots offline* because you can also do that with Rollback 8. Maybe not as fast or easy but it can be done. I don't think I overhype Rollback. I think I give concrete proof (correct me if I'm wrong). I have never said Rollback is more stable than FDISR or easier to store offline snapshots. I just listed facts. I tell people rollback works great for me with no data loss and I recommend it over FDISR.
FDISR is a great program I do not say otherwise.

Thanks,

Chris

Longboard

June 26th, 2007, 09:26 AM

@Chris1293{QUOTE-> Sorry to hear your troubles. <-QUOTE}No specific issues here with RB since early issues with V7 to do with imaging and restores. Atm I just dont use it (found the install exe in a folder the other day after these threads stirred my interest again) but as noted: always open to other options if they work good.

Out of interest: you obviously have no problems with ATI and RB?

Again, ooi, are you using english version of Viguard?: a utility which has always intrigued me but has been a bit elusive to date: do you have a link to english versions for dl or support? heh: might install into an RB snap. ;)

silver0066

June 26th, 2007, 09:57 AM

{QUOTE-> @Longboard

Sorry to hear your troubles. I have used Rollback version 7 and 8 both on Xp Pro and Vista Home Premium. None of the configs have lost data. But again any program including FDISR and others (ATI) can have issues to cause data loss. So although unforunate data can be lost by many programs. *please no FDISR comments like yea but I can store snapshots offline* because you can also do that with Rollback 8. Maybe not as fast or easy but it can be done. I don't think I overhype Rollback. I think I give concrete proof (correct me if I'm wrong). I have never said Rollback is more stable than FDISR or easier to store offline snapshots. I just listed facts. I tell people rollback works great for me with no data loss and I recommend it over FDISR.
FDISR is a great program I do not say otherwise.

Thanks,

Chris <-QUOTE}I have been using FD-ISR for two years with no data loss. FD-ISR is as stable as they get. I started using Rollback v7 in July 2006 along with FD-ISR and had chkdsk problems with Rollback that trashed my system, and I sent Rollback back for a refund. Earlier this year I trialed V8 and it worked great for a couple of weeks. I then purchased 3 licenses for it. Several weeks later, it trashed two of my computers due to chkdsk problems. I then switched back to the updated V7 and have been using it without incident for about 2 months now.

I am NOT fully confident that Rollback won't trash my system again. If it does, I still have ATI and FD-ISR archives to restore my system quickly.

I would NEVER recommend Rollback over FD-ISR to anyone. However, using both in combination with a good imaging program has enhanced my computing experience and with FD-ISR and ATI, I am very confident that my system can be easily recovered if Rollback has another chkdsk failure.

Peter2150

June 26th, 2007, 10:03 AM

{QUOTE-> I have been using FD-ISR for two years with no data loss. FD-ISR is as stable as they get. I started using Rollback v7 in July 2006 along with FD-ISR and had chkdsk problems with Rollback that trashed my system, and I sent Rollback back for a refund. Earlier this year I trialed V8 and it worked great for a couple of weeks. I then purchased 3 licenses for it. Several weeks later, it trashed two of my computers due to chkdsk problems. I then switched back to the updated V7 and have been using it without incident for about 2 months now.

I am NOT fully confident that Rollback won't trash my system again. If it does, I still have ATI and FD-ISR archives to restore my system quickly.

I would NEVER recommend Rollback over FD-ISR to anyone. However, using both in combination with a good imaging program has enhanced my computing experience and with FD-ISR and ATI, I am very confident that my system can be easily recovered if Rollback has another chkdsk failure. <-QUOTE}

You kind of summarized my feelings. I've had no issues with V8, but I am also running on unsupported Raid 0. I can also say with early Rollback I did lose data. I've encountered several serious bugs with FDISR(which have been fixed) but even with that no data loss.

Rollback does work, it recovered from an unbootable system. But it is nice having SP and FDISR in the background, just in case.

Pete

huntnyc

June 26th, 2007, 10:49 AM

I had chkdisk problems with Rollback 7.2.1 but no data loss that I know of. Now using version 8 so far with no problems but I am always wondering when this problem might come again. Giving Rollback another chance to see if it will be stable because I love its advantages in being a system restore function on steroids so to speak. Have not tried FD-ISR yet but keeping it in mind always. SP image backing up all just in case of disaster.

Gary

TonyW

June 26th, 2007, 10:57 AM

{QUOTE-> I started using Rollback v7 in July 2006 along with FD-ISR and had chkdsk problems with Rollback that trashed my system, and I sent Rollback back for a refund. Earlier this year I trialed V8 and it worked great for a couple of weeks. I then purchased 3 licenses for it. Several weeks later, it trashed two of my computers due to chkdsk problems. <-QUOTE}I'm just curious. Is this because you ran chkdsk whilst RollBack was installed? I only ask because I've never run chkdsk on Windows XP.

ErikAlbert

June 26th, 2007, 11:16 AM

FDISR is worth $69 considering its reliability and possibilities, but RollbackRx doesn't deserve that price at all, $25 would be more reasonable. :)

Chris12923

June 26th, 2007, 12:14 PM

{QUOTE-> FDISR is worth $69 considering its reliability and possibilities, but RollbackRx doesn't deserve that price at all, $25 would be more reasonable. :) <-QUOTE}
Somehow I knew you'd chime in. Yes FDISR is worth 69.00 and please tell me beside this stability issue that very few people are having with Rollback what are these possibilities that FDISR has that Rollback doesn't. I keep hearing you say FDISR is the greatest thing since sliced bread so please tell me about all these possibilities.

Thanks,

Chris

Peter2150

June 26th, 2007, 12:15 PM

{QUOTE-> I'm just curious. Is this because you ran chkdsk whilst RollBack was installed? I only ask because I've never run chkdsk on Windows XP. <-QUOTE}

When it runs it runs because windows detects it is needed. Sometimes with crashes it causes a chkdsk.

Peter2150

June 26th, 2007, 12:16 PM

{QUOTE-> FDISR is worth $69 considering its reliability and possibilities, but RollbackRx doesn't deserve that price at all, $25 would be more reasonable. :) <-QUOTE}

Erik, Im afraid that really isn't a valid statement. Since I've installed v8 it's worked perfectly, and it is indeed quicker, and easier. No doubt I like having FDISR in the background, but still Rollback is doing fine for me at this point.

TonyW

June 26th, 2007, 01:24 PM

I think we can argue the merits of both programs till the cows come home, but it's obvious both have their benefits. They are different programs with similar goals in mind. It is even possible to run both on the same machine if one so wished.

One of the moderators over at HD forums said this in answer to why HD are supplying a "competing" product:{QUOTE-> RollBack Rx is a great product - however, its architecture does not allow us to support RAID based PC's and mission critical server systems (RAID5).

Many of our clients that have servers have large hard drives and could care less about having 40K plus snapshots. For them 10 snapshots are more than sufficient. Thier requirements are specifically suited to FirstDefense-ISR... <-QUOTE}I'm not sure people would have 40k snapshots anyway, but I think the point he was trying to make is that there are different needs and either one of the products will suit one individual/group better than others.

Please can we stop this FD-ISR/RollBack back-biting? Both are excellent products in their own right, and will suit one person more than another, but let's call a halt to the "my product is better than yours" form of discussion this has turned into in parts.

I'm sorry, but I just felt it needed saying.

Chris12923

June 26th, 2007, 01:30 PM

@Tony

I understand what you are sayinf. I originally only posted features rollback had FDISR disn't because thats what the OP asked for. Then it appeared instead of comparisons some people started a little bashing not comparing so i had to jump in. The last post from me was not saying either product was better but asking Erik what are all the possibilities he keeps mentioning. There is really nothing besides RAID support for FDISR that gives FDISR any more possibilities that I can think of. But I'm fine with what your saying since none of this helps the OP. Although it does help FDISR resellers so they are happy I'm sure :)

Thanks,

Chris

nanana1

June 26th, 2007, 01:36 PM

{QUOTE-> FDISR is worth $69 considering its reliability and possibilities, but RollbackRx doesn't deserve that price at all, $25 would be more reasonable. :) <-QUOTE}

This is really a biased statement. As I had said many times, both are not better software, just different. We can choose what we like for our needs.

No need to make such a biased statment. You should heed the wise advice of TonyW given to Chris and it should really apply to you too.

TonyW

June 26th, 2007, 01:41 PM

{QUOTE->
You should heed the wise advice of TonyW given to Chris and it should really apply to you too. <-QUOTE}I'd like to point out I wasn't aiming my comments just specifically at Chris. :)

I'm just aware of what has been said in certain parts of this discussion by a few people, and I could see it possibly rearing its ugly head again hence I felt I needed to say something for the benefit of all who read here.

EASTER.2010

June 26th, 2007, 02:42 PM

{QUOTE-> But again any program including FDISR and others (ATI) can have issues to cause data loss. <-QUOTE}

Point me to one time where FD-ISR could possibly make for data loss, "IF" a user has also taken the wise decision to ARCHIVE any snapshots to alternative media.

I can kill FD-ISR AND all it's directory snaps plus archives and still be back up and running again COMPLETELY INTACT in literally minutes.

I think you just don't want to admit the facts which are obvious. FD-ISR was specifically designed AGAINST any such occurances as data loss as but just one of it's many valuable and reliable features.

I like to see Rollback Rx prove the same dependability. It can't.

TonyW

June 26th, 2007, 03:14 PM

*Tony bangs head on wall*

Why do I bother? *sighs*

Chris12923

June 26th, 2007, 05:52 PM

See Tony I tried to leave it alone :p

Easter maybe you haven't heard (I'm sure you have but just don't like to listen) Rollback 8 can also archive snapshots offline. You can also be up in running in minutes. How many times do I have to say that? Maybe the archive takes longer to restore from offline drive than say FDISR (Im not sure) but it can still be done.

@ Tony

Since obvioulsy some people don't like to listen. This is my last post here unless someone has a question worthy of an answer.

@ Original Poster

Sorry we went a little OT in your thread but in a way you are probably learning things about both programs. Again whichever one you choose you are making a wise decision. They are both good programs. So let us know when your up and running and what you think of whichever one you choose.

EDIT: @ Erik

Feel free to PM me with all those possibilities that your talking about since I'm not posting in this thread anymore. Also cc the thread if youd like.

Thanks,

Chris

Coolio10

June 26th, 2007, 06:04 PM

I laugh now at this thread since the maker of RBX also owns FD-ISR!

Now all these competitions sound like do i hate this company or like it because one of their products i like and one i hate lol.

Oh well now Horizon DataSys makes money both ways :D.

Also is their any price difference between Horizon DataSys and Raxco?

Chris12923

June 26th, 2007, 06:08 PM

{QUOTE-> Also is their any price difference between Horizon DataSys and Raxco? <-QUOTE}
I think they are the same prices.

Thanks,

Chris

EASTER.2010

June 27th, 2007, 12:28 AM

FD-ISR remains the Superior of these two no matter what straws are grabbed at to support some lame brain theory that your data is safest with Rollback Rx.

When any program destroys or otherwises locks you away from accessing your data normally, that program is highly suspect to repeat that occurance again.

Rollback Rx still has bugs not yet addressed and AFAIK is a real & present danger to some systems as already evident by many others who have also suffered ill results from use of it.

Just because you say it works for you i don't believe you also haven't experienced some difficulty at one point or another because you give the dubious impression that you would likely just switch snapshots and not concern yourself over the loss of other snapshots afterwards that are deleted after that point.

Untill they fully examine and choose to re-evaluate Rollback Rx's issues to repair them, i warn against it's use if you're a user who values your data.

Peter2150

June 27th, 2007, 12:54 AM

I don't know if it was partially because of the Raid 0, but I had to pull Rollback off my system. A program hung on install and I had to power reset. Rollback ran it's improper power down disk check, and then chkdsk ran. Took almost 15 minutes and I saw some error corrections the likes of which I haven't seen before. After chkdsk finished system rebooted, and Rollback reran it's own disk check again. There after system stayed in a reboot loop. I intervened and selected a prior snapshot, and to it's credit Rollback rebooted okay. But at that point I just couldn't trust the file system condition so I did the image restore/fdisr recovery and removed it.

I also discovered Rollback was causing a terrible boot lag others have reported.

Can I say this wouldn't have happened without the Raid 0. Don't know, but at this point, I'd say given HorizonDatasys's position on Raid, even if it does work on your system, beware.

Note, I am posting this to make people aware, but please don't use this for another round of Rollback bashing.

Pete

DVD+R

June 27th, 2007, 09:21 AM

What people are Confusing about FirstDefense-ISR and Rollback Rx is that they are intended for 2 entirely different Enviroments, FirstDefense-ISR is Aimed at Businesses, While Rollback Rx is Commercially Aimed at Consumers

FirstDefense-ISR is an Instant System Recovery solution that has been designed for enterprise and mid-range servers and mission critical workstations, running Windows 2000, XP, and Server 2003 operating systems. FirstDefense-ISR functions transparently and allows administrators to quickly restore their systems to any complete predefined configuration. No special hardware is required. Furthermore, you do not require special CMOS, or additional disk partitions to be created. FirstDefense-ISR works on single or multi-partitioned systems, fully supporting RAID 0, 0+1, 5, and/or in clustering environments.

Specifications
Size: 5.54 MB
Price: $69 (PC Version)
Platforms:
Win 2000, XP and Vista

"... Any business that needs high availability to their servers and workstations without expensive software/hardware solutions will find this software extremely useful. Even if your company has already implemented a backup recovery system this software complements all imaginable recovery scenarios and shortens time-to-recovery beyond your wildest expectations..."

John C Craig – Microsoft Press

FirstDefense-ISR performs full-system backups for the purpose of immediate system recovery. The concept was developed as a result of years of listening to IT professionals concerned about having to deal with non-recoverable Windows blue screens, service pack installs going awry, and critical files becoming corrupted. These occurrences render the system unbootable and data is inaccessible until the problem is repaired.

FirstDefense-ISR periodically (and transparently) takes snapshots of the current state of the user’s system and applications software. It has the capability of storing up to ten point-in-time snapshots. Following a system crash, the user can immediately fall back to the most recent and uncorrupted snapshot. This reduces the MTTR to virtually zero and enables users and IT staff to instantly repair system crashes without the loss of productivity that results from extensive downtime.

Rollback is for Desktop Computers:

RollBack Rx™ is a robust system restore utility that enables home users and IT professionals to easily restore a PC to a time before certain events occurred. RollBack Rx makes it easy for users of all skill levels to quickly and easily repair PC issues - saving time, money and PC trouble. With RollBack Rx you can...

Reverse any system crash (even if Windows can't startup)
Backout of any failed software installations, botched update etc.
Reverse user errors manually, or set Restore-on-Reboot or Log-off
Roll back minutes, hours, or even months.
Roll backwards and forwards to any system snapshot
Allows users to safely test any software. Fast, 100% clean uninstaller
Roll-back, yet recover files from your "future" snapshot(s)
Retrieve files from a crashed PC, even if it can not boot into Windows.
Access control - prevent unauthorized users from accessing any RollBack Rx functions
Automatically schedule snapshots or hard drive restores at set intervals
Day Zero Disaster Recovery with no data loss
Group Management and Enterprise Network Administration Control

Quick Links

RollBack vs System Restore

Perfect Uninstaller utility

Continuous Data Backup Solution

Disaster Recovery Solution

Enterprise Network Solution

Your Complete Windows System Restore Solution - Windows System Restore can only restore Windows "System Files" and "Some" Program files. RollBack Rx functions at the sector level of the hard drive and restores every bit of data - in essence making your PC a virtual time-machine.

Full Details are shown here:

http://www.horizondatasys.com/253715.ihtml

And Here:

http://www.horizondatasys.com/169614.ihtml

FirstDefense-ISR takes up consideravly more Disk Space for snapshots, as its designed to encorporate Networks with 1 Terabyte Drives and Above

While Rollback Rx will Increment snapshots to consolodate disk space which is more acceptable for people with typical hard drive space on there Desktop/Laptop Computers. Therefore for the Average user Rollback is the more Logical Choice.

stapp

June 27th, 2007, 09:51 AM

DVD, you say that FD is aimed at the business world, whereas I believe it to be far more flexible than that.

Homeusers can, and do, benefit greatly from using FD.

While I agree that it can give the business user protection from financial loss due to downtime, the home user also can experience a "peace of mind" environment where software testing, and system recovery problems can be dealt with.

silver0066

June 27th, 2007, 09:53 AM

{QUOTE-> I'm just curious. Is this because you ran chkdsk whilst RollBack was installed? I only ask because I've never run chkdsk on Windows XP. <-QUOTE}No. It happened when Rollback performed a chkdsk on it's own without any intervention by me.

silver0066

June 27th, 2007, 10:12 AM

{QUOTE-> See Tony I tried to leave it alone :p

Easter maybe you haven't heard (I'm sure you have but just don't like to listen) Rollback 8 can also archive snapshots offline. You can also be up in running in minutes. How many times do I have to say that? Maybe the archive takes longer to restore from offline drive than say FDISR (Im not sure) but it can still be done.

Chris <-QUOTE}You admit that: (Im not sure)

It appears that you have not even tried FD-ISR. I think that it is good that you are not posting in this thread anymore. You have been scolding people who have posted some of their experiences with Rollback. These postings are beneficial to others in this forum and you should remain silent about things you don't know about.

It takes only a few minutes to create or restore a FD-ISR archive vs. up to a half hour or more for Rollback v8 to create an archive plus about as long to restore it.

silver0066

June 27th, 2007, 10:23 AM

{QUOTE-> I don't know if it was partially because of the Raid 0, but I had to pull Rollback off my system. A program hung on install and I had to power reset. Rollback ran it's improper power down disk check, and then chkdsk ran. Took almost 15 minutes and I saw some error corrections the likes of which I haven't seen before. After chkdsk finished system rebooted, and Rollback reran it's own disk check again. There after system stayed in a reboot loop. I intervened and selected a prior snapshot, and to it's credit Rollback rebooted okay. But at that point I just couldn't trust the file system condition so I did the image restore/fdisr recovery and removed it.

I also discovered Rollback was causing a terrible boot lag others have reported.

Can I say this wouldn't have happened without the Raid 0. Don't know, but at this point, I'd say given HorizonDatasys's position on Raid, even if it does work on your system, beware.

Note, I am posting this to make people aware, but please don't use this for another round of Rollback bashing.

Pete <-QUOTE}Hi Pete,

I don't think that it has anything to do with RAID. The chkdsk problem happened to me on both Raid 0 systems and non Raid systems. I have been using v7 for over a month with no problems, however, I have FD-ISR and ATI in case it does. I keep it on my system as I really like the quick snapshots as I do alot of testing. Since the chkdsk problem happens infrequently and with FD-ISR and ATI, I can be back up and running in less than 10 minutes.

Silver

TonyW

June 27th, 2007, 11:27 AM

{QUOTE-> These postings are beneficial to others in this forum and you should remain silent about things you don't know about. <-QUOTE}That's not a fair statement to make as it's obvious his experiences are different to others who have posted here. It's like with any software, and when you look around at the many forums here, there are people who are happily using product X while others have problems with it. The old phrase "your mileage may differ" springs to mind.

The problem lies in the fact some people have had real trouble with RollBack even to the point of losing data, and, therefore, they don't trust using it for those reasons. By the same token, there are others who seemingly haven't come across this situation, but we shouldn't berate them for using the software if it works for them.

When I tested RollBack last year, I didn't lose any data, and when I uninstalled the program, I still had my data intact. I uninstalled RollBack because of the longer boot-up time on my system and the fact the systray icon didn't always show when Windows loaded up. However, there are many others who never experienced either of those problems, but it would be wrong and churlish of me to go around to try dissuade people from using the product because of what I considered to be an unacceptable boot-up sequence.

Everyone's system is different, and we all have different experiences with product X, Y and Z. Whatever works and behaves in an acceptable manner within the constraints of a person's particular setup is the way to go I think.

silver0066

June 27th, 2007, 02:03 PM

{QUOTE-> That's not a fair statement to make as it's obvious his experiences are different to others who have posted here. <-QUOTE}I posted this because of his inaccurate postings regarding FD-ISR, not his postings regarding Rollback. Also, he has consistently scolded other posters regarding their experiences. All ideas and experiences are beneficial to all readers and it is not up to him to degrade postings made by anyone.

ErikAlbert

June 27th, 2007, 05:14 PM

With which Image Backup softwares do pure RBRx-users a backup and restore of ALL RBRx-snapshots ?

TonyW

June 27th, 2007, 06:33 PM

In the main, I think it is aimed primarily at the enterprise/business market, especially I.T. departments. Even Leapfrog's main page states:{QUOTE-> FirstDefense-ISR reduces the time to recover a failed system to zero, thereby increasing network efficiency, reducing IT staff repair time, and increasing employee perceived value of the IT department. Product focus is on instant recovery in both attended and unattended modes of operation. <-QUOTE}However, home users are able to use it if they study the manual carefully and understand how to operate the program.

Coolio10

June 27th, 2007, 07:19 PM

I also believe that FD-ISR is aimed at business/IT because how many people actually have the space to hold an image at the exact same size?

Not Me thats for sure. A average user has a size of 320GB max and an average of 250GB as that is how much computers from stores come at.

I have 153GB and i only have 61.1GB free. See what i mean? I couldn't even hold 1 image!

So it's not really depending on which application works better or has less bugs but which program will actually work as in be able to make atleast 1 or 2 images.

Longboard

June 27th, 2007, 07:54 PM

{QUOTE-> I have 153GB and i only have 61.1GB free. <-QUOTE}:o :o wow. ?? What have you got there? Library of Congress??

Peter2150

June 27th, 2007, 09:21 PM

{QUOTE-> :o :o wow. ?? What have you got there? Library of Congress?? <-QUOTE}

I was wondering the same thing. I have a 640gig drive and only 22gig in use.

EASTER.2010

June 27th, 2007, 10:38 PM

Rollback Rx versions 7.2.1 + 8.0 failed these for me. Plus that annoying ChkDisk and i almost forgot it sometimes mentions it needs to defrag which complicates matters further.

{QUOTE-> Reverse any system crash (even if Windows can't startup)
Roll backwards and forwards to any system snapshot
Retrieve files from a crashed PC, even if it can not boot into Windows.
Day Zero Disaster Recovery with no data loss <-QUOTE}

Advertising claims are one thing, actually performing up to those claims 100% of the time is completely another subject.

{QUOTE-> Easter maybe you haven't heard (I'm sure you have but just don't like to listen) Rollback 8 can also archive snapshots offline. You can also be up in running in minutes. How many times do I have to say that? Maybe the archive takes longer to restore from offline drive than say FDISR (Im not sure) but it can still be done. <-QUOTE}

Irregardless, you are in no position to dispute my findings. I don't post complaints of serious program issues for the sake of using space.

You don't listen, what good is it anyway even if it does archive snapshots only to fudge them again via the main program bugs. That's lost time better spent for productive work and not troubleshooting and trying to recover a system of it's files/data.

I don't know how many times it takes to make you aware that Rollback Rx IS NOT fully functional yet. For some it might work fine for now, but it's only a matter of time before it malfunctions in some matter.

Simply put. It needs fixed and improved.

TonyW

June 28th, 2007, 08:00 AM

{QUOTE-> I have a 640gig drive and only 22gig in use. <-QUOTE}At the other end of the scale, I have a 40GB drive with 15GB in use - all taken with 4 snapshots, but in reality if you take the snapshots away leaving the Primary, I have 3.8GB in use.

Chris12923

June 28th, 2007, 08:08 AM

I haven't posted in about 16 posts and there's still a ping pong game going on as one user put it.

I see many questions that I have asked that went unanswered and a few new ones I hope can be answered as well. Let's review just a couple. If you guys can answer these you will help myself and the OP out.

1. Erik I never received the pm about all the endless possibilities that you mentioned earlier. I am very interested in these. Might even make me think about switching and would be a great benefit to the OP as well I assume with his original question if you cc the thread.

2. Silver please post where I scolded anyone in this topic. Also a post to my inacurate finding about FDISR if you would please.

3. Easter please post where I said I disputed your findings?

4. Bonus question: Where did I ever say Rollback is more stable then FDISR?
5. Bonus #2 Where did I say Rollback was better than FDISR.

Hopefully these can be posted so I can correct myself if needed because if I said some of these things I will glady apologize. So please let me know I greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

Chris

Peter2150

June 28th, 2007, 09:17 AM

Okay folks.

Timeout needed. We need to stop all back and forth about people here and confine discussion to the topic at hand.

Pete

danny9

June 28th, 2007, 03:41 PM

{QUOTE-> Okay folks.

Timeout needed. We need to stop all back and forth about people here and confine discussion to the topic at hand.

Pete <-QUOTE}

Agree Peter2150
Let me say that I use both, BootBack and EAZ-FIX, together with no problems.
The other day my power went out.
When it came on I turned my computer back on and as it was booting the power went out again.
When it came back on I tried rebooting again.
Got a screen that said files where bad in windows and I'd have to do a repair install.
Because the last BootBack snapshot copy was from 12 hrs. ago and the EAZ was 2 hrs. prior, I rebooted with the EAZ snapshot.
All I can say is Perfect.
Put my system back the way it was.
As far as the BootBack snapshot, please correct me if I'm wrong, because of the windows error, I trashed the baseline and redid with a new snapshot.
I think they both have a purpose and both are good.
For installing a new program, I think EAZ is the way to go.
Quick snapshot, don't like it, restore to a second before it was downloaded.
Because I've had no problems with either in any way, A thumbs up to both! :thumb: 8)

lucas1985

June 28th, 2007, 03:50 PM

{QUOTE-> The other day my power went out.
When it came on I turned my computer back on and as it was booting the power went out again.
When it came back on I tried rebooting again. <-QUOTE}
You should use a UPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uninterruptible_power_supply) :)

danny9

June 28th, 2007, 04:07 PM

{QUOTE-> You should use a UPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uninterruptible_power_supply) :) <-QUOTE}

I do use good surge protectors.
But thanks for the suggestion and the link.
I will look into this.;D

ErikAlbert

June 29th, 2007, 01:59 AM

{QUOTE->
1. Erik I never received the pm about all the endless possibilities that you mentioned earlier. I am very interested in these. Might even make me think about switching and would be a great benefit to the OP as well I assume with his original question if you cc the thread.
<-QUOTE}
The most important advantage of FirstDefense-ISR is that you can :
1. backup and restore all your snapshots with most popular Image Backup softwares. Very Important !!!
2. archive and restore each snapshot and update faster than any existing Image Backup software.
Sorry, but I can't afford to lose my off-line and on-line snapshot, because they are too different and too much work to re-install them from scratch.

I really wonder how YOU do that with RollbackRx without losing any of your snapshots.
If RollbackRx can't do that, I'm not even interested in the many more possibilities of RollbackRx and then the discussion of this thread is closed for me.

The combination of "FirstDefense-ISR + RollbackRx" is useless to me.

The combination of "FirstDefense-ISR + ShadowProtect" = total recovery solution.
FirstDefense-ISR and ShadowProtect even cover eachother, except for Windows and FirstDefense-ISR itself.

Is "RollbackRx + ShadowProtect" = total recovery solution ? :)

lucas1985

June 29th, 2007, 02:26 AM

{QUOTE-> 1. backup and restore all your snapshots with most popular Image Backup softwares. Very Important !!! <-QUOTE}
You can backup all RollbackRx's snapshots if you use "raw mode" in your image backup software. Raw mode is slower and it generates bigger files than "normal mode".
FD-ISR uses NTFS, so it's transparent to Windows and image apps, but snapshots are big. RollbackRx uses its own filesystem, so it isn't transparent to Windows and image apps, but snapshots are small.

ErikAlbert

June 29th, 2007, 06:29 AM

{QUOTE-> You can backup all RollbackRx's snapshots if you use "raw mode" in your image backup software. Raw mode is slower and it generates bigger files than "normal mode".
FD-ISR uses NTFS, so it's transparent to Windows and image apps, but snapshots are big. RollbackRx uses its own filesystem, so it isn't transparent to Windows and image apps, but snapshots are small. <-QUOTE}
Yes I've read this before and raw mode is a bad solution. That's a backup of my entire harddisk, including free space. That's ridiculous. :)

Chris12923

June 29th, 2007, 07:45 AM

{QUOTE-> The most important advantage of FirstDefense-ISR is that you can :
1. backup and restore all your snapshots with most popular Image Backup softwares. Very Important !!!
2. archive and restore each snapshot and update faster than any existing Image Backup software.
Sorry, but I can't afford to lose my off-line and on-line snapshot, because they are too different and too much work to re-install them from scratch.

I really wonder how YOU do that with RollbackRx without losing any of your snapshots.
If RollbackRx can't do that, I'm not even interested in the many more possibilities of RollbackRx and then the discussion of this thread is closed for me.

The combination of "FirstDefense-ISR + RollbackRx" is useless to me.

The combination of "FirstDefense-ISR + ShadowProtect" = total recovery solution.
FirstDefense-ISR and ShadowProtect even cover eachother, except for Windows and FirstDefense-ISR itself.

Is "RollbackRx + ShadowProtect" = total recovery solution ? :) <-QUOTE}
Erik I totally agree with you. Not being able to backup with regular backup software is a definate negative for me. As for the faster recoveries than imaging software, thats a plus as well. In those respects FDISR does have an advantage over Rollback. The way I run my system this is not such a high priority but I can see why it would be for many people. Although not the endless possibilities I was looking for I appreciate your post. Although sometimes we dont agree on the same software, it seems we look for the same thing. Programs that work for us.

Thanks,

Chris

TonyW

June 29th, 2007, 10:08 AM

{QUOTE-> Not being able to backup with regular backup software is a definate negative for me. <-QUOTE}There are solutions to the backup situation. I've seen Peter recommend AJC Backup for example.

There is other software to backup important files on CD or elsewhere.

Before I heard of FD-ISR and stuff like imaging, I always backed up my important data anyway - that was one of the rules of computing I learnt way back in the early 90s. As long as I have those documents etc., everything else is secondary really.

Peter2150

June 29th, 2007, 11:24 AM

{QUOTE-> There are solutions to the backup situation. I've seen Peter recommend AJC Backup for example.

There is other software to backup important files on CD or elsewhere.

Before I heard of FD-ISR and stuff like imaging, I always backed up my important data anyway - that was one of the rules of computing I learnt way back in the early 90s. As long as I have those documents etc., everything else is secondary really. <-QUOTE}

The two I use are AJC's active backup, which saves files to your main drive, but it saves them every time you either save a file or exit the program. This allows easy recovery of previous versions of stuff.

The other is AJC's directory sync. I use this to get all the files that are data or program settings and sync them both to external drives and the other computer. This in essence is my data backup.

Something else I am doing is letting shadowprotect incrementally image my main business computer every 15 minutes. Again this is so I can get to the most recent data should something bad happen.

silver0066

June 29th, 2007, 12:19 PM

huntnyc

June 29th, 2007, 07:43 PM

removed Rollback version 8 today because after taking a scheduled snapshot after a normal restart, I got an error saying one of my Windows XP files was missing and I needed to use repair to fix it. Other snapshots worked but if any snapshot is unreliable, I just cannot trust it at this point of developement. These problems seem to happen after R?ollback does its defrag routine. Don';t mean to bash but just my recent experience. ShadowProtect imaging though has never let me down so far. Will deeply consider Bootback in future.

Gary

Chris12923

June 29th, 2007, 07:56 PM

{QUOTE-> removed Rollback version 8 today because after taking a scheduled snapshot after a normal restart, I got an error saying one of my Windows XP files was missing and I needed to use repair to fix it. Other snapshots worked but if any snapshot is unreliable, I just cannot trust it at this point of developement. These problems seem to happen after R?ollback does its defrag routine. Don';t mean to bash but just my recent experience. ShadowProtect imaging though has never let me down so far. Will deeply consider Bootback in future.

Gary <-QUOTE}
Sorry to hear the news. Have you informed HDS support about the issue? If so I'm sure they would be interested in trying to fix it. It does seem for some users Rollback is having some issues. Looks like sales for FDISR will be increasing. Fortunately no problems yet for me. But believe me if/when they happen I'll post 'em here.

Thanks,

Chris

huntnyc

June 29th, 2007, 08:06 PM

Chris, thanks and I did let support know I have been having various problems. I do like the potential functionality fo the program but of course it must be coupled with rock solid reliability or for now, those of us who have had problems cannot depend on it. However, hope they will fix these and can go back to it in future. Will let you know if anything comes from this.

Gary

Chris12923

June 29th, 2007, 08:38 PM

{QUOTE-> Chris, thanks and I did let support know I have been having various problems. I do like the potential functionality fo the program but of course it must be couple with rock solid reliability or for now, those of us who have had problems cannot depend on it. However, hope they will fix these and can go back to it in future. Will let you know if anything comes from this.

Gary <-QUOTE}
I appreciate that.

Thanks,

Chris

nexstar

June 30th, 2007, 08:00 PM

Not been in this section before. I must get out more :).
{QUOTE-> With which Image Backup softwares do pure RBRx-users a backup and restore of ALL RBRx-snapshots ? <-QUOTE}
Drive Snapshot (http://drivesnapshot.de)

{QUOTE-> Yes I've read this before and raw mode is a bad solution. That's a backup of my entire harddisk, including free space. That's ridiculous. :) <-QUOTE}
I have just imaged a system drive which occupies 9GB of a 40GB drive before installing Rollback. It took 13 minutes and generated a 4.GB image. I then installed RB, made various changes and installations and imaged again using Drive Snapshot's RAW mode. This saved all 6 snapshots to a 4.88GB image and took 17 minutes to do it.

I then successfully restored this image (which took about 15 minutes) and not a single DOS command was issued in the whole process.

I'm not sure how this is 'bad' and 'ridiculous' as, from where I'm sitting, it seems pretty much ok :).

Graham

ErikAlbert

July 3rd, 2007, 02:05 AM

{QUOTE-> Not been in this section before. I must get out more :).

Drive Snapshot (http://drivesnapshot.de)

I have just imaged a system drive which occupies 9GB of a 40GB drive before installing Rollback. It took 13 minutes and generated a 4.GB image. I then installed RB, made various changes and installations and imaged again using Drive Snapshot's RAW mode. This saved all 6 snapshots to a 4.88GB image and took 17 minutes to do it.

I then successfully restored this image (which took about 15 minutes) and not a single DOS command was issued in the whole process.

I'm not sure how this is 'bad' and 'ridiculous' as, from where I'm sitting, it seems pretty much ok :).

Graham <-QUOTE}
My system partition = 14.6 GB and a normal backup with ShadowProtect Desktop v2 took 5m34s.

I just replaced Acronis True Image with ShadowProtect, I have no good reasons to replace ShadowProtect with DriveSnapshot.
I'm not going to spend any money on another Image Backup Software, just to get RollbackRx on my computer.

nexstar

July 3rd, 2007, 04:54 AM

{QUOTE-> My system partition = 14.6 GB and a normal backup with ShadowProtect Desktop v2 took 5m34s.

I just replaced Acronis True Image with ShadowProtect, I have no good reasons to replace ShadowProtect with DriveSnapshot.
I'm not going to spend any money on another Image Backup Software, just to get RollbackRx on my computer. <-QUOTE}

Sorry Erik, I thought you were asking a question in your post #81. I also wanted to re-dress the the balance slightly for any users that may have gotten the impression that raw imaging of Rollback partitions is not workable, when it clearly can be, without being onerous.

I certainly wouldn't dream of suggesting that you spend money on any other software or that whatever strategy you use is wrong in any way. We all have different methods of cracking the same nut, which is what makes the exchange of ideas and experiences around here interesting :).

Graham

Acadia

July 3rd, 2007, 07:53 PM

{QUOTE->
I just replaced Acronis True Image with ShadowProtect ... <-QUOTE}
Erik, just curious, as long as a person has the drive space, why not have both ATI and SP on the system "just to play it safe"? That is what I am contemplating, but then again, drive space is not an issue for me.

Acadia

Peter2150

July 3rd, 2007, 09:30 PM

{QUOTE-> Erik, just curious, as long as a person has the drive space, why not have both ATI and SP on the system "just to play it safe"? That is what I am contemplating, but then again, drive space is not an issue for me.

Acadia <-QUOTE}

I'll answer that myself, since I have both programs. Honestly I just don't feel the need to have anything more than SP to feel perfectly safe. Some of the stuff I've done with it, and just the high number of restores, I feel perfectly safe. I test restore each image, and haven't had a failure yet.

Pete

Acadia

July 3rd, 2007, 09:49 PM

Peter, its just that I already have Acronis so why get rid if it (LAYERS!) Just that I also want a program PROVEN with working with FD. Thanks.

Acadia

Peter2150

July 4th, 2007, 01:34 AM

{QUOTE-> Peter, its just that I already have Acronis so why get rid if it (LAYERS!) Just that I also want a program PROVEN with working with FD. Thanks.

Acadia <-QUOTE}

Acronis works with FDISR. All I ever did with it was full disk images and restores. It always worked. Just it is a little flaky around the edges, and I just have a higher confidence level in SP.

Pete

ErikAlbert

July 5th, 2007, 12:57 AM

{QUOTE-> Erik, just curious, as long as a person has the drive space, why not have both ATI and SP on the system "just to play it safe"? That is what I am contemplating, but then again, drive space is not an issue for me.

Acadia <-QUOTE}
I had Acronis True Image and ShadowProtect together on my off-line snapshot, but they don't like eachother.
When both were installed and I did a backup with ShadowProtect, suddenly my computer rebooted during the backup and I could start all over again and this happened regularly.
After uninstalling Acronis True Image, ShadowProtect never rebooted during a backup again and worked fine until today.

There was also another problem : new hardware. When I restored with Acronis True Image or with ShadowProtect, WinXPproSP2 started display messages about new hardware and I had to reboot my computer.

Maybe I wouldn't have these problems if I have done these backups/restorations with the Recovery CD of both softwares, but I prefer to do my backups via Windows, because all these Recovery CD's are sooo slow.
I only need the SP Recovery CD to restore my system partition and nothing else. All the rest can be done with ShadowProtect under Windows.

So I don't think it's a good idea to have more than one Image Backup software on your computer.

Besides ShadowProtect seems to be very reliable and 3 times faster than Acronis True Image (without BartPE) and I still have FirstDefense-ISR as second backup for my system partition and I also have several full backups of each partition, in case one fails. :)