Any one tried FD-ISR and Deepfreeze together?

[eniqmah]

I'm about to roll the FD trial onto my desktop which is using Deepfreeze. Just have to ask...Since FD doesn't require a reboot, I can install it while my system is Frozen, then make a snapshot and store that snapshot on external disk? If so, I won't have problems installing FD again after rebooting, and revert to the old snapshot sitting on the ext HDD?


This would be the best combination ever, if it can work.

[Long View]

How are you going to revert to the old snapshot if you don't have FD-ISR loaded after a reboot ?

[eniqmah]

install it?
Did I miss something?
Don't I just reinstall FD, create any snapshot, copy the snapshot I have sitting on the external HDD over, and boot from THAT one?

[farmerlee]

You'd have to boot your computer thawed then reinstall FD and boot to the imported snapshot. If you tried this while frozen it won't work.

Its for this reason that i don't use fd-isr and deepfreeze together.

[Long View]

I have used FD-ISR and DeepFreeze together FD-ISR follows:

Install FD-ISR with primary and then make a secondary snapshot. Install Deepfreeze to the secondary and freeze that snapshot with DeepFreeze. Now you have an ordinary primary and a frozen secondary. At the moment I have one machine this way - using Returnil rather than FD-ISR.

You want to do something different ? but I don't understand what you are trying to achieve

[eniqmah]

That's what I want to do. It seems to work fine, at least on the VMs. I have 3 snapshots, all installed with Deepfreeze, 1 is booting frozen. That's the one I'd use every day. 1 of the thawed ones will be used for testing things, and the other one will be used to restore the tester. :)
This makes it complete. Looks like I might be sending money to Leapfrog. Thanks for the replies.

[Rilla927]

{QUOTE-> That's what I want to do. It seems to work fine, at least on the VMs. I have 3 snapshots, all installed with Deepfreeze, 1 is booting frozen. That's the one I'd use every day. 1 of the thawed ones will be used for testing things, and the other one will be used to restore the tester. :)
This makes it complete. Looks like I might be sending money to Leapfrog. Thanks for the replies. <-QUOTE}

Eniqmah can you keep us updated as you go a long? I'm interested in this myself.

I'm curious how any imaging program will work with DF installed.

[Long View]

{QUOTE->

I'm curious how any imaging program will work with DF installed. <-QUOTE}

DeepFreeze 6 and Reurnil both work in more or less the same way when it comes to imaging. Before making an image according to the program makers it is nceessary to turn off the protection. with deepfreeze you reboot in thawed mode and then "set the flag" and turn the machine off. In the case of Acronis you then boot to the emergency disk and make the image.

Returnil is much easier in that you turn off the protection mode, reboot and then just make your image.

To be fair to Deepfreeze I have ignored set the flag and made an image just by thawing and rebooting and the world did not come to an end but if you ask faronics they will advise the more complex solution.

[Rilla927]

Hey, thanks Long View for the heads up.

I hope this combo can work okay together.

[eniqmah]

{QUOTE-> Eniqmah can you keep us updated as you go a long? I'm interested in this myself.

I'm curious how any imaging program will work with DF installed. <-QUOTE}

Here are some results.

FD_ISR really takes the fun out of waiting for ATI to restore an image...bummer.

[Long View]

KISS - Just don't make any images while frozen and all will be well.

[eniqmah]

Actually, you can image while frozen, you can restore the image and any/all snapshots in that image could be frozen. You just can't restore it unless you're in a thawed state.

[Long View]

I appreciate that you are doing this for test purposes but have you thought of a
significant reason why anyone would want to make an image of a frozen system ? Ask Faronics and they will advise against. Returnil also say that protection should be turned off. For the same reason that I only make full images - to keep things simple - I would only want to make images of thawed or unfrozen systems.

Have you tried Returnil yet ? Personally I like to run in a permanent freeze state but Returnil has a couple of advantages - one being the ability to Freeze a snapshot for a session only.

[eniqmah]

There's only 1 reason to image a frozen partition: laziness. You have your system partition set up with 1 frozen snapshot which you use daily + any other snapshots and you just wanna image that partition for the quickest recovery.
Without FD-ISR, I wouldn't image a frozen partition, it wouldn't work. It doesn't take much work to [use in freeze mode>thaw>image>restore>freeze>use in freeze mode]...but then it takes LESS work to [image in freeze mode>restore>use in freeze mode]
Haven't tried returnil, don't really want to... I wanna make Deepfreeze work for its money first.

[ErikAlbert]

Due to my troubles with SP activation, SP is installed in the wrong snapshot : my frozen on-line snapshot.
So I do my backups in a frozen snapshot all the time without troubles, except one : the numbering of backup files, that's all.
I restored many of these images already without troubles.

If I re-freeze my on-line snapshot, the numbering of backups is OK, but I usually forget this.

SP was supposed to be installed in my off-line snapshot, that is not frozen, but I can't activate SP, because I can't go on-line, there is no protection, except a disabled internet connection.
Even when there was protection, I can't activate SP either, because you can't install SP twice on the same computer or another snapshot.

If SP's activation ever causes a problem again during the re-installation from scratch in September, I'm going to ditch it.

[kennyboy]

{QUOTE->
Even when there was protection, I can't activate SP either, because you can't install SP twice on the same computer or another snapshot.

If SP's activation ever causes a problem again during the re-installation from scratch in September, I'm going to ditch it. <-QUOTE}

They appear to have taken the view that it is worth losing sales to the general public due to the activation issues, rather than losing business due to piracy. I am one who can not afford to pay that sort of money for software, and then have problems activating due to numerous installs.
On one hand I feel it to be unfair to genuine customers, but on the other, it may make more commercial sense. Be interesting to know just how many "pirates" actually end up buying the software because of the activation. Not sure it would be that many.
The other reason for them limiting their sales with activation issues seems to be their inability to provide support to the less knowledgable masses. They may have a point there, but in the long term I'm not so sure it is a sound policy.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> They appear to have taken the view that it is worth losing sales to the general public due to the activation issues, rather than losing business due to piracy. I am one who can not afford to pay that sort of money for software, and then have problems activating due to numerous installs.
On one hand I feel it to be unfair to genuine customers, but on the other, it may make more commercial sense. Be interesting to know just how many "pirates" actually end up buying the software because of the activation. Not sure it would be that many.
The other reason for them limiting their sales with activation issues seems to be their inability to provide support to the less knowledgable masses. They may have a point there, but in the long term I'm not so sure it is a sound policy. <-QUOTE}

It's not the "inability" to provide support. But would you do something know will lose you money. I suspect not. Activation is a real pain, but it's not just with SP, but with many top programs. Just a fact of life.

Erik. If I were you, I'd just wait until your ready to do a new installation and then contact them. Like it or not, it's something you will face more and more with top software. Problem is the piracy.

[kennyboy]

{QUOTE-> It's not the "inability" to provide support. But would you do something know will lose you money. I suspect not. Activation is a real pain, but it's not just with SP, but with many top programs. Just a fact of life.

<-QUOTE}

Peter. By "inability" I meant they do not feel able to justify a level of support to everyone who might use the program. It would mean increasing their support staff quite a lot I imagine. I think they themselves have admitted that this is their view.
No of course I would not do something knowing I would lose money. 2 Points though.

1. Do they KNOW they would lose money? If their support documentation is adequate, and they have made the program as user friendly as possible,they might be pleasantly surprised at how the average user might get on.

2. I think by pricing the software so high, and causing concerns over the activation, they will lose a LOT of sales to people like myself, who, although not being completely happy with the alternatives eg. ATI, Paragon, are able to do with minimal or zero support.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Peter. By "inability" I meant they do not feel able to justify a level of support to everyone who might use the program. It would mean increasing their support staff quite a lot I imagine. I think they themselves have admitted that this is their view.
No of course I would not do something knowing I would lose money. 2 Points though.

1. Do they KNOW they would lose money? If their support documentation is adequate, and they have made the program as user friendly as possible,they might be pleasantly surprised at how the average user might get on.

2. I think by pricing the software so high, and causing concerns over the activation, they will lose a LOT of sales to people like myself, who, although not being completely happy with the alternatives eg. ATI, Paragon, are able to do with minimal or zero support. <-QUOTE}


On 1. Follow the Acronis Forum. That is enough of an answer for me.

2. Depends on their business model. Again a bit of math. Their main target model is enterprises using the IT edition. That is $3500/YEAR. So say there policies as you outline costs the sales to 100 wilders users. Thats a flat $7000 period. I do understand that reasoning. In my business, I have about 130 clients and I charge of my service on a rate per service charge and my clients are fine with it. Periodically I'll get a call from someone who wants to use me but wants to have a flat monthly few(which typically is lower than what I charge). I just apologize and say I don't work that way. I usually hear "gee if you did, I could bring you 10 people" I just flat am not interested due to the problems involved. I simply don't care about that business, as to me it's more trouble than it's worth.

That's why I do understand, and just have to make the decision that the product is worth it to me which in the case of ShadowProtect it is.

Pete

[EASTER]

{QUOTE-> They appear to have taken the view that it is worth losing sales to the general public due to the activation issues, rather than losing business due to piracy. I am one who can not afford to pay that sort of money for software, and then have problems activating due to numerous installs.
On one hand I feel it to be unfair to genuine customers, but on the other, it may make more commercial sense. Be interesting to know just how many "pirates" actually end up buying the software because of the activation. Not sure it would be that many.
The other reason for them limiting their sales with activation issues seems to be their inability to provide support to the less knowledgable masses. They may have a point there, but in the long term I'm not so sure it is a sound policy. <-QUOTE}

I wouldn't worry too much over ShadowProtect's restraints OR heavy costs. If you already jumped onboard with them you have to make the best of all they will afford you. Their decision doesn't encourage me to make recommendations to others and since they "NEED" to focus on Corporate interests then that's what they have to do to stay afloat these days.

I will remind everyone that ShadowProtect fortunately for most IS NOT and WILL NOT become the end all of efficient backup solutions, there WILL be others in the future.

So don't fret. Yeah it's purported to be a good program and i don't doubt that it is, but it is still a "SOFTWARE", and the program development world with even newer ideas are always going to come along eventually. :)

[Long View]

Fully agree - It is only an imaging program when all is said and done and there are numerous alternatives to consider.

[Huupi]

{QUOTE-> Fully agree - It is only an imaging program when all is said and done and there are numerous alternatives to consider. <-QUOTE}

I agree,imaging app.are just that,but a good working imaging software can be the cause for a more easy live.

[Long View]

For me imaging is an essential. Personally I have been using Acronis since version 6 without any major issues. Others have had problems with Acronis and have claimed that Paragon or ShadowProtect or Ghost or XXXX are "better".
Well I could never get Paragon to work with my systems and the cost and activation issues have put me off ShadowProtect.

In the end all that matters is that I have an imaging program that works for me -
I leave the question of which is best for others.

Combinations of Acronis, FD-ISR, DeepFreeze and or Returnil all make for an easier life BUT at the end of the day they are only programs and just like Qemm
and countless other programs will one day, probably quite soon, will be replaced by better alternatives.

[Huupi]

{QUOTE-> For me imaging is an essential. Personally I have been using Acronis since version 6 without any major issues. Others have had problems with Acronis and have claimed that Paragon or ShadowProtect or Ghost or XXXX are "better".
Well I could never get Paragon to work with my systems and the cost and activation issues have put me off ShadowProtect.

In the end all that matters is that I have an imaging program that works for me -
I leave the question of which is best for others.

Combinations of Acronis, FD-ISR, DeepFreeze and or Returnil all make for an easier life BUT at the end of the day they are only programs and just like Qemm
and countless other programs will one day, probably quite soon, will be replaced by better alternatives. <-QUOTE}

Yes that's the way of live.One day we made our appearence here on earth and sooner or later we make our dismiss,there are no exceptions.

[Rilla927]

@Eniqmah

This may be a day late and a dollar short but thanks for the info in post#10. I'm going to do this but I need a few more answers.

How is your adventure going with DF and imaging? I don't know how true this is but someone on this forum mentioned you can't resize your partition once DF is installed. Have you tried this?

[ErikAlbert]

My experience until now with this combination :

1. No off-line defragmentation with PerfectDisk possible. Smart defragmention was good.
Returnil allows off-line and smart defragmention.

2. The boot system of FDISR doesn't work normal anymore when DF = ON.
- sometimes normal,
- sometimes it shows the boot options, waits ... then automatic boot
Quite unpredictable, what you get during the next reboot.
The same mess with Returnil.

3. No issues with backup/restore so far.

4. DF will double my reboots, any change requires two reboots :
- one in thawed mode to make the change and
- one in frozen mode to freeze the change. Pffft.

I don't like it and I'm afraid it will be the same with Returnil, but I try it anyway.

[Rilla927]

In regards to #2, I'm kind of surprised since FD-ISR doesn't sit in the MBR anymore. Last I knew they had changed this.

In what order did you install the two? Did you report this issue to Faronics?

How long did you use them together?

Thanks Erik

[Peter2150]

I have returnil on 3 system and all play quite well with FDISR. No issues at all that I can see.

Pete

[Long View]

Same here - Deep Freeze and Returnil works fine now with Perfect Disk off line unlike earlier versions of Returnil.
Perhaps Erik has a virus ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

think I better hide for a while ?

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE-> Same here - Deep Freeze and Returnil works fine now with Perfect Disk off line unlike earlier versions of Returnil.
Perhaps Erik has a virus ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

think I better hide for a while ? <-QUOTE}

ROFL. I think though he is talking about FDISR, not Perfect Disk.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Same here - Deep Freeze and Returnil works fine now with Perfect Disk off line unlike earlier versions of Returnil.
Perhaps Erik has a virus ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

think I better hide for a while ? <-QUOTE}
Yeah, I can imagine how fine it is, I tried it myself.
Returnil itself and DeepFreeze itself work fine on my computer also, that's not the problem.
I have to turn them OFF, if I want to boot in another snapshot normally. I tried all combinations and 50% of them didn't work normally.
If I close my eyes for that, than everything is normal.

I don't need them. FDISR offers more possibilities than Returnil and DeepFreeze.

[EASTER]

{QUOTE-> I don't need them. FDISR offers more possibilities than Returnil and DeepFreeze. <-QUOTE}

Theres the high-spirited highly suspicious Erik
we all know who trusts unequivocally in FD-ISR over "ANY" & "ALL" others. ;D

As far as Erik's concerned, FD-ISR "IS" his DeepFreeze :)

My DeepFreeze is PARAGON DRIVE BACKUP PRO images :thumb:

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE->
My DeepFreeze is PARAGON DRIVE BACKUP PRO images :thumb: <-QUOTE}
I second that. The only thing I really trust are my clean images, created with ShadowProtect and I would say the same thing, if I was a Paragon-user.
What SP restores for me is a clean basis, that I can use to recreate FDISR's snapshots, archives and freeze storage completely.

FDISR is still good, because it has never been attacked so far. FDISR is not an interesting target for the bad guys either, because the number of users is too small. The majority of users still prefers the classical setup and that is an interesting target.
FDISR is constantly on-line, while images are stored off-line and that makes them much safer.

Working with ISR-softwares requires a total new way of working and that's a problem for many users.
For instance : when you use an ISR-software, you don't have to stop the installation of malware, like real-time shields do, because the installation of any malware is removed by the ISR-software on reboot.
What you must stop is the execution of malware, when you use an ISR-software.
The installation and the removal of malware is not a problem, the execution is THE problem.

Scanners also remove malware, unfortunately not complete. Scanner-users like to BELIEVE this, but that doesn't mean it's also true.
what about unknown malwares, missing signatures, ... only ISR-softwares can protect you against these, because they consider them as "changes".

Also keeping the "good changes" is different with ISR-softwares.
In a normal environment, you can keep the good changes at any moment, you can't do that with ISR-softwares.
If you want to keep the good changes, you have to reboot first, because that removes the possible bad stuff from your computer and then you can do the good changes.
In principle, you have to turn OFF any automatic updating, because you can't keep them between reboots, you have to do this RIGHT AFTER reboot when your computer is still malware-free and then you can freeze the good changes.
Most users don't want this discipline, they like to do things in a natural way.

[tradetime]

{QUOTE-> 2. The boot system of FDISR doesn't work normal anymore when DF = ON.
- sometimes normal,
- sometimes it shows the boot options, waits ... then automatic boot
Quite unpredictable, what you get during the next reboot.
The same mess with Returnil. <-QUOTE}
Hmn, that's quite interesting, the bit about works sometimes I mean. I tried this once with Returnil and it booted back to the same snapshot, which for my logic seemed understandable since a command has been issued in session lock, therefore that command will cease to exist upon reboot, so I'd expect to be back in the same snapshot. I simply reboot out of session lock and then boot to snapshot, lengthens the process by a few minutes, but then everything has a price, and the times when I need to move between snapshots an extra few minutes is not an issue. So for me Returnil is a keeper, so far.

[Peter2150]

{QUOTE->
FDISR is still good, because it has never been attacked so far. FDISR is not an interesting target for the bad guys either, because the number of users is too small. The majority of users still prefers the classical setup and that is an interesting target.
FDISR is constantly on-line, while images are stored off-line and that makes them much safer.

<-QUOTE}

Readers should bear in mind that FDISR is not designed to defend against attacks. It is designed to all one to recover from stuff that screws up the system, usually the user.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Readers should bear in mind that FDISR is not designed to defend against attacks. It is designed to all one to recover from stuff that screws up the system, usually the user. <-QUOTE}
Which software is designed to defend itself against attacks ? I don't know any software that is able to defend itself against attacks, not even security softwares.
The bad guys compromise any software, if they want to.

[tradetime]

{QUOTE-> Which software is designed to defend itself against attacks ? I don't know any software that is able to defend itself against attacks, not even security softwares.
The bad guys compromise any software, if they want to. <-QUOTE}
Well none of them have a gun, if that's what you mean, but there are plenty of security software that prevent their processes from being terminated. Were that not the case then no security software would be worth putting on your computer because by default all malware would simply eliminate the processes of all security software. Can they be defeated, for sure defend does not equal invincible.

[ErikAlbert]

{QUOTE-> Well none of them have a gun, if that's what you mean, but there are plenty of security software that prevent their processes from being terminated. Were that not the case then no security software would be worth putting on your computer because by default all malware would simply eliminate the processes of all security software. Can they be defeated, for sure defend does not equal invincible. <-QUOTE}
As far as I remember, some AV's were disabled by malwares in the past and didn't protect anymore.

[Huupi]

{QUOTE-> As far as I remember, some AV's were disabled by malwares in the past and didn't protect anymore. <-QUOTE}

Yes but the Vendors learn from past experiences and almost all of them has covered up their lame selfprotection.