RollBack has crashed!!!

I am probably the least knowledgeable person in this forum. However, my experience with RRX goes back to Ver 7. I used 7-9 without major problems. That all changed with Windows 8 and RRX 10.
My problem was RRX corrupted my MBR making my computer un-bootable. I lost everything.
I understand RRX needs to modify the MBR so it can load prior to the OS (incase the OS will not load). Well, I have never had the OS not load but I have had my computer not boot 2X due to my MBR being corrupted by RRX.
OK, here is where my inexperience shows….
Why not eliminate the practice of making RRX load before Windows so no modifications of the MBR are needed (seems to be the root of all trouble). Then use DX6 to make backups. You will get snapshots and an image backup.
This would allow me to make and use snapshots using RRX for any reason other than an unbootable computer. In the case of an un-bootable computer, I restore the whole system via DX6 via a USB recovery media drive.
Wouldn’t this eliminate much of the unreliability of RRX and still give me the option of using snapshots and complete backups?

Sounds too simple to me.

 

http://www.horizondatasys.com/files/downloads/utility/scavenger20130930v102.iso

Google is your friend...

Cheers
manolito

 

It's not inexperience, MB... both Windows and the private file structure of RBrx are difficult for most people to understand, even me. I understand the concept, I sure don't understand the underpinnings of how it's done.

It's not just the MBR failures that cause some of these accidents. After my first RBrx MBR accident (I screwed up the MBR, not RBrx), I then understood how it was making its way to its private disk surface protection area (snap data and the database that controls access to it). After that failure, I would make a copy of the RBrx special MBR on a given system and squirrel it away. When the MBR got blown the next time, I just replaced the blown MBR with the one that belongs to RBrx and all took off just fine. Most people don't even know how to go about something like this... I forced myself to learn.

The other major failure area is things being done to the protected volume that run through an OS (or other mechanism) that isn't the protected OS. This is way worse than MBR corruption. NCP's most recent experience is one of these.

It's the nature of the beast. RBrx uses all non-standard methods to keep track of the snapshot data (which is hidden from Windows) and when these mechanisms go awry (for a number of reasons), you're dead in the water.

As far as the new DC6 SNAPSHOT PROTECTION is concerned, it looks like nothing more than a standard RAW image of that disk UP TO THE END of the Windows file structure used data blocks or RBrx snapshot data blocks, whichever occurs last on the disk. This is not Rocket Science technology in any way. Many RBrx users are already doing RAW imaging of RBrx protected volumes (COLD) and having no problem whatsoever if a restoration is needed. The issue is that the volume is usually much larger than the used data, causing the imaging tool to produce a large image... if you have the room, it's not a problem. The big key for DCv6 is it can find out from RBrx where the info stops (this info was made available in the Nov. 2014 release of RBrx), COLD RAW imagers cannot. The other issue being DCv6 can do the RAW imaging in HOT mode just like IFW and the PhyLock driver used to be able to do before v2.78. DCv6 knows how to image around the special RBrx disk driver to get access to all the disk blocks... maybe even using a standard Windows API (I don't know).

Anyway, to try and summarize... RBrx needs a major design change to accomplish what you would like to do, and DCv6 is nothing more than a BandAid for existing RBrx users to get them out of HOT WATER, nothing more. We would all love to see this vulnerable snapshot mechanism change, but I'm not sure it ever will.

 

Not me, that's for sure...

This snapshot mechanism makes RBrx so fast, and it makes it possible to move around freely among your snapshots. Other snapshot mechanisms which use "True Write" technology (as opposed to Virtual Write) do not depend on a kernel driver which loads before Windows, and they do not need to modify the MBR. But with these technologies (used by RestoreIT, Toolwiz Time Machine or SysRestore) you will always lose all snapshots taken at a later point in time after restoring an earlier snapshot. And this method is slower. I prefer the way RBrx does it...


Cheers
manolito

 

It certainly is a recovery solution as long as it works, but it certainly is NOT a backup solution which can save your behind in case of a disaster...
But for what it does (fast switching between different snapshots) it is second to none. Period.

Cheers
manolito

 

Manolito... how do you BACKUP your system?

 

A recovery solution that when fails, the user cannot recover anything, is not a solution but a problem itself.

As for fast switching betweeen snapshots is second to InstantRecovery. Period.

Panagiotis

 

While many users can't recover their data, quite a few more actually have salvaged snapshots from the Scavenger Tool; so not sure how this is a problem, especially since Drive Cloner will soon make image files of your drive including snapshots.

 

I have said this a couple of times already:
The use of Rollback RX has not changed my backup routine at all. I do hot imaging using Acronis (or Aomei sometimes). For RBrx 9.1 this is all, for RBrx 10.x I have a backup of my MBR made with BootICE. So far this combination never failed to restore any image backup.


Cheers
manolito

 

I absolutely refuse to deal with a company which requests all kinds of personal information before even giving me a price quote. This would be illegal in Germany.


Cheers
manolito

 

As long as HorizonDatasys keeps advertising RollBackRX as the holy grail of recovery, but does not give an advice/warning like e.g.
"Don't put any important data on RollBackRX protected area unless you frequently BackUp it!"
for me is a problem. And is a problem because users install it, trust it and then regret it, bigtime.
What you guys do is bad marketing; an angry customer that has lost 2 years of memories photos/videos/etc. is more "loud" in the net than 100 happy customers.
A simple warning like the above in the program itself or even in the bootscreen would have eliminated all the complaints.

Panagiotis

 

Of course it does
http://www.raxco.com/home/products/instantrecovery
My signature is from last year (they only sold it as a business program at the time).

Panagiotis

 

as a result of reading all the negativity about rollback rx, I had my paid version uninstalled out of fear of a crash and problems. Do not get me wrong, rollback rx is a great app and was excellent and fast at snapshoting and reverting, but these major problems has me scared to use.

 

Your data will thank you one day, if it could. The only other option would be to re-install RBRX and roll with real, genuine, true backups. Individual file or sector-by-sector imaging; based around your needs for when RBRX breaks.

I'm not anti-RBRX, I think the concept is cool. And when it works it works well. All the people I personally know whom use RBRX have some sort of recovery plan in place outside of RBRX. A completely independent solution.

I mean like it's ok to use RBRX, just don't depend on it. You needs something else going.

HDS needs to state clearly and upfront that RBRX is not a backup solution and that one is required.

 

When I googled for InstantRecovery, I got the URL without the "home" in it. And the page looks like this:





I just downloaded the trial version and I will play with it a little bit...


Cheers
manolito

 

RollBack Rx is a snapshot program, wholly unique. It's not a back up solution, and if you'd like one we offer software (Drive Cloner) that does that. I won't however say it's required, because that's a decision in the hands of the customer.

 

Your own website says Rollback is basically all you need to keep your computer running smoothly, regardless of what happens via software (not hardware faults). Even your own video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxiW4iqnL4k) is ridiculously promoting RollBack Rx in an "all you need" software with one guy even saying "regardless of what happens to your computer, you've got the ability now to back out of that with one reboot".

If you haven't got a backup and your hard drive dies then its tough **** but you don't expect Rollback (the safety net) to kick the user ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ when it causes the bloody fault in the first place.

 

If anything happens within Windows then RollBack Rx is not affected. If something changes or attacks RollBack outside of Windows, then there are issues. Most times it's Windows who changes the infrastructure around RollBack Rx, and this causes most issues. If you can, contact Microsoft and ask them to give us all a heads up, or a beta of their upcoming Windows Updates as that would be extremely helpful for us!

Sadly, that's not reality, and like any company, any program, if you aren't fully aware of what Windows will do to your computer, or our program, and you install that update, well what can we do? We have a support network of people who test these updates, and they will tell you if it's good to go, it's that most people don't really care to wait, or don't know we offer that support.

At the end of the day this is a small minority of our customers. Most of our clients use SCCM to ensure none of their systems are affected. You can argue you don't need an SCCM, but the idea exists, you should wait to see what an update will do. Not just change the settings to automatically install Windows Updates and hope for the best. That's not our fault, that's someone who thinks they know better and later blames us when the product fails

 

With professional respect. I cannot sanction such a statement. A backup *is* required more than ever when you're using RBRX. The way I see it, unfortunately, is that HDS is steering people AWAY from proper backups with RBRX marketing.

 

Like I've said on Wilders here, I have my OS on a SSD while my data is on a seperate standard 2 TB HDD. I haven't had RollBack Rx crash on me, but if it ever did my data is intact.
Even if you didn't do that, you could wait for Drive Cloner Version 6.
You could also keep an eye open on how Windows Updates affects our programs. WU are the primary cause of issues for RollBack Rx failing. You can even install RollBack Rx Home on a VM and apply updates as a 'test' to see how it affects it.

That's three solutions I see, and only one of them requires purchasing additional software. Only one of those is related to backing up. There's a lot of options, and not all of them require backing up. It's not required to back up, if you know what your options are.

 

That's part of the problem. Not everyone knows what their options are. HDS' marketing creates the illusion that backups aren't required. And HDS' marketing doesn't mention having to test MS-issued updates before applying them.

The class of people that RBRX is marketed to aren't going to be going into detail testing Windows Updates and all that. It's easy, and sometimes fun for us tech people to do so, but not the non-tech person. These people will rely (rightfully so) on Windows Update to get it right. And if WU makes a serious mistake it gets plastered all over the blogosphere and MS fixes the problem.

But WU damaging RBRX? MS or HDS woudn't be able to fix the resulting mess.

It is the responsibility of all software developers to operate within the framework that the host operating system provides, following its conventions and limitations.

Again with respect, asking users to check WU compatibility with RBRX is plain B-S. This is not a customer's job. Nor is it to tell MS that they have to check with HDS.

 

An overwhelming majority of our customers are educational/corporate. Many of them actually enough employ the option of a multi-partition system, and use SCCM or something similar to manually test and deploy updates. So I don't know if it's marketing, when it's only a minority of customers who aren't aware of this. In fact, I have a couple customers who are IT Admin's in their 60's and they safely employ and monitor their updates, and are prepared for the oft chance it fails.

You touch on one of the biggest drawbacks to Windows is the updates. No developer knows how an update will affect their program, and you can tell companies it's their responsibility to prepare for otherwise, but how? How can any company know what an update will do? I don't move into a neighbourhood until researching what it's like, I don't eat a new food unless I know what's in it, so why would I update my computer if I don't know how it'll affect my systems and it's software?

And we do operate with that, but if Windows decides to change the framework then we have to adapt, and if in that interim people decide they are impatient or know better, and decide to proceed with an update and it botches their system then how is it our fault? We make those resources available, even for those who don't know to look for it, we answer support calls, chats, and emails about this. At a certain point, we aren't going to hold your hand, if you can't be bothered to do research on an update then what do you expect? Do you expect HDS to magically remove that update from your computer? Do you expect Microsoft to tell you that this update doesn't work with RollBack Rx? You're starting to come across as someone who's shifting the blame here. Yes, Microsoft releases updates, and we evaluate them and change our program if we need to, but if you don't heed our advice or do the research then that lands solely on the end user, especially if they decide to change the settings back to automatic install after RollBack Rx changes the installation settings to manual

 

Keatah has it exactly correct, all HDS would have to do is recommend that the user be sure to a: check with HDS before updating Windows, b: use an imaging program to protect their systems and data from problems that Rx cannot protect against. G^$ forbid they in anyway suggest that Rx is not the be all and end all, that it cannot protect against any conceivable event. I guess thats asking too much. I bet however this will be shouted from the roof tops when DC6 is finally released, after all, that will be a selling point for DC6 which otherwise would just be another imaging program. The main selling point of DC6 is its (eventual) ability to protect the user from Rx, other than that its nothing special. Great synergy between the 2 products eh! and now 2 programs sold instead of one. HDS is more concerned with sales that the customer.

 

What has that got to do with anything. All your customers deserve to be protected, the corporate customers will have an IT dept in place who see beyond the marketing hype. Its the poor single license user that is left by the wayside. An easy situation to fix (as per my post above) but HDS apparently does not consider these individuals important enough to bother about.

How about instead of defending HDS you get the marketing dept to make it clear as to what an Rx user needs to do to be fully protected. At least get it put into the users guide. Until HDS does this all you are doing is spewing smoke.