Just when I need it - didn't happen

Hi

I have FD-ISR on win 2k v3.05 and needed it today.

Admittedly I am pretty new to it and maybe i am doing something wrong -
Went to open the computer and winnt\system32\config\system file is corrupt or missing.
That will be a sinch says me...just go back to the snapshot I did on the 4th Feb. Didn't happen. When booting through FD the same error message came up repeatedly. The only way i fixed it was though the Win2k CD repair.

Is it the way I have done my snapshot or do you know of similar incidences. Thx

 

I'll do that Peter2150 and let the group know.

If I had the probelm b4 it would not have booted the previous boot so I am shrugging my shoulders.
More later Thx

 

Another extract from the FDISR problems, yet nobody will admit It isnt all its made up to be. Regardless of who does or who doesnt have problems, the fact of the matter is this product certainly has more than enough.

 

I notice on your sig you have RollbackRx also installed which may or may not gel as expected. Even so, and assuming Rx plays no part in what you experienced the key factor in assuring 100% recovery is archiving to either another partition or more preferable another hard drive then pull it for emergency storage.

This way it doesn't matter how bad things go awry with your system, if you regularly keep those off-machine archives updated close enough by date, you can always fall back to those and completely return your system to before when you began to exhibit disturbing issues or conflicts.

I know because i virus file infected an entire 200GB HD x 3 partitions and because beforehand i exercised presence of mind to FIRST archive to another drive, i was able to 100% restore that entire drive x 3 partitions just by wiping the drive and reconstructing via those same saved archives right back to working order again.

 

DVD+R,

No program is perfect. Not FD-ISR neither Rollback RX. In fact there are ways to take down both their protection. But this does not mean that their are not pretty damn good applications.

I use them both (on the same machine) and they work fine.

p.s.1. Did you fix the ntldr problem?

p.s.2. Why do you feel the need of bashing FD-ISR around? Same goes for those that do the same with Rollback RX. If I do not like an application I do not use it. Certainly I do not go around talking bad about it...

Panagiotis

 

No amount of rhetoric or diversion be it real or imagined can never discount the absolute effectiveness that FD-ISR is proven to this customer.

When you can totally trash an entire FD-ISR system plus all it's snapshots, FD-ISR can put hunpty-dumpty back together again in 100% perfectly working order again.

I proved this first hand.

In fact FD-ISR had to come to the rescue because at the time there was no backup images to turn to for me.

And it only required forethought ahead of time to archive each snapshot to another HD for safekeeping then pull it out for safekeeping untill needed.

I completely erased and wiped the affected 200Gb drive, formatted & partitioned again with Paragon, then reinstalled windows to the same drive as well as reinstall FD-ISR again.

Then transpositioned those safeguarded FD archives right back to 100% working snapshots again which restored everything fully intact as before easily.

FD-ISR is a work of art & recovery Miracle.

Nothing will ever change that, it only requires making backup archives of snapshots to an alternate HD beforehand and then storing the archived HD away for just this type of circumstance.

Theres some small insignificant effort required or rather time to duplicate those snapshots again from their archives which for all purposes could very well be compared to backup images in any backup program IMHO.

But the bottom line is, it is a truly stable and reliable failsafe program that cannot fail when properly implimented.

EASTER

 

Easter,

You should really write a book of your experiences-"The Miracle of FDISR and the Curse of Rollback",you shouldnt have any problems filling a thousand pages or so!

If contributions are accepted,I will compose a suitable poem in allegorical form" The Triumph of Good over Evil"

All sure to be a best seller.

 

Rhetoric and the occasional dissuasion will gain no votes irregardless of any pot shots against it.

FD-ISR is been standing squarely tall on it's own merits long before it ever attracted my attention and now my complete support based on results unequalled by ANY others PERIOD.

The two don't even come close to being on equal terms in any respect

 

Please don't take it as a spelling flame. I mean this in a helpful way. I've noted many occasions that you use the psuedo-word irregardless. For me, it grates, and I find myself mentally converting it to it's proper intent, of regardless. I've thought of letting you know before, but it would have been such an injection of tangential material, that it would feel out of line. Since the subject of writing a book has come up, I just thought this might be my chance to offer it as a bit of a friendly suggestion.

Irregardless is not actually a word, but can be used occasionally in a poetic license type situation. The word is regardless. Appending the "ir" prefix actually negates its meaning, thus the reason for it's non-acceptance as a proper term.

Regardless - as far as FS-IRS goes, compared to the Rollback or EAZ-Fix type products, the usefullness to the novice or even average user negates the endorsement of the FS-IRS system. This is likely what has played a part in the demise of FS-IRS, as such a multi-featured single workstation product. On a system of anyone's, other than the more knowledgeable and sophisticated user, it's but a complex additional mess that will likely contribute to the system's failure, rather than it's salvation. The rollback system though can be installed by the novice, and then leave it to do it's job, accessing it only if necessary in the most intuitive of ways.

 

No offense taken.

It's just a pity that so many users came flooding in after it left Raxco's distribution and now is all but rests in limbo for the foreseeable future.

With that in mind, ISR's like EAZ-FIX are viable alternatives, i even finally gathered up enough courage to add it myself after repeated let downs with rollback, but surprisingly have not been disappointed in the least.

I cound my blessings now that enough noise was raised when it was at it's absolute apex in popularity & satisfaction, so much that i had no choice but to experience for myself what all the crowing was about and to my shock & surprise i realize i landed a huge lump of Gold in it.

 

Also please dont take offence about this,Easter-its all good clean fun!

In your post you had this sentence

"No amount of rhetoric or diversion be it real or imagined can never discount the absolute effectiveness that FD-ISR is proven to this customer."

This is whats called a double negative,so effectively what you are saying is;

"An amount of rhetoric or diversion be it real or imagined can discount the absolute effectiveness that FD-ISR is proven to this customer"

I thought you liked FDISR

 

Never mind those interpretations, they really have no bearing anyway.

As i already alluded to, FD-ISR (Genuine) is Legendary and will always remain that way.

And you bet your buttons i more than just like FD-ISR, it's proven a 100% rescue apparatus like none ever before nor likely after it save a backup image maybe, but you can't boot to 10 individual systems with any of them like FD-ISR affords.

A truly remarkable creation courtesy Leapfrog that won't soon be forgotten for some time to come, at least for those who made it in line before it left the building.

 

I was that Little Green Frog standing on guard with its shield and sword

Then I stood up and shouted "KERMIT!!!!!!!!" (Actually its called "Kevin") bet you never knew that huh and the rest is History

 

"Another extract from the FDISR problems, yet nobody will admit It isnt all its made up to be. Regardless of who does or who doesnt have problems, the fact of the matter is this product certainly has more than enough."

I had problems with FDISR in my early days of using it. I didn't understand what is a fairly complex program as well as I should have done, and I didn't run any tests. I just installed it onto a fairly unstable system, that had been running for almost a year and so was filled with junk at that point. When the time came to use the program in anger, it didn't work. I can't really say that it let me down, because I had no experience of the thing working, so I had no expectations of that either.

After a fresh install of XP, I decided that I'd get rigorous about it. One snapshot of a bare install. Boot and test. Works. Make an archive copy and store offline. Update with windows patches. Rinse and repeat. Install my apps. Rinse and repeat.

When I *know* I've got all of my snapshots working, I'll do a disk image, so that I can always get back to my base working snapshots. I've never had to use that, because since I started to get rigorous about my procedures, I've never had a snapshot fail, and never had to even rely on one of my offline archives, though I have used them from time to time, when I've deleted an online snapshot to save diskspace, and decided I wanted that particular snapshot back again.

Bottom line: I've used it for three or four years now without a problem, and when it comes to errors in FDISR, I'm inclined to believe that the problems lie with the operator rather than with the software itself.

 

You can say All you like about Archives or images on external drives till your blue in the face, proceedure like this are totally Unnesessary, and a complete waste of time in my opinion, all that Balony seems totally unwarrented, This is supposed to be ISR (Instant System Recovery) that is Far from instant Unless your unfamiliar with the term Instant, let me draw your attention to the meaning

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/INSTANT

Archiving or creating Backups to Disk/External Drive do not classify for the term Instant.

Also let me draw your Attention to this before you comment further

5 Installs/ 5 Attempts to boot to any snapshot other than Primary result in ANCHOR Not found or _~ Missing = Unsatisfactory

 

I concur completely.

This ISR program is been as near flawless as anything i have ever experienced since computer day 1, and when it wasn't it was easily and simply corrected, even when the entire disk & app + online archives were pulvarized by a severe distortion from a virus.

The archives when saved off machine + reinstall = 100% restoration!

Many a time it has served as my personal backup imaging program and is done an outstanding job at renewing my own confidence that a software, in this case a ISR, really can be counted on when in a real pinch and even make computing exciting and totally reliable again.

 

Absolute Bollocks! In this scenario, your accusing everyone with more than a problem or two with this product, of not knowing what the hell they're doing If you can Back that up with physical evidence then fine, If not I suggest you keep with comments like that. Some of us have Decades of experience with Computing industry, However 1 Software does not an Empire make Find me one product that does not or has not had issues with someone somewhere sometime, and I'll give you $1 Million Cash My moneys safe though cause you'll never accomplish the task I've just set you This also emphasises my statement a while back, that FD-ISR was developed for Companys running servers, NOT! Desktops, regardless of how well/bad it performs for you personally, If its working for you, then I'm pleased for you, but thats not my concern, what is bothering me is that on my systems It performs abyssmally And the question I have to ask myself, is how much, is too much? Well the answer for me is '5' times.

 

The FD-ISR Rollback war is getting ridiculous

 

What's wrong with folks who like a program stating such and helping others? Usually, when you hear about a program it is a complaint, it is refreshing to hear so many folks so enthusiastic about a program.

Acadia

 

Not exactly.

I'm sure that it's possible that there's software or hardware out there may interact poorly with it. What I am saying though, is this: if you can't get it working on a bog standard PC with a fresh install of either 2000, XP or Vista, then I'd be happy to bet you any money you like that the problem lies with the user, not with the software. If you then add your applications one at a time, you'd be able to work out precisely what it was that was breaking it.

However, your posts have made it clear that you aren't interested in putting this sort of effort in, and that's fine. But blaming the software in that context is incorrect. That inability to identify what interaction is causing the problem is user failure, not a software problem, in my opinion.

Yeah. My experience is that those people who don't take much trouble to get the detail of their written stuff correct (in respect of spelling, grammar, etc.) are similarly unlikely to get the details of software configuration right either.

I've also spent some time fixing misconfigurations that people with 'decades of experience in the computing industry' were responsible for, and the number one cause of these failures is precisely that lack of attention to detail. Because a random point and click GUI interface sort-of works 95% of the time, whether it's correct or not, most people nowadays are rarely bothered about reading manuals and following the instructions precisely as laid down. So when things don't work as expected, they invariably blame the software or the hardware, yet 9 times out of 10, my experience has been that the problem lies with the wetware.