Regarding RollBack Rx

Warning,,,,rant


There has been a lot of chatter lately from a number of individuals regarding the lack of any need for "broken software like RollBack Rx" (not my words for those who did not pick up on it) or that Rx is "junk" (again not me).

It is clear from the discussion that these individuals are quite tech savy, that is, when it comes to PCs they know their stuff. This can clearly be seen from a number of discussions that have been taking place and a good example would be the discussion regarding alternatives to Acronis True Image, https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=327200 . As can be seen in this discussion of boot disks and the merits of various approaches to these, as well as to the discussion of in depth investigations of the various imaging programs and how best to use them, that these guys are more knowledgeable than the average user. These guys know how to solve problems and protect themselves and really, thats great, but not all of us are able to do likewise.

Some of us (many/most) need a little help now again and we often will get that help from programs that are designed to make our lives easier, and frankly I find some (most) of the Rx alternative regime suggestions to be rather more complicated than I care for.

Besides, I have used Rx for 3 or 4 years without any problem at all, so why would I be interested in a more complicated solution?

So I cannot defrag my drive while Rx is installed, really, that is of little concern to me,,,,, so I periodically will have to reset the baseline or uninstall and reinstall Rx, again, not a big deal. What is a big deal is that Rx has gotten me out of nasty jams on many occasions, and it did so without me having to be a tech wizard. And I am not just talking about rolling back to before updates that have gone wrong, or a virus or other malware infection, or even about testing software, I am talking about day to day problems such as files that were wrongly saved over, or files that were completely lost due to a computer crash etc.

Here is just the latest example.

I run a spreadsheet for my business and I do this nightly. When Friday rolls around I generally get a bit lazy and wait to run the numbers on Sunday evening. Well tonight when I tried to open my file things got bad. The bloody file had somehow gotten corrupted. It simply would not open. No problem though, I simply opened the Rx consoul, and mounted the snapshot from Thursday evening as a virtual drive I then copied my data files and my spreed sheet from the virtual drive and pasted them to my C: drive, 5 min later I was good to go. All this and me not being much of a tec (and thats an understatement). No fuss, no muss, and hardly any bother at all.

What I do not understand is why my 3 or 4 years of experience with a program that has performed flawlessly is summarily tossed aside by its detractors as if my experience was not worth spit. How come their couple of weeks experience is more valuable, and more telling, than my 3 or 4 years worth.

In fact, I wonder if it could be the case that their expertise is what may have been at the bottom of their problems. No off the shelf PC for them I bet, maybe they tweaked the H of their systems, maybe they have some exotic hardware or even software that interfered with how Rx performed. I have no idea, but its possible, is it not.

Now don't get me wrong, I did learn something from their negative experience I leaned about filters and how, if you load Rx before or after IFW problems may occur. Good to know for sure (I guess), I also learnt that before you install any program that works at a low level its a VERY GOOD IDEA to create an image of your drive, JUST IN CASE. Valuable for sure. So these guys provide a valuable service to the rest of us. They alert us to potential problems that we may run into and they alert us how to possibly avoid or remedy these problems when (and if) we do run into them. But thats as far as they they should take it.

IMO its just rude to talk down to people who are less knowledgeable than you are and to suggest that folks who are using a program that has worked very well for them for years are somehow stupid and or ignorant. The fact is this program works very well and does so a very great deal of the time. Why it should have to live up to a "perfect record" standard is beyond me. No program does so why should they insist that this one should.

Very puzzling indeed.

I for one will continue to use Rx until something better comes along or until it stops working for me. Some good programs get abandoned by their creators and need to be let go, others get purchased by 3rd parties who manage to turn them in junk. I have been using a PC long enough (and lived long enough) to know nothing is forever and nothing is always and under all circumstances going to work the way you would like (or hope) it to.

Bottom line, I would suggest that if any of you out there have been put off from trying RollBack Rx because of the statements that have been made by these good folk that you think about giving it a try yourself. By all means take precautions, that just makes sense, but decide for yourself if Rx (or any other program) has a place on your PC.

Lastly I want to apologize for this rant, it is now 4:27 am local time and I have been up for more hours than I should be.

 

BG, Thanks to your encouragement last year, I installed RB and have never looked back. Once I learned how to use it I have avoided and saved myself from countless disasters. The occasional need to uninstall to defrag has become a simple routine I don't mind. I'm looking forward to V10.

 

Oh NO... not another rant by BG!

As BG knows, I am also a very happy RBrx user... and I use it in a ton of dangerous scenarios (the worst being with a HONEY POT on the internet... being attacked by everything known to man ). I have since learned most of its limitations, which of course, as Pandlouk says, are far from being explained in their product claims.

The "perfect record" claim is also puzzling to me. Almost everything I've ever tried in the form of software applications has failed to be perfect in some way. As Alladin has hopefully investigated, even the final light virtualization tool he has selected for his systems (Deep Freeze... to replace Rollback) has forums and blogs devoted to the serious breakage of that application via appropriate malware... hopefully it's been fixed by now. Even the "save all" imaging programs have one serious flaw... if the virus is in your system when it's imaged, it'll be there when you need it once again. Many of today's virii are based on sleeper cells which wake at a later time and do their damage... get one of those in your succession of backup images and you'll be doing as Alladin describes... tons of work, tons of re-installations, tons of data recovery, etc.

As Pandlouk had done, he's played/tested with many of the so called system fixer solutions and has come down to selecting what seems to work best for him. BG has done the same thing as I have... we use what's best for us in our work environment.

There is no panacea in system reconstruction... all "solutions" seem to have their particular drawbacks. Read the blogs, join the forums, listen carefully and learn... there's ton of very valuable information out here, sop it up!

And if you think a system BSOD, which may have been caused by a system RAM access fault, an overclocked system whose clock is running way above recommended speeds, a disk transfer error that makes it into the system undetected, or through a myriad of other ways is necessarily detectable and something that any OS/whatever can deal with... I happen to have in my catalog a bridge from Brooklyn.

Don't base your product decisions on CLAIMS, especially for system protectors... get the tool, try it out, read the forums/blogs, become knowledgeable on your selection. This is the only way.

And yes, I do like Rollback RX for what I do with my system... it's a great tool in my arsenal

 

I totally understand the need of a tool like RollbackRX even if you're a computer guru. I like to experiment sometimes and I'd much rather have a quick way to undo an experiment gone wrong than spending hours fixing it myself. And software upgrades do go wrong at times (I'm looking at you MS Visual Studio 2010).

Last month, Windows Update decided to apply an update at the same time our power went out for 5 seconds. Enough to totally screw up my system. RBX rolled it back and I was back in business to properly apply the patch again.

I consider such tool as an easy and fast way to fix an "oops" moment and they do happen.

 

i agree that rbrx and its clones haves flaws but only by becoming aware of them we can work around them and hopefully not get caught short. as said above NOTHING is perfect and we shouldnt put too much trust or faith in any single solution thats magically going to save us, or else we are very likely to get caught short.

rbrx or ANY program or solution cant be relied upon not to suddenly fail (including windows in all its flavours) . rbrx is simply a tool in our arsenal to hopefully make our lives easier and should only be included along with other precautions. and we shouldnt put all our hopes on it or we are ultimately destined for a fall. in a nutshell "dont put all your eggs in one basket"

Gazzer.

 

For 3 reasons:

1st. Because they claim in their website that:
"With RollBack Rx you can..
.....
Retrieve files from a crashed PC, even if Windows can not boot
.....
Day Zero Disaster Recovery with no data loss
...."

2nd. Rollback RX in difference with all other programs is a virtualization hd tool. The current data is written in invisible containers/virtual incrementals impossible for the user to find them. When it fails to work it means that your most recent data is lost with no way to recover anything (at least for the average Joe)... Even raw recovery programs have difficulties retrieving the lost files that reside inside the rbrx snapshots.

3rd. and most important is addressed as you say versus the not so experienced users. If horizondatasys does not provide a way to, at least, search the disk and load the containers/snapshots of a corrupted RBRx system or a damaged baseline, how on earth their customers will get some of their data back?

ps. Sometimes, RBrx is the one to blame for corrupted files like your spreadsheet for example. When you open a file and modify its contents the previous data that you changed get replaced with the new one. With RollbackRX the file will, in reality, simple grow in size and the new data will be placed in another part of the disk (write redirection). If the RBrx filter fails to hide the "deleted/overwriten parts" even for some of the duplicated/changed bits of the file, from the program, the file will get corrupted and the responsible for this will not be the program that created the spreadsheet but RollBack RX! And in this case RBRX will not have saved you from the corruption, as you believe, but it is the one that created the corruption and made you lose hours of work...

Panagiotis

 

what your saying all sounds good and well thought out, but lets not forget that in order for rbrx or any other program to monitor changes it needs to remain resident and active in memory to track any changes, and this clearly isnt the case. any changes will be made in will only be recorded in a new snapshot or all will be lost on the next reboot.

 

I 'm not sure I understood what you say...
Rollback RX driver is always resident and active in memory, so it always tracks any and all changes.
Examples of how the driver of RBRX works:
No snapshot in the branch = Baseline + Active snapshot = RBRX virtual disk
1 Snapshot in the branch = Baseline + 1st snapshot + Active snapshot = RBRX virtual disk
2 Snapshots in the branch = Baseline + 1st snapshot + 2nd snapshot + Active snapshot = RBRX virtual disk
N Snapshots in the branche = Baseline + 1st snapshot + 2nd snapshot +..+...+ Nnth snapshot + Active snapshot = RBRX virtual disk

The active snapshot is the snapshot that its boundaries are not yet defined (or better say that its boundaries are everything outside the baseline, the defined snapshots and the RBRX hidden file table) and this is where the write redirection occurs.
The Defrag of RBRX releases the free space from the defined snapshots and from the active one where is critical because if it does not occur you will eventually remain with no free space.

Panagiotis

 

if rollback driver is always active in memory, then why do we need to take manual snapshots or system rollback(s), surely if its always active then it would be done automatically without need for user intervention. i think your getting confused with the driver being loaded and the driver actually monitoring the system for changes and taking appropriate action. theres a big difference between the driver being loaded and sitting idle and the driver being loaded and monitoring

 

No, I'm not confused.
One is used to load the actual OS/virtual drive, that appears as your real system, one is used for the IO redirections and one is used to load/unload the previous or parallel and future snapshots as virtual drives.

The drivers of rollback rx are always active (the one that loads the OS and the one that is used for the IO redirection).

Why do you need to manually take snashots? You can configure the console to automatically take a snapshot based on time or based on events.
When you take a snapshot you simple tell RollbackRX driver to create boundaries around the currently "occupied" sectors of the active snapshot. When you run a defrag you simple tell RBRX to search inside those snapshots and inside the active one and release the sectors that do not contain any data (according to the file table stored in every snapshot).
If you don't believe what I'm saying run two simple tests:
1. put in some files of a few gb and delete them and then check the free space reported in the snapshot defragmenter, after that run a defrag and check the free space again.
2. uncheck the option to delete the oldest unlocked snapshot, and run a program that will create files filed with zeros... your system when will fill up will hang even if you delete them because RBRX will not have the time to defrag/release the free space from the current active snapshot.

Panagiotis

 

I take manual snapshots just before I install/update an app. That way if I encounter anything I don't like and I want to back out leaving no trace in the previous snapshot, I roll back to the previous snapshot as if nothing happened.

 

This claim sounds pretty similar to what is claimed for most any imaging/backup program.

In my experience this has always been the case. I agree that its possible/likely that at times this will not be the case but I would rather have a good chance of recovery (and I do) than moderate to little chance of the recovery of all my data.

There is a scavenger file/program that is available for download for these cases. I do not know much about it as I have never had to use it.

I do not know about this but I do know that lots of things can corrupt a file. Personalty I would rather have an automatic, quick snapshot program than have to create mirror versioned files. Thats the beauty of Rx, it provides an extra layer of security for me. As noted elsewhere I image weekly and I use Rx to provide an automatic series of images (sort of) between these weekly images. The hourly snaps greatly increase the likelihood of being able to recover both your data and system in the event of a problem. Yes, this could be accomplished with other approaches but these approaches for the most part will require multiple programs and will take up a lot more time to set up and space than Rx snaps.

Clearly Rx is not for everyone. Some will prefer to protect their PCs differently (or not at all) but to say the program has no value is simply wrong.

Just out of curiosity pandlouk could I trouble you to detail how you protect your system against problems? Also, how do you assure yourself that regardless of the circumstance you will never loose any data? I am not trying to be provocative here, I know you are very knowledgeable and I am curious how you would accomplish this. Thanks

 

Yes, you are not only being provocative here, but also being feverish here. The OP is testimony to this.

Have you heard the old adage, "One man's trash is another man's treasure". So, for some people it might have no value at all. Period!

Rollback Rx is not for everyone, neither everyone should be forced to use it. There are people who might like Rollback Rx and they are people who might had nightmares with Rollback Rx.

When Rollback Rx trashes one's system, it renders the system useless which can be very daunting for a noob, because they have bought the Rollback Rx as protection for their system being not trashed. It suppose to PROTECT and not to TRASH.

Of course, if they haven't bought Rollback Rx and the system is trashed, it is still daunting for a noob, but they haven't paid for a ridiculous program which is supposed to protect them.

BTW, NO IMAGING PROGRAM TRASHES THE SYSTEM.

The diehards of Rollback Rx are always trashing CTM, and giddily pointing out that how many systems CTM has trashed. They will tell you to just look over their forum. They forget CTM is for FREE and lots of people use it until their system is trashed, so they are lots of complain about it. And, when these people complain in the CTM forum, their complains are accepted.

Where as, Rollback Rx cost around $100 per machine, so not very many people use it until their system is trashed. When it happens to these unfortunate users, and they post in HDS forum, then the fangs are out. Even if people post in other forum's like Wilders', then the gang pounce on these unfortunates with their fangs out.

I not only had problems with the wrong version given to me by HDS, but I had my system rendered useless with the right version too, as many have testified to this in the past and many will do so in the future too!

Dear Barry, I believe that you need to clam down and use Rollback Rx to your heart's content. If others don't want to use it, and they had nightmares with it, then please don't force it down their throat. And, you are entitled to give your opinion to any new users, so they are too.

BTW, also look into the recent example of HDS and MagiCure. And, then look into Agency Laws, while at the same time look into the ethics of the company, which sells the product.

Best regards,

 

Are you saying that if you have Firefox v13.0 installed and then you install Firefox v13.1 on top of it then the changes will be lost on next reboot if you don't take a new snapshot right after it before reboot?

No, the changes won't be lost if you reboot without taking a new snapshot, and this is what Panagiotis is trying to explain it to you. You think that the last snapshot is the one which you have taken is last, but it is not the last, as there is a snapshot sitting there which is an Active Snapshot and has the updated Firefox v13.1 in it. But you have not given a name to it. Once you give a name to it, it becomes your last snapshot, but then again Rollback Rx creates another Active Snapshot, so again it is not your last snapshot.

Panagiotis is a very experienced user and there is no confusion in his mind. In fact, we have learned quite a lot from him.

 

iam only saying that it wont be contained in a snapshot unless you had previously taken a snapshot containing it and that rollback no matter how well configured is going to save u from file deletion or other probs 100% of the time, and that ppl shouldnt rely on it to save them 100% of the time. it should only be considered as part of an overall strategy.

 

No, I asked a civil question, thats all, also, I am not trying to force anyone to do anything, I am trying to counter your feverish attacks on Rx, thats all. In fact, if you look at my previous posts, I did say what you just said, that Rx is not for everyone. I also said that folks should not allow the statements of a number of detractors to prevent them from trying Rx and then deciding for themselves if it has any value.

Apart from your issues with the older version of RX I see no proof that Rx itself and on its own trashes a system. Or did I miss the presentation of this proof?

What has this got to do with anything. The complaint was with the claim by Horizons marketing that the program will enable the restoration of the system without data loss. The issue is with this claim, not with anything else. Further, in my experience this claim has been proven to be the case, at least so far. I know that no program works all the time however and well before your experience with Rx I was advising folks not to consider Rx as all that is nec to protect their systems. I have always advised they image frequently. Your experience has given me a 2nd reason to advise this (the first reason is because in the event of HD failure Rx will not be of any use).

I have never used CTM and I have never commented on it but I am grateful to someone who points the shortcomings of a program out to me, especially before I trial it. In this sense I am grateful to you and others who have pointed out a number of shortcoming in Rx, my issue with you is that you have gone well beyond pointing out shortcoming to trashing the program completely. You do not suggest that people should be cautious when testing Rx because of A & B, rather you state that RX is junk and that is should be avoided at all costs.

In addition the fact CTM is free has no bearing on if Rx has value or not. In addition no one is rejecting complaints about Rx, what is being objected to is the statements about Rx not only being junk but that is a hazard/danger to your system.

The complaints about Rx are very valuable IMO. For example, I was not aware that rootkits could circumvent Rx, I was also not aware that SD was able to protect against this, your complaint about Rx made me aware of this and I embrace the complaint. So now, I use SD as well as Rx when I am doing certain things, like opening suspicious e-mails. In addition your experience with being sent the link to the previous version of Rx rather than the current version prompted a number of Rx users to advise potential new users of Rx to be sure that they were downloading the current version,,,,again this complaint was embraced and we are the better for it.

When you posted your complaints over on the Rx forum there were no 'fangs' as you say, I distinctly remember Froggie and others trying to help you. The fact that these individuals may disagree with your conclusions about the cause of the problem does not constitute an attack.

I was not aware (or possibly have forgotten) about of this, could I trouble you to direct me to the posts you made regarding this?

Actually I am being quite calm and I def am not trying to force anything down anyones throat.

If Horizon is breaking any laws then the proper authorities should be alerted and the issue will be dealt with.

 

No it's not. imaging or backup recover files from the backup they not retrieving it on the disk.

Good for you. this means that RBRx works flawlessly on your system... but as you know programs almost always contain bugs and to the unfortunate owns that encounter one of RBRX or a conflict with another program will mean that they'll lose everything and they won't know it until it is too late.

There was, but you had to specifically request it from the support and it did not work on versions 8.1 and later. This tool should be included as a free download on the account of every RBRX customer without having to contact support, or better yet should be included in the RBRX distribution zip.

Windows SystemRestore accomplish it with ease, Roxio backontrack suite does it too...Both take no time to configure and the space occupied by the RBRX snaps are not much smaller than SystemRestore snapshots

Never said that has no value. I only said that they should either keep their promise or at least provide the user the ability to recover their files when things go south. The people that are angry are not because they lost their OS but because they lost their important files.
They should either provide the scavanger tool to all customers so that they can prepare a recovery enviroment "just in case" or they should include the ability to create an "Immune Space" (a feature that I requested directly to the developer in 2007 and I'm sure I was not the first one to ask for it). Why they included it only in the drive vaccine 9.x and not in RollbackRX 9.x is a mystery to me...

Sure.
First, I use to image my pc once a month after a defrag and create a differential of that image every one or two weeks (when I change something important or update my programs).
Second never update right away to newer versions of the programs but wait at least a few days, better let the others encounter the major bugs of the newer versions... at least on the machines that i do not want to encounter problems.
Last but not least, I always put my important data on another partition and not where the OS is installed and every now and then I update a backup to my external disks (for this I use xyplorer, the backup option of it).
For everything imaging, ISR, and backup windows 7 OS tools are more than enough... If a user want to buy other tools he should expect from that tools to be better and at least as reliable as those of the OS.

Panagiotis

 

Thank you for your reply Panagiotis, most appreciated. I am currently still using XP so the system restore in 7 will do me no good. I am hoping Windows 8 is released before I need to upgrade my PC.

May I ask how reliable system restore is on 7? I remember having problems with system restore points in the past. This was a long time ago and I remedied the problem by not using SR and imaging frequently instead. I still image frequently but have not had occasion to have to restore an image since I began using Rx.

 

Mr. Barry Goodman,

I don't have to provide you with any proof. Like I said, the OP is not rant, but rather it is feverish, disguised as rant and clouding your judgement.

However, to let the others know how bad Rollback Rx and the providers of the Rollback Rx, I will reiterate the problems I had. Also, showing how buggy the programs is:

1. They sent with my purchase to download Rollback Rx which was an older version which didn't work with SSDs. The version I tested before the my purchase, worked with SSDs. This destroyed all my three computers which the effects I am still suffering with.

a. Windows Restore Environment still don't work on all three computers.

b. Task Scheduler which is giving me a lots of headaches with corrupt registry entries on all three computers.

c. System Restore Points which were turned off by Rollback Rx, they don't work any more on all three computers. Now, I am not able to use "System Restore" on all three computers. See attached image.

Note: The makers of Rollback Rx still have not apologized to me for this, let alone compensate me. This doesn't speak very well for them.

2. Rollback Rx has an option on installation which is supposed to check for the recent version. Every time, I checked this option on installation it came back and reported that I have the recent version, even though I didn't have the recent version.

3. Supposedly the activation issue was taken care. I had to install and uninstall umpteen times during this mess and had to contact Gold Support for which I paid over $40 for one year. By then they were sick of me. Another bug in the program, which some user has now found the solution. When Froggie suggested that I am using the wrong version, I corrected this, but however I had activation issues for days after that, until they refunded my money.

4. Even after installing the correct version, I had system rendered useless. What can I do then, provide Mr. Barry Goodman with some proof.

You seems to be very feverish with this issue, and this is clouding your judgement.

Best regards,

 

KOR, if you are still having problems with your PCs why do you not simply format your drives or restore from one of the images you created prior to your problems with Rx? You could do an image before this so that you could recover any files that may have been created since the image.

EDIT: just wondering, is it possible that the problems you had with the correct version of RX were due to the problems you had previously with the incorrect version? It seems reasonable that there may have been something left from this period that caused problems with the current version of the program as well as is causing your current problems. I would suggest a reformat of the drives and a clean installation of Windows, then restore your last, pre Rx image as a probable solution.

 

Dear Barry,

To format my three computers will take days to bring them back to the status I have them on. All of them have Windows 7 on them with lots of software and lots of customization.

When I purchased Rollback Rx for my three computers with SSDs, I tried Rollback Rx as a trial until the trial was over. I didn't encounter any problem so I purchased three licenses. When I got the link with the purchase I made, I made images of all three computers and installed Rollback Rx on them from the link.

After day or two, one of the computer trashed. So, I used the image to restore it and updated what I have lost in those days. Not suspecting Rollback Rx being the culprit, I re-imaged and installed Rollback Rx. I thought I had some virus on it. Again, day or two later another computer crashed or the same one, I did the same again. I was spending 14 hours a day on these computers for about a month, until I posted my problem on the forum, and Froggie pointed out that I might be using the old version which doesn't work with SSDs.

By the time I discovered all my problems, I was only left with corrupt images.

Best regards,

Mohamed

 

I am sorry to hear this Mohamed, clearly a case of Murphys Law at work. I honestly wish there was something I could do to help.

 

Wish HDS the maker of Rollback Rx, at least apologize for this mess, let alone compensate me, somehow!

However, many thanks for your kind sympathies and understanding!

Best regards,

 

I have all along felt that what happened to you with the link to the incorrect version of the program is intolerable and I hope that the incompetent person responsible for this gross error has been severely dealt with.

I do agree that at a min Horizon should apologize to you, the refund of your purchase price is good but by itself is IMO inadequate. Yes, at a min an apology is in order.

 

1. Another beef that I had with Golden Support and I recorded this on HDS forum, is that I bought the Rollback Rx from Oman, with a USA credit card and USA address. When it is midday in California, it is midnight in Oman. So the Golden Support instead of calling me in Oman, they were calling my in-laws in USA, even though the Golden Support which I paid $40 per year was logging my support tickets from my IP address in Oman.

I even told them please not to call my in-laws in USA as I am not there but in Oman. I was getting some not nice phone calls from my in-laws during this time as they were becoming irritated with these phone calls.

2. I purchased family license for Total Uninstall for one year during August last year for a hefty price. After few months, on uninstalling any software, it started to give, "catastrophic error". I gave up on it and purchased Revo Uninstaller PRO. Two months ago, upgraded v6 came out. I couldn't activate the software as it kept on giving error, "trying to activate from Oman, though bought in USA". So, I contacted the developer about activation. Then told him that that program is not working. After both of us spending days, he figured out that the "Task Scheduler" was not working due to corrupt registry entries. The software one year free update is over in one month or so.

3. I don't know what else is wrong with my all computers, everyday I am finding out something anew.

Best regards,