Thanks for confirming guys. So it seems that the issue is specific to RB v10.2. I'll submit a support ticket at HDS since no-one seems to be responding to this issue on their forums. For those of you that are still interested, I'll let you all know how it goes. Cheers EDIT: Just a heads up for those still willing to play with fire. HDS have released a new build dated 19/08/2013. For some strange reason they've kept the build number the same. Hopefully it wont cause confusion. Sometimes you just got to wonder... Below is the changed files of the new build compared to the original release. A lot of changes indeed! Newer build is on the left Below is the changed files from the one I've been playing with compared to the build released on the 19/08/2013. Probably some fine tweaking before release Newer build is on the left
Dear Carfal, When I was testing Rollback Rx v9, before my purchase I had the same problem with O&O DiskImage and Jetico BestCrypt. it took me a long time to realize that Rollback Rx was the culprit and then again about a month testing to realize that the above two programs were conflicting with Rollback Rx. Before my purchase I brought this to HDS attention. Jacob's answer on their forum was not to use these programs with Rollback Rx. Anyhow, I found the answer, a simple registry fix and it did the trick. When Barry (bgoodman4) was having problem with his new machine with Windows 7, I thought he had the similar problem but with another program conflicting. However, Pandlouk narrowed it down for him that it might be the failing bad drive. That turned out to be the problem for Barry. Best regards, Mohamed
Aladdin. I'm very interested in HDS's response to this latest MBR issue when restoring images with other programs. We should lay bets on what the response will be. Seriously though, besides the MBR issue there is still the issue of some corruptions detect by chkdsk. So no matter what, HDS are going to have to look into it.
Hi Carfal, I had serious hard disk corruption. Every time, I booted or restarted the the computer, the computer went into tizzy, and went into chkdsk before loading Windows, finding all kind of corruptions, bad and orphaned files. This is remembering from memory, which happened about 16 months ago. When Barry had a similar problem about 4+ months ago, I had Pandlock to test Rollback Rx in virtual environment with O&O DiskImage and he confirmed the results. Best regards, Mohamed
Aladdin. HDS had to rewrite the code for RB v10.x from scratch so whatever the issues were with previous versions they're probably going to have to be put aside and it would be best to start afresh with their newest build. Even though that kind of info would be useful for those of you who are still using older versions of RB i think that it's best if we stick with issues that relate to the new code of the current version of RB otherwise it could become quite confusing very quickly. Of coarse if anybody wants to hash out issues with previous versions it's probably more useful to start their own thread stating the version they wish to discuss as this thread relates to RB v10.2. Does that sound fair?
At some point, it becomes dangerous just trying to keep up because all the versions have the same build number. I don't know how they keep track of all this activity internally, but I can see potential accidents if they keep using the same build number everytime.
I do recall an earlier post by Isso where he said that he was going to implement restoring a standard MBR. Looks like it didn't happen yet... Whatever, using some external tool to rebuild a standard MBR before rebooting seems like a good idea. So far I have been using a command line tool called 'MBRFix'. It lets you backup your MBR and Partition Table to a file and restore it from a console prompt. I have copied it to my AX64 recovery USB stick, and it works for me. Unfortunately this utility is not developped any more, and it does not support GPT drives. So far this does not concern me yet (no GPT drives), but if anyone knows a utility which can backup and restore the MBR (or the GPT) plus the partition table, please let me know... Cheers manolito //EDIT Just noticed that the latest version of MBR Wizard (free CLI version) has preliminary GPT support. Cool...
Manolito... BootICE is a tool that does what you state and the latest release (August 10 2013) seems to support GPT style disks as well. Users must remember though that attempting to change the MBR while running Windows under RollbackRX's control will NOT SUCCEED. It will not fail but RollbackRX will protect its MBR and not allow it to be written... basically a BLACK HOLE for the modifying application. This type of operation must be done from an external OS (WinPE, WinRE, Linux, BartPE, etc.) on the disk in question prior to your operation discussed above.
Thanks Froggy for directing me to BOOTICE, but this tool is not doing what I want it to do. You can backup the MBR, but then for each partition on your HDD you have to backup the PBR separately. What I need is a tool which backs up the MBR (or GPT) plus the whole partition table (covering all partitions on this drive) to one single file. And it would be nice if restoring from this file worked from a command prompt (because as you mentioned I must be done from an external OS). Cheers manolito
Manolito... the MBR contains the entire drive's partition table, it's no where else. The PBR is the partition BOOT record and contains no partition table information, it's only used if that particular partition is the ACTIVE BOOT partition. Norrmally the PBR is in fine shape but one of the TDL4 rootkit variants uses the PBR to install it's baddies... that's why it's nice to have a copy. Normally the MBR looks into its partiton table and then vectors to the ACTIVE partition in that table... the place it vectors to is the PBR which looks for BOOTMGR or NTLDR depending on the Windows edition that's installed.
A comment on this thread... and RollbackRX v10.x in general. As a FORUM member over on the HDS Forums, I also have received a FREE registration code for v10.2. But after reading what's going on over there and what's being spoken of here, I am convinced that all the current "general" users of this package are clearly the guinea pigs for HDS' Beta (alpha?) effort on this new version. They speak of corporate customers being the trial testbed for this version... but what I've seen since the introduction of v10 is corporate customers providing only a single common configuration for HDS to verify their release with. If many corporate customers, possibly many configurations... probably not. As soon as this release hit the general user community, all havoc broke loose. Tons of different users, tons of different configuration problems... I can't believe how many different problems I've seen users having with this product. Clearly the general "paying" user is ALPHA testing this product... a sad situation ar best. I will not even be trying the FREE product registration until all this dust settles... and that I s'pect will be pretty far off based on what I've seen. HDS' Development Team needs some serious tutoring when it comes to testing and verification. Here they are changing versions willy nilly based on user experiences and they aren't even chaning the Build identification of those versions... how the hell is a user supposed to know where he's at. They've been doing this for years to everybody's disappointment. On my systems (testbed or otherwise), this product will wait for installation for quite a while. In the meantime, almost all of my systems have been involved in AX64 Time Machine testing and for good reason... the support is outstanding. I feel much better contributing to an excellent responsive development effort that surely will produce an outstanding product that ALL users can be proud to use.
On the lighter side: I hope that I'm not the only one who thinks what's written above is written in an alien language....
Hi Alex. I guess it may seem that way... Basically, MS Windows is a 2(large)-step process to get the operating system running. The computer needs to know what piece (partition) of the hard disk Windows lives on. It goes thorugh the MASTER BOOT RECORD (MBR - 1-block for each hard disk) to find out which piece of the hard disk is where Windows lives. It does that by looking into the MBR at the PARTITION TABLE (list of disk words that show where each piece of the hard disk <partition> is located) and finding out which disk piece is marked ACTIVE (only 1 is for each hard disk if there is a bootable partition there). It then goes to that partition and starts executing code located there in that partition's PARTITION BOOT RECORD (PBR or sometimes known as a VBR or VOLUME BOOT RECORD). That code gets it to the beginning of the Windows BOOT process (uses BOOTMGR for W7 and W8 and NTLDR for XP... they are BOOT files for the opeerating system located in the Windows folder <they may be hidden>). Don't know whether the above helps... suffice it to say if the pieces are all in place, the system boots up just fine, if they aren't... toast.
I agree with you on all but 1 point,,,,,the future testing of RX. I see no reason to do this since I could not care less about RX and HDS. I liked RX and if it had a competent team behind it I think it would be an excellent product. But the team is far from competent if past experience is anything to go on. The treatment of the customer is shameful and the misleading statements abound (some appear to me to be outright lies). I am very glad that AX64 has come on the scene and allowed me the freedom to drop RX & HDS like the very hot potatoes they are. I had visions of having to use Rx 9 for years yet. It worked well for me and I had no confidence (rightly so it appears) in V 10. Now that I have AX64 I can rest easy that the product is as advertised, that it is very well supported, and that development will actually occur and not simply be promised for some future time. HDS & Rx,,,,,,,good riddance.
Carfal, out of curiosity, can you check if trim works on your D partition (if case RBRX is set to protect only the c)? thanks, Panagiotis
It seems very funny to me that lots of previous fans of RBRX are so harsh against HorizonDatasys. Nothing has changed over the years with Horizon and their support and the quality of RBRX as a product. So, I cannot understand why until recently most of you defended them and nowadays you attack them. Panagiotis
Hi Panagiotis, LOL! Some people come out of the coma quickly, others take years to come out from the vegetative, deep sleep. Best regards, Mohamed
Hi Mr P I understand what you are saying/perceiving and I believe that it is a natural, human reaction due to loyal users feeling extremely let down by HDS. I would not class myself as a vindictive person but having used RB Rx since version 6 or 7 (I forget as it was that long ago) I believe that things improved up to v9.1 (although transparency/frequency of information from support has at time been patchy even then) but since then there has been a dramatic decline even by HDS's own previous 'standards'. And I think that the worst thing is not being honest enough to front up about the issues/likely timescales for product releases/fixes, i.e., treat users like grown ups. Add to that, an alternative that refreshingly is the opposite of all that is 'perceived' as wrong with HDS/RB Rx at present...and you have a fertile ground for harsh, or harsher, comments, etc. C'est la vie...but much, IMHO, is of HDS's own doing. Just my half penny's worth...for what it is worth...
Sorry Panagiotis, I should have mentioned this earlier. Yes only my C: drive is protected and yes Trim DOES work on the unprotected D: drive. So i guess it's half good news.
Panagiotis... my mini rant above concerns only RBrx v10.x, not the previous version. As a long time user of v9.x I am very satisfied with their product. I used it on many XPproX86sp3 and W7proX86sp1 systems without incident, and as such, found it to be an excellent product. I never defended HDS (never had to use their support services) only the RBrx product. When I upgraded one of my systems with an SSD primary storage device, that's when TRIM became an issue for me. After exhaustive testing with your mentioned TrimCheck tool, I acceopted the fact that RBrx was not properly functional in this area and removed it from that system... to date it has not returned. I was saddened to hear HDS defend their TRIM workaround as a "solution" and that was the first time I had a serious issue with HDS and their technical representatives. Since the RBrx v10.x release, I have seen HDS do nothing but stumble through many technical issues associated with GPT/EFI configurations and apparently their new code set for the application... clearly an indication of poor ALPHA/BETA testing environments (I guess they don't trust their "general" users... only corporate customers). This is the first time I have watched them perform at a new product release (I became a user late in the v9 cycle) and it's sad to watch. They have shown an interest (for the first time) in getting involved in their User's NEW Forum and some of the results of such have proven fruitful... but the v10.x product remains what appears to be at best, a BETA solution at this point in time. I continue to be a v9.1 product defender (in my system environments) but have never defended HDS in a support environment or otherwise... I just haven't used them for any direct assistance. I know many users (Mohamed, especially) have had horrid experiences with HDS support, but I cannot use innuendo to form a position in regards to HDS as a company or support environment... I need first hand experience. That's why I have never taken a position on HDS' competence in these areas. That said... RollbackRX v10.x SUCKS at this point in time. I continue to use v9.1 successfully on many of the older systems I'm responsible for, but at the same time am moving in the direction of an AX64 Time Machine type of solution... one which offers both snapshot protection and image backup for systems. This application should work fine as my systems migrate toward their future configurations (SSDs, GPT/EFI storage, etc.)
I am not attacking them or RBX. I am dismissing them and RBX. No longer part of my toolbox. And you would too if you had lost so much from corruption caused by RBX and plain simple hot imaging (but AX64 saved the day).
Thanks Carfal, Sure, it's better than no trim at all. At least your D partition will always be fast during writes. Panagiotis
