RollbackRX, RestoreIT, Acronis True Image, FD-ISR?

It,s fault of the people, not of this neat feature.

 

@Wilbertnal

As I know ATI modies MBR when u reboot to recover from within windows but this modification is transient only.

@ejr

I will suggest FDISR( only bad thing in this option is that u can,t explore images and recover individual file/ files etc and u can only protect ur C drive/ partition). For bare metal recovery with FDISR, u can just use any free imaging software like DriveImageXML or ATI version 7( not sure if still offered) to get a working windows snapshot and then FDISR can help to get into last snapshot taken by FDISR.

If u go for imaging, use ShadowProtect. Here u can recover individual files etc also.
Best of all you can combine both. U need an external HD in any case.

Don,t go for EAZ-FIX/ RollBackRx. Also don,t forget to give it a full trial first whatever u plan to buy.

I can assure u that u have to compromize, u will never get all that u want. There are simply not many choices here.

 

anyone know when the new rollbackrx version is out, i was told a couple of weeks, but that was a couple of weeks ago

 

Best not to rush them. Version 7 was released much to quickly, lacking adequate testing and as a consequence many users (myself included) had big-time problems! It took several months of update fixes to get v7.21 to where it is now stable and trustworthy!

 

Around the 15th march... (http://www.horizondatasys.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=76&PN=1)

 

cool, cannot wait.

sooner, the better for sure

 

THAT IS FOR SURE!!

I just installed the Version 8. It did not install, even though it said it did. No preboot screen, no Tray Icon, no Application Module.

 

My apologies to Horizon Data Systems for my earlier criticism on this thread.

I was installing on multiboot system and only installed on first boot when I made the above comments.

After installing on second boot system, Vista, everything is working as advertised.

I have not tried the backup snapshot yet, but wanted to clarify my unwarranted criticism of the product. This program could really be a winner!!

 

Allright,waiting for testing comments,especially concerning the snapshot backup...if OK I will probably buy it...(Time to make a new thread)

 

Hi ho silver (sorry, couldn't resist that),

Are you running Rollback Rx v8 in Trial-Mode or have you actually upgraded from v7?

Regards,
pv

 

I've installed RollbackRX v8 Trial. Installation worked not like previous v7 which didn't install. I have it on a RAID0 setup which don't even know if its actually supported. Made first snapshot and backed it up to another drive successfully. I haven't reverted back since I haven't had the chance to install anything to screw up my pc, but will do so soon. Still wondering what FD-ISR will do when I revert and also wondering what my Secondary Snapshot in FD-ISR be without RollbackRX. Also wondering what Acronis True Image will image with both FD-ISR and RollbackRX installed, I am guessing all FD-ISR snapshots and Rollback RX baseline only.

dja2k

 

I,m sticking with PARAGON for the time being. It's bailed my socks out from the dust more than a few times already and is really not as intimidating or confusing as some can be.

Like the idea of FD-ISR but not sure if it's right for me since i keep some heavy loads on disk and would require lots of extra hard drive space just to snapshot a pair.

 

What would PARAGON Drive Backup be directly compared to? Acronis True Image? or somekind of rollback software? In the demo video, it shows restoration inside windows, then reboots and restores, how is that possible without running a Rescue Disk? Is it like Acronis Secure Zone?

dja2k

 

It is not like Acronis Secure Zone. When you restore the backup image from Windows, Paragon will reboot in a blue screen mode and restore the backup image from there. No secure zone or hidden partition is needed whatever they call it. You only need to use the rescue CD if only Windows is corrupted and unbootable.

 

Acronis has the same in win,with or without sec.zone...You´re prompted to reboot for the restore to complete...

Paragon makes by choice raw images which means you can capture all snapshots at the expence of bigger image...You can also choose to make a raw image of the sys partition only(no need for the whole physical disk) without loosing the snapshots...

 

there is a thing called backup capsule that is like the acronis secure zone that stores the images on another partistion on the same drive.
i would never use anything like the secure zone i would just backup images to another drive externals are the best.
lodore

 

That will be the best place to keep the backup images.

 

The Blue Screen of Rebirth (BSOR)

 

lol yeah

 

I wouldn't even try the combination FDISR & RBRx, because both softwares do a similar job.
You choose either FDISR or RBRx and live with the advantages and disadvantages of your final choice.

If you choose RBRx, you have to find an Image Backup software that recover RBRx with all its snapshots.
When only the baseline snapshot is recovered or even worse NOTHING is recovered, look for another Image Backup software.

From my readings the combination FDISR + RBRx + ATI doesn't even work. What's the point of using this combination if the restoration of ATI isn't complete. That's not a solution, that is an unsuccesful experiment, that can't be used in practice.
I've read already 3 different stories of the combination RBRx/EazFix + ATI only.
- ATI restores NOTHING.
- ATI restores only the baseline snapshot and not the other snapshots.
- ATI restores all snapshots.
In the end, I was sick and tired of reading these posts, asking myself what are these people looking for.
I always have a goal and expectations in advance, when I try something new.
You can't fool around with Image Backup and Immediate System Recovery, because both are supposed to keep you out of trouble or save your personal files in the worst scenarios.

Image Backup is a necessity, while Immediate System Recovery is luxury, you don't need it.
If I ever have to choose between Image Backup (ATI) and Immediate System Recovery (FDISR), I ditch FDISR (or RBRx) without hesitation.

Choosing Image Backup is quite simple, if the restoration doesn't work, look for another one until you find one.
Restoration means getting back what you had in the past without missing anything.

Choosing Immediate System Recovery is more complicated, but the choice isn't big when you want multiple snapshots.
It's FDISR (+ clones) or RBRx (+ clones) and that makes it easier.
The first question is, do you want/need Immediate System Recovery or not ?
The second question is, do you want/need multiple snapshots or not ?
The third question is, do you want/need to include your personal data or not ?

IMO you have to put personal data aside, when you are making your choice, because data grows and grows and certainly when you have alot of graphical data. That is a long term solution.
It's all about Windows + Applications, those need Immediate System Recovery, otherwise they would have called it "Immediate Data Recovery".
Saving your personal data is done by Image Backup or File Backup or even a simple copy/paste of your personal files to another harddisk.
If you decide to include your personal data in Immediate System Recovery, you better have a small and stable volume of data.

All good Immediate System Recovery software have one thing in common, they offer you the choice and recommend to separate your data files from your system files, because they are SO DIFFERENT in many ways.
What is worse : losing your system files or your data files ? My answer : losing my data files, because I worked very hard and spend alot of time to get or to create them. That is just one important difference.
System and data aren't the same, so they need a different approach.

I prefer solutions, that work in all circumstances and not just for a few users.
Including data in your Immediate System Recovery setup is only good for users with small/stable volume of data, but not if you have large volume of data.
That's why I stored my data on another partition and even on a second harddisk.
My data partition is INDEPENDENT from my system partition, because it doesn't contain any Windows system objects, not even moved Windows folders and that means total freedom on my system partition, which is also the most trouble-making partition, not only because of malware, but also because of legitimate softwares that don't like your total system.
Also my snapshots are INDEPENDENT, because I use FDISR and I don't lose them when I recover my system partition.

RBRx has only one advantage : SPEED and the other advantage : "less space" is unpredictable according my readings. It doesn't work like advertised.
FDISR is at least RELIABLE and that's what I need to save my computer in no time.
What's the point of speed, if you can't trust it and you will lose all that speed when you have to spend your time on defragging.
Nobody needs 30,000 or 60,000 snapshots either, I use only two snapshots in practice and I have an unlimited amount of archived snapshots and that's more than 60,000 snapshots.

If you use RBRx you better test it over and over again and find first a decent Image Backup, that recovers all its snapshots and don't accept any frequent failures, because it's not your task to save RBRx, RBRx is supposed to save YOU.
If RBRx was so reliable, Wilders wouldn't have spend HUNDREDS of posts on RBRx and the story isn't finished yet.
I use FDISR for more than a year, I don't even need support or advice, it works and that's it.

 

I wonder why using Shadow Protect couldn't be an all in one solution to backup and instant system restore? You eliminate the problems associated with trying to find programs that can perform these functions separately and work seamlessly together (no conflicts). You eliminate the problem of maintaining different backups/snapshots for each program and the extra storage space needed. The time required to take an on demand snapshot once you have your main image should be virtually identical using Shadow Protect or instant recovery software (FD-ISR\RollbackRX).
The only downside I can see is the extra time required to restore in Shadow Protect due to having to restore from the cd. This seems like a minimal tradeoff for all the conveniences. If Shadow Protect was able to restore the system drive from within Windows without having to be rebooted into recovery environment cd, than even this small negative would appear to be eliminated.
I've never used FD-ISR or RollBackRX but from reading all the posts on this and other forums, it seems time and money could be better spent with an all in one solution.
Any thoughts?

 

I tried the snapshot backup. The backup went fine to external disk. The Recovery CD has to be built from BartPE and a RollbackRx plug-in is included with the program. I have my system drive on a RAID 0 setup.

However, when I booted the BartPE disk, which includes RAID drivers, and entered the RollbackRx BartPe program the following occurred.

It asked me where to find the Snapshot Backup Image. It listed all of my drives and partitions, including the RAID 0 drive with the System and Data partitions. However, when the program asked me which partition to Restore the image to, the System drive was no where to be found.

It appears that this program does not work on RAID 0 drives. I have sent in a ticket to Horizon to find out why. It seems strange that the program would recognize the RAID drive in one part and not the other.

I still use it in conjunction with the new FD-ISR beta and Acronis. I like it for it's speed and with the FD-ISR archives and Acronis backups, I feel well protected. Also, along with Peter, I get smaller images by using Archives in FDISR which makes my Acronis backups much faster.

I agree with Erik, that an imaging program should restore all of the image and my experience with Acronis is that it will not restore Rollback snapshots. I think it has something to do with the way Rollback works on sectors rather than files. However, since with FD-ISR archives, it is very seldom that I need to do a Recovery restore from the boot disk. When I do, it is simple to reinstall RollbackRx and have the benefit of quick snapshots with a smaller disk space for experimenting with. I do a daily First Defense Archive update and an Acronis backup when I make alot of changes to my system.

 

Image Backup, like ShadowProtect is a necessity, because you can't work with a computer without backup and certainly not at work.
You don't need Immediate System Recovery, because you can restore your computer always in any situation with ShadowProtect.
But ShadowProtect is just an Image Backup software, just like Acronis, Terabyte, etc.

With FDISR I can create different versions of my system partition for permanent or temporary usage and I only have to boot in one of them and I have another system partition, which can be entirely different and can even contain another Operating System.
With ShadowProtect, I have only one version of my system partition, if I want another version I have to restore another image and that isn't practical.

If I'm in trouble I only need to refresh my work snapshot, which takes seconds or a few minutes and that is faster than restoring an image with ShadowProtect.
If I try a new software and I don't like it, I only have to refresh my work snapshot and everything is gone without uninstalling the software and you know how bad software uninstaller are.
If the new software contained malware, that malware is also gone. Registry is clean again.
All this by just refreshing my work snapshot.
A user without FDISR has to backup/restore an image to get the same result.

I work with ATI at this moment, but ATI bores me to death. Backup and restore and that's it,
what is so exciting about that. Even restoring, which was the most exciting one, bores me because it never failed and even when it fails, I still have FDISR to solve it. So ATI is just an icon on my desktop.

But FDISR still fascinates me, even after using it more than a year.
RBRx would make me angry that's for sure.